
Eugène Delacroix Liberty Leading the People 1830

June 20
The Simpsons predicted that on June 20th everything will come to an end. pic.twitter.com/lztQuqojba
— War Analyst (@War_Analysts) June 18, 2025
As expected, AI is the opposite of a productivity booster. Instead it is making everyone dumber and lazier. https://t.co/n0her8HL7B pic.twitter.com/C9PgSERVza
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 19, 2025
Candace
Candace is spot on. pic.twitter.com/egUGy8WNdm
— Texas Patriot (@Texasbrn) June 18, 2025
The same people say Iran can’t have a nuke because they are religious fundamentalists are the same people who hold the heretical belief that we must support Israel’s non-stop campaign of murder, blackmail, land theft bombing & starvation of the innocent because ‘God will bless… pic.twitter.com/79UUiPsAX1
— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) June 18, 2025
export
If Iran’s Oil Is Cut Off, China Will Pay the Pricehttps://t.co/Gn3izH6J3m https://t.co/x7yWI4HqCV
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 18, 2025
Gaetz
If the world is interested in secret nuclear programs in the Middle East, there is a country that doesn’t allow ANY IAEA inspectors:
It’s Israel. https://t.co/rpACsIHo1G
— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) June 19, 2025


We get the impression that Trump is having, let’s say, some second thoughts. On Tuesday, he said “The next week is going to be very big, maybe less than a week.” On Thursday, it was “Amid speculation regarding negotiations with Iran, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next 2 weeks.”
Why the second thoughts? Is it because of new facts, is it the -broad- resistance against direct US involvement among his supporters and voters, or is it because he realizes it’s doubtful that US bunker busters could hit the desired underground Iran targets?
• White House Says Trump To Decide On Attacking Iran ‘Within Next 2 Weeks’ (ZH)
Summary: The White House held a high stakes presser Thursday afternoon, as President Donald Trump also again convened his top national security officials in the situation room to hear intelligence officials and make key decisions on the Israel-Iran war, just prior. Of course, the biggest question that remains is: will the US directly enter the war against Iran?
White House quoting Trump: Amid speculation regarding negotiations with Iran, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next 2 weeks.
• Leavitt: Trump thinks ‘substantial chance’ of Iran negotiations
• Leavitt: Witkoff has been in touch with Iran
• Leavitt: Trump always interested in diplomatic solutions
• Leavitt: it’s the US belief that Iran has never been closer to a nuclear weapon
• Leavitt: Iran can and should make a deal or face consequences
• Leavitt: Trump remains in contact with Netanyahu
• Leavitt: Iran is in a weakened position and we have sent a deal
• Leavitt: Iran has all that it needs to achieve a nuclear weapon, it just needs a ‘decision’
Oil slides on the “two weeks” announcement, as the can gets kicked down the road:Israel-Iran Conflict Continues, Trump Weighs Options
The most pressing issues at stake:
• Last ditch diplomacy working? Reuters reports in a breaking development that Iran held direct talks with US over de-escalation and potentially restarting nuclear negotiations.
• The Guardian reports that Trump only wants to strike Iran only if the US can destroy the Fordow enrichment facility.
• Destruction of Fordow would at least require the 30k pound bunker buster bomb, but still may not be effective in ending Iran’s enrichment capacity.
• Netanyahu says that while regime change in Tehran is not the current goal, the option is on the table.
• Tactical nuke on the table?• Will the Iranians close the Strait of Hormuz, choking off global oil shipping?
• Reports of US bases in the region taking protective and defensive measures
• Israeli intelligence official says ‘imminent collapse’ of Iranian government is “far from the truth” – NBC reports
• Iran is warning that a “third party intervention” would spark an immediate military response
• Netanyahu has said the US has been “helping a lot” – without defining specifics

