René Magritte Personal values 1952
https://twitter.com/i/status/1887952783858393241
DOGE
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 8, 2025
Astroturf
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 8, 2025
Antonio Gracias: DOGE Happened Just in Time to Stop America from Turning into a Kleptocracy
"When (@DOGE) started, I thought we had a democracy, but it turned into a bureaucracy."
"What I'm afraid of now, is we have a bureaucracy that is about to turn into a kleptocracy."… pic.twitter.com/FfALmMt04p
— The All-In Podcast (@theallinpod) February 8, 2025
Sen. John Kennedy
Sen. John Kennedy: Democrats Critical of DOGE Are Not Talking About What Elon Musk Is ‘Finding’
"A lot of my Democratic colleagues and members of the tofu crowd are very upset and screaming like Musk stole their dog. But they are not talking about what Mr. Musk is finding. Just… pic.twitter.com/GKAChNo4wI
— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) February 7, 2025
Maher
https://twitter.com/i/status/1888080063800705027
Bannon
Steve Bannon: "Bobby's term as HHS will just be the top of the first inning. They will put you in prison. They will break you. They will bankrupt you. They will smear you. Look, they control the most powerful nation in the history of the Earth. They're not prepared just to toss… pic.twitter.com/6Uoarpyl6w
— Camus (@newstart_2024) February 8, 2025
SPower
More USAID Corruption EXPOSED
– Samantha Power was sworn in as Administrator of USAID on May 3, 2021
– Her financial disclosure filed in Jan 2021 showed her assets were estimated at $6.7 million to $16.5 million
– Today, in 2024, her net worth is estimated at up to $30 million… pic.twitter.com/zj5SOVHmEL— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) February 8, 2025
McClain
Lisa McClain on Morning Joe: "Listen, I think what President Trump is doing by appointing Elon Musk is absolutely brilliant. We have a spending problem. It is going to take some unconventional thought process, some unconventional wisdom, to get us out of the mess we're in right… pic.twitter.com/lTNsD2bTDm
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 7, 2025
“Every day people are dying. Young handsome soldiers are being killed. Young men, like my sons. On both sides. All over the battlefield.”
• Trump Reveals He’s Spoken With Putin By Phone (Miranda Devine)
President Trump has spoken to Russian leader Vladimir Putin on the phone to try to negotiate an end to the Ukraine war, he told The Post in an exclusive interview aboard Air Force One Friday. “I’d better not say,” said Trump when asked how many times the two leaders have spoken. But he believes Putin “does care” about the killing on the battlefield. In an exclusive interview with The Post aboard Air Force One Friday, President Donald Trump spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the phone as he is trying to negotiate with him to end the Ukraine war. “He wants to see people stop dying,” said Trump. “All those dead people. Young, young, beautiful people. They’re like your kids, two million of them – and for no reason.”
The three-year-old war “never would have happened” if he had been president in 2022, Trump asserted. “I always had a good relationship with Putin,” he said, unlike his predecessor. “Biden was an embarrassment to our nation. A complete embarrassment.” Trump said he has a concrete plan to end the war. “I hope it’s fast. Every day people are dying. This war is so bad in Ukraine. I want to end this damn thing.” Addressing National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, who joined him in his study aboard Air Force One Friday night, the president said: “Let’s get these meetings going. They want to meet. Every day people are dying. Young handsome soldiers are being killed. Young men, like my sons. On both sides. All over the battlefield.”
Vice President Vance will meet Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky at the Munich Security Conference next week. Trump has said he wants to strike a $500 million deal with Zelensky to access rare-earth minerals and gas in Ukraine in exchange for security guarantees in any potential peace settlement. On Iran, Trump told The Post: “I would like a deal done with Iran on non-nuclear. I would prefer that to bombing the hell out of it. . . . They don’t want to die. Nobody wants to die.” “If we made the deal, Israel wouldn’t bomb them.” But he would not reveal details of any potential negotiations with Iran: “In a way, I don’t like telling you what I’m going to tell them. You know, it’s not nice.” “I could tell what I have to tell them, and I hope they decide that they’re not going to do what they’re currently thinking of doing. And I think they’ll really be happy.” “I’d tell them I’d make a deal.” As for what he would offer Iran in return, he said, “I can’t say that because it’s too nasty. I won’t bomb them.”
Fire and brimstone. We’re getting serious. It should result in an audit, which is long overdue. But that won’t come easy.
Elon Musk, as head of the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has been tasked with revising federal spending, and has set his sights on the Pentagon and the Department of Education, US President Donald Trump has confirmed. The newly authorized audits come in line with a broad push to slash public expenses. Musk, CEO of SpaceX and Tesla and owner of X (formerly Twitter), has been appointed as a “special government employee” to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under Trump’s administration, and is currently among the president’s key advisers. Despite its name, the agency is not a permanent federal executive department, but a temporary body dedicated to reducing government spending. Its primary goal is to cut up to $2 trillion in federal expenditures by July 2026.
Speaking at the press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba on Friday, Trump said that Musk will go through “just about everything” while reviewing the budgets of the departments. “I’ve instructed him to go check out education to check out the Pentagon, which is the military, and sadly you’ll find some things that are pretty bad, but I don’t think proportionately, you’re going to see anything like we just saw,” Trump said, highlighting that the DOGE would find “a lot,” taking into account how “bad” it was “with what we just went.” Earlier this week, Trump stated that billions of dollars have been stolen by the US Agency for International Development (USAID), highlighting that the lion’s share of the funds were used to pay for positive media coverage of Democrats.
Trump’s administration is currently focused on shutting down the agency, which operates as Washington’s primary means for funding political issues abroad. On the first day of his presidency, Trump ordered a 90-day freeze on almost all foreign aid. The president has also pushed against diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs within the federal government since assuming office on January 20. After being sworn in, Trump signed a series of orders rolling back protections for transgender individuals and terminating DEI initiatives. Last week, DOGE claimed that it had managed to save over $1 billion thanks to the elimination of contracts related to DEI. Prior to that, the agency had stated that it had slashed federal spending by approximately $1 billion per day as of January 29, due to an effective halt to “the hiring of people into unnecessary positions, the deletion of DEI, and stopping improper payments to foreign organizations.”
https://twitter.com/i/status/1888008418914382254
BREAKING: Pete Hegseth just told Pentagon personnel that a massive audit is coming.
