Ivan Kramskoy Christ in the desert 1920
Leads in all swing states.
Trump poll and Trump Media.
The election is three weeks away — but the legal battles have already begun. Politico reports @KamalaHarris has “hundreds of lawyers on call in all 50 states.” Her massive legal team is already waging electoral war in the courts. Today in Georgia, a judge ruled that election… pic.twitter.com/yW6a3KuvZu
— Jesse Watters (@JesseBWatters) October 16, 2024
Ackman
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846214495779119179
Elon
Elon Musk says Rachel Maddow and Mark Cuban remind him of a Iesbian couple from Portland
Never deleting this app 🤣 pic.twitter.com/TDMZn6fOrv
— TaraBull (@TaraBull808) October 16, 2024
RFK
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846213396452053410
Voter ID
The Republican Party has become the party of common sense.
“We need borders. We need fair elections. We don’t want men playing in women’s sports. We don’t want transgender operations without parental consent.. 99.9% is common sense.” pic.twitter.com/A6c6fJxlYB
— America (@america) October 15, 2024
Gutfeld Musk
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846444714117288154
Engineer
ELON: I ENSURE GREAT ENGINEERS CAN FLOURISH AT MY COMPANIES
“I consider one of my core responsibilities in running companies to have an environment where great engineers can flourish.
And I think in a lot of companies, maybe most companies, if somebody is a really talented,… pic.twitter.com/ncYmTgBqv0
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) October 15, 2024
Trump Faulkner he’s good in this
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 16, 2024
BB
Donald Trump had a fiery interview today with the editor-in-chief of Bloomberg John Micklethwait.
Here are the top 5 moments:
5. Trump roasts the Federal Reserve, says they show up to the office once a month to "flip a coin."
4. Trump calls out Micklethwait to his face along… pic.twitter.com/DEgrTyOlUx
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 15, 2024
X thread.
• I’m Voting For Him And Here’s Why (Jason)
I can’t stand Donald Trump. He is braggy, he insults people for no reason, and he is just a brutal personality. But my mind is made up. I’m voting for him and here’s why:
* He puts Americans and their well-being first. Kamala will not.
* He will bring @elonmusk into his cabinet to be the efficiency czar and get rid of waste. This alone may be the best single reason to vote for him.
* He will bring @RobertKennedyJr into his cabinet to Make American Healthy Again. He will finally get to the bottom of why our food companies are destroying the health of our children.
* I’m sick of the way the media lies continuously about @realDonaldTrump, starting with the incessant racism claims. They are just nonsense. The latest thing I learned? He sent his plane to fly Nelson Mandela home after he was in jail with the U.S. wouldn’t do it. Racist? No.
* I’m sick of the U.S. being embroiled in foreign wars. Trump will keep us out of them again. He’s just crazy enough that foreign nations will stand down. They have no fear of Kamala. They will fear him.
* Trump sees this country as fundamentally good. Kamala sees it as inherently evil.
* Trump will end the nonsense of the open border which makes our country less secure, less financially stable, and brings in millions of people illegally who compete for Americans’ jobs.
* This government has to print billions to care for the illegals. That makes all of our dollars less valuable and makes prices zoom upward.
* He will stockpile Bitcoin.
* He will keep men out of women’s bathrooms and women’s sports.
* He is a heavyweight personality and negotiator. Kamala is a phony personality and a lightweight negotiator.
* The people who want Kamala Harris to win are the most annoying people in the country. They have pushed for pronouns, masks, endless vaccines, cancel culture, riots, blatant racism towards whites, gender confusion, undermining the U.S. constitution.
* He will upset the current political system. He was nearly the victim of assassination 3x. And he keeps going. He’s not the best in interviews, but he at least puts himself out there. Over and over and over. Kamala hasn’t done a single press conference.
* Harris and the media trying to prop her up hid Biden’s cognitive decline. They accuse @realDonaldTrump of being a threat to democracy. Yet she was installed as the nominee with no votes. She wants to pack the Supreme Court. She wants to eliminate the filibuster. She sued @RobertKennedyJr to keep him off the ballot. And the threat to democracy is Trump? Nonsense.
* Those who support Harris look at Trump supports as vile, stupid, ignorant, and fascists. They disown family members or disinvite them from Thanksgiving dinner of they support Trump. This is disgraceful.
* Every time she talks, I try to give her a chance. But she is the most phony and condescending politician I have ever seen. Ever. I can’t do it. I won’t do it.
* She and those who support her are resistant to Voter ID and believe requiring an ID is racist. Her Department of Justice is suing the state of Virginia for trying to purge the voter rolls of illegals. Why would we not want 1 vote per 1 U.S. citizen? Is it more racist to believe people from the inner city are perfectly capable of securing a government issued ID? Or to believe they are incapable?
That’s it. I’m done. Thanks for hearing me out.
“America PAC was created to support six key values: secure borders, sensible spending, safe cities, a fair justice system, self-protection, and free speech..”
• Musk Stumps For Trump In Pennsylvania, Donates Nearly $75 Million To PAC (ZH)
Businessman Elon Musk is touring Pennsylvania until Monday to stump for former President Donald Trump, where he’ll give talks to votors across the state. “Tomorrow night through Monday, I will be giving a series of talks throughout Pennsylvania,” Musk wrote early Wednesday on X. “If you’d like to attend one of my talks, there’s no attendance fee. You just need to have signed our petition supporting free speech & right to bear arms & have voted in this election.” “To clarify, you need have voted in Pennsylvania,” he added. Of note, the deadline to register to vote in Pennsylvania, a critical battleground state, is Oct. 21.
🚨 #BREAKING: Elon Musk has just announced he will be touring Pennsylvania from tonight until Monday, giving talks to voters all across the state
This is HUGE!@elonmusk being on the ground here is the Kamala campaign’s worst nightmare.
In order to attend, you must be have… pic.twitter.com/EywVI2egdf
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) October 16, 2024
Meanwhile, Musk has donated nearly $75 million to his America PAC, and was the sole donor of $74,950,020 according to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). The PAC set a goal to get 1 million voters in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and North Carolina to sign the petition in support of the First and Second Amendments by Oct. 21. “Sign our petition in defense of YOUR Constitutional rights to Free Speech & Bear Arms!” the PAC wrote on X earlier this month. “For each registered swing state voter you refer that signs the petition, you get $47!” As the Epoch Times notes further, Musk is the world’s wealthiest person, with a net worth of $246.8 billion, according to the Forbes real-time billionaires list. He announced the launch of the America PAC back in May, stating at the time that it was created to “support candidates who believe in the core values of America.”