“The next week is going to be very big, maybe less than a week.”
• Trump Has Reportedly Approved Iran Attack Plans, Withholds Final Order (ZH)
As President Trump convenes a White House situation room meeting this Tuesday early evening, and following Ayatollah Khamenei’s earlier televised speech vowing ‘we will not surrender’ – The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Trump has made the decision: “President Trump told senior aides late Tuesday that he approved of attack plans for Iran, but was holding off to see if Tehran would abandon its nuclear program, people familiar with the deliberations said. Iran’s well-defended Fordow enrichment facility is a possible U.S. target. Israel has yet to attack the facility, which is buried under a mountain and is generally considered by military experts to be out of reach of all but the most powerful bombs. Asked earlier if he had decided whether to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities, Trump said, “I may do it, I may not do it.” And he repeated his insistence of Iran’s unconditional surrender: “The next week is going to be very big, maybe less than a week.”
Is this yet another last ditch effort to strong arm Tehran to the negotiating table, where Trump’s hope is that it will declare zero enrichment? Has the US Commander-in-Chief painted himself into a corner, and now it’s all zero sum? The Iranians remain under heavy Israeli bombing, and with leadership likely in deep bunkers, are unlikely to negotiate the end of their own ‘regime’. Trump may have finally pulled the trigger here. Where’s Congress? Meanwhile, elements of the Right and elements of the Left are uniting around this simple and very reasonable observation…
Netanyahu is not the President of the United States.
He should not be determining U.S. foreign and military policy.
If the people of Israel support his decision to start a war with Iran, that is their business and their war.
The United States must not be a part of it.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) June 18, 2025
* * *
Update(1302ET): Things are quickly going from bad to worse for Iran, amid ongoing Israeli airstrikes, and given Iran’s air defenses in its western portion of the country appear completely destroyed and disabled. Iran is now in a ‘near-total national internet blackout’ – according to monitoring from a UK-based watchdog: Vital civic infrastructure in Tehran, including some sewage system and water networks, have also been hit.* * *
President Donald Trump on Wednesday fielded reporters’ questions on the Iran crisis, but refused to answer whether the US military will directly enter the war, amid Israeli requests that the Pentagon assist in striking Iran’s nuclear facilities. “There’s a big difference between now and a week ago,” Trump told reporters outside the White House, and added curiously: “Nobody knows what I’m going to do.” He indicated that the Iranians had reached out but he feels “it’s very late to be talking.” But he also threw out the possibility: “We may meet. It’s, I don’t know, there’s a big difference between now and a week ago,” he said on the White House lawn. “I can tell you this, that Iran’s got a lot of trouble and they want to negotiate. And I say, ‘Why didn’t you negotiate with me before all this death and destruction?'” And more: “For 40 years they’ve been saying death to America, death to Israel, death to anybody else that they didn’t like,” he said. “They were bullies. They were schoolyard bullies. And now they’re not bullies anymore. But we’ll see what happens. “I wouldn’t say that we won anything yet. I would say that we sure as hell made a lot of progress.”

“Trump is now said to be relying on a smaller, more experienced ‘Tier One’ advisory group..”
• Tulsi, Hegseth et al Sidelined From Iran-Israel Discussions (RT)
US President Donald Trump has excluded Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard from high-level discussions on the ongoing Iran-Israel conflict, NBC News and the Washington Post have reported, citing senior administration officials. Gabbard’s sidelining, according to NBC, reportedly stems from her public and internal pushback against the official US and Israeli narrative that Tehran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons. Hegseth has also been edged out of operational discussions, with the Washington Post reporting that two four-star generals overseeing the deployment of additional US military assets in the Middle East have taken the lead.
Trump is now said to be relying on a smaller, more experienced ‘Tier One’ advisory group – comprising Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Joint Chiefs Vice Chair General Dan Caine – which is now reportedly shaping US policy on Iran, rather than the traditional civilian defense and intelligence leadership. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell has denied the reports, insisting that Hegseth is “speaking with the President multiple times a day each day and has been with the President in the Situation Room this week.” Gabbard also told reporters that she and the president are “on the same page.”
Israel launched a large-scale bombing campaign against Iran last week, claiming Tehran was close to producing a nuclear weapon. Trump will decide whether to join the Israeli campaign “within the next two weeks,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Thursday. However, US intelligence still assesses that Iran, while it has stockpiled enriched uranium, has not taken concrete steps toward developing nuclear weapons, according to Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. This view has remained unchanged since March, when Gabbard told Congress that the US intelligence community “does not believe Iran is building a nuclear weapon.” Trump contradicted this assessment on Tuesday, stating that Iran is “weeks away” from obtaining nuclear weapons and dismissing Gabbard’s remarks by saying, “I don’t care what she said.”
A former Democratic congresswoman and Iraq War veteran, Gabbard has long been critical of the US intelligence community, which she now oversees, and she was known for supporting NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. Her release of a video warning about the horrors of nuclear war following a visit to Hiroshima reportedly annoyed Trump’s advisers. Her absence from a key June 8 meeting at Camp David on Iran policy has fueled speculation about her diminished influence, with multiple sources telling NBC that she has not taken part in recent strategic discussions.