"We are going to focus heavily to ensure that at a bare minimum, by the end of four years, the Pentagon passes a clean audit."
"I believe we are accountable for every dollar we spend and every… pic.twitter.com/TlDECg2jQn
— George (@BehizyTweets) February 7, 2025
Two federal judges separately(?!) getting involved. The first one says USAID cannot mass-fire employees…
• Judge Puts Brakes On Trump’s USAID Purge (RT)
A federal judge has temporarily barred the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington’s primary vehicle for funding political projects abroad, from putting thousands of employees on paid leave. The order was in response to a lawsuit filed by two labor unions representing federal workers. A “limited,” temporary restraining order issued by Judge Carl Nichols in the US District Court in Washington, DC, on Friday, banned the US government from placing around 2,200 USAID workers on administrative leave or evacuating them from their host countries before the end of the day on February 14. The ruling also reinstates some 500 employees who had already been furloughed.
“All USAID employees currently on administrative leave shall be reinstated until that date, and shall be given complete access to email, payment, and security notification systems until that date, and no additional employees shall be placed on administrative leave before that date,” the order reads. A request for a longer-term pause will be considered at a hearing on Wednesday, according to the ruling. Earlier on Friday, Democracy Forward and Public Citizen Litigation Group filed suit on behalf of two labor unions representing federal workers. The two unions are the 800,000-member American Federation of Government Employees and the American Foreign Service Association, which represents thousands of foreign service officers working for USAID.
US President Donald Trump suspended all US foreign aid, pending a three-month review, in one of his first executive orders after taking office on January 20. The decision is part of a broader plan to significantly reduce government spending. Subsequently, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio suspended a number of projects assigned to USAID. Earlier this week, Trump claimed that the agency had funneled billions of taxpayer money into media companies to foster positive media coverage of Democrats. Meanwhile, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, leading the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which is evaluating federal agencies’ spending, has branded USAID a “criminal organization” and claimed it funded bioweapon research.
…the second one says DOGE can’t access “personal financial data of millions of Americans”. Both cases run until Feb 14.
That DOGE would increase “Cybersecurity Risk” sounds fake. They’re too good for that. And as soon as something leaks, their project is over. But yeah, you can make the claim, no matter how empty…
• Judge Blocks DOGE’s Access to Sensitive Treasury Records (ET)
A federal judge has temporarily barred the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), run by Elon Musk, from accessing the personal financial data of millions of Americans kept at the Treasury Department. The late-night order, issued Saturday by U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan, blocks most Trump administration officials—including Musk and members of his cost-cutting initiative—from accessing sensitive Treasury records for at least a week while the case proceeds in the New York court. The injunction specifically prohibits President Donald Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent from granting access to records containing personally identifiable or confidential financial information to political appointees, special government employees, or any other employees from outside of the department. The White House has designated Musk a special government employee.
Under the order, only those working at the Bureau of Fiscal Services and have passed background checks may access those records in order to do their job. The judge further ordered any person among those whom he restricted to “immediately destroy any and all copies of material downloaded from the Treasury Department’s records and systems, if any.” A hearing on the matter is scheduled for Feb. 14. The decision was made after 19 state attorneys general sued the Trump and Bessent after DOGE was given access to the Treasury records. DOGE is an advisory body tasked to identify ways to reduce government spending.
The attorneys general argued that Musk and DOGE, which is not an official government department, should not have access to such highly sensitive financial data. They claimed that the move violates federal law and presents a massive cybersecurity and privacy risk. “Defendants’ new expanded access policy poses huge cybersecurity risks” that put “vast amounts of funding for the States and their residents in peril and endangers the [personally identifiable information] of States’ residents whose information is stored on the payment systems,” reads the complaint, which was filed late Feb. 7 in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Engelmayer agreed with the state’s argument that they “will face irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief.”
“That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking,” Engelmayer wrote. There was no immediate comment from the White House or Musk. The decision is the latest in a series of judicial interventions blocking the Trump administration’s rapidly unfolding actions to overhaul the federal bureaucracy. Just hours before Engelmayer’s order, another federal judge in Washington halted a Musk-led initiative to dismantle USAID, the agency responsible for administering foreign aid programs. In recent weeks, judges have also intervened to block Trump’s early executive actions ending automatic citizenship for children born on U.S. soil, pausing federal grants and loans, offering buyout to federal workers, and sending male inmates who identify as transgender women back to men’s prisons.
Eventually published as “Welcome to the Executive Presidency”. This was the working title.
• Trump Alone Can Fix It (RCP)
“I would support you to be spokesperson for the Pentagon,” Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal acidly told Pete Hegseth during his hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The insult was a poke in Pete’s eye for his career at Fox News. Blumenthal, who once fibbed that he had served in Vietnam as a Marine (he never left the States), thought Hegseth lacked the record of “leadership” to head an organization as large and complex as the Department of Defense. Evidently, it never crossed Blumenthal’s mind that this appointment was a first step toward making the department less large and complex. On paper, former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin had such “leadership” experience, as did Jim Mattis, Bob Gates, Leon Panetta, Donald Rumsfeld, and most other department secretaries over the last 25 years.
Pete, on the other hand, led a platoon in Iraq before smiling his way through Saturday morning news shows. Once, during a bit on “Fox and Friends,” Hegseth tossed an ax that sailed over its target and struck a man standing nearby. Pete grimaced, the man was unhurt, and the show went on. Despite Blumenthal’s putdown, Hegseth’s nomination passed out of committee and cleared a floor vote on his way to becoming the youngest secretary of defense since Donald Rumsfeld was first confirmed 50 years ago. Hegseth wasn’t the traditional nominee, and that’s the point. Blumenthal and others like him looked at Hegseth through distorted, outdated glasses. They fail to understand that Donald Trump is remaking the executive branch of the federal government, and it starts with choosing communicators.
