And it makes a wonderful distraction from the Epstein files. Remember them?
Assuming a wag-the-dog strategy at work(*), the anti-Iranian aggression was likely supposed to be the primary distraction from Epstein. But while it has technically succeeded in that goal, it's almost certainly not in the way that Trump had hoped, since the war has been getting, at best, middling approval numbers from hoi poloi. So Trump would likely want a distraction from the distraction, as it were, and back-and-forth jab fests with the pontiff might've seemed like an attractive option.
(*) Not usually my first assumption, but with Trump I could see it, throwing in the caveat that it's also in the long term interests of the USA, as those interests are defined by certain factions of long-standing influence in American policy.
I assume some of the big pharma firms are gonna do well on this, 'cuz I don't see doctors sourcing the medication from the local hippie botanist down in the valley.
Looking into the American companies involved with ibogaine, they seem to me like mostly start-ups that are publically traded on the stock market but haven't yet garnered their own wikipedia pages. At least one of them has a weird pun as its name.
And if I'm understanding the wikipedia page on the drug's legality in respective nations, some places are currently more liberal than the USA, some places less. Trump being Trump, I'm guessing that somewhere in his mind, he's thinking that pushing the research forward will soon result in America dominating the market for the future pharmaceuticals.
I was many years in fundamental drug development (with a well replected US corporation, as it happens) and I'm not (yet) aware of any proper clinical trials of this compound. Surely the legal registration of Ibogaine will take some time yet?
I assume some of the big pharma firms are gonna do well on this, 'cuz I don't see doctors sourcing the medication from the local hippie botanist down in the valley.
Looking into the American companies involved with ibogaine, they seem to me like mostly start-ups that are publically traded on the stock market but haven't yet garnered their own wikipedia pages. At least one of them has a weird pun as its name.
And if I'm understanding the wikipedia page on the drug's legality in respective nations, some places are currently more liberal than the USA, some places less. Trump being Trump, I'm guessing that somewhere in his mind, he's thinking that pushing the research forward will soon result in America dominating the market for the future pharmaceuticals.
I was many years in fundamental drug development (with a well replected US corporation, as it happens) and I'm not (yet) aware of any proper clinical trials of this compound. Surely the legal registration of Ibogaine will take some time yet?
Maybe, yeah. The FDA is supposed to be doing something or other next week, but I'm not exactly clear what.
And I have to stand corrected, re-reading the chart, right now, the USA's laws are among the most restrictive, rather than in the middle.
It seems veterans groups are among the biggest backers of ibogaine in the USA, due to it's supposed utility in combating PTSD. Some vets have been going down to Mexico for treatment.
I'm still scared. He may well unleash nukes on Iran this week.
Trump always telegraphs what he is about to do. He has yet to say anything about nuking Iran. He has said he will take out the power plants and bridges of Iran. That can be done through conventional weapons. Nevertheless, that in itself is a war crime.
The atomic clock may be ticking closer to midnight, but it is not there yet.
I'm still scared. He may well unleash nukes on Iran this week.
Trump always telegraphs what he is about to do. He has yet to say anything about nuking Iran. He has said he will take out the power plants and bridges of Iran. That can be done through conventional weapons. Nevertheless, that in itself is a war crime.
The atomic clock may be ticking closer to midnight, but it is not there yet.
At least on low-rent social media, debate, such as it is, is now taking shape over whether companies should pass their tariff rebates onto consumers. Among the naysayers are people claiming that it wouldn't matter because the vast majority of companies are the tariffs anyway, and thus the consumers are owed nothing.
For companies that DID pass the tariffs down but still wanna withhold compensation from their customers, the next little bit of time could see some rocky PR for them.
I am not expecting to see any reimbursement. Fact is, I am not even expecting to see any reduction in prices.
I suspect you're not alone in that.
Three of the judges in the majority for Learning Resources are Republican appointees, two of them by Trump(*). But I've still see tariff apologists on-line somehow trying to blame the Democrats(unspecified as to which branch of government) for the shitshow.
Re that Guardian quote. I think Trump has moved beyond silly and inconsistent to just dangerous.
Despite the fact that cognitive decline is in general very sad, one of the things I’ve observed is that people with previously nasty tendencies (under control to some extent) tend to become worse if the decline lessens inhibitions. Which it often does.