According to its mission statement, America PAC was created to support six key values: secure borders, sensible spending, safe cities, a fair justice system, self-protection, and free speech. The super PAC has since become the seventh-largest outside spender during the 2024 election cycle, spending a total of $106,031,817, according to a tally by OpenSecrets. The pro-Trump super PAC, Make America Great Again Inc, has spent $253,970,695 this election cycle, and the pro-Harris super PAC, Fast Forward USA, has spent $263,417,307 according to the non-profit. Earlier filings from September show that America PAC received millions of dollars in donations from Palantir Technologies co-founder Joe Lonsdale’s Lonsdale Enterprises, venture capitalist Doug Leone, and Sequoia Capital partners Shaun Maguire, among others.
You left out “racist”. And why not throw in “misogynist”.
• Joy Reid: Black Male Trump Voters Part Of A ‘Global Fascist Phenomenon’ (ZH)
While it’s true that not many Americans watch MSNBC’s Joy Reid and take her seriously (her show ‘The ReidOut’ is #14 on the list of most popular news commentary shows in the US according to viewership), she does remain a symbol of the woke left and her views often give us a glimpse into the collective hive mind of progressives. Similar to women on shows like ‘The View’, Reid is a standard bearer for perpetually angry, post-menopausal cat ladies that do sadly tend to vote in large numbers. These are the same women coming out in droves to support Kamala Harris based purely on her gender and skin color. They are the same women that supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 simply because they wanted a woman president and they didn’t care who it was. And generally speaking it is these kinds of women that use shaming tactics as a means to control the people around them. Their only source of power in life is to henpeck others into submission.
Joy Reid completely loses it on air and is now claiming black and brown men voting for Trump are fascists
Keep it up, this is exactly why Kamala Harris is losing the male vote
The Democrat desperation is glorious
— Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) October 15, 2024
The problem for Harris is that childless cat ladies are not a large enough demographic to ensure a presidential win; she needs men to vote for her as well. As many critics have pointed out, this is rather ironic given the fact that Democrats and leftist activists have spent the better part of the last decade calling masculinity a “toxic” and oppressive social disease that needs to be eliminated. They have worked hard to demonize all men as potential rapists, misogynists, mass shooters and fascists. Now, not surprisingly, progressive women want men to lift them out of the hole they’ve dug for themselves. But they don’t want to admit they were wrong about men or apologize for their behavior and accusations, no. That would be asking far too much. Instead, they have turned to the same old shaming tactics they always use to get what they want.
This week Joy Reid suggested that Kamala Harris’ plunge in the polls is due in large part to a ‘global fascist phenomenon’ led by white males. She also argues that pockets of ‘black and brown men’ are a part of this supposed fascist takeover. The campaign to drag black voters back to the Democrat plantation continues. Reid’s comments come not long after Barack Obama (also a henpecker) tried to shame black men into voting for Harris by accusing them of bias against her because she’s a woman. As 2016 taught Americans, it’s foolish to blindly trust the polls and the election isn’t over until it’s over – That said, numerous indicators suggest that Harris does not inspire trust or optimism among most Americans.
Minority voters including black men have been loudly explaining why they don’t like Harris, and her being a woman is rarely on their list of complaints. Here’s what most American voters care about according to the surveys: The failing economy and stagflation, mass immigration and open borders and foreign policy leading to WWIII. That’s it. It doesn’t matter if they are white, black, brown, man or woman, these are the issues that concern people the most. Electing the first black woman president is irrelevant compared to these problems. Black male voters in particular are walking away from the political left, not because they are turning “fascist”, but because they’re finally waking up to the game being played with their futures.
“Trading platform Kalshi [..] is offering investors the opportunity to stake up to $100 million on the result of the November vote..”
• US Election Betting Skyrocketing (RT)
Election betting using so-called ‘prediction markets’ is skyrocketing in the US after a ban on the practice was recently lifted, according to media reports. Platforms are currently forecasting a narrow win for Republican candidate Donald Trump against Democratic rival Kamala Harris. Trading platform Kalshi, which last week won its legal fight against a US regulator in a Washington court, is offering investors the opportunity to stake up to $100 million on the result of the November vote. The court’s decision came after the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) failed to demonstrate harm to elections, despite arguing that such bets are similar to gaming and could undermine democratic integrity. The CFTC’s appeal against the ruling is ongoing. In the first days since the ban was lifted, more than $12 million has been taken in, according to Kalshi founder Tarek Mansour.
He added that the platform is working to attract more traders and several institutional investors. The bets are structured as binary options, priced up to $1 per contract. As of Monday, contracts favoring the former US president traded at 54 cents, while those for current Vice President Harris were at 47 cents. The prices also reflected a widening gap between Trump and Harris that has fluctuated between 51 and 49 cents for either candidate since the market opened a week ago. Although betting prices may indicate belief among traders that Trump will win the election, experts are cautious, saying that only the participation of institutional players could bring a clearer assessment.
“You may want more institutional money because while these investors might have their own particular political views, they’ll have studied the outcome and their wagers represent especially informed opinion,” Grant Ferguson, a political scientist and a follower of prediction markets at Texas Christian University told the Financial Times on Tuesday. Offshore prediction platforms such as Polymarket have also seen a surge in bets with over $1.9 billion staked on the presidential race. Experts expect volumes to soar tenfold as election day approaches.
She said “There is not a thing that comes to mind” when asked how she would differ from Biden. She was chastised for it. So they reinvented her. Easy as pie.
• Harris Pledges Break From Biden’s Course In Fox Interview (RT)
US Vice President and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris has distanced herself from the political course set by President Joe Biden, in an interview with Fox News on Wednesday. In previous media appearances, Harris had avoided drawing contrasts between herself and the outgoing president. “You’re not Joe Biden, you’re not Donald Trump, but nothing comes to mind that you would do differently?” Fox host Bret Baier asked the Democratic candidate. “Let me be very clear, my presidency will not be a continuation of Joe Biden’s presidency,” Harris replied, pledging to draw on her “professional experiences” and bring in “fresh new ideas.” “For example, as someone who has not spent the majority of my career in Washington DC, I invite ideas: whether it be from the Republicans who are supporting me, who were just on stage with me minutes ago, and the business sector and others, who can contribute to the decisions that I make,” the vice president continued.