Any effective network of strategic communication must be organized as a hierarchy – if there is no one “at the top” who determines the messaging, there will be as many messages as there are nodes in the network. The executive’s ability to achieve his goals is fundamentally dependent on high-fidelity, rapid information transferal, where the message is relayed broadly, quickly, and without significant distortion. That’s what effective communication is – and it explains why Trump’s first term was less effective than it could have been. When Trump took office eight years ago, the left resisted him through the mainstream media, Hollywood, and corporate America, but the spearhead of “The Resistance” was his own government. The bureaucrats of the vast “administrative state” did not see Trump as a legitimate occupant of his office. Thus, they didn’t merely distort the communication that came from the top.
They tried to subordinate his agenda by refusing to transfer the information. More than that, they actively disseminated information that ran counter to the president’s stated aims. Accomplished people like Jim Mattis and Rex Tillerson were seasoned executives with deep managerial experience, but their priorities were misplaced: Rather than advance the president’s initiatives, they focused on protecting themselves and their legacies.In his 1938 classic “The Functions of the Executive,” author Chester Barnard explains that an executive’s first task is to create a “definite system of communication.” Barnard wasn’t talking about the technical means of communication – whether that be telephone, memo, or computer – but the communicators themselves. These new modes of transferring information sometimes obscure the human interaction that remains the most effective form of information transfer.
“Communication,” Barnard writes, “will be accomplished only through the agency of persons,” meaning the appointment of the right people. Controlling an enterprise, he tells us, hinges on the executive’s choice of who will repeat and amplify the executive’s message. During the Biden interregnum, it seems that Trump absorbed these insights, almost as if by osmosis. Consider the inauguration. There were Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg front and center. Yes, they are among the world’s wealthiest men, but they also happen to be the owners of national and global media organizations. Trump spent the entire first day of his second term on camera, narrating his executive actions. “Here, David, that’s for you,” Trump said, passing his trademark, Trump-embossed marker to an aide, then holding up an executive order before the cameras like a newborn baby.
Never before had a president so merrily occupied the stage of the Oval Office, hosting audiences of millions online and on television, as he signed documents, bantered with reporters and staff, and generally went about his business. Trump knew his daylong, unscripted availability would contrast sharply with his predecessor’s behavior. Joe Biden’s increasing withdrawal from the public and his inability to deliver spontaneous remarks hid his declining mental health, and the fact that he really wasn’t in charge.
They didn’t just influence the news, they made it too (4,291 media outlets).
• USAID Funded Massive ‘News’ Platform, ‘Censorship Industrial Complex’ (ZH)
In addition to propping up far-left corporate media outlets like Politico and the BBC with taxpayer funds, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has funneled half a billion dollars to a secretive non-governmental organization operating a global news propaganda matrix. WikiLeaks published the bombshell report in the overnight hours that shows the massive taxpayer-funded state propaganda network – operating as a shady NGO – called “Internews Network”: “USAID has pushed nearly half a billion dollars ($472.6m) through a secretive US government financed NGO, “Internews Network” (IN), which has “worked with” 4,291 media outlets, producing in one year 4,799 hours of broadcasts reaching up to 778 million people and “training” over 9000 journalists (2023 figures). IN has also supported social media censorship initiatives.
The operation claims “offices” in over 30 countries, including main offices in US, London, Paris and regional HQs in Kiev, Bangkok and Nairobi. It is headed up by Jeanne Bourgault, who pays herself $451k a year. Bourgault worked out of the US embassy in Moscow during the early 1990s, where she was in charge of a $250m budget, and in other revolts or conflicts at critical times, before formally rotating out of six years at USAID to IN. Bourgault’s IN bio and those of its other key people and board members have been recently scrubbed from its website but remain accessible at http://archive.org. Records show the board being co-chaired by Democrat securocrat Richard J. Kessler and Simone Otus Coxe, wife of NVIDIA billionaire Trench Coxe, both major Democratic donors. In 2023, supported by Hillary Clinton, Bourgault launched a $10m IN fund at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI). The IN page showing a picture of Bourgault at the CGI has also been deleted.
IN has at least six captive subsidiaries under unrelated names including one based out of the Cayman Islands. Since 2008, when electronic records begin, more than 95% of IN’s budget has been supplied by the US government.
USAID has pushed nearly half a billion dollars ($472.6m) through a secretive US government financed NGO, "Internews Network" (IN), which has “worked with” 4,291 media outlets, producing in one year 4,799 hours of broadcasts reaching up to 778 million people and "training” over…
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 8, 2025
“We had a former cocaine addict sitting in on the most sensitive meetings of the most consequential and most important government in world history. Does that sit right with you?”
• Now We Know Who was Running the Country for Joe Biden (Margolis)
Have you noticed how leftists are losing their minds over Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency to expose rampant waste and corruption? As Musk uncovers shocking levels of mismanagement and even actions aiding America’s enemies, critics have launched coordinated attacks on him, implying that he’s the one who is actually running the White House. “No one voted for Elon Musk!” they say. Time Magazine’s latest issue has joined the fray, featuring Musk seated confidently at the Resolute Desk—a symbolic jab suggesting he’s really the one in charge. The outrage is ironic, considering the same voices now wailing about Musk’s alleged control were silent while Joe Biden spent four years clearly not running the White House. Why does this matter? Well, we now have fresh allegations from Lindy Li, a former Democratic National Committee (DNC) insider, about who was running the White House for Joe Biden.
And it’s quite terrifying. Once a proud fundraiser for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, Li has turned into an insider spilling the Democratic Party’s most closely held secrets—and, boy, does she have stories. Her revelations pull back the curtain on what has been described as a chaotic and delusional 2024 campaign for the Democrats, which spectacularly collapsed under the weight of its own hubris. Li has revealed intriguing insider details about how Joe Biden was ultimately ousted, and what Pelosi and Obama really think of Kamala. Back in December, she revealed new dirt on Joe Biden’s mental decline. “The president has not been cognitively fit to assume the duties of the Oval Office for a number of years now,” she told Fox News. “And it breaks my heart because I know President Biden and I love the man, but he is in no shape or form able to carry out the duties that the Commander in Chief requires, and it’s just devastating.”
