Moldovan oligarch jailed in $1bn 'theft of the century' fraud case Vlad Plahotniuc, once Moldova's richest man, was found guilty of partaking in a fraud which involved around 12% of the country's GDP.

Wonderful news.

www.bbc.com/news/article...

Ah, the good ole "completely irrelevant from a global oil price perspective but sure does help Russia sell its oil at inflated prices issued on a Friday so no one will notice" license.

ofac.treasury.gov/media/935526...

Oof, that's rough. At least I was able to buy a burrito to make up for the 1 millionth email asking why I think sanctions are the same thing as a Picasso.

Thanks for the tip @profsaunders.bsky.social. I do have a question for @reidpauly.bsky.social, though: how often do you get hate mail asking why you think "coercion" is an art? Cuz if I had a nickel for every time I'm asked that about sanctions, I'd outstrip my actual royalties pretty damn quick.

This is excellent news.

All I know is that we had this scenario (first bit, anyway) for Cuba and a Russian tanker docked with Trump's blessing in March. Sooooo....

So, maybe, just maybe, we ought to take what some of these people advocating this line of argument -- simple, appealing in its direct boldness, uncomplicated -- with a bit more skepticism.

6/6

They placed a bet that this would all be better than a functional deal. And now we all get to see if they were right. Thus far, they're wrong.

Walk away from the JCPOA and get a better deal? Nope.

Max pressure and get a better deal? Nope.

A few strikes, better deal? Nope. 5/6

And those alternatives would have been far cheaper in blood and treasure. They would've required more work to maintain and verify, they required compromise with a bad regime. But, they could've worked.

Some people preferred all of this right now to making a deal work. 4/6

You can say "this proves the only solution is regime change" and, given everything, that's now probably true! It's hard to imagine a deal that would actually solve this problem now with this current regime.

But, it wasn't always probably true. There were alternatives. 3/6

This point has substantive value. It underscores the deep commitment Iran places on retaining nuclear capacities, for whatever reason. Personally, I think it's because they wanted to keep a weapons option and I'm even more sure that's true today.

So, what to do about that? 2/6

Worth noting: when next you hear someone say "oh, if only the negotiators on the JCPOA had tried harder, we could've gotten Iran to give up its nuclear program," this whole episode is a useful demonstration of why that assumption is wrong.

This isn't just me being snotty. 1/6

Army survivors of deadly attack in Kuwait dispute Pentagon's account, say unit "was unprepared" to defend itself Survivors of an Iranian attack that killed six U.S. service members have disputed the Pentagon's description of events and said their unit in Kuwait was left dangerously exposed.

BREAKING CBS:

Survivors of the deadliest Iranian attack on U.S. forces have disputed the Pentagon's description of events and said their unit in Kuwait was left dangerously exposed when six service members were killed and over 20 wounded.

The members disputed the description from Pete Hegseth.

Happy Appomattox Court House Day to all those who celebrate (hint: that should be everyone.)

OK, so according to Barak Ravid on the other site, the 10 points he referenced in tweet 1 are not the same 10 points that were made public by Iran.

I guess that's possible?

But big "my girlfriend is from Canada, you don't know her" vibes...

OK, but you explicitly acknowledged as "workable basis" the 10 point Iranian plan, Mr. President. That was you, in this format.

I observe that some Trump supporters are claiming that his acceptance of the Iranian 10-point plan as a basis of negotiations is no concession. And to be sure, I doubt that's the final text.

On the other hand, the man did license Iran to sell its oil sanctions free, sooooo...

I think what’s happening is that, for the first time in his life, Trump is being told “no.” Having dealt with people who have this particular personality disorder, there’s no obvious limit to what he’ll do to himself or others trying to avoid accepting it.

This is an invocation of a genocidal threat, made worse by his dodging of responsibility for the crimes he may order.

Those of us who comment on U.S. Iran policy have a responsibility to make clear their position on his appalling threat below.

Do you support this? I do not.

I wasn't inclined to share further an image of the Trump Iran statement on Easter, but I gather that some news agencies and commentators are avoiding doing so. That is actually their job, but if they won't do it, others should.

This is what the man said. Don't look away.

"Barely a day goes by where there is not a credible allegation of corrupt practices..."

www.justsecurity.org/133481/year-...

If you were wondering why so many people were outraged by Hegseth's "no quarter" bullshit, take a moment today to think about what it actually means...

How the Iran War undermines the nuclear nonproliferation regime The ramifications of the war on Iran are becoming clearer: The war raises doubts that the Non-Proliferation Treaty can hold as a central pillar of international security. If it doesn't, will US-friend...

Well worth the read.

thebulletin.org/2026/04/how-...

Absolutely nothing new in that speech. Conflict will go on for weeks to finish the job, which is finished, to deal with the nuclear issue, but we don't have to because it's buried, and we did it before, and prices are low and tax refunds are coming. If you missed it, congrats.

‘I Don’t Care About That’: Trump Says Iran’s Enriched Uranium Is Not a Concern

Well, you may care about it soon enough, buddy.

‘I Don’t Care About That’: Trump Says Iran’s Enriched Uranium Is Not a Concern www.nytimes.com/2026/04/01/u...

Trump Faces Blowback on Easing Iran Oil Sanctions

The easing of oil sanctions on Iran is intended to lower energy prices, but by doing this, the Trump administration is asking Tehran to “please, please, please sell oil because the market is going haywire,” @richardmnephew.bsky.social told the @nytimes.com.

No kings.

I've been working to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons for a long time.

This is the stupidest way of explaining why Iran having nuclear weapons would be bad that I have ever heard. I think people understand the concept without having to word salad magic vests.

Was just thinking: anyone else remember when the CBI/oil sanx passed in Dec 2011 and Obama was given a shut-off valve for those sanx if oil supply was too tight and oil prices were around $100/barrel...and he ordered us to use the sanx to reduce Iranian exports anyway?