☕️ CONSEQUENTIAL ☙ Tuesday, April 14, 2026 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

The media spent a month saying the blockade failed— now they're proving it works; NYT stuns its own readers; America eyes China's other oil lifeline; Swalwell evicted from billionaire's mansion; more.

Good morning, C&C, it’s Tuesday! Your roundup includes: how the C&C Army’s respectful pushback on the President’s AI post was answered with grace — proving that civility still works when both sides want it to; how the media’s Strait of Hormuz narrative collapsed so completely that the New York Times admitted Trump was right while European leaders publicly pleaded for him to reopen the world’s most critical shipping lane; how the Pentagon, in a move the media barely whispered about, signed a military agreement beside the strait that carries eighty percent of China’s crude oil — positioning America at the throat of Beijing’s energy supply; and how the Democrat party’s moral reckoning with Eric Swalwell cost them a congressman, a billionaire benefactor who walked out in disgust, and whatever credibility they had left on “protecting women.”

⛑️ C&C ARMY BRIEFING — MORNING MONOLOGUE ⛑️

It only took about an hour before President Trump took down yesterday’s AI cartoon. And then he went further; he discussed it with reporters, which he didn’t have to. So far as I can tell, though dozens of platforms rushed to report the existence of the original post, only CNBC ran a story about him taking it down and explaining it, headlined, “Trump deletes Truth Social image depicting him as Jesus: ‘It was me as a doctor.’”

Meanwhile, a spirited social media debate consumed the day’s feeds. To all our credit, it generally more resembled a lively dorm-room debate than a Celebrity Cruises food fight. Defenders made several good points, including that (1) Trump may not have even posted the pic himself (blaming the social media team), (2) it could have been alternatively interpreted in any number of more innocuous ways (including how the original poster had intended), and (3) as I pointed out yesterday, it must be understood in the context of his tét-a-tét with Pope Leo.

Associated Press headline:

Regardless, President Trump obviously gracefully and quickly accepted the rebuke, for which he deserves much credit. He didn’t call it “a perfect meme” or disparage critics. He just took it down and explained that wasn’t what he’d meant. Given his unsurpassed volume of direct public communications —a historical record— the real surprise is how few misfires the president encounters.

However unintentionally sacriligeous President Trump’s now-deleted tweet was, at least he never declared Easter to be the Trans Day of Visibility.

Let’s celebrate yesterday’s effort. We pushed back politely and without demands. It turned out to be a terrific example of how intra-party disputes should be handled. Yesterday’s readers noticed that I did not threaten to rage-quit the GOP, advance any dark theories about President Trump being co-opted by shadowy figures from Fartistan, or even demand that he do any particular thing.

I simply presented my case respectfully, presumed that he didn’t mean to offend anyone (except perhaps Pope Leo), and expressed my preference that he consider removing it. Let’s call it the three-P system.

We have no time to squabble with each other. We have a world to tame. We have less than three years to do it. And sometimes, between allies, being nice, assuming good intentions, and discussing things rationally works. If we could ever get back to where rational discourse worked between Democrats and Republicans, we’d all be much better off.

🌍🇺🇸 ESSENTIAL NEWS AND COMMENTARY 🇺🇸🌍

🚀🚀🚀

Gripping our Big Theory, let’s consider a few of yesterday’s electrifying developments. First, take in this quietly hilarious headline from the BBC: “US-sanctioned ships pass Strait of Hormuz as China calls Trump’s blockade ‘dangerous.’”

The President is playing the trad-media like a fiddle. They just spent a month crowing over how no ships were crossing the Strait (and how politically terrible for Trump that was). Now, after Trump said America would stop up the narrow passage into the Persian Gulf, they can’t report their original narrative anymore, since no ships transiting the Strait shows Trump’s blockage being effective.

Now, to ‘prove’ Iran is ‘winning,’ they must switch sides, and breathlessly report every single ship that does navigate the narrow channel. In this story, the BBC even named them: the Christianna, the Rich Starry, the Murlikishan, and the Elpis— all four China-bound.

The irony is sweeter and stickier than spilled honey. The media won’t speculate about whether the Navy might have strategically allowed those ships to get through. Why would the Navy do that? Perhaps to placate China, and keep it on the sidelines. A leaky blockade could be politically preferable to an impermeable one.

Either way, the flip-flop makes corporate media look completely incoherent. Which it is.

🚀 Meanwhile, yesterday the New York Times reported, “UK Will Not Join U.S. Blockade of Strait of Hormuz, Starmer Says.” Obviously not. The UK needs oil, not blockades. Starmer said he prefers “to keep the straits open, not shut,” adding redundantly, “it is vital that we get the strait open and fully open.” (The Prime Minister still looks like something a taxidermy freshman came up with as a semester project. Just saying.)