“..it’s an “extremely dangerous, extremely volatile situation,” and one that clearly has “nothing to do with nuclear weapons..”
• Larry Johnson Reveals What’s Really at Stake as Trump Mulls Iran Attack (Sp.)
With Tehran refusing to fold in the face of US ultimatums and threats, Donald Trump is considering joining Israel’s campaign of aggression. Sputnik asked veteran ex-CIA and State Department insider Larry Johnson to make sense of the administration’s calculations, including what could be holding Trump back. President Trump is vacillating on whether or not to move forward with the attack because he knows it would tank his ratings, including among Republicans, Johnson, a former CIA officer and State official, explained. “There are public opinion polls showing that 53% of Republicans are against any attack on Iran. Overall, 61% of Americans are against any attack on Iran. There have been several individuals who were prominent supporters of Donald Trump in the election that have come out condemning him,” he noted.
“I think the political realities are starting to catch up to Trump, which is why he’s now backing away from that,” Johnson said, pointing out that conservative voices sounding the alarm bell include Trump’s most prominent pre-election supporters, from political commentators Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens to comedian Dave Smith. On top of that are the logistical uncertainties, like whether a US bunker buster bombing of the Fordow nuclear site would even work, and whether the B-2 bombers based in Diego Garcia used for such an operation would be safe if Russia were to supply Iran with systems capable of detecting and downing the stealth bomber. Overall, it’s an “extremely dangerous, extremely volatile situation,” and one that clearly has “nothing to do with nuclear weapons,” Johnson stressed. Instead, it’s about “regime change” – an attempt “to install a government that’s going to be a lackey of the West and that will not cooperate or be friendly with Russia.”

“..you’ve got the president basically dismissing all of the intelligence.”
• US Intel Has No Evidence Iran Building Nuclear Weapon – Top Democrat (RT)
US intelligence still assesses that Iran, despite stockpiling enriched uranium, has not taken steps to develop nuclear weapons – a view which has remained unchanged since March, according to the Senate Intelligence Committee’s top Democrat. US President Donald Trump claimed on Tuesday, however, that he believes Tehran was “very close” to obtaining nuclear weapons at the time of Israel’s recent military strikes. His statement contradicts earlier remarks by his own director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who told lawmakers that Iran “is not building” one. The Iranian authorities insist that their nuclear program is purely peaceful and that they have every right to pursue it. In an interview with MSNBC on Wednesday, the vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Democratic Senator Mark Warner, said senators were briefed this week – following the Israeli strikes – that US spy agencies still find no evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.
He criticized Trump’s remarks as “foreign policy by tweet,” calling them irresponsible and perplexing, given that they contradict the intelligence briefings lawmakers have received. Warner noted that in March, Gabbard stated that Iran had “taken no steps toward building a bomb.” “And we got reconfirmed… Monday of this week, that the intelligence hasn’t changed,” he added. At the time, she said the US intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” When Trump was reminded of this by journalists on Tuesday, he replied: “I do not care what she said.”
Responding to Trump’s remark, Warner said, “you’ve got the president basically dismissing all of the intelligence.” He added that even as vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he is unclear on the current US strategy, asking: “If I don’t have the foggiest idea, what do the American people know?” Trump said he has not yet decided whether to support Israel’s military action against Iran, but echoed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim that Iran was “weeks away” from developing a nuclear weapon.
Since launching its campaign against Iran last week, Israel has targeted uranium enrichment infrastructure, bombing centrifuge facilities – including a site at Natanz, south of Tehran – and laboratories used to convert uranium gas into metal, according to Israeli officials and the IAEA. Trump has called for Iran’s “unconditional surrender,” claiming that the US now controls its airspace. He also said killing Khamenei would be “easy.” Media reports suggest he may soon join Israel’s military campaign. Tehran has vowed not to yield to pressure and warned it will retaliate if attacked.

“..A day before Israel’s initial attack on Iran, the IAEA passed a resolution declaring that Tehran was not complying with its obligations concerning nuclear non-proliferation..”
• No Proof Iran Is Working On A Nuclear Bomb – UN Watchdog (RT)
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found no evidence that Iran is making a “systematic effort” to produce a nuclear weapon, according to the agency’s chief, Rafael Grossi. Israel began bombing Iran on Friday, asserting that the country was on the brink of developing a nuclear bomb. The sides have been exchanging retaliatory strikes ever since. US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he believes Tehran was “very close” to obtaining the nuclear weapon, contradicting early statements from his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who stated that Iran “is not building” one. Iranian authorities insist that their nuclear program is purely peaceful and that they have every right to pursue it. I
n an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday, Grossi said that, currently, “there is this competition about who is wrong or right about the time that would be needed” for Iran to produce a nuclear bomb. “Certainly, it was not for tomorrow, maybe not a matter of years,” he noted. The Iranians may have enough enriched uranium, but in order to turn it into a nuclear weapon, technology and extensive testing is also required, the IAEA chief explained. Despite inspecting Iran’s nuclear sites for more than two decades, the UN watchdog “did not have… any proof of a systematic effort to move into a nuclear weapon” on the part of Iran, he said. “What we are telling you is what we have been able to prove. The material is there. There have been, in the past, some activities related to the development of nuclear weapons, but we did not have, at this point, these elements,” Grossi stressed.
A day before Israel’s initial attack on Iran, the IAEA passed a resolution declaring that Tehran was not complying with its obligations concerning nuclear non-proliferation. Among other things, the agency noted that Iran had “repeatedly” been unable to prove that its nuclear material was not being diverted for further enrichment for military use. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said last weekend that Tehran will limit its cooperation with IAEA due to the agency’s reluctance to condemn Israel’s attacks on the country’s nuclear sites. The UN watchdog’s conduct “makes no sense,” he stated.