Referring to the Harris campaign’s slogan, “Time to turn the page,” Baier pressed the Democrat nominee about what she would turn the page to, having already been vice president for three and a half years. Harris pivoted her answer to her Republican rival. “Well, first of all, turning the page from the last decade in which we have been burdened with the kind of rhetoric coming from Donald Trump,” she replied, accusing the former president of dividing the American people. Harris had been widely criticized in the media over her recent interview on the Late Show, for evading a question on what “major changes” her presidency would bring, compared to Biden’s. “Sure, well I’m obviously not Joe Biden,” she told host Stephen Colbert last week, adding that neither is she Donald Trump, to cheers from the studio audience.
“And so when we think about the significance of what this next generation of leadership looks like, were I to be elected president, it is about – frankly, I love the American people, and I believe in our country,” she said, going on to praise the American work ethic, ambition and character. In an interview on ABC last week, Harris was also asked how she would have done things differently to Biden. “There is not a thing that comes to mind in terms of – and I’ve been a part of most of the decisions that have had impact,” the presidential nominee said. Trump seized on the remark, writing on his Truth Social platform the following day: “Kamala stated clearly, yesterday, that she would not do anything different than Joe Biden, so there is nothing to debate.” Harris took over as the Democratic party’s contender for the election after Biden stepped down earlier in the year, after a disastrous televised debate against Trump raised concerns over his mental state.
Kamala Fox
Why haven't you posted any clips of the interview then?
Because this is a total lie — and every answer was an unmitigated disaster.
See for yourself:pic.twitter.com/fiLfiGyQeM https://t.co/jq5Ul54YVz
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 17, 2024
“..she “empowers a culture” that has left local elected officials feeling “unengaged and disrespected.”
• US Democrats Worried About Pennsylvania – Politico (RT)
Some of the top Democrats in Pennsylvania are reportedly unhappy with the way Vice President Kamala Harris has run her campaign in the biggest battleground state in the upcoming US presidential election. Pennsylvania accounts for 19 Electoral College votes and Democrats are hoping their traditional strongholds of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh will come through for Harris on November 5 against Republican Donald Trump. Both parties are on track to spend over $500 million in TV advertising there, more than in any other state. “Democrats fret that any mistake here, big or small, could tip the election away from them,” Politico reported on Wednesday, citing insider sources.
“Pennsylvania is such a mess, and it’s incredibly frustrating,” said one elected Democrat, who asked to remain anonymous. “I feel like we’re going to win here, but we’re going to win it in spite of the Harris state campaign.” Harris’ campaign manager for Pennsylvania, Nikki Lu, has drawn criticism from the Philadelphia set. One strategist claimed that she “empowers a culture” that has left local elected officials feeling “unengaged and disrespected.” Lu is from Pittsburgh, on the other side of the state. Philadelphia City Councilmember Kendra Brooks told Politico that “there’s been a lot of struggles” within the campaign, due to “folks coming into Philadelphia that are making assumptions about what needs to happen in Philadelphia and not necessarily having the relationships to move Philadelphia politics.”
Lu has also been accused of not doing enough to attract black and Latino voters, seen as key Democrat voting blocs. While complaints about voter outreach are common among Pennsylvania Democrats, “this level of frustration and finger-pointing is not,” Politico noted. The campaign’s initial Latino coalition manager, Mariel Joy Kornblith Martin, quit after just two weeks on the job and sent a memo to state party leaders in August complaining she was not given the data or the infrastructure she needed. A Harris campaign official said Martin’s claim was “untrue.” According to former Philadelphia city council member Maria Quinones-Sanchez, the campaign has become “so scientific around door-knocking and connecting, that they forget that culturally, Latinos like just noise.”
“We need young African American men to come home. We need African American women… to come out in record numbers, and disaffected African Americans,” said Ryan Boyer, an important Philadelphia labor leader. He accused Lu of being “slow” to reach out to surrogates that could help with the black community, such as Mayor Cherelle Parker. Lu herself did not comment to Politico. Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez sent a statement that the Democrats were “running the largest and most sophisticated operation in Pennsylvania history,” with 50 staff reaching out to black voters and another 30 to Latinos. In recent weeks, however, the campaign brought in President Barack Obama’s former field director for Pennsylvania, Paulette Aniskoff, as well as several other operatives with ties to Philadelphia.
“..a major part of Joe Biden’s legacy as president..” What, the end of NATO?
• Ukraine Wants To Join NATO While Biden Is US President – Envoy (RT)
Admitting Ukraine into NATO before the end of the year could be a major part of Joe Biden’s legacy as president, Kiev’s envoy to the bloc, Natalia Galibarenko, has said. Vladimir Zelensky has pitched immediate membership in the US-led bloc as part of his ‘victory plan’, which he presented on Wednesday. Galibarenko explained the reasoning behind this in an interview with Reuters in Brussels, recorded the day before. “Our idea is that giving Ukraine [an] invitation at this moment is a political signal,” she told the agency. “We sincerely believe that it can be part of the legacy of current American administration.” Russia has demanded Ukraine’s military neutrality, and the specifically the renunciation of its NATO aspirations, as one of the preconditions for the current conflict to end.
According to Galibarenko, fast-tracking Kiev into the bloc would be “like a final, final verdict,” making Moscow unable to press the issue further. Even an invitation by itself, without any practical actions towards membership, would “send a powerful public message,” she argued. While NATO has declared that Ukraine is on an “irreversible” path to join eventually, it has qualified this by saying it will happen “when allies agree and conditions are met.” The US-led bloc has also told Kiev that it cannot join while at war and declined to give a timeline for accession. Two NATO members, Slovakia and Hungary, have already said they would vote against admitting Ukraine. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has argued that this would mean an open war with Russia, which he is opposed to.
The US has been one of the biggest supporters of Ukraine, approving almost $180 million in military and financial aid to Kiev since 2022. According to Reuters, Galibarenko’s push suggests there is “major uncertainty” in Kiev about what might happen after the American presidential election on November 5. Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democrats’ candidate for the White House, has “signaled” continued support for Ukraine but has not spelled out any policies. Former president and Republican candidate Donald Trump has promised to end the conflict within a day, presumably by discontinuing the US aid that is sustaining Ukraine.