Helping someone in cognitive decline isn’t easy. It can require hard decisions in their interests and the interest of others. And the more powerful the person, the harder that is.
I am expecting Cabinet 25th Amendment action at some stage. I’m hoping it’s not too little, too late. This is moving beyond self-interested political calculation. In my view it’s already done so.
The impending use of the 25th has been hanging in the air for months now. So has Donny passing into the next world before the year is out. He still manages to carry on.
He doesn’t always signal what he intends to do, mostly yes but he has surprised the world on occasion.
Many countries seem to be hoping the GOP will take action.
The impending use of the 25th has been hanging in the air for months now. So has Donny passing into the next world before the year is out. He still manages to carry on.
He doesn’t always signal what he intends to do, mostly yes but he has surprised the world on occasion.
Many countries seem to be hoping the GOP will take action.
I can’t see the 25th Amendment being invoked because too many of those who would have the power to pass it, owe their positions to Trump and Trump alone. Moreover, in what way would Vance be better?
Since the 25th involves the cabinet which he picked standing up, no it probably will not be invoked.
What I am concerned about, though, is what would happen if the Democrats can flip both houses with only a simple majority in each of them? Would DjT become so unstable he really becomes dangerous--ya ain't seen nothing yet folks.
Something tells me once he is out of office, there is going to have to be some new amendments to address those scenarios
Since the 25th involves the cabinet which he picked standing up, no it probably will not be invoked.
It all depends on how many members of the Cabinet want a successful political career after this administration, and what they view as most advantageous or disadvantageous to that post-Trump successful political career.
Since the 25th involves the cabinet which he picked standing up, no it probably will not be invoked.
It all depends on how many members of the Cabinet want a successful political career after this administration, and what they view as most advantageous or disadvantageous to that post-Trump successful political career.
Since the 25th involves the cabinet which he picked standing up, no it probably will not be invoked.
It all depends on how many members of the Cabinet want a successful political career after this administration, and what they view as most advantageous or disadvantageous to that post-Trump successful political career.
Many of the cabinet members have already made their fortunes. They can retire very easily. Some of them, though, may have to deal with legal ramifications for being in DjT's circle.
Many of the cabinet members have already made their fortunes. They can retire very easily. Some of them, though, may have to deal with legal ramifications for being in DjT's circle.
Having already made fortunes enabling one to retire easily and wanting a continuing successful political career are hardly mutually exclusive. There are too many wealthy politicians for it to be otherwise.
I suspect that if Trump is removed via the 25th it will happen very suddenly, and we'll go from cabinet members giving him full throated support to Vance being sworn in within a few hours. There will be a tipping point where no-one will want to be the last Trump loyalist left standing and a sudden rush for the exit.
But as noted recently in one of these many Trump-related threads, that rush for the exit is going to need to need to yield supermajorities in both houses of Congress, or it’ll all be a waste of time.
But as noted recently in one of these many Trump-related threads, that rush for the exit is going to need to need to yield supermajorities in both houses of Congress, or it’ll all be a waste of time.
True, though I assume that if we get to the point of half the cabinet being ready to jump then half of congressional republicans will be on board too.
I suspect that if Trump is removed via the 25th it will happen very suddenly, and we'll go from cabinet members giving him full throated support to Vance being sworn in within a few hours. There will be a tipping point where no-one will want to be the last Trump loyalist left standing and a sudden rush for the exit.
If the cabinet declares the president is unable to carry out the functions of the office, the Vice President will become the Acting President until such time as the President can return to the office. The President can contest the declaration which would then take 2/3 of both houses to agree with what the cabinet did. But even then, the VP would only be an Acting President unless the President later dies or resigns or is removed by impeachment.
I really cannot see the 25th imposed unless the President f+cks up real badly. Or he has a stroke, as in the case of Woodrow Wilson.
Serious question - I don't know the extent of his power concerning nuclear war etc.
IIRC, US Shipmates have pointed out that even the President can't fire off nukes on his own, so to speak, but has to have others present.
Not that that's necessarily a comforting thought, given the sycophancy surrounding him.