“The Zionist regime’s claim that Iran attacked one of the hospitals in the occupied territories is completely false..”
• Israeli Nuclear Sites To Face ‘Crushing Blows’ – Iranian Source (RT)
Iran intends to continue its military response against Israel and could target its nuclear infrastructure, a senior Iranian security official has told RT. In an exclusive statement to the head of RT’s Tehran bureau, the official, who chose to remain anonymous, said that Iranian armed forces will maintain missile and drone operations throughout the day, specifically targeting “the occupied territories and Israeli garrisons.” nThe official said Iran’s response follows “the Quranic advice on retaliation,” and warned that Iranian forces would respond “to any extent and wherever the regime attacks Iranian soil.” He noted, however, that based on “Iran’s moral principles,” there would be no attacks on hospitals. “The Zionist regime’s claim that Iran attacked one of the hospitals in the occupied territories is completely false,” the official stressed, referring to reports of the Soroka hospital being struck in the city of Be’er Sheva in southern Israel.
He also stated that Tehran’s response will be escalated in light of the Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. “Since the [Israeli] regime has attacked our nuclear facilities, our armed forces will subject their nuclear facilities to crushing blows,” the official said. Since launching its assault last week, Israel has hit several Iranian nuclear facilities, including sites in Natanz, Isfahan, Fordow and near Tehran. Between nine and 14 nuclear researchers have been reported killed in the attacks. Without naming the US directly, the Iranian official also warned that “if another country directly enters into war with us, it will provide much more accessible targets for the Iranian armed forces to destroy.”
US President Donald Trump has hailed Israel’s attacks on Iran as “excellent” and has urged Tehran to surrender unconditionally. He has also warned that the US could become directly involved in the conflict if any American targets are hit by Iran. Last Friday, Israeli forces began carrying out strikes on Iran, claiming Tehran is nearing the completion of a nuclear bomb. Iran dismissed the accusations and retaliated with waves of drone and missile strikes on the Jewish state. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Grossi, has since also refuted Israel’s claims, stating that the watchdog has found no evidence that Iran has been making a “systematic effort” to produce a nuclear weapon.