Speculation about Biden fast-tracking Ukraine’s NATO bid first appeared earlier this month in Financial Times, but has not been substantiated. Then Vice President Biden was entrusted with Washington’s Ukraine policy during President Barack Obama’s second term, and played a key role in the 2014 coup in Kiev. His presidency’s sole foreign policy achievement so far has been to end the US war in Afghanistan after nearly 20 years. The pullout from Kabul in August 2021 ended in a virtual stampede for the exits, however, as the US-backed Afghan government imploded before the advancing Taliban.
“..the Kremlin rubbished his “ephemeral peace plan,” saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”..”
• Zelensky Presents ‘Victory Plan’ To Ukrainian Parliament (BBC)
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has presented MPs with a long-awaited “victory plan” that aims to strengthen his country’s position enough to end the war with Russia. Zelensky told parliament in Kyiv that the plan could finish the war – which began with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 – no later than next year. Key elements include a formal invitation to join Nato, the lifting by allies of restrictions on long-range strikes on Russia, a refusal to trade Ukraine’s territories and sovereignty, and the continuation of the incursion into the Kursk region of Russia. The Kremlin dismissed the plan with a spokesman saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”.
Addressing MPs, Zelensky also criticised China, Iran and North Korea for their backing of Russia, and described them as a “coalition of criminals”. He said he would present the victory plan at an EU summit on Thursday. “We are at war with Russia on the battlefield, in international relations, in the economy, in the information sphere, and in people’s hearts,” Zelensky told parliament.
The plan outlined by Zelensky consists of five key points:
• Inviting Ukraine to join Nato
• The strengthening of Ukrainian defence against Russian forces, including getting permission from allies to use their long-range weapons on Russian territory, and the continuation of Ukraine’s military operations on Russian territory to avoid creation of the “buffer zones” in Ukraine
• Containment of Russia via a non-nuclear strategic deterrent package deployed on Ukrainian soil
• Joint protection by the US and the EU of Ukraine’s critical natural resources and joint use of their economic potential
• For the post-war period only: replacing some US troops stationed across Europe with Ukrainian troopsThree “addendums” remain secret and will only be shared with Ukraine’s partners, Zelensky said. The plan was presented to US President Joe Biden, as well as presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, back in September. Key allies such as Britain, France, Italy and Germany have also reportedly been shown the plan. However Zelensky’s conditions for peace are increasingly at odds with the situation which surrounds him. In front of MPs he acknowledged the growing fatigue in his country. His own tiredness was etched across his face as he said that “victory has become for some an uncomfortable word and it’s not easy to achieve.” nNational morale has gradually been crumbling under the weight of a mounting death toll, a controversial mobilisation law and never-ending Russian assaults on Ukrainian territory.
It’s increasingly thought any peace deal would have to involve Ukraine conceding territory in exchange for security guarantees. However, there was no hint of a compromise to bring the end of the war closer. Instead, Zelensky doubled down on wanting to force Russia to negotiate and to not cede Ukraine’s territory, through the strengthening of his own military. He also claimed his extensive plan could be implemented with the agreement of his allies, and not Russia. In public, Zelensky evidently still sees this war as existential, and warned of Russian President Vladimir Putin continuing to strengthen his position.
He also seemed to frame his vision as an investment opportunity for Western allies in terms of natural resources and economic potential. The Ukrainian president wants his exhausted troops to keep fighting. But with his army so reliant on Western aid, his “victory plan” will need the approval of the next US president. Immediately after Zelensky finished speaking, the Kremlin rubbished his “ephemeral peace plan,” saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”. The only way the war would end was Ukraine to “realise the futility of the policy it is pursuing,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.
“..by significantly increasing military aid, Western nations would enable Ukrainian forces to make Russia “helpless, running somewhere screaming in terror.”
• British Military Believes Kiev ‘On The Verge Of Losing’ – Daily Express (RT)
Behind closed doors, the British military has grim expectations for the Ukraine conflict and believes that Kiev is about to lose, the tabloid Daily Express claimed on Tuesday. Over the past month, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has been touting his ‘victory plan’ to foreign leaders. Later this week he is set to unveil it to Ukrainian MPs and the general public, as well as the European Council. What Zelensky will present to his nation on Wednesday will not include specific numbers of requested weapons shipments by donor nations, according to his aide Mikhail Podoliak. As one of the key suppliers of arms to Ukraine, Britain has publicly supported Kiev’s uncompromising position in the conflict with Russia. But private assessments by its generals say the situation is bad for Ukraine, a military source cited by Daily Express said.
”I was speaking to a very senior British Army officer today,” the source was quoted as saying. “He told me that Ukraine is on the verge of losing the war against Russia. It’s very serious.” Zelensky has briefed the leaders of key Western nations on his ‘victory plan’, starting with US President Joe Biden in late September and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer last week. The head of the British government said it was “very important we’re able to show our continued commitment to support Ukraine.” Kiev has been asking for permission to use British-donated Storm Shadow missiles for long-range strikes into Russia. The lifting of restrictions on the use of Western weapons is understood to be integral to Zelensky’s proposal.
The Ukrainian leader had hoped to promote his plan at a gathering of donors in Germany last week, but the event was postponed after Biden canceled his participation to deal with the aftermath of deadly Hurricane Milton. Russia has made significant gains on the battlefield in the past several months, particularly since August, when Ukraine sent some of its best-equipped and experienced troops into Kursk Region. Podoliak claimed in an interview earlier this week that by significantly increasing military aid, Western nations would enable Ukrainian forces to make Russia “helpless, running somewhere screaming in terror.” Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that Moscow will treat Ukrainian long-range strikes with arms provided by Western nations as coming directly from the donors, and will respond accordingly.
A history of..
• How The West Doomed Ukraine (Diesen)
In February 2022, Russia started its military operation against Ukraine to impose a settlement after a group of NATO countries had undermined the Minsk II peace agreement for seven years. On the first day after the start of hostilities, Vladimir Zelensky confirmed that Moscow had contacted him to discuss negotiations based on restoring Ukrainian neutrality. On the third day, Russia and Ukraine agreed to start peace negotiations based on a Russian military withdrawal in return for this. Zelensky responded favorably to this condition, and he even called for a “collective security agreement” to include Russia to mitigate the security competition that had sparked the war. The talks that followed are referred to as the Istanbul negotiations, in which Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement before the US and UK sabotaged it, according to numerous claims by people close to the process.
