Sadly, we have an idiot running the country.

In a fresh twist on U.S.-Venezuela drama, President Trump is clashing with Exxon Mobil over his ridiculous push to revive the country’s massive but battered oil sector following the U.S.-backed ouster of Nicolás Maduro.

At a White House meeting on Friday with top oil executives, Trump pitched big incentives: unspecified U.S. security guarantees for companies willing to invest heavily in fixing Venezuela’s crumbling energy infrastructure. He envisions U.S. firms (and others) pouring in billions to boost production, lower global energy prices, and deliver economic wins back home.

But Exxon CEO Darren Woods wasn’t buying the hype. He bluntly called Venezuela “uninvestable” right now, citing the need for major overhauls to commercial frameworks, the legal system, investment protections, and hydrocarbon laws. Exxon has painful history there—assets nationalized twice (most notably in 2007 under Chávez/Maduro), leading to a long arbitration battle where they recovered only a fraction of the claimed $12 billion. Woods said any return would require “pretty significant changes” from past conditions, though he left the door open for a technical team to assess assets soon.

Trump didn’t take the caution well, and of course he’s acting like a child. On Sunday aboard Air Force One, he told reporters: “I’ll probably be inclined to keep Exxon out… I didn’t like their response. They’re playing too cute.” He claimed other companies are eager to jump in and dismissed past losses, saying, “We’re not gonna look at what people lost in the past. You’re gonna make a lot of money, but we’re not going to go back.”

Similar hesitancy came from ConocoPhillips (also burned for billions in 2007 nationalizations) and even Chevron (the only major U.S. player still active there), which offered modest ramp-up potential but no huge commitments.

This episode exposes the gap between Trump’s authoritarian delusions and corporate pragmatism. Trump seems to assume that toppling a regime and waving security promises is enough to get Big Oil marching into Venezuela’s fields like it’s a surefire gold rush. Yet executives remember the expropriations, outstanding debts, political instability, and the massive capital needed to revive dilapidated operations—risks that don’t vanish overnight with presidential assurances.

The result? A public spat where the president threatens to sideline the largest U.S. oil company from his own “America First” energy vision. It’s a stark reminder: oil isn’t pumped by fiat. Even with military-backed regime change, companies won’t ignore billions in past losses, legal uncertainties, or the need for durable protections just because a president says “come on in.”

This is another pathetic example of Trump’s foolishness, thinking you can conquer a country, seize its oil, and have corporations line up like it’s a government contract. Reality check: Exxon isn’t a branch of the military; it’s a business that learned the hard way Venezuela isn’t a reliable partner.

Also, there’s the reality US oil companies have strong incentives not to support (or eagerly participate in) a rapid flood of cheap Venezuelan oil onto global markets. These companies are heavily reliant on fracking, particularly the independent shale producers in places like the Permian Basin. Frackers don’t want to fund competition that tanks their margins in an already oversupplied world. Trump’s vision of cheap Venezuelan oil as an “America First” win ignores how it could hurt the very US energy sector he champions, highlighting yet another gap between idiotic political bravado and market reality.

Donald Trump has created a mess with his tariffs, and we’re starting to see evicence across various industries.

The spirits industry in the U.S. is facing all sorts of challenges. Young people are drinking much less alcohol. The post-Covid booze boom has subsided. And there’s a ton of supply. One executive in the beer business told me this is the worst year of his 35-year career.

The recent news from Jim Beam has certainly rattled people. The company is pausing production of its flagship bourbon product for all of 2026! That’s a real punch in the gut.

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board doesn’t mince words as they place blame squarely and Trump an dhis tariffs. Even as some tariffs are lifted, the damage has been done. Canadians hate him and gleefully avoid American products. So it’s much more than a simple cost issue. It’s a destruction of the American brand. It will be interesting to see how this starts to manifest in other industries.

Last weekend bankers and dignitaries from around the world descended on Washington for the annual World Bank–IMF meetings. But just a few days before, the conference rooms were not only still available at Trump International, they were heavily discounted. On October 2, a deluxe room, with a rack rate of $805, could be had for as low $445 a night on Hotels.com. All other five-star D.C. downtown hotels were sold out. By Wednesday, October 5, weekend stays in the deluxe rooms were marked down to $404 per night on Trump International’s own website. The more luxurious 500-square-foot executive rooms, with a city view and marble bath, were only $484. By comparison, at the Waldorf-Astoria in Georgetown, the only available rooms were $1,139 per night, according to Hotels.com.

Mark Cuban predicted this, and it will be interesting to see if this trend continues after the election.

Would you stay at a Donald Trump property? Would you buy a condo with the Trump name on it? If you’re reading a blog like this, you’re probably one of the millions of people repulsed by Donald Trump’s disgraceful campaign for the presidency. You have to think that this will have an effect on his business model which revolves around the power of the Trump name.

We asked this same question five years ago during the Donald’s birther mania, but even that racist attack didn’t hurt his brand. But now with his presidential campaign and repeated racist and offensive statements, it’s hard to imagine he’ll avoid a permanent smear on his reputation.

Mark Cuban has emerged as one of Trump’s most effective critics, as many Americans respect Cuban’s business acumen, so his attacks on Trump tend to stick. Cuban has predicted that Trump will go personally bankrupt withing seven years of the election if he loses as a result of doing so much damage to his brand.

I have no idea if Trump and his children will ever go bankrupt, but I do know that I would never again stay at a Trump property. I’ve spoken to many professionals and business executives who feels the same way. Trump’s legions of supporters don’t fit the demographic of his business clientele, so Cuban may be right and this could be a real problem for Trump. One can only hope . . .

Anyone interested in the stability of the world economy can’t be happy with the Brexit mess. David Cameron took a political risk and it blew up in his face, while also offering a modern lesson of why Alexander Hamilton and James Madison were skeptical of letting the passions of the majority rule in any given moment.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump offered up a typical, idiotic and self-centered response.

Fortune 500 CEOs prefer Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump by 58% to 42% as explained in this video. This shouldn’t be a surprise as Trump has sounded like an economic buffoon with statements about tariffs and negotiating down the national debt.

Basically, he came across as a jerk. Then, Obama smacked him down by releasing his birth certificate, mocking Trump in front of the Washington press corps and then interrupting “Celebrity Apprentice” with the news that Navy SEALS had killed Osama bin Laden.

Meanwhile, the press has started to dig into Trump’s business dealings, shining a light on some of Trump’s less impressive ventures. Trump is getting sued by some who purchased condos thinking they were Trump projects, only to find later when the project folded that Trump was just licensing his name.

These stories are now all over the media. So it begs the question – did Trump screw up with his high-profile, mean-spirited attacks on the President? Is this going to hurt his brand? I always thought he was a clown, but he didn’t bother me. Now, I have no interest in supporting anything he’s associated with. Others I’ve spoken to feel the same way.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out . . .