But it’s her revelations about what happened in the White House in the aftermath of Biden’s devastating performance in his June debate on CNN with Trump that are truly jaw-dropping. According to Li, Joe Biden, already staggering from public scrutiny, effectively lost control of the White House after that fateful debate. The event reportedly prompted an audacious power shuffle at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue—one spearheaded by none other than Hunter Biden. Li alleges that, following Biden’s disastrous debate drubbing, Hunter essentially took over White House operations. Speaking with podcaster Shawn Ryan, she painted a picture of dysfunction at the highest levels of government: “After the [CNN] debate, Hunter basically commandeered the White House. He sat in on all of the White House top-level meetings. We had a former cocaine addict sitting in on the most sensitive meetings of the most consequential and most important government in world history. Does that sit right with you?”
Ryan’s immediate reaction—“No”—reflected what many are surely thinking. “Without security clearance mind you,” Li added. The idea that Hunter Biden, with no security clearance, was allegedly dictating the flow of information to his father is a much bigger deal than Elon Musk going after government waste, don’t you think? “That’s who was basically running the show. So Hunter basically battened down the hatches after the debate to make sure his father would only receive intel he pre-approved.” The media’s and the Democrats’ hypocrisy is glaring. They attack Elon Musk for exposing waste, accusing him of having too much power without having been elected, while their lack of scrutiny during the Biden presidency allowed for an unelected crack addict to run the country.
“The Hur Report revealed that Biden suffers from ‘poor memory’ and, even in his ‘prime,’ could not be trusted with sensitive information.”
• Trump Revokes Biden’s Security Clearances, Intel Briefings: “Poor Memory” (ZH)
President Trump revoked former President Biden’s security clearance and terminated his daily intelligence briefings, stating that, given his “poor memory,” there was no reason for Biden to continue receiving classified government information. “There is no need for Joe Biden to continue receiving access to classified information. Therefore, we are immediately revoking Joe Biden’s Security Clearances, and stopping his daily Intelligence Briefings,” Trump wrote on Truth Social late Friday evening. Trump said the decision was based on the precedent of Biden’s 2021 decision to end his access to the secret information. He also pointed to the special counsel report last year: “The Hur Report revealed that Biden suffers from ‘poor memory’ and, even in his ‘prime,’ could not be trusted with sensitive information.”
Biden in 2021…
JUST IN: President Trump revokes Joe Biden's security clearances, tells Biden, "YOU'RE FIRED!"
Biden revoked Trump's intelligence briefings in 2021, something that was historically provided to former presidents.
During an interview with CBS in 2021, Biden said that Trump… pic.twitter.com/iEzeFj3DYb
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) February 7, 2025
Trump concluded the post with: “I will always protect our National Security — JOE, YOU’RE FIRED. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” Steven Cheung, the president’s communications director, shared Trump’s Truth Social post on X and said: “Hit the road Jack and don’t you come back no more!” Trump’s team made a smart move given the investigations into various Biden family members—including Hunter Biden, who has been at the center of a probe into influence peddling schemes. Federal investigators have also recently become concerned about the Biden family’s close ties to China. Speaking with The Hill last month, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY.) said the pardons “validated” the investigations into Biden family members. Perhaps the actual reason the Trump team revoked Biden’s security clearance is over the family’s close ties with the Chinese.
“USAID and Soros allegedly spent $27 million on anti-Trump prosecutions, claims journalist Mike Benz.”
• USAID or SorosAid? How US Tax Dollars Fund Chaos Worldwide (Sp.)
Soros’ vast NGO network has spent over $20 billion since 2000 on radical liberal causes across the world. Tens of millions or even billions of US taxpayer dollars were funneled through USAID, observers suspect. The Soros-linked East-West Management Institute received over $260 million from USAID to influence foreign affairs in Georgia, Uganda, Albania, and Serbia. Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center, backed by Soros, began receiving USAID grants in 2014 – the same year the US-backed Euromaidan coup ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych with neo-Nazi support. Over $1 million has been funneled by USAID to the center.
In August 2024, a coup against Bangladeshi PM Sheikh Hasina was allegedly fomented by USAID, IRI, and Soros-linked groups. Her successor, Muhammad Yunus, is a known Clinton and Soros ally. According to The Grayzone, US taxpayer money funded rappers, transgender activists, and LGBT* initiatives to create a “power shift.” Soros and USAID have long sought to unseat Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán, who has actively opposed the globalist billionaire since 2017. During the 2022 elections, the Soros-linked NGO Action for Democracy funneled $7.6 million to his opposition.
Soros-linked groups, backed by USAID, led resistance efforts against Donald Trump during his presidency, influenced the 2020 election through Black Lives Matter protests, and worked to flip battleground states in 2020–2021. Soros funded the Electoral Justice Project, Black Lives Matter’s voter mobilization effort, and gave $22 million to Tides Advocacy, which supported the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation’s pre-election nationwide protests aimed against Trump in 2020. USAID and Soros allegedly spent $27 million on anti-Trump prosecutions, claims journalist Mike Benz. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg was also accused of being “bought” by Soros.
“..an agency gone rogue, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on inane programs, refusing to answer basic questions from congressional committees, and actively undermining the foreign policy goals of the United States.”
• How USAID and Its $50 Billion Budget Became a Target for Reform (ET)
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) was a little-noticed federal agency until it suddenly became the object of a fierce political battle over the limits of presidential power and the accountability of government bureaucracies. When the Trump administration closed the agency’s offices on Feb. 3 and later placed most employees on administrative leave, USAID took center stage in a drama unfolding at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. On one side is the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to make all parts of the executive branch comply with the president’s agenda. On the other side are congressional Democrats, who are warning that the action is a dangerous abuse of executive power and are vowing to fight it. Meanwhile, many observers fear that USAID’s true purpose—to advance U.S. interests through the use of soft power—may be overlooked.
On Feb. 3, President Donald Trump appointed Secretary of State Marco Rubio as acting director of USAID. The next day, the president indicated that the agency may be shuttered and its functions permanently transferred to the State Department. Here is why critics want to abolish or reform the agency, supporters want to save it, and what may happen next. USAID was established by an executive order of President John F. Kennedy in 1961 to advance U.S. foreign policy by offering developing nations technical assistance, help with education and health care, and disaster relief. The idea was that turning poor countries into stable world citizens would benefit U.S. citizens, too. A stable, prosperous nation makes a good ally, the theory went. Champions of USAID continue to see it as both an essential tool for foreign policy and a tangible expression of the goodness and generosity of the U.S. people.