For Washington, there were great incentives to use the large proxy army it had built in Ukraine to weaken Russia as a strategic rival, rather than accepting a neutral Kiev. On the first day after the start of the military operation, when Zelensky responded favorably to starting negotiations without preconditions, US State Department spokesperson Ned Price rejected this stance – saying Russia would first have to withdraw all its forces. “Now we see Moscow suggesting that diplomacy take place at the barrel of a gun or as Moscow’s rockets, mortars, artillery target the Ukrainian people. This is not real diplomacy… If President Putin is serious about diplomacy, he knows what he can do. He should immediately stop the bombing campaign against civilians, order the withdrawal of his forces from Ukraine, and indicate very clearly, unambiguously to the world, that Moscow is prepared to de-escalate.”
This was a demand for capitulation as the Russian military presence in Ukraine was Moscow’s bargaining chip to achieve the objective of restoring Kiev’s neutrality. Less than a month later, Price was asked if Washington would support peace talks, to which he replied negatively as the conflict was part of a larger struggle: “This is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine… The key point is that there are principles that are at stake here that have universal applicability everywhere, whether in Europe, whether in the Indo-Pacific, anywhere in between.” In late March 2022, Zelensky revealed in an interview with The Economist that “there are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.”
Israeli and Turkish mediators have since confirmed that Ukraine and Russia were both eager to make a compromise to end the war before the US and UK intervened to prevent peace from breaking out. Zelensky had contacted former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett to help with the talks. Bennett noted that Putin was willing to make “huge concessions” if Ukraine would restore its neutrality to end NATO expansion. Zelensky accepted this condition and “both sides very much wanted a ceasefire.” However, Bennett argued that the US and UK intervened and blocked the peace agreement as they favored a long war. With a powerful Ukrainian military at its disposal, the West rejected the Istanbul peace agreement and there was a “decision by the West to keep striking Putin” instead of pursuing peace.The Turkish negotiators reached the same conclusion: Russia and Ukraine agreed to resolve the conflict by restoring Ukraine’s neutrality, but NATO decided to fight Russia with Ukrainians as a proxy.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu argued that some NATO states wanted to extend the war to bleed Russia: “After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long… But following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, I had the impression that there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue – let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine.” Numan Kurtulmus, the deputy chairman of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s political party, confirmed that Zelensky was ready to sign the peace agreement before the US intervened: “This war is not between Russia and Ukraine, it is a war between Russia and the West. By supporting Ukraine, the United States and some countries in Europe are beginning a process of prolonging this war. What we want is an end to this war. Someone is trying not to end the war. The US sees the prolongation of the war as its interest.”
“Anyone returning a ballot for a family member or disabled voter is required to enter county boards of elections offices and fill out an attestation form stating that they are following the law..”
• Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Anti-Ballot Harvesting Directive (JTN)
The Ohio Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the secretary of state’s directive preventing ballot harvesting, ruling that its challengers filed their suit too late. In August, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) issued a directive stating that ballot drop boxes outside county boards of elections can only be used by voters dropping off their own ballots, Dayton Daily News reported. Anyone returning a ballot for a family member or disabled voter is required to enter county boards of elections offices and fill out an attestation form stating that they are following the law. The Ohio Democratic Party sued over the directive, requesting that it be rescinded. However, the lawsuit was not filed until Sept. 27, nearly a month after the directive was issued. The court ruled that the lawsuit was filed too late, as military and overseas ballots were sent out on Sept. 21 and early voting began on Oct. 8, according to the Statehouse News Bureau.
“I’m grateful the court has allowed us to proceed with our efforts to protect the integrity of Ohio’s elections,” LaRose said in a statement on Tuesday. “Political activists tried once again to dismantle the safeguards we’ve put in place, specifically in this case against ballot harvesting, and they’ve been rejected. This is the same policy that’s been used successfully in other states, and it’s designed to protect both individuals and election officials from accusations of illegal voting. The court’s decision should reinforce the confidence Ohio voters have in the security, honesty, and accountability of our elections.” In July, an Ohio federal judge partially struck down a state law restricting who can return absentee ballots for disabled voters, ruling that it violated the Voting Rights Act. LaRose issued his directive about a month later.
“Go to the polls and vote. Then for the next 21 days get everyone you know to get out and vote. We don’t want to take a chance.”
• Trump Urges Georgians To Vote Early Amid Record Breaking Turnout (JTN)
Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday night urged Georgia residents to turn their ballots in early, after the state counted a record-breaking 300,000 votes cast during the first day of early voting and a state court blocked a hand-counting ballot rule. Georgia Secretary of State Chief Operating Officer Gabriel Sterling confirmed the number in a social media post, saying the number was “123% higher than the old record for the 1st day of voting.” Tuesday was the first day of in-person early voting in the Southern state, and the first day voters could return absentee ballots. Other states have already begun their early voting, including Arizona, Minnesota, South Dakota, and Virginia. North Carolina will begin its early in-person voting on Thursday.
Trump has been campaigning in critical swing states, including Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, ahead of the November election. The former president’s urging on Tuesday occurred during a campaign stop in Atlanta. “Early mail-in voting in your state is now underway, and early in-person is underway. But I’ll tell you what, I’m hearing very good things,” Trump said during the rally. “So if you have a ballot, return it immediately. If not, go tomorrow or as soon as you can. Go to the polls and vote. Then for the next 21 days get everyone you know to get out and vote. We don’t want to take a chance.”
The comment comes as a Georgia judge late Tuesday paused a new rule from the Georgia State Election Board that would have forced officials to hand-count the number of ballots cast at each polling place, determining that it would cause “administrative chaos” because of a lack of preparation and training, according to CNN. Vice President Kamala Harris, who is the Democratic nominee for president, is campaigning in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin this week. Trump is also expected to campaign in Detroit, Michigan, on Friday night.
“..a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person known to be represented by another lawyer in the matter..”
• Liz Cheney Under Fire for Improper Contacts with Jan. 6 Witness (Turley)
Former J6 Committee Co-Chair and Rep. Liz Cheney has long been criticized for her role in creating a one-sided and at times erroneous record of what occurred on January 6th. That includes editing out Trump’s call for supporters to protest “peacefully,” burying evidence on Trump’s offer to supply National Guard support for that day, and highlighting a false account of Trump in his presidential limo that was directly contradicted by witnesses. She now stands accused of unethically contacting a key represented witness to get her to change her testimony. In my view, ethical proceedings are unlikely after the disclosure of ex parte communications with former Trump aide Cassidy Hutchinson. However, the evidence seemingly contradicts public accounts of how Hutchinson decided to fire her counsel and change her testimony.