“Some in West Jerusalem may dream of “reformatting” the Middle East – reshaping the region through force and fear. If successful, it could buy Israel a few decades of security and breathing room. But such outcomes are far from guaranteed.”
• The End of Israeli Exceptionalism (Bordachev)
Israel has now been at war with its neighbours for nearly two years. The latest round began with the Hamas-led terrorist attack on 7 October 2023. In response, West Jerusalem launched an aggressive military campaign that has since expanded to touch nearly every country in the region. The escalation has placed the Jewish state at the centre of Middle Eastern geopolitics once again – this time, dragging in Iran, a state that had long avoided direct confrontation through strategic caution. Now, even Tehran finds itself under fire, with US backing making the stakes far higher. Iran is left facing a grim choice between the bad and the very bad. But this isn’t about Iran. It’s about Israel, a country that has for decades functioned as the West’s forward operating base in the Middle East.
Since the mid-20th century, Israel has enjoyed a privileged position – a bridgehead of Western power in a volatile region, while also deeply enmeshed in its politics and rivalries. Its success has rested on two pillars: the unshakable support of the United States, and its own internal capacity for innovation, military strength, and a unique social model. That second pillar, however, has weakened. The clearest sign is in demographics: Israel is facing rising negative migration. In 2024, some 82,700 people are expected to leave the country – a 50% increase from the year before. It is not the unskilled or disengaged who are leaving, but the young and educated. The people who are needed to sustain a modern state are choosing to go.
Of course, Israel’s troubles are not unique. Like many developed nations, it is struggling under the weight of a decaying neoliberal economic system. The pandemic made things worse, exposing the fragility of the model and encouraging a shift toward a “mobilisation” mode of governance – rule through emergency and constant readiness for conflict. In the West more broadly, war and geopolitical confrontation have become a way to delay or disguise necessary systemic reform. In this regard, Israel has become a laboratory for the West’s emerging logic: permanent war as a method of governance. In the autumn of 2023, the Israeli establishment embraced this fully. Conflict became not just a tactic, but a way of life. Its leaders no longer see peace as the goal, but war as the mechanism for national unity and political survival.
In this, Israel mirrors the broader Western embrace of conflict with Russia and China – proxy wars chosen when actual reform is off the table. At the global level, nuclear deterrence limits how far such wars can go. But in the Middle East, where Israel wages war directly, those constraints don’t apply. This allows war to serve as a pressure valve – politically useful, even as it becomes self-destructive. But even war has limits. It cannot indefinitely mask economic decay or social unrest. And while conflict tends to cement elite power – even among incompetent leadership – it also drains national strength. Israel is now consuming more and more of its own resources to sustain this permanent state of war. Its social cohesion is fraying. Its once-vaunted model of technological and civic progress is no longer functioning as it did.
Some in West Jerusalem may dream of “reformatting” the Middle East – reshaping the region through force and fear. If successful, it could buy Israel a few decades of security and breathing room. But such outcomes are far from guaranteed. Crushing a neighbour doesn’t eliminate the threat; it merely brings distant enemies closer. Most importantly, Israel’s deepest problems aren’t external – they are internal, rooted in its political and social structures. War can define a state, yes. But such states – Sparta, North Korea – tend to be “peculiar,” to put it mildly. And even for them, war cannot substitute for real diplomacy, policy, or growth. So has Israel, always at war, truly developed? Or has it simply been sustained – politically, militarily, and financially – as a subdivision of American foreign policy? If it continues down this path of permanent conflict and right-wing nationalism, it risks losing even that status. It may cease to be the West’s bridge in the Middle East – and become something else entirely: a militarised garrison state, isolated, brittle, and increasingly alone.

“..what I am confident about is that if Tulsi Gabbard is removed, she will not be replaced, and that’s as good as a win for the bad actors trying to target and survive Trump.”
• A Dangerous Moment – The Targeting of Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)
For the sake of urgency I’m going to talk in direct and bold terms about the targeting of Tulsi Gabbard. The IC system is attempting to remove her as a disruptive influence by using Iran as a wedge to get her out, but the issue they have with her has nothing to do with Iran. CTH approaches this after being very concerned about Tulsi Gabbard’s ability. Not because of intent, but rather because we doubted she understood the scope of the IC opposition aligned against the office of the Director of National Intelligence. She started out with these weaknesses, but she learned quickly – grasped the opposition– and has become a transformative force within the Intelligence Community. Director Gabbard’s recent efforts within the Intelligence Community Inspector General office is another feather in her cap of competence. Gabbard is now a threat.
If President Trump allows or supports the removal of DNI Gabbard, he is opening up the backplate of his armor, and making himself vulnerable. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Chairman Tom Cotton, the disassembled National Intelligence Council and a host of Intelligence Community embeds would like to see Gabbard removed. DC wants to see her removed because the traditional role of the DNI has been a willful tool of the Intelligence Community; Gabbard is not that. As DNI Mrs Tulsi Gabbard has chased down intelligence community leakers, released the JFK files, released Joe Biden’s domestic terrorism surveillance plan, intercepted an NIC plot to impeach President Trump (confirmed by Rubio), taken control of the Presidential Daily Briefing, and begun to confront the corruption within the IC Inspector General organization. These are actions, not words, and those actions speak boldly. Suffice to say, her effectiveness has placed a target on her back.
In the past few weeks, ever since she began intercepting the ICIG issues and using her own personnel to monitor the IC network, she has been targeted with several direct smear campaigns. It is obvious the targeting is coming from inside the intelligence apparatus, and perhaps even the orbit around/under CIA Director John Ratcliffe. She did make a strange video about nuclear weapons contrast against the horrific outcomes in Japan, but that seemed to be more of a personal video entry expressing a deep concern about nuclear weapons from her own perspectives. I said it was weird when I saw it, but I put that into the context of ‘surfboard Tulsi‘, the DNI peacenik. No biggie. However, with the Israel -v- Iran conflict encompassing the White House, there is a transparent objective to weaponize Tulsi Gabbard’s activity as a contrast against President Trump supporting military conflict in Iran.
This contrast is being stimulated by the same elements who want to see her removed for the reasons noted above. The latest narrative du jour in the files includes: “WASHINGTON DC – […] Trump has increasingly mused about nixing Gabbard’s office completely, an idea he floated when he gave her the job. In the White House there have been discussions about folding its mandate into the CIA or another agency, according to one of the people familiar with his response to the video and two others familiar with the matter — though it’s unclear what that would mean for Gabbard. The Director of National Intelligence serves as the president’s principal intelligence adviser and oversees the sprawling U.S. spy community.
First, “nixing Gabbard’s office completely” is exactly what the bad elements of the Intelligence Community would love to see. Second, “folding its mandate into the CIA” is like a dream come true for the darkest elements of the IC and Senate enablers. And Third, “serves as the president’s principal intelligence adviser” is false. That’s the job of the National Security Advisor, Marco Rubio. If there is one hope amid this looming and increasing drumbeat to remove her, it is that Marco Rubio likely can see exactly what the motives and intentions are from his former colleagues. The elements targeting DNI Gabbard all come from SSCI Chairman Marco Rubio’s old tribe. SoS/NSA Rubio might save her, as too may Vice President JD Vance. Both of them are at the perfect distance to see the assembled drumbeat against Gabbard for what it is. At least that is my hope.
I am not confident they will succeed removing her. However, what I am confident about is that if Tulsi Gabbard is removed, she will not be replaced, and that’s as good as a win for the bad actors trying to target and survive Trump. President Trump has no more juice or influence in the Senate. That time is over. Trump has exhausted all of the political capital he held in the upper chamber. Every Republican Senator will now smile, nod and do whatever the heck they want regardless of how it impacts President Trump. This is especially true for the SSCI who would control confirmation of a DNI replacement. They don’t have to pretend any longer, Trump’s juice is gone. If President Trump allows the Brutus crew in his orbit to isolate, ridicule and marginalize Tulsi Gabbard, he will be putting a significant part of his administration at risk. This is the Six Ways from Sunday crowd.