Most observers agree that the agency does some good. Relatively small by Washington’s standards, USAID employs about 10,000 people and controls an annual budget of about $50 billion. In 2023, USAID poured $10.5 billion into humanitarian aid and $10.5 billion into health programs in countries around the world, according to the Congressional Research Service. One program that is often touted as a shining success story is the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, a USAID program that has provided more than $110 billion for controlling the spread of HIV/AIDS in more than 50 countries. “Most estimates are that somewhere in the vicinity of 27 million people are alive today because President Bush initiated and Congress supported that program,” Scott Pegg, acting director of the Global and International Studies program and chair of political science at Indiana University–Indianapolis, told The Epoch Times.
President Donald Trump said in remarks to reporters on Feb. 4 that “some of the money is well spent.” Yet the agency’s halo dims on closer inspection. Critics tell the story of an agency gone rogue, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on inane programs, refusing to answer basic questions from congressional committees, and actively undermining the foreign policy goals of the United States. The White House on Feb. 3. produced a list of projects funded by USAID that it characterized as examples of waste and abuse. The projects include $1.5 million to “advance diversity equity and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and business communities,” another $47,000 for a “transgender opera” in Colombia, and $2.5 million for electric vehicles in Vietnam.
Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Texas) listed further examples on social media platform X on Feb. 3, including $56 million to boost tourism in Egypt and Tunisia and $27 million for “reintegration gift bags” for deported Central Americans. Hunt said the agency was behaving “like a child with YOUR credit card.” Some USAID grant recipients include terrorist-controlled organizations, according to a study by the Middle East Forum released on Feb. 1. The study found that $122 million has gone to groups aligned with designated terrorist organizations, including millions of dollars for organizations directly controlled by the Hamas terrorist group. A July 2024 report from the U.S. Office of Inspector General noted deficiencies and vulnerabilities in USAID’s vetting process, which is supposed to prevent the diversion of U.S. funds to terrorist organizations.
In one case of apparent abuse, USAID partnered with Chemonics, an international consulting firm, to spend $9.5 billion to improve health supply chains. Chemonics allegedly overbilled the agency by up to $270 million and failed to meet its objectives, and the project led to 31 indictments for the illegal resale of USAID-funded materials, according to Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), who has called for an independent analysis of USAID grant recipients. Ernst said USAID also provided nearly $1 million in funding to China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology, which the CIA has said was the most likely source of the virus that causes COVID-19. USAID has resisted congressional oversight for decades, some lawmakers say, resulting in a culture of defiance. “The agency has engaged in a demonstrated pattern of obstructionism,” Ernst wrote in a letter to Rubio on Feb. 4.
False claims were made that certain documents were classified to delay review by congressional staffers and to mislead Congress on the indirect cost of programs, Ernst wrote, adding that in some cases, this amounted to more than 25 percent of the grant total. The agency refused to provide data on administrative costs, Ernst said. The agency later said that providing the data to Congress would violate federal law and that it had no obligation to respond because Ernst did not present a formal request from a “committee of jurisdiction.” “Washington insiders are more upset at DOGE for trying to stop wasteful spending than USAID for misusing tax dollars,” Ernst told The Epoch Times. “The agency has stonewalled me and used every trick in the book to hide what they are doing from the American people. It has lied, misled, and deceived taxpayers, but I will not be deterred in fighting for and uncovering the truth.” Rubio leveled his own criticism at the agency on Feb. 3, after being appointed its interim caretaker.
“They have basically evolved into an agency that believes that they’re not even a U.S. government agency, that … they’re a global charity,” Rubio said in an interview on Fox News. Worse, the agency frequently works at cross purposes with the interests of the United States, the secretary of state said. “One of the most common complaints you will get … from State Department officials and ambassadors and the like, is: ‘USAID is not only not cooperative, they undermine the work that we’re doing in that country,’” sometimes advancing programs that the host government finds objectionable, Rubio said. Speaking about USAID at the U.S. Embassy in El Salvador on Feb. 4, he said: “It’s been 20 or 30 years where people have tried to reform it, and it refuses to reform. When we were in Congress, we couldn’t even get answers to basic questions about programs. That will not continue.”
Chemonics – revealing
This research from @IanCarrollShow on USAID funding is INSANE:
Ian says roughly 93% of USAID funding is estimated to be fraud
– Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and their friends appear to be the top money laundering recipients
– The majority of sub awards being given out by USAID… pic.twitter.com/4OqEQ101lt— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) February 7, 2025
“..the best symbolic indication that the old partisan and ideological divides in the country that date back three-quarters of a century find themselves fully scrambled into a wholly new alliance.”
• The Rise and Rise of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (ET)
There is much to learn about the way the world works today by watching the confirmation vote on Trump’s pick of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to head the Department of Health and Human Services. In so many ways, this is a remarkable development with a dramatic story arc, one that speaks presciently to events over the past five years and where they stand in public consciousness. In November 2021, a major book blasted onto the scene that hardly anyone had expected. It was “The Real Anthony Fauci” by Kennedy. The author had already emerged as the world’s leading critic of the policy response to COVID-19, which included locking down societies across the globe to prepare the population for a vaccine that was already on record as failing to protect against both infection and transmission.
This book was not just a criticism of the way that the “nation’s leading infectious disease doctor” had been the dominant voice for shutdowns, closures, distancing, and masking. It dug through the deep history of the U.S. bioweapons program to highlight the role of dangerous research with a military angle. Fauci was not merely the guy telling you how to stay well; he had become a powerful figure in the bioweapons industry, which had a deep relationship with pharmaceutical companies. The book was beyond mind-blowing, and its many hundreds of footnotes provide an incredible documentary source for readers to check. I dug through them to discover features of the pandemic response I never knew existed. The depth of research here was simply astounding.
As the book became a bestseller, Amazon itself faced pressure to censor it. It acquiesced for a time simply because the powers that be were so awesome and aggressive. Still, the book made inroads in any case. At that time, the political constellation in the country was shifting wildly, and no one knew where it would wind up. The Biden administration had doubled down on coercive pandemic policies and added vaccine and mask mandates while issuing wild warnings of mass death for noncompliance. Resistance on the right and left were growing, but no one knew for sure where all of this would end up. As Trump clinched the Republican nomination, there was a brief moment when it seemed that the Democrats would be open to replacing Biden on the ticket.