Hutchinson was represented by Stefan Passantino, who some clearly viewed as a stumbling block to getting Hutchinson to turn against Trump. Hutchinson would claim under oath that Passantino pressured her to stay “loyal” to Donald Trump and coached her responses to support Trump despite her conflicting accounts. However, newly disclosed evidence allegedly contradicts that account, including Hutchinson telling former Trump aide (and now The View co-host) Alyssa Farah Griffin that “[Passantino’s] not against me complying.” Griffin reportedly responded “I actually agree with Stefan’s approach and think it’s accomplished everyone’s goals. I am happy to tip liz off.” Hutchinson would later dump Passantino and testify to allegations that have been challenged as untrue. That includes the limo allegation that was repeatedly raised by Cheney and others. Hutchinson recounted the story that Trump allegedly grabbed the wheel of the vehicle after the Secret Service allegedly refused to take him to the Capitol.
Cheney and the Committee were aware that the account was directly and clearly refuted by the driver of the vehicle. However, they buried his account and highlighted that claim in its final report as being credible. The new allegation concerns the communications leading up to that changed testimony. Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., chairman of the House Administration oversight subcommittee has released the new evidence while alleging that Cheney used an encrypted phone app to evade defense counsel in speaking with Hutchinson. Under Rule 4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, “a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person known to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the prior consent of the lawyer representing such other person or is authorized by law or a court order to do so.” Cheney is a D.C. licensed lawyer.
At the outset, in my view, Cheney was acting as a member of Congress in this matter. That has always been a rather grey area for lawyers who are also members of Congress. The bar has taken a broad view of the need for lawyers to adhere to these ethical standards. However, it is not clear politically or ethically if the Bar officials would be inclined to pursue Cheney, who has been lionized in Washington for her role in the investigation. Yet, the record does indicate that Cheney was not just aware of the represented status but the policy of the House to respect the rules governing represented parties. In one message Griffin tells Hutchinson, “Her one concern was so long ad [sic] you have counsel, she can’t really ethically talk to you without him.”
That did not appear to prove a barrier. Before Passantino withdrew as counsel, Cheney communicated secretly with Hutchinson. A later message was send to Cheney reading on June 6, “Hi, this is Cassidy Hutchinson. I’m sorry for reaching out this way, but I was hoping to have a private conversation with you (soon), if you are willing.” Cheney responded, “I would be happy to. Let me know what time works for you.”
“Tel Aviv is exhausting its defense and intelligence resources without achieving any meaningful objective..”
• The Zionist Lobby Wins, But The US Loses (SCF)
The U.S. has apparently made the decision to intervene directly in the large-scale conflict currently taking place in the Middle East. According to recent reports, American military units, including auxiliary groups and special forces, are being sent to Israel to more effectively support Tel Aviv’s forces in their land-to-air operations. The main reason for the U.S. intervention is to support the IDF in air defense operations, and there is an official statement that there is no intention to use U.S. troops on direct combat lines. However, these claims have no practical credibility, since what we are seeing in the Middle East is a progressive escalation. Previously, direct American assistance was limited to the naval front. Now, specialized troops are already operating air defense systems on “Israeli” soil. Soon, it is quite possible that there will be direct American combat involvement both in Gaza and on the border with Lebanon, since Washington clearly does not have the ability to impose limits on Israel.
The arrival of American troops in Israel at this time is highly significant because the Zionist occupation is going through one of the most difficult moments in its recent history. Israel failed to achieve any of its strategic objectives with the genocidal operation in the Gaza Strip, having killed thousands of civilians, but failed to defeat Hamas and free the prisoners of war. Now, after suffering a humiliation during the recent Iranian attack on Zionist military and strategic bases, Israel is carrying out a disastrous invasion of Lebanon, where it suffers from Hezbollah’s high qualification in guerrilla and attrition warfare – in addition to Israeli cities being increasingly easy targets for the Shiite militia’s missiles and drones. It is fair to say that Israel is facing more difficulties now than at any other time in its military history. Tel Aviv is exhausting its defense and intelligence resources without achieving any meaningful objective, falling into a trap from which it will certainly not escape without profound changes in its state structure – if not its actual ceasing of existence as a state.
It would be naive to think that Pentagon strategists are unaware of this type of situation. Despite American propaganda encouraging Israel, senior American defense officials certainly know that entering Israel is strategic suicide for the United States, which is why the Pentagon’s recent decision seems even more irrational. However, it is important to understand that not all decisions made by a state are based on strategic sense and rationality, and that several factors influence it, such as historical and ideological ties and, above all, the stimulus of various lobbies. Contrary to what many experts say, the reality of U.S.-Israeli ties cannot be understood by taking Washington as the main agent of relations. Israel seems to have much more influence on American politics than Washington has in Tel Aviv. It is no coincidence that, despite Democrats and Republicans disagreeing on many issues, they continue to agree on Israel, with support for Zionism being absolute among all American politicians.
In fact, what the decision to send American military personnel to Israeli soil reveals is that it is the Zionist lobby that really controls the main strategic decisions of the United States. Joe Biden and his main allies have made it clear several times that they are not willing to directly support Israel in a major regional war in the Middle East. With elections coming up and major domestic problems in the United States, all Washington wants to do is to resolve its own issues and avoid military engagement. However, American decision-makers do not seem to have enough strength to neutralize the influence of the Zionist lobby, giving in on several important issues, even though all strategic sense advises something different to be done. In the end, it is possible to say that once again the Zionist lobby has won the American political game. It remains to be seen how long the U.S. will be able to resist the pressure from this same lobby for direct intervention.
“That is to say,” Rogozin has written, “there have been some rather decent people in my family tree”.
• Dmitry Rogozin For President (Helmer)
According to the Russian Constitution amendments adopted in 2020, Vladimir Putin can run for re-election in 2030 and win another term until 2036, when he will be 84. The contest over the presidential succession may thus be postponed for another decade. Or else it is under way already. That’s one of the stakes in the present argument in Moscow over how the Ukraine war should end between the General Staff and the Kremlin – between unconditional capitulation of the regime west of the Dnieper River to the Polish border, and the east-of-Dnieper terms Putin proposed at Istanbul in March 2022, and repeated in a speech to the Foreign Ministry this past June. The debate in Moscow over the terms of Istanbul-I and of Putin’s proposed Istanbul-II involves much more than future control of the territories east of the Dnieper and of the territories to the west.