Actually, the President has the sole authority to order a nuclear strike. He does not need to go to Congress. He does not need the agreement of the Cabinet. Nor does he need the approval of the joint chiefs of staff in the military. BUT there is a key guardrail. The military must verify if the order is legal. Is it necessary? Is it proportional? Who/what is it targeting. Then too, multiple people must authenticate and transmit the order. The president has to give identity codes. The duty officer at the National Military Command center has to be alerted, the STRATCOM commander must down to the launch crews. All have to agree the codes are authentic before a launch can take place. If someone in that who line says this is not right, the chain would be broken
There is a story doing the rounds that Trump requested the nuclear codes recently and was refused by a senior military officer. If that's the case there is some hope that the backstop against an order to deploy nukes may hold.
There is a story doing the rounds that Trump requested the nuclear codes recently and was refused by a senior military officer. If that's the case there is some hope that the backstop against an order to deploy nukes may hold.
I can't imagine that story has any credible source.
There is a story doing the rounds that Trump requested the nuclear codes recently and was refused by a senior military officer. If that's the case there is some hope that the backstop against an order to deploy nukes may hold.
I can't imagine that story has any credible source.
Serious question - I don't know the extent of his power concerning nuclear war etc.
IIRC, US Shipmates have pointed out that even the President can't fire off nukes on his own, so to speak, but has to have others present.
Not that that's necessarily a comforting thought, given the sycophancy surrounding him.
Actually, the President has the sole authority to order a nuclear strike. He does not need to go to Congress. He does not need the agreement of the Cabinet. Nor does he need the approval of the joint chiefs of staff in the military. BUT there is a key guardrail. The military must verify if the order is legal. Is it necessary? Is it proportional? Who/what is it targeting. Then too, multiple people must authenticate and transmit the order. The president has to give identity codes. The duty officer at the National Military Command center has to be alerted, the STRATCOM commander must down to the launch crews. All have to agree the codes are authentic before a launch can take place. If someone in that who line says this is not right, the chain would be broken
There is a story doing the rounds that Trump requested the nuclear codes recently and was refused by a senior military officer. If that's the case there is some hope that the backstop against an order to deploy nukes may hold.
I can't imagine that story has any credible source.
That's one of those stories where anyone in a position to verify it wouldn't comment. And, anyone who comments isn't in a position to verify it. About the only person who may know and be inclined to break all protocol relating to security surrounding nuclear codes would be Trump himself.
There is a story doing the rounds that Trump requested the nuclear codes recently and was refused by a senior military officer. If that's the case there is some hope that the backstop against an order to deploy nukes may hold.
I can't imagine that story has any credible source.
That's one of those stories where anyone in a position to verify it wouldn't comment. And, anyone who comments isn't in a position to verify it. About the only person who may know and be inclined to break all protocol relating to security surrounding nuclear codes would be Trump himself.
I think that, in a sense, that's what is most worrying.
I used to buy a Guardian every day it published, but no longer. They did more than any other newspaper, except possibly their longtime sister publication (now under new owners) The Observer, to legitimise and spread the hatred and persecution of trans people as acceptable on the British left with horrific results - and they still do. They have blood on their hands.
I think their US edition may be different in this respect but not the parent company in the UK.
They have done that for a long time. I am a monthly supporter of the Guardian.
Oh, they have excellent journalism (from my perspective), and I have cited them from time to time too. But, as a retiree on limited pension, I cannot support every paper I agree with.
The app is even more so as you're only allowed a certain amount of articles before the pay wall whereas with ordinary online version you get reminders like please support us but you can scroll past them
I wonder if people have tried the Conversation? It's an Australian publication but it has a UK edition. I'd imagine it also has a US one
I sometimes buy the I newspaper, originally an offspring of the Independent but now owned by the Mail (!) but I think some of the letters and indeed articles would have the average Mail punter having apoplexy......!!
Trump was asked on MNBC yesterday about some high-profile companies that are considering NOT collect tariff compensation from the government. Unsurprisingly, he expressed approval of their stance, and said he would "remember" them.
Haven't really heard anything, but I'm gonna speculate that somewhere in the admin, some guys are tossing around the idea of jawboning companies to forego compensation, so the government can somehow hand the money over to "the people" directly.
There is a story doing the rounds that Trump requested the nuclear codes recently and was refused by a senior military officer. If that's the case there is some hope that the backstop against an order to deploy nukes may hold.
I can't imagine that story has any credible source.
That's one of those stories where anyone in a position to verify it wouldn't comment. And, anyone who comments isn't in a position to verify it. About the only person who may know and be inclined to break all protocol relating to security surrounding nuclear codes would be Trump himself.