“..Putin does not understand that the problem is Greater Israel. Iran is the last Muslim country with the capability of resisting the Israelization of the Middle East.”
• Putin Aligns With Israel and Finds A New Way To Deny Reality (Paul Craig Roberts)
John Helmer reports that Putin said he supports the “unconditional security of Israel” and that the Russian-Iranian treaty “did not envisage military cooperation.” Is this Putin’s green light for a US/Israeli strike on Iran? Why does Putin support the security of Israel but not of Iran? Israel is the aggressor, not Iran. Iran is a buffer for Russia. Israel is a threat. Putin offered his ideas to Netanyahu and Trump on how to resolve the “problem.” Putin said, “In my opinion, in general, such a solution can be found.” Putin does not understand that the problem is Greater Israel. Iran is the last Muslim country with the capability of resisting the Israelization of the Middle East. Israel has had a target on Iran for many years, and the American whore media has succeeded in demonizing Iran in the hearts and minds of the American people.
Putin’s foolish statements putting distance between Russia and Iran removes the only real constraint on a US/Israeli war with Iran. Such a war could soon begin. Gilbert Doctorow and the Washington Post report that Israel’s supply of missiles for its air defense are being rapidly depleted by sustained Iranian attacks. Israel faces the possible humiliation of having to sue for peace in about a week to ten days or use its nuclear weapons. This prospect is a huge incentive for Netanyahu to get Trump into the war and for Trump to oblige him.