The question is whether the military trust Putin to administer the outcome of the war which Russian voters believe has been won by the General Staff. In his June 14 speech Putin admitted to his audience of senior Foreign Ministry officials what they all knew – that he and the General Staff had disagreed over the “preservation of the Ukrainian sovereignty over these territories, provided Russia has a stable land bridge to Crimea.” Putin’s “land bridge” and other territorial concessions were dismissed by the General Staff. One candidate has already tossed a military style cap into the succession race: this is Dmitry Medvedev, the one-term president and currently deputy secretary of the Security Council; he is 59 now, 71 in 2036. In his Telegram platform, Medvedev has been a consistent advocate of the General Staff line: “In my opinion, recently, even theoretically, there has been one danger – the negotiation trap, into which our country could fall under certain circumstances.
Namely, the early unnecessary peace talks proposed by the international community and imposed on the Kiev regime with unclear prospects and consequences [Medvedev was referring to Istanbul-I]. After the neo-Nazis committed an act of terrorism in the Kursk region, everything has fallen into place. The idle chatter of unauthorized intermediaries on the topic of the beautiful world has been stopped. Now everyone understands everything, even if they don’t say it out loud. They understand that there will BE NO MORE NEGOTIATIONS UNTIL THE COMPLETE DEFEAT OF THE ENEMY! [Medvedev’s caps]” Medvedev implies criticism of Putin but remains loyal in the hope of negotiating an amicable transfer of power between the two of them. At the same time Medvedev is signalling the General Staff that the military can trust him. But they don’t.
There is another succession candidate who is trusted by both the military and the voters, but who has not announced he is running. Putin is well aware of him; he has repeatedly tried to sideline him. This is Dmitry Rogozin, a presidential campaigner against Boris Yeltsin; Duma deputy and negotiator in Chechnya; ambassador to NATO; deputy prime minister in charge of the military industrial complex; head of Roskosmos, and now, after surviving a Ukrainian assassination attempt, senator for the Zaporozhye region in the Federation Council. Rogozin is 60; in 2036 he will be 72. Rogozin is the son of a Russian Army general, grandson of a Russian Navy officer, great-grandson of a Red Army pilot, great-great-grandson of a general of the Russian Army in the war against Japan of 1904-05. Rogozin’s ancestors have been recorded in the Russian fight against the Teutonic Knights (13th century) and with Dmitry Pozharsky and Kuzma Minin in the war against the Poles (17th century). “That is to say,” Rogozin has written, “there have been some rather decent people in my family tree”.
In a recently published book, On the Western Front, Rogozin has said more explicitly: “The war against Ukrainian radical nationalism and Russophobia is not a confrontation between armies and military technologies, but our country’s response to an existential threat to our entire people, the entire Russian civilization. This is the restoration of historical justice. This is a common cause, in which the unity of the army, society and its political class must be manifested. This is the opportunity to kick out of the country (and not let back in!) the fifth column of traitors and globalisation-mongers.
The war in Ukraine is a war for Ukraine and Russia, it is a holy war for the right of the Russian people to exist and reunite on their ancestral territory. This is a war against a much stronger and more resourceful enemy, a war to force the collective West, manipulated by the Anglo-Saxons and German revanchists, to recognize Russia’s right to a safe and independent future for our children. Therefore, there should be no ‘red lines’ for us in this war…I consider it fundamentally important to constantly show universal solidarity with our army. It is impossible to maintain the illusion that the army is ‘out there doing its job’, and we continue to live as before.”
“In my opinion it is essential that Trump be elected, because it will give America four more years. But the result is unlikely to be renewal of our country. Simply, the can will be kicked down the road.”
• How Do We Get Off the Road to Armageddon? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Two days ago on October 14 I posted my column about a new US Department of Defense Directive, 5240.01, that radically alters the relationship between the US military and American citizens. In the new directive issued one month prior to the election, the US military is authorized to intervene against American citizens and to use deadly force against Americans. I asked why such a drastic reformulation of long established policy unless the Democrats were setting up a coup in place of a lost election. The dramatic change in policy requires more examination than my speculative question, but does not seem to be getting any attention. One would think that those patriots who are convinced that the military will come forward at the last resort and save our freedoms should be alarmed by Department of Defense Directive 5240.01. Those patriots who see Trump as America’s savior should be alarmed by his response.
In a Fox Business interview on October 13, Trump was asked if he anticipated any chaos following the announcement of the election results. Trump said not from his supporters, a surprising statement if the Democrats steal the election. Trump thought that Kamala’s loss could result in disturbances from the woke left-wing, but “it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military.” So here we have it: Trump has bought into Directive 5240.01. Having accepted the directive, how can Trump complain if the directive is used against him? It is only a few days before the presidential election and Trump seems again to be in the clutches of advisors composed of the ruling elites. Who are Trump’s advisors? Do they have any sense? Why is Trump aligned with Israel’s genocide of Palestine and attacks on Iran? Is Trump just another warmonger serving the military/security complex and Greater Israel?
Trump directs American hostility toward China, because of the lopsided trade deficit. But it was Wall Street that forced the offshoring of US manufacturing. The trade deficit results when the US corporations bring their offshored production home to America to sell. How can it be that Trump hasn’t a single advisor able to inform him of the real problem? We have to be grateful for Trump. He realizes that America is in dire straits, and he alone has emerged as anyone willing to do anything about it. But Trump is a real estate developer. He does not know issues and their history. His first term proved him to be a poor judge of people as he appointed to his government the very people he had declared to overthrow, and they overthrew him. Judging by his positions on DOD 5240.01, China, Israel, he has learned nothing and has no better advisors. In my opinion it is essential that Trump be elected, because it will give America four more years. But the result is unlikely to be renewal of our country. Simply, the can will be kicked down the road.
It is difficult to rouse the American people to the realities that they face. Americans are the most insouciant of all peoples. They exist surrounded by oceans and friendly countries devoid of military potential. Americans have ruled the world because World War II destroyed all rivals. Americans might be beginning an acquaintance with hardship, having lived on credit card and student loan debt, but despite the deceptions their government inflicts on them — 9/11, Muslim Terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, Covid pandemic, Russian invasion of Ukraine, Iranian nukes, Chinese threat, Trump insurrection, Putin’s resurrection of the Soviet Empire, the return of slavery by white supremacists– a large segment of the population still trusts the government that is destroying them. So, what can be done? How can an insouciant population deal with a ruling elite when the population doesn’t understand what is happening?