It was said of retired General James (Mad Dog) Mattis, Secretary of defence for two years in the first Trump administration, that he had advised the most senior military officers as follows. If Trump ever issued a direct order as Commander in Chief to use nuclear weapons, they should refer the order to him. In chain of command terms he had no authority to do that. But I am very sure he would have been obeyed. He had the experience and the reputation. I can’t recall the details but I’m pretty sure he ignored a bellicose (non-nuclear) instruction from Trump on at least one occasion.
I’m not sure there is anyone in active military command who would do that, and certainly not the current Secretary for War.
So I guess the world is genuinely at risk in the event that Trump doesn’t follow the TACO pattern. There’s a cognitively declining, nasty natured, inconsistent, vain man in the White House with the power to push the nuclear button. It’s a major understatement to say that’s a worry.
There is a story doing the rounds that Trump requested the nuclear codes recently and was refused by a senior military officer. If that's the case there is some hope that the backstop against an order to deploy nukes may hold.
I can't imagine that story has any credible source.
That's one of those stories where anyone in a position to verify it wouldn't comment. And, anyone who comments isn't in a position to verify it. About the only person who may know and be inclined to break all protocol relating to security surrounding nuclear codes would be Trump himself.
It was said of retired General James (Mad Dog) Mattis, Secretary of defence for two years in the first Trump administration, that he had advised the most senior military officers as follows. If Trump ever issued a direct order as Commander in Chief to use nuclear weapons, they should refer the order to him. In chain of command terms he had no authority to do that. But I am very sure he would have been obeyed. He had the experience and the reputation. I can’t recall the details but I’m pretty sure he ignored a bellicose (non-nuclear) instruction from Trump on at least one occasion.
I’m not sure there is anyone in active military command who would do that, and certainly not the current Secretary for War.
So I guess the world is genuinely at risk in the event that Trump doesn’t follow the TACO pattern. There’s a cognitively declining, nasty natured, inconsistent, vain man in the White House with the power to push the nuclear button. It’s a major understatement to say that’s a worry.
Trump was asked on MNBC yesterday about some high-profile companies that are considering NOT collect tariff compensation from the government. Unsurprisingly, he expressed approval of their stance, and said he would "remember" them.
Haven't really heard anything, but I'm gonna speculate that somewhere in the admin, some guys are tossing around the idea of jawboning companies to forego compensation, so the government can somehow hand the money over to "the people" directly.
These comments were panned by MSNBC Lawrance O Donnell. He pointed out if companies would forego applying for tariff rebates they would likely be sued by shareholders for neglect of fiduciary responsibilities. In essence, it is not the company's money, it is the shareholder's money they are playing with.
Trump was asked on MNBC yesterday about some high-profile companies that are considering NOT collect tariff compensation from the government. Unsurprisingly, he expressed approval of their stance, and said he would "remember" them.
Haven't really heard anything, but I'm gonna speculate that somewhere in the admin, some guys are tossing around the idea of jawboning companies to forego compensation, so the government can somehow hand the money over to "the people" directly.
These comments were panned by MSNBC Lawrance O Donnell. He pointed out if companies would forego applying for tariff rebates they would likely be sued by shareholders for neglect of fiduciary responsibilities. In essence, it is not the company's money, it is the shareholder's money they are playing with.
Makes a lotta sense. But I wonder what the shareholders for Apple and Amazon are thinking, as those companies have been reported, albeit somewhat vaguely and passively, as "opting not to claim" the refunds.
Trump was asked on MNBC yesterday about some high-profile companies that are considering NOT collect tariff compensation from the government. Unsurprisingly, he expressed approval of their stance, and said he would "remember" them.
Haven't really heard anything, but I'm gonna speculate that somewhere in the admin, some guys are tossing around the idea of jawboning companies to forego compensation, so the government can somehow hand the money over to "the people" directly.
These comments were panned by MSNBC Lawrance O Donnell. He pointed out if companies would forego applying for tariff rebates they would likely be sued by shareholders for neglect of fiduciary responsibilities. In essence, it is not the company's money, it is the shareholder's money they are playing with.
Makes a lotta sense. But I wonder what the shareholders for Apple and Amazon are thinking, as those companies have been reported, albeit somewhat vaguely and passively, as "opting not to claim" the refunds.