A lifelong Democrat and the inheritor of the mantles of both his father and uncle, Kennedy seemed like an obvious choice to take the nomination in an open primary. He started an ad campaign that revived his uncle’s early efforts. But there would be no primary, thus forcing him into an independent bid for the presidency. Third-party attempts in the United States always run into the same problem: The whole system is geared toward two parties, and voting logic usually ends up reinforcing that as well. As that reality gradually dawned on Kennedy, there was a growing sense within the large movement that backed him that he needed another option. As events unfolded, Trump was subjected to a close assassination attempt on July 13, 2024. That was the moment when the two camps came together.
After several days of talking, there was a sudden realization on both sides that they were fighting the same corporatist enemies from two different fronts, one focused on immigration and trade and the other focused on food and pharma power. There was general agreement that many things in America needed to change. The sudden emergence of the unity effort of Trump and Kennedy together disoriented both sides, simply because the coalition brought together factions that had long seemed opposed. Kennedy was a long-time environmental lawyer, and Trump was generally an anti-environmentalist. They would agree to disagree on oil and energy but concentrate on the economic and physical health of America, which came to be embodied in the MAGA/MAHA coalition.
The shock in both camps was high, but the urgency of the moment—and the deep desire for change in Washington—impressed upon the grassroots the need to shake off their squeamishness and get to work together. How much did Kennedy’s involvement help the Trump campaign? Enormously. Was it decisive in the sweeping victory? Very likely. As a thank you for joining forces or perhaps a quid pro quo that was nonetheless highly merited, Kennedy gained nomination to the position of secretary of health and human services, which oversees many other agencies in the realm of food, health, pharmaceuticals, and much more.
The real challenge then began after Trump’s victory because of a peculiar feature of the American system: Cabinet picks have to be confirmed by the Senate. In normal years, and with most appointees of the past never really presenting that much of a challenge to the status quo, a president’s picks sail through with bipartisan support. Trump’s picks would be different, particularly the Kennedy choice since his stance on pharma and pandemic planning was well known. A choice for him would represent a repudiation of the past five years of policy, a prospect nearly all of Washington dreaded.
In the course of events, an incredible irony emerged. In committee—and likely too in the larger Senate—the vote fell along party lines, but not in the way one would expect. This lifelong Democrat and scion of the great Democrat family was opposed by every Democrat and supported (so far) by every Republican. Not only that, but the Republican-friendly press opposed him tooth and nail. The Wall Street Journal, National Review, and the New York Post all published bitter editorials that called the nominee a crank and conspiracy theorist.
Largely because of a huge push from the grassroots—and because of support from Trump—the Republicans voted for him in any case, while the Democrats simply could not and did not, despite the manner in which Kennedy, in many ways, represented causes long important to many people generally considered to be on the left. Thus does the expected confirmation of Kennedy—his rise and rise for fully five years—embody the best symbolic indication that the old partisan and ideological divides in the country that date back three-quarters of a century find themselves fully scrambled into a wholly new alliance. If you attend any events that bring together MAGA and MAHA, you know exactly what I mean. They are exciting scenes of people who have never been in the same room together, gradually discovering points of agreement and feeling very optimistic about the future.
Trudy is nervous.
• Trudeau Warns Trump’s Threat To Annex Canada Is ‘Real Thing’ (RT)
Outgoing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been caught on a hot mike telling businessmen that US President Donald Trump is not joking when he talks about absorbing Canada, the Toronto Star newspaper has reported. Trump reiterated his desire to make Canada “our 51st state” when he spoke to journalists in the Oval Office earlier this week. “I would love to see that. Some people say that would be a long shot. If people wanted to play the game right, it would be 100% certain that they would become a state,” he claimed. The US president and the Canadian PM discussed the hiccups in their relations during two phone calls on Monday. On Thursday, Trudeau revealed some of the details of those conversations to businessmen and union leaders ahead of a closed-door meeting as part of the Canada-US Economic Summit in Toronto.
The prime minister thought he was speaking confidentially, but it turned out that his microphone had not been turned off promptly and he was overheard by journalists. “I suggest that not only does the Trump administration know how many critical minerals we have but that may be even why they keep talking about absorbing us and making us the 51st state,” Trudeau said as cited by the Toronto Star. The US wants to “benefit” from Canada’s natural resources and “Trump has it in mind that one of the easiest ways of doing that is absorbing our country, and it is a real thing,” he warned. When Trump first raised the possibility of making Canada part of the US in December, Trudeau insisted that there was “not a snowball’s chance in hell” of it happening.
Last week, the US president argued that Canada would struggle to remain viable if it stopped getting “hundreds of billions of dollars” in subsidies from Washington. The solution would be joining the US, which would result in “much lower taxes, and far better military protection for the people of Canada – and no tariffs!” In early February, Trump imposed 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico and 10% on imports from China – citing concerns over illegal immigration and drug trafficking. Ottawa vowed to retaliate by slapping equivalent duties on US goods. However, Trump decided to postpone the introduction of tariffs on the two neighboring countries for 30 days in return for promises by both governments to strengthen border security.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1887994885967380517
“The Post noted that the access sought by the UK “has no known precedent in major democracies.”
• Apple Ordered to Provide UK Gov’t Access to ALL User Data on the Cloud (HUSA)
The Washington Post reported Friday that the United Kingdom’s deep state has demanded that Apple create a back door for them to retrieve all the content any Apple user worldwide has uploaded to the cloud—what would be an unprecedented erosion of online privacy and civil liberties. Citing anonymous sources, the Post reported that the British government’s undisclosed order was issued last month. It reportedly requires Apple to give officials blanket capability to view fully encrypted material. Typically, Apple has assisted authorities on a case-by-case basis—such as helping the FBI access a terrorist’s phone, for example. The Post noted that the access sought by the UK “has no known precedent in major democracies.” According to the Post, the UK’s order was made pursuant to the sweeping U.K. Investigatory Powers Act of 2016, which authorizes law enforcement to compel assistance from companies to access user data.