Opening the Strait is “vital” to the UK, anyway. But the Times disappointedly reported that “Mr. Starmer refused to blame Mr. Trump personally for rising energy costs in Britain.” To that particular point —who Starmer didn’t blame— it devoted four full paragraphs. 🙄

Dainty French President Emmanuel Macron also stressed “the need to restore free and unimpeded navigation through the Strait of Hormuz as quickly as possible.” Spain’s pugnacious defense minister, Margarita Robles, said yesterday that the plan to blockade the Strait of Hormuz “makes no sense.” I guess nobody explained the plan to her.

The media is finally starting to connect the dots, a little. In a different story about the Strait, demonstrating a flash of real journalism, the Times recalled how Trump had also blockaded Venezuelan oil shipping in the weeks before snatching its president at midnight— which was yet another strategic connection between the two conflicts that I’d overlooked. (Thanks, Times!)

The story also reported that Fatih Birol, IEA’s executive director, said yesterday that it could take up to two years to fully restore the region’s production. With the AI arms race getting underway, two years is the strategic equivalent of several lifetimes. Now consider this remarkable admission, words I’d bet you never expected to see printed in the New York Times:

Trump was right! I screenshot that to my desktop. I might even get it framed.

The Times then quoted an ‘energy expert,’ Clayton Seigle, who opined: “Iran will come under pressure if it’s not able to export its oil.” In other words— the blockade might work. And it could hamstring Iran for years. “You can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube,” Mr. Seigle noted. Another expert on Iran, Miad Maleki, was quoted saying, “I can’t think of a better option to increase pressure on the Iranian regime.”

I had to triple-check what newspaper I was reading.

Nor has the blockade created any outsized costs for the US. “Oil traders have mostly shrugged off news of the blockade and failed peace talks,” the Times reported, “and international oil prices traded just shy of $100 a barrel.” So.

Then it admitted the most important point of all: “The United States is not facing the kinds of fuel shortages that many other countries are dealing with.” Even higher consumer gas prices in America are due solely to increased demand for our oil from everyone else. We’re not short of the stuff; we’re practically swimming laps in it. We’re just competing with Europe and China at the pump.

Call it a limited hangout or whatever. But consider what it means when the Grey Lady starts conceding that Trump’s Iran war might work. The concession shook and confused its readers, that’s for sure. At the time of blogging, shocked and sullen Times readers had left only two comments on the story. They don’t know what to say.

🚀 Let’s drop one more puzzle piece onto the board, and this one could be biggest one of all. It could tie the whole picture together. Yesterday, Al Jazeera reported, “Indonesia, US sign ‘major’ defence cooperation agreement.” It was especially weird timing, considering that Indonesia controls another oil-shipping passage critical to China: the Strait of Malacca.

Corporate media was largely silent about the deal, even though it cannot possibly be coincidental that the U.S. is now making moves around the world’s second critical oil chokepoint in the same 30-day period. Trump’s team is walking, chewing gum, and taking names.

Indonesia is the world’s fourth-largest country by population, and its largest majority-Muslim country. For the last twenty years, analysts and officials have repeatedly highlighted the Strait of Malacca as a critical vulnerability for China, even coining the label “China’s Malacca dilemma.” It’s so well known that there’s a whole Wikipedia entry about it.

The dilemma is “a strategic vulnerability for China” because the strait handles a quarter of global trade and funnels roughly 80% of China’s crude oil imports through a long, skinny channel you could almost see across. It gives “deep throat” a whole new meaning.

China needs oil to survive. Unlike the US, the PRC imports over half of its annual oil demand. Wikipedia confirmed, “the Strait of Malacca is one of the most strategically important maritime chokepoints globally.” Even more so than the much-ballyhooed Strait of Hormuz. After blocking Hormuz, America is now stretching its hands toward Malacca’s neck. So you’d think this contemporaneous development would make bigger news.

It’s not merely a minor second-world development. Yesterday, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth personally hosted Indonesia’s defense minister at the Pentagon, and even tweeted about it.

While considering the media’s narrative of a “chaotic and reckless” President Trump who just randomly does stuff without a plan, please consider the Indonesian timeline. Starting just before the Iran War began, there have been a succession of recent major developments in Indonesia, which has historically remained studiously neutral between the United States and China, its largest trading partner. But behold:

• On February 20th, Indonesia agreed to drop duties on U.S. beef and buy 50,000 tons of American beef products. (And no plantburgers.) A minor win, but important to U.S. cattlemen.

• On March 18th —twenty days after the Iran war began— AP reported, “A new US trade deal with Indonesia secures fossil fuels and access to critical minerals.” It’s a pretty big deal for Indonesia. “A new trade pact between Indonesia and the United States has recast their economic ties,” the AP said, “binding Jakarta’s resource wealth and energy future more closely to Washington’s strategic needs.”