Depends if they can justify it, it's always possible that there are plenty of cases where applying for a tariff rebate costs more than the rebate.
Trump was asked on MNBC yesterday about some high-profile companies that are considering NOT collect tariff compensation from the government. Unsurprisingly, he expressed approval of their stance, and said he would "remember" them.
Haven't really heard anything, but I'm gonna speculate that somewhere in the admin, some guys are tossing around the idea of jawboning companies to forego compensation, so the government can somehow hand the money over to "the people" directly.
These comments were panned by MSNBC Lawrance O Donnell. He pointed out if companies would forego applying for tariff rebates they would likely be sued by shareholders for neglect of fiduciary responsibilities. In essence, it is not the company's money, it is the shareholder's money they are playing with.
Makes a lotta sense. But I wonder what the shareholders for Apple and Amazon are thinking, as those companies have been reported, albeit somewhat vaguely and passively, as "opting not to claim" the refunds.
Depends if they can justify it, it's always possible that there are plenty of cases where applying for a tariff rebate costs more than the rebate.
Yeah, based on what I've been reading, it's apparently a pretty complicated procedure to get through, even for companies with all the paperwork on hand.
Comments
Assuming a wag-the-dog strategy at work(*), the anti-Iranian aggression was likely supposed to be the primary distraction from Epstein. But while it has technically succeeded in that goal, it's almost certainly not in the way that Trump had hoped, since the war has been getting, at best, middling approval numbers from hoi poloi. So Trump would likely want a distraction from the distraction, as it were, and back-and-forth jab fests with the pontiff might've seemed like an attractive option.
(*) Not usually my first assumption, but with Trump I could see it, throwing in the caveat that it's also in the long term interests of the USA, as those interests are defined by certain factions of long-standing influence in American policy.
I was many years in fundamental drug development (with a well replected US corporation, as it happens) and I'm not (yet) aware of any proper clinical trials of this compound. Surely the legal registration of Ibogaine will take some time yet?
Maybe, yeah. The FDA is supposed to be doing something or other next week, but I'm not exactly clear what.
And I have to stand corrected, re-reading the chart, right now, the USA's laws are among the most restrictive, rather than in the middle.
It seems veterans groups are among the biggest backers of ibogaine in the USA, due to it's supposed utility in combating PTSD. Some vets have been going down to Mexico for treatment.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/20/trump-presidency-evil-absurd-frightening-ideology
I'm still scared. He may well unleash nukes on Iran this week.
Trump always telegraphs what he is about to do. He has yet to say anything about nuking Iran. He has said he will take out the power plants and bridges of Iran. That can be done through conventional weapons. Nevertheless, that in itself is a war crime.
The atomic clock may be ticking closer to midnight, but it is not there yet.
Maybe. I'm still scared, though.
Never mind. The Cockroaches Of The Apocalypse will enjoy them.
For companies that DID pass the tariffs down but still wanna withhold compensation from their customers, the next little bit of time could see some rocky PR for them.
I suspect you're not alone in that.
Three of the judges in the majority for Learning Resources are Republican appointees, two of them by Trump(*). But I've still see tariff apologists on-line somehow trying to blame the Democrats(unspecified as to which branch of government) for the shitshow.
Re that Guardian quote. I think Trump has moved beyond silly and inconsistent to just dangerous.
Despite the fact that cognitive decline is in general very sad, one of the things I’ve observed is that people with previously nasty tendencies (under control to some extent) tend to become worse if the decline lessens inhibitions. Which it often does.
Helping someone in cognitive decline isn’t easy. It can require hard decisions in their interests and the interest of others. And the more powerful the person, the harder that is.
I am expecting Cabinet 25th Amendment action at some stage. I’m hoping it’s not too little, too late. This is moving beyond self-interested political calculation. In my view it’s already done so.
He doesn’t always signal what he intends to do, mostly yes but he has surprised the world on occasion.
Many countries seem to be hoping the GOP will take action.
I can’t see the 25th Amendment being invoked because too many of those who would have the power to pass it, owe their positions to Trump and Trump alone. Moreover, in what way would Vance be better?
What I am concerned about, though, is what would happen if the Democrats can flip both houses with only a simple majority in each of them? Would DjT become so unstable he really becomes dangerous--ya ain't seen nothing yet folks.
Something tells me once he is out of office, there is going to have to be some new amendments to address those scenarios
Serious question - I don't know the extent of his power concerning nuclear war etc.