“Strengthening Rimland is a necessary condition for the integrity of Eurasia. Not a possibility, but a necessity.”
• Could The SCO Summit Save The BRICS+ New Order? (Pacini)
On Tuesday, Oct. 15 and Wednesday, Oct. 16 in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan, is the 24th SCO Summit, the partnership established in 2001 as an outgrowth of the Shanghai Five to promote mutual defense, security and international counter-terrorism across the greater Eurasian region. Today there are 10 full members, namely China, Belarus, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Russia, with Afghanistan and Mongolia as observer members already welcomed and Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain as countries in dialogue, Cambodia, Egypt, Kuwait, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates, to be joined at this 2024 Summit by guests from ASEAN, the CIS, the UN, and a representation from Turkmenistan.
A long and extensive list of states representing, geopolitically speaking, all of Eurasia and the Rimland coastal zone. Since this is a partnership centered on security issues, and therefore with an at least partially military agenda, we are talking about a meeting that can be a thorn in the side of NATO and the collective West. Strengthening Rimland is a necessary condition for the integrity of Eurasia. Not a possibility, but a necessity. This the Soviet leaders understood, and for that reason they had aimed not only at effective control of most of the areas abutting the Rimland, and thus to the South and East, but also had been far-sighted in weaving strong diplomatic relations and ideological-political cooperation with the countries to the East, so as to ensure lasting stability at the expense of attempts at destabilization coming from the West.
Rimland stability is not only a strategic issue but also an economic and political one. This meeting of SCO leaders comes just days before the start of the long-awaited BRISC+ Summit in Kazan, dubbed by many as “the event of the year,” from which the organizational line of the new global majority, or at least the programmatic lines of it, could emerge. As described earlier, there is a possibility-not officially stated, but theoretically plausible and confirmed by some rumors-that an alliance between BRICS and SCO, that is, between the two lungs of the emerging multipolar world, one economic and the other strategic, is in the works. This union would lead the new bloc to have a cohesive strength superior to that of NATO and, therefore, to represent not only an adversary, but even an enemy.
There are many reasons for the need for such an alliance: the West continues to promote wars and destruction, with aggressive diplomacy and an exasperated attempt to control the globe, without accepting that the rules-based order no longer applies; International Law is practically dead and it no longer makes sense to reason with paradigms written by the offices of bureaucrats in Washington and New York; genocide is taking place in Palestine and it is almost impossible to intervene because of the balance of war that Israel and the U.S. have created, threatening a nuclear apocalypse and blaming Iran and the Axis of Resistance. But, more than anything else, there are some brief reasons that are particularly urgent:
• the BRICS countries need an integrated defense system that harmonizes differences and specificities, especially now that the partnership is expanding and the new members lack the real military strength of the great powers. This in a multipolar world is normal, because military capacity is redistributed among multiple actors participating in the same scenario, the hegemonic polarizing force is lost, and a balance is set up made up of different magnetisms, which must keep in constant contact and balance in order to subsist;
• the economy of the BRICS countries and the politics of the partnership are in danger of being compromised, the hegemon still being very strong and entrenched, thus with the capacity to undermine the stages of realization of the multipolar transition.
This second point is very topical: think of how the situation in Gaza and Lebanon is undermining delicate diplomatic balances between Israel and Russia, and between Russia and Iran, involving the other Middle Eastern states and provoking antipathy in the Eastern countries that are bearers of peaceful solutions and seek to limit escalation. Think also of the situation in Taiwan, where the U.S. continues to foment a colorful revolution, or Turkey’s double-dealing that is teasing Islamic countries. A solution that gives whiplash to the West’s slowly waning adversaries is urgently needed.
Never was of course. Delusional.
• BMW Says EU Ban On Gasoline Cars From 2035 Is “No Longer Realistic” (ZH)
Germany’s car manufacturing giant BMW is warning that an EU ban on the sale of gasoline and diesel cars from 2035 is “no longer realistic” amid slow EV sales as the European auto industry will see a “massive shrinking” with such a ban. European carmakers are already struggling with their EV sales as subsidies in many countries are coming to an end and Chinese low-cost vehicle makers are gaining market share. Last year, the EU member states approved an emissions regulation under which the bloc will end sales of new carbon dioxide-emitting cars and vans in 2035. The rules target 55% CO2 emission reductions for new cars and 50% for new vans from 2030 to 2034 compared to 2021 levels, as well as 100% CO2 emission reductions for both new cars and vans from 2035. Under the regulation, the European Commission will assess in 2026 the progress the EU has made in achieving the target. The Commission will decide whether the targets need to be reviewed.
But BMW’s chief executive Oliver Zipse said on Tuesday at the Paris Automotive Summit that the ban “could also threaten the European automotive industry in its heart.” The current regulations will “with today’s assumptions, lead to a massive shrinking of the industry as a whole,” Zipse added, as carried by Bloomberg. Electric vehicle sales in Europe have been suffering this year. Sales in Germany, for example, are plummeting as Berlin ended subsidies at the end of 2023. Amid slowing sales of EVs, the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, ACEA, last month called for urgent action to reverse this year’s trend of declining EV sales. The European auto manufacturers united in ACEA, called on the EU institutions “to come forward with urgent relief measures before new CO2 targets for cars and vans come into effect in 2025.” Europe’s automakers “are playing our part in this transition, but unfortunately, the other necessary elements for this systemic shift are not in place,” ACEA said.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: "Today, over 100 members of Congress support a bill to fund Ozempic with Medicare at $1,500 a month. Most of these members have taken money from the manufacturer of that product, a European company called Novo Nordisk. As everyone knows, once a drug is… pic.twitter.com/qrken4yM75
— Camus (@newstart_2024) October 16, 2024
Candace
With Barack Obama making the rounds referring to black men as “brothers” and talking about “the struggle”—I feel like it really is time to address the elephant in the room. pic.twitter.com/TiNQKV6H71
— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) October 16, 2024
Aristotle Time
The Paradox of Time according to Aristotlepic.twitter.com/cT6BYxoeji
— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) October 16, 2024
Dog toys
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846586910031950085
New shoes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846594910075470191
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
Home › Forums › Debt Rattle October 17 2024