“Why do you regard the risk of a nuclear war as less of a threat than a mutual security agreement with Russia?”
• Is Trump’s Constituency Netanyahu or MAGA-America? (Paul Craig Roberts)
President Trump is supposed to be America’s President, different from Biden who was the immigrant-invaders’ president, the president for DEI, the president for Zelensky in his conflict with Russia, the president for misunderstood criminals and sexual perverts. So why is Trump behaving as if he is President for Netanyahu? Iran has done nothing to America. It has not attacked us, sanctioned us, frozen our bank reserves, forbidden trade with us, assassinated any of our leaders. These are things that Washington has done to Iran. Why? Because Netanyahu told us to. Having failed to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities used to produce fuel for nuclear power and for medical purposes, Netanyahu has turned the task over to Trump, “Israel’s best friend.” Why does Trump want to be best friend with a government that for 21 months bombed and staffed Palestinian civilians, green-lighted Israeli soldiers to shoot babies and children in the head, and is now relying on starvation and disease to finish off the Palestinian population, forcefully preventing food, water, and medicine from entering Gaza?
Would you want to be friends with Netanyahu? Can you respect a president who not only wants to be friends with a genocidal maniac like Netanyahu, but is ready to take America to war for Netanyahu? I cannot. It seems that Trump is going to do good for Netanyahu by harming America and forfeiting American lives in yet another war for Israel. Hey Trump, what happens to the domestic agenda if taking on Iran is a bigger job than Netanyahu told you? Are you going to end up expanding Israel’s borders instead of protecting America’s borders? What happened to your plan to use Gaza as the anchor for your development of an American Middle East colony in place of Greater Israel? You declared Gaza an American possession and the first stage in the development plan. Has Netanyahu straightened you out about Greater Israel?
What happened to peace in Ukraine in 24 hours? You never sat down with Putin, understood the Russian concerns about NATO on Russia’s borders, and understood that the obvious solution was a mutual security agreement. That is all it takes to solve the problem before another fool green lights another attack on Russian strategic forces. Why do you regard the risk of a nuclear war as less of a threat than a mutual security agreement with Russia? What’s wrong with a mutual security agreement? Is the answer that the US military/security complex won’t allow you to take away the enemy that justifies their budget and power? America’s last industry seems to be weapons. Can we survive without it?
Hey Trump, considering all your problems at home with the judiciary blocking your deportation efforts and your ability to exercise executive branch powers to control the federal government’s policies and spending, with state and local Democrat officials working against your effort to control the border, with NGOs and foundations financing anti-deportation riots, why are you diverting your limited time and energy to foreign wars? After Netanyahu gets you into a war with Iran, are you going to start one with China? When the dumbshits in Europe get into a war with Russia, are you rushing Americans to the rescue?
Trump, you were supposed to be an American President, not President of the World. Our own country is drowning in problems. Why are you getting involved in other countries’ problems? Your dumbshit predecessors–Dubya/Cheney, Obama, Biden–have already destroyed five countries for Israel. If you make it six with Iran, Netanyahu will hand you number 7–Saudi Arabia–and then numbers 8–Pakistan, a larger problem as Pakistan has nukes. Will number 8 be Turkey? Are you going to be the president who created Greater Israel for the genocidal Netanyahu? Do you think that this is something to be proud of?
That is not why you were elected. You had better pay attention to your base. When the American Establishment concludes that you have been given enough rope, the RINOs will join the Democrats in impeaching you, and your disappointed public base will not come to your rescue. You will be impeached and convicted and so will be your supporters. Privileges for DEI will reappear along with open borders as white heterosexuals become accustomed to their second class status in a country that the Democrats have created in their image–a Sodom and Gomorrah Tower of Babel. The Camp of the Saints will advance, and you, Donald Trump, will have opened the last door to the replacement of the white ethnicities.

“Wednesday’s ruling is a crucial step toward restoring sanity to American healthcare and protecting our most vulnerable citizens from ideologically driven medical abuse.”
• Supreme Court Delivers a Crushing Blow to Trans Agenda (Margolis)
In a resounding victory for parental rights and child protection, the Supreme Court delivered a 6-3 decision Wednesday that upholds Tennessee’s ban on so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors. This landmark ruling represents a triumph of common sense over radical gender ideology that has been targeting America’s children for far too long. nAs you could have guessed, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, while the conservative majority on the court correctly recognized what Tennessee and 24 other states have already figured out: Children deserve protection from irreversible medical experiments masquerading as healthcare. The ACLU and its allies tried to dress up this radical agenda in constitutional language, claiming that banning these dangerous treatments for gender dysphoria while allowing the same medications for legitimate medical conditions somehow violated “equal protection.”
What a joke. There’s nothing “equal” about subjecting confused children to experimental treatments that could sterilize them and cause lifelong health problems. And thankfully, a majority of the court disagreed with the ACLU. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that such policy decisions are best left to voters and their elected officials, not the courts. In her dissent, Sotomayor accused the court of retreating “from meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most,” and “abandon[ing] transgender children and their families to political whims.” The medical establishment’s endorsement of these treatments is hardly the slam-dunk argument the left thinks it is. The same organizations pushing puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones have been captured by woke ideology and are more interested in political correctness than protecting children.
Meanwhile, as we’ve previously reported here at PJ Media, European countries that have been dealing with this gender madness longer than we have are now pulling back because they’re finally acknowledging what many of us have been saying all along: the risks far outweigh any supposed benefits. Various studies have supported this conclusion. This Supreme Court decision is a massive win for the 25 states that have had the courage to stand up to the transgender lobby and put children’s welfare first. It’s a vindication of basic common sense in an age when saying that boys are boys and girls are girls can get you labeled a bigot.
Of course, the fight isn’t over. The radical left won’t give up its crusade to confuse and mutilate America’s children just because the Supreme Court dealt them a major blow. There are still battles to fight in schools, sports, and countless other institutions that this gender ideology has infected. The Court has yet to address the broader questions of parental rights and the scope of state authority to protect children from harmful medical interventions. But Wednesday’s ruling is a crucial step toward restoring sanity to American healthcare and protecting our most vulnerable citizens from ideologically driven medical abuse.