“The law, known by critics as the Snoopers’ Charter, makes it a criminal offense to reveal that the government has even made such a demand,” the Post reported. “Apple can appeal the U.K. capability notice to a secret technical panel, which would consider arguments about the expense of the requirement, and to a judge who would weigh whether the request was in proportion to the government’s needs. But the law does not permit Apple to delay complying during an appeal.” An Apple spokesman reportedly declined to comment. The Post reported that Apple is likely to stop offering encrypted storage in the UK. “Yet that concession would not fulfill the U.K. demand for backdoor access to the service in other countries, including the United States,” the newspaper added.
Western countries, including the U.S., have been pushing for total access to online user data for years. In March 2021, for example, former FBI Director Chris Wray told the Senate Judiciary Committee that encryption was stifling his agents from investigating domestic extremism. According to Wray and other law enforcers, tech companies should be able to build “backdoors” into their encryption that preserves privacy, while allowing for access when necessary. That, they say, strikes the proper balance between data security and national security.
However, numerous tech experts, civil libertarians, and others say that it’s impossible to build a backdoor that can’t be exploited by hackers. They also say that by banning encryption, the United States would be following in the footsteps of authoritarian countries such as China, which blocked the encrypted messaging app Signal. “It is important to understand that any kind of back door (or front door) access for the ‘good guys’ can also be exploited by the ’bad guys,’” the pro-industry Information Technology & Innovation Foundation stated in a July 2020 report. “For example, key escrow systems would introduce new attack vectors that could allow attackers to gain access to encrypted information, such as by compromising the system that maintains copies of the keys.”
“..this is not an agency for aid, assistance and development..” [..]“This is a machine for interference in internal affairs, a mechanism for changing regimes, political systems, and state structures..”
• Russian News Finds Readers Despite Sanctions, USAID-Funded Competition – FT (RT)
RIA Novosti and Russia Today have been spreading their message despite competition from media outlets funded by USAID and Western sanctions pressure, the Financial Times has said. In an article published on Thursday, the British daily outlined the hit various media outlets would face from President Donald Trump’s crackdown on the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington’s primary means for funding political causes abroad. A number of USAID projects were focused on “countering” major Russia media outlets such as RIA Novosti and Russia Today, whose news coverage was “spreading on social media despite Western sanctions,” the newspaper said.
According to FT, the agency spent around $100 million on funding programs in Russia in 2023. Programs in Moldova received $309 million while around $1.7 billion was spent on Ukraine. The US president froze most US foreign aid for a 90-day review shortly after his inauguration. USAID has subsequently seen a number of its projects suspended, and Trump has said he wants the agency shut down. Without funding from the agency, many NGO media outlets around the world are struggling to stay afloat, FT wrote. According to French NGO Reporters Without Borders (RFS), 9 out of 10 media outlets in Ukraine relied on donations and USAID as their primary donor, with many already announcing that they’ll have to shut down.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova noted that Trump’s crackdown on the agency vindicated Moscow’s 2012 ban on its activity in the country. “We said that this is not an agency for aid, assistance and development,” the spokeswoman stressed in a press briefing on Thursday. “This is a machine for interference in internal affairs, a mechanism for changing regimes, political systems, and state structures,” she said, adding that the agency had acted outside the realm of Russian and international law.
“..it’s the embarrassingly passe “there are no Palestinians” trope on steroids.”
• In Valdai, Confronting The “American Problem” In West Asia (Pepe Escobar)
The 14th Middle East Conference of the Valdai Club in Moscow was hit by a geopolitical bunker buster bomb right in the middle of the proceedings: the announcement, by US President Donald Trump himself, of some sort of future Trump Gaza Riviera Resort and Casino in Palestine. Even before international outrage started to overspill, from the BRICS front to ASEAN to the Arab world (which sees it as Nakba 2.0), reaching even Trump-friendly Saudi Arabia and major US allies in Europe, perplexity set in at Valdai among most scholars and academics. Two glaring exceptions were professor at the University of Tehran Mohammad Marandi and former British diplomat Alastair Crooke – always delicately nuanced analysts of West Asia.
Both have long argued that as the US empire is being forced to retreat, it will become much more ruthless and take greater risks. Marandi qualifies Trump as “a gift” to American global decline. Crooke, for his part, wonders whether Israel’s far-right Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu really trapped Trump in a quagmire – when it may be the other way around. Trump now seems to have Netanyahu – which he basically despises – exactly where he wants him: owing favors. Trump made a lot of bombastic promises, which Netanyahu can sell as a major success to the Tel Aviv warmongers who compose his government. So his coalition will hold – for now. Yet, in return, Israel will still have to follow the next steps of the despised ceasefire project.
And that would lead, in theory, to the end of the war. Netanyahu wants an Infinite War, with unlimited Eretz Israel expansion and annexation. That is not a done deal – by far. As it stands, at face value, in one fell swoop, Trump normalized genocide, ethnic cleansing, and the reduction of the Gaza tragedy to a tawdry real estate deal in a “phenomenal location.” The accumulated effect of “the US will take over the Gaza strip,” “we will own it,” and “… level the site” not only opens the US to a shockingly illegal foreign annexation, but it’s the embarrassingly passe “there are no Palestinians” trope on steroids.
But this is far from “sheer lunacy,” as defined by US think tanks everywhere. It’s a natural extension of trying to buy Greenland, trying to annex Canada (in both cases, an increase to the US resource base), grabbing the Panama Canal, and rechristening the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. It’s about changing the subject and the predominant narrative instead of addressing the real threat to the Empire: the Russia–China strategic partnership. In this case, the new Gaza Riviera built on a pyramid of skulls is not only endorsed but already envisioned by the genocidals in Tel Aviv in tandem with Trump’s billionaire donors, a key part of Israel’s lobby in the US.
Trump’s vision, according to New York insiders, came from his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who less than a year ago was already talking about the real estate gold represented by the Gaza seashore. Kushner is even more dangerous now that he’s acting behind the curtains in Trump’s second term: he’s the main influencer on POTUS when it comes to a possible, future US-sanctioned occupation of Gaza. For the moment, we have a Deporting-Building-Selling reality show ethos applied to the most insoluble problem in West Asia. Marandi calls it the “US–Israel problem.” Taha Ozhan at the Ankara Institute qualifies it as “the Israeli-centered order” as well as “the American problem.”
That’s just one little problem. Try this:
Name me one European country where people are fine with German troops on their land.