It’s by no means the same but the visible collapse of Thatcherism in the UK was sudden. But there had been rumours of rumbling for some time before.
In politics, loyalty to a leader is rarely permanent.
I
Many of the cabinet members have already made their fortunes. They can retire very easily. Some of them, though, may have to deal with legal ramifications for being in DjT's circle.
True, though I assume that if we get to the point of half the cabinet being ready to jump then half of congressional republicans will be on board too.
If the cabinet declares the president is unable to carry out the functions of the office, the Vice President will become the Acting President until such time as the President can return to the office. The President can contest the declaration which would then take 2/3 of both houses to agree with what the cabinet did. But even then, the VP would only be an Acting President unless the President later dies or resigns or is removed by impeachment.
I really cannot see the 25th imposed unless the President f+cks up real badly. Or he has a stroke, as in the case of Woodrow Wilson.
IIRC, US Shipmates have pointed out that even the President can't fire off nukes on his own, so to speak, but has to have others present.
Not that that's necessarily a comforting thought, given the sycophancy surrounding him.
Actually, the President has the sole authority to order a nuclear strike. He does not need to go to Congress. He does not need the agreement of the Cabinet. Nor does he need the approval of the joint chiefs of staff in the military. BUT there is a key guardrail. The military must verify if the order is legal. Is it necessary? Is it proportional? Who/what is it targeting. Then too, multiple people must authenticate and transmit the order. The president has to give identity codes. The duty officer at the National Military Command center has to be alerted, the STRATCOM commander must down to the launch crews. All have to agree the codes are authentic before a launch can take place. If someone in that who line says this is not right, the chain would be broken
Yeah, the source is pretty dubious now I've done some digging:
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-nuclear-codes-11857229
Thank you - point taken.
I think that, in a sense, that's what is most worrying.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/21/doj-southern-poverty-law-center-investigation
I think their US edition may be different in this respect but not the parent company in the UK.
Oh, they have excellent journalism (from my perspective), and I have cited them from time to time too. But, as a retiree on limited pension, I cannot support every paper I agree with.
I wonder if people have tried the Conversation? It's an Australian publication but it has a UK edition. I'd imagine it also has a US one
I sometimes buy the I newspaper, originally an offspring of the Independent but now owned by the Mail (!) but I think some of the letters and indeed articles would have the average Mail punter having apoplexy......!!
And yet they're not actually interested in going after the extremists. One suspects because a lot of them are cabinet officers or their advisers.
Haven't really heard anything, but I'm gonna speculate that somewhere in the admin, some guys are tossing around the idea of jawboning companies to forego compensation, so the government can somehow hand the money over to "the people" directly.
It was said of retired General James (Mad Dog) Mattis, Secretary of defence for two years in the first Trump administration, that he had advised the most senior military officers as follows. If Trump ever issued a direct order as Commander in Chief to use nuclear weapons, they should refer the order to him. In chain of command terms he had no authority to do that. But I am very sure he would have been obeyed. He had the experience and the reputation. I can’t recall the details but I’m pretty sure he ignored a bellicose (non-nuclear) instruction from Trump on at least one occasion.
I’m not sure there is anyone in active military command who would do that, and certainly not the current Secretary for War.
So I guess the world is genuinely at risk in the event that Trump doesn’t follow the TACO pattern. There’s a cognitively declining, nasty natured, inconsistent, vain man in the White House with the power to push the nuclear button. It’s a major understatement to say that’s a worry.
No. I was thinking of a populist bailout in the form of tariff rebates mailed to the general public just in time for the midterms.
Alas, this - especially that last paragraph.
These comments were panned by MSNBC Lawrance O Donnell. He pointed out if companies would forego applying for tariff rebates they would likely be sued by shareholders for neglect of fiduciary responsibilities. In essence, it is not the company's money, it is the shareholder's money they are playing with.
Makes a lotta sense. But I wonder what the shareholders for Apple and Amazon are thinking, as those companies have been reported, albeit somewhat vaguely and passively, as "opting not to claim" the refunds.
Depends if they can justify it, it's always possible that there are plenty of cases where applying for a tariff rebate costs more than the rebate.
Yeah, based on what I've been reading, it's apparently a pretty complicated procedure to get through, even for companies with all the paperwork on hand.