Imagine bankrupting yourself over a fantasy threat.
• Germany’s 5% of GDP Defense Spending Goal Will Ruin Economy (Sp.)
Germany would “ruin” its economy by agreeing to a blitzing raise in its defense spending, particularly the NATO-proposed target of 3.5% to 5% of GDP, Ralf Dickel, an independent German energy expert specializing in international energy trade, told Sputnik on Thursday.In early May, media reported that NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte had proposed that NATO states increase their defense spending to 3.5% of GDP and allocate another 1.5% of GDP to additional defense needs to meet US President Donald Trump’s demand for a 5% target. The minimum requirements are expected to be agreed upon at the NATO summit in The Hague from June 24-25. “First of all, again, this 3.5 percent, 5 percent is completely ridiculous. We will ruin our economy for nothing,” Dickel said on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF). The expert expressed his concern over the prevailing mindset in the West where the emphasis on military readiness is seen as a solution to global tensions.
“What worries me is that in the West, we have a lot of people who say, ‘okay, this must spend much more on defense,’ on being war-ready, actually. Not on defense, but war-ready. That is very stupid on several accounts,” Dickel said. He argued that true defense should not be measured solely by the percentage of GDP allocated to military spending but should be informed by a careful analysis of potential threats. “I mean, first of all, it’s fair to be able to defend yourself, but that is something you would not usually link to a scale of your GDP, but you would rather analyze what is a scale of potential military actions against your country, and then you should be sure to meet them. But in parallel to that, we should also make an offer to negotiate. And to negotiate eventually some new architecture, some new security architecture,” he stated. The expert concluded by stressing that sustainable security for any state could not solely be achieved through military means but must also involve dialogue and cooperation.

Will NATO survive this?
• Spanish PM Rejects NATO Call to Raise Defense Spending to 5% of GDP (Sp.)
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez told NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that Madrid would not support the proposal to increase the alliance’s defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2032, according to a letter published by El Pais newspaper on Thursday. “For Spain, committing to a 5% target would not only be unreasonable, but also counterproductive; it would move Spain away from optimal spending and would hinder the EU’s efforts to strengthen its security and defense ecosystem,” the letter read.
Sources at the Spanish government told the newspaper that while they do not rule out Europe reaching 5% defense spending, they believe it is too early to set that target. Earlier in June, Rutte called on NATO member states to increase their defense spending from the current 2% to 3.5% of their respective GDPs, and spend another 1.5% on infrastructure development, military industry and other security-related investments. US President Donald Trump previously demanded that NATO allies spend 5% of GDP on defense.

”If the Ukrainian state entrusts someone to negotiate on its behalf, suit yourself, let it be Zelensky,” Putin said. “The question is, who will sign the document?”
• Putin Reveals Pitfalls Of Potential Meeting With Zelensky (RT)
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he could meet with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to conduct peace talks between the two countries, but expressed doubt regarding Zelensky’s authority to sign a treaty. Zelensky has repeatedly called for a meeting with Putin, claiming that he alone can resolve key bilateral issues, including territorial disputes.nSpeaking late Wednesday with international media at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, the Russian president reiterated Moscow’s concerns about Zelensky’s legitimacy. ”If the Ukrainian state entrusts someone to negotiate on its behalf, suit yourself, let it be Zelensky,” Putin said. “The question is, who will sign the document?”
Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, and no successor has been elected due to martial law. Zelensky insists that he has the right to remain in office, even though the Ukrainian Constitution calls for the transfer of presidential powers to the speaker of the parliament. ”Propagandistically, one can say anything about the legitimacy of the current authorities, but we care about legal aspects and not propaganda when dealing with serious issues,” Putin said.
He added that since Ukrainian officials are appointed by the president, Zelensky’s questionable legitimacy calls into question the authority of those serving under him. We don’t care who conducts negotiations, even if it is the head of the regime. I am even willing to meet with him for some final phase, where we won’t be spending endless amounts of time divvying things but would just put a stop to it all. ”But the signature must come from legitimate authorities,” Putin stressed. “Otherwise, whoever comes after him will toss it to the dumpster. That’s not a way to conduct serious business.”




Cancer
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1935346765256863947
Heart
First-ever heart transplant performed in the US, fully by robots without opening the chest or cutting bones
— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) June 19, 2025
Alright, you’ve watched Tucker Carlson’s takedown of Tel Aviv Ted @SenTedCruz now you can watch a portion with receipts!!
Meow! pic.twitter.com/z5Jwy2Nw3a
— GenXGirl (@GenXGirl1994) June 19, 2025


Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.



Home › Forums › Debt Rattle June 20 2025