• On March 26th —a month into the war— Indonesia ironically joined President Trump’s Board of Peace. The country’s president, Probowo Subianto, said, “We are very optimistic that with the leadership of President Trump, this vision of real peace will be achieved.”

• Yesterday, on April 13th, Indonesia signed the major military agreement with the U.S. By May, the countries will probably be sharing a Netflix password.

What can explain this sudden shift from official neutrality to a rash of signing major American trade deals, joining Peace Boards, praising President Trump’s leadership, and now granting America flyover rights?

The answer is: leverage. Headline from the Jakarta Post, April 1st:

Although an oil-producing nation, Indonesia, with its massive population, still remains a net importer. Their current energy crisis is so severe that, at the end of March, Indonesia announced public fuel rationing and ordered all non-essential government employees to work from home. Citizens are limited to buying only around 13 gallons (50 liters) of gas per day per vehicle.

The U.S. is ready to help with that problem! The February and March trade deals lowered Indonesia’s tariff rate from a threatened 32% to 19%, and lowered tariffs to zero on its key exports of palm oil, coffee, cocoa, spices, and rubber. Indonesia agreed to buy American planes and invest $10 billion in the US. The US also agreed to sell Indonesia oil and natural gas, help the country build modular nuclear reactors, and buy its rare minerals— which, AP reported, also reduces the US’s reliance on China.

As corporate media consumers, we aren’t updated on developments related to Trump’s tariffs or the Iran energy squeeze. (In February, the Council on Foreign Relations published a big report rounding up all the trade deals in progress. Media was silent.) But, even though the Strait of Malacca is not explicitly named in this week’s military agreement, thanks to the tariffs and the energy crisis created by Iran attacking its own neighbors, America is now standing on the shoreline.

If Trump controls Hormuz and has leverage over Malacca, China’s entire energy supply is in American hands. That’s not a trade war. That’s an existential chokehold.

🔥🔥🔥

Speaking of leverage, I (correctly) reported yesterday that, having sacrificed his gubernatorial ambitions, disgraced Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-Ca.) was reconsidering his pledge from earlier this year to give up his House seat. Changing his mind only took one day of additional leverage. Fox reported, “Eric Swalwell to resign from Congress as pressure mounts over misconduct claims.” After years of Democrats defending his Chinese spy relationships and apparently well-known dalliances with young staffers, the tsunami of shame finally washed over the hapless congressman.

Swalwell’s Democrat support vanished into a sinkhole of infamy. Fox reported that Senator Ruben Gallego (D-Az.) —once described by Swalwell as his “best friend in the world”— announced yesterday he would support expelling the lusty lawmaker, mere minutes before Swalwell himself announced his plans to resign. Washington friendships.

Not only that. A New York Post article reported that Swalwell —presumably having been thrown out of his own house by his wife— had been shacking up bachelor style with his biggest benefactor, progressive billionaire Stephen Cloobeck. Yesterday, Cloobeck emerged from his $26M Beverly Hills mansion and told reporters he’d thrown the concupiscent congressman out.

“I am no longer associated with a man that takes advantage of women,” Cloobeck said. “I support women’s rights.” It sounds like a very unpleasant breakup. The billionaire said he’d “ripped him a new f—king a—hole.”

But wait, there’s more. Cloobeck also said he was so angry about Swalwell that he was rage-quitting the Democrat party. “Mad? I’m no longer a Democrat! I’m now a libertarian-Republican, because that’s what a Blue-Dog Democrat used to be.” I wonder how many others feel the same?

CLIP: Listen for yourself. Democrat purge of Swalwell cost them a billionaire donor (0:37).

Meanwhile, as fellow gubernatorial and anger-management-candidate Katie Porter tried to join in on the fun, Libs of Tiktok posted one of the most brutal community notes of all time:

Meanwhile, the New York Times, still piling on, ran a tough op-ed with a headline asking the obvious question:

Finally, and as it turns out, not coincidentally, Republican congressman Tony Gonzales (R-Tx.) also announced his resignation within minutes of Swalwell’s announcement— for an admitted affair that may have caused the young woman’s self-deletion. Gonzales, who had already announced he would not run for re-election, still lay under the shadow of a looming House ethics vote. Gonzales’ resignation critically narrowed the GOP’s margin in the House, but Swalwell’s simultaneous departure equalized it.

So Swalwell’s meltdown also helped House Republicans avoid a political embarrassment. Getting rid of Eric was costly for Democrats. They must be hoping it was worth it.

Have a terrific Tuesday! Rollerblade back here tomorrow morning for more breaking essential news and colorful commentary.

Don’t race off! We cannot do it alone. Consider joining up with C&C to help move the nation’s needle and change minds. I could sure use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can: ☕ Learn How to Get Involved 🦠

How to Donate to Coffee & Covid

Twitter: jchilders98.
Truth Social: jchilders98.
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
Telegram: t.me/coffeecovidnews
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com