• NATO Troops Unable To Move Quickly Across EU (RT)
The EU would be unable to move a major military force within the bloc’s territory in case of need, a recent report by its financial watchdog stated this week. Bureaucratic hurdles and chaotic logistical planning would prevent a swift deployment, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) concluded in the document. Brussels has already spent all of its budget allocated for improving military logistics between 2021 and 2027 without achieving the stated goal of “moving military staff, equipment, and supplies swiftly and seamlessly,” the ECA said in a statement accompanying the report. Funding worth €1.7 billion ($1.76 billion) was spent in just two years and no money was “left in the pot by the end of 2023,” the report said, adding that organizing military movements within the bloc could still face “significant delays.”
Member states still need to file a notification of cross-border movement 45 days in advance in order to get authorization, according to the paper. One nation’s tanks can also be outright banned from crossing into the territory of a neighboring EU member simply because they are heavier than allowed by the neighbor’s road traffic regulations, the report said. Military logistics directions can also include infrastructure like bridges that are not suitable for heavy equipment, requiring armor to take a major detour, it added. The ECA blamed the chaotic planning and management structure for the setbacks. “Governance arrangements for military mobility in the EU are complex and fragmented, without a single point of contact, which makes it difficult to know who does what,” it said.
With the allocated military mobility budget spent, there will be “a significant gap of over four years” before any more funds will be available, it warned. “Projects were funded mainly in the east of the EU, but the bloc hardly funded any projects at all on the southern route towards Ukraine” the watchdog said. The ECA – an independent auditing body with a college consisting of individual members assigned by each EU member state – has been critical of Brussels’ defense policy initiatives over the past several years.
In 2024, it warned that the European Defense Industry Program could fail to reach its goals despite a €1.5 billion budget due to a poor balance between policy objectives, funding, and the timeline for implementation. The program could result in resources “spread across a wide array of projects that may not have a measurable impact at EU level,” it said. In 2023, it stated that the EU was lacking a long-time strategy on defense spending, while also warning later the same year that financial assistance to Kiev could add tens of billions of euros to the bloc’s debt due to Ukraine potentially being unable to repay its loans.
The function of plastics recycling is to make people feel less guilty, so they will use more plastics.
• “Recycling” Makes Plastic Pollution Worse (McGlinchey)
If you’re like many people, you’ve always thought a numbered-triangle symbol on the bottom of a plastic container tells you it’s recyclable — giving you peace of mind that when you toss it into a blue bin, it will be turned into something else. That’s not true. Those symbols are Resin Identification Codes (RICs). Numbered 1 through 7, they only identify the kind of plastic an item is made of. Far from giving a sweeping assurance that RIC-stamped items are recyclable, the symbol frequently indicates a particular item absolutely cannot be recycled. Reluctant to burden citizens with figuring out which plastics are recyclable — a chore that could dampen participation and cause confusion as recyclability of various plastics changes over time — many municipal recycling programs simply encourage people to toss all their RIC-stamped plastics in the bin and let the recyclers sort it out.
Which ones do recyclers actually want? The most-recycled plastic in America is stamped with a “1,” identifying the item as polyethylene terephthalate (PET). You’ll find it on beverage bottles, cooking oil containers, and many other liquid-containing bottles. A “2” tells you it’s high-density polyethylene (HDPE). Another generally recycling-suitable plastic, it’s used for milk jugs and laundry detergent jugs, and spray-cleaner bottles. It’s all downhill from there. Chances are your bin has plenty of #5 — polypropylene (PP) — which is frequently used for single-serve coffee-maker pods; yogurt, butter, prescription pill and soft tofu containers; and the lids on paperboard raisin cartons. Unfortunately, while there’s been a modest recent uptick in recyclers’ interest, polypropylene generally isn’t being recycled in the United States.
As for the rest of the RIC spectrum, feel free to make pointed inquiries with your city government, but chances are extremely slim that any #3, #4, #6 or #7 items you throw in your curbside blue bin will be made into anything else. That heap includes lots of packaging, such as non-cardboard egg cartons, fast-food clamshells, styrofoam cups and to-go containers, flexible 6-pack rings and bread bags. Feeling a little demoralized? Brace yourself: This blue-bin buzzkill is just getting started.
Let’s circle back to recyclers’ favorite: #1 PET. Even for this most-favored plastic, much of what’s placed in blue bins isn’t recycled. It’s a question of configuration: Recyclers love clear PET bottles, but most of them don’t want PET when it’s in the form of clamshell containers, cups and tubs. In these formats, PET reacts differently to the heat of recycling. For example, if they’re combined with bottles, those PET tubs used to package your blueberries and strawberries create ash that contaminates the whole batch. “This is a perfect example of why we don’t go by plastic numbers,” explains Millenium Recycling. “A #1 clamshell container is NOT the same as a #1 bottle and they cannot be recycled the same way.”
Size matters too. No matter the type of plastic, if it’s smaller than three inches, most recycling processors don’t want it cluttering up their works. Given that, the Washington Post recently advised simply throwing away any plastic that doesn’t fit in the palm of your hand. Thinness is another liability — which means your plastic forks, spoons and straws are also a no-go. Then there’s color discrimination — any kind of black plastic is pretty much guaranteed not to be recycled, because infrared scanners in automated sorting machines aren’t able to “see” most black plastic. And while clear #1 PET bottles are at the top of the recyclability list, colored PET bottles are less favored.
Cooked
https://twitter.com/i/status/1887888796261216690
Helmet
NEW: The Prime Minister of Japan gave President Trump a super special gift called the "Eternal Helmet," a golden samurai helmet created by a company in the Prime Minister's hometown
"The Japanese government’s order came with two specific requests: (1) The helmet had to be… pic.twitter.com/lH11t9D9X8
— George (@BehizyTweets) February 8, 2025
Mums baby
A 107-year-old Chinese grandmother pulls out a sweet from her pocket and gives it to her 84-year-old daughter,
You’re always mums baby no matter how old
pic.twitter.com/0Zx3VHeOEE— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) February 8, 2025
Tigerboar
https://twitter.com/i/status/1888172830749003908
Cat
It approached the dog with polite and calmed it down. pic.twitter.com/6MY6grUPcI
— The Figen (@TheFigen_) February 7, 2025
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
Home › Forums › Debt Rattle February 9 2025