El Greco Dormition of the Mother of God 1565-1566
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 22, 2026
BREAKING: Donald Trump just dropped the 🎤 by saying his Multi Billion Dollar Lawsuit against the New York Times will include all the false reporting
— MAGA Voice (@MAGAVoice) June 21, 2026
SUE THEM INTO OBLIVION 🔥 pic.twitter.com/DKabj8jCT8
ELON MUSK: "In 5 years, digital intelligence will exceed the sum of all human intelligence."
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) June 21, 2026
Within five years, there may be at least 100 million humanoid robots, possibly even 1 billion.
The economy could double in size within 5 to 7 years because AI and robotics may increase… https://t.co/P6vLUAKvAp pic.twitter.com/kw0zudz5db
There’s quite a few people I don’t agree with anymore on the topic. Makes me curious.
• War On Iran: Trump: “It Really Probably Is Unconditional Surrender” (MoA)
On Wednesday, June 17 2026, Trump signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Iran in Versailles. That palace has seen a lot of defeats. Asked about the MoU he called it an “unconditional surrender”: Caputo also asked Trump about his original promise that the war would end with an “unconditional surrender” from Tehran, pointing to the memorandum of understanding he signed on Wednesday. “Well, it really probably is unconditional surrender,” Trump told the outlet. But Trump leaves this open: Surrender by whom? His declared war aims and demands for Iran were regime change, no ballistic missiles and no nuclear program.Read more …
Now Trump himself is fearing regime change. He defends Iran’s reliance on ballistic missiles and no longer minds it having nuclear stuff. March 6 2026: President Trump declared on Friday that he would settle for nothing short of “unconditional surrender” by Iran, the latest and broadest expansion of his goals for the conflict, Six days into the Israeli and American bombing campaign, Iran has shown no interest, at least publicly, in surrendering. Mr. Trump declared on Saturday, in the opening hours of the U.S. attack, that Iran’s people should rise up and overthrow their government.But in the following days, both Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth pivoted away from the emphasis on regime change, saying that the United States was simply focused on assuring that Iran’s nuclear program was permanently destroyed, and that it no longer had the missile capability to attack Israel, its Arab neighbors, and perhaps someday America. Trump Demands ‘Unconditional Surrender’ by Iran (archived) – Mar 6 2026 – NY Times
June 18 2026: President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he was motivated to finalize the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran to prevent “economic catastrophe” if the war was not resolved soon. “So rather than possibly going into a depression, rather than having your favorite president be Herbert Hoover, he was always the one I didn’t want to be,” Trump said of the 31st president whose policies are often blamed for starting the Great Depression. Trump also said he was open to allowing Iran to maintain its stockpile of ballistic missiles, claiming it was “unfair” for Iran to not be able to have the weapons if their neighbors do. …
And despite his insistence that the memorandum states that Iran cannot develop or obtain a nuclear weapon — one of his chief concerns during negotiations, Trump also appeared softer during the press conference on Wednesday in his position on whether Iran could develop a nuclear program for civilian purposes in the future. “You know, it’s also, it is a little hard though when you say that somebody wants—other people have it, other adjoining states have it and you’re not letting them have it for purposes of electricity and things like that. It’s always a little tough. You have to use a little common sense,” Trump added.
Trump didn’t want ‘Herbert Hoover’ presidency with Iran; said it has to have ‘some’ missiles – Jun 18, 2026 – ABCnews. Professor Mearsheimer was quite explicit in his latest talk (vid) with Judge Napolitano: Trump must shut the war down, whatever it politically might cost, to save the economy and his presidency.After he had launched the war he had to surrender, unconditionally, to prevent a global depression (which still may well happen). It may still take while, and maybe even another round of fighting, until that really sinks in.
“93.1% said Iran won.”
What did they presumably win?
• Israelis Are Livid Over Trump Ending War, Overwhelmingly Believe Iran Won (ZH)
After roping President Trump into breaking a core campaign promise, watching the United States expend resources and risk American lives to attack Iran, and then watching Trump take steps to end the war via MOU – Israelis are livid because the US didn’t commit to full-on decimation to celebrate America’s 250th, and say Iran came out ahead. According to a survey conducted by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in partnership with the Agam Institute, 92.1% of Israelis believe Iran came out ahead in the conflict and the US-brokered deal that followed.Read more …
Even among voters loyal to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conservative bloc, 93.1% said Iran won. 82.9% of respondents said the six-week military campaign against Iran left Israel’s long-term security weaker, not stronger. Another 86% hold a negative view of both the way the fighting ended and the way Washington negotiated the subsequent deal without meaningful Israeli input. Nearly 88% of Israelis believe their country either fell short of its war aims entirely or achieved only partial success, despite the stated objectives being nothing less than dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, neutering its missile arsenal, and toppling the regime in Tehran. Those were the goals. None of them, by the public’s own assessment, were fully met.Netanyahu has tried to project confidence in the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding anyway. At a press conference Monday, he insisted Iran will never possess nuclear weapons “as long as I am prime minister of Israel.” As we noted on Tuesday, hardline Israeli politicians are livid over the Iran deal, and want Netanyahu out so they can do ‘real regime change.’ “With an agreement or without an agreement, Iran will not have nuclear weapons – not today and not tomorrow,” he said, calling the mission his “life’s mission.” He has also maintained that the nuclear threat from Iran was an “immediate danger” that Israel removed “together with our American friends.”
Either way, Israelis aren’t buying it. 72.5% of respondents reject Netanyahu’s claim that Israel secured major gains and eliminated an existential threat. Only 26.5% rate his handling of the war as “good” or “excellent,” while 56.4% call it “failed” or “poor.” His personal approval as prime minister has collapsed from 40.5% in early March to 29.4% in June, a fifteen-point swing in roughly three months. And of course, there’s Trump… with 69.1% of respondents rated his handling of the war and the resulting deal as “failed” or “poor,” against just 10.8% who called it “good” or “excellent.” Quite the change in sentiment from his 2024 election win…
Despite the widespread belief that the Iran campaign backfired, 48.2% of Israelis say their country should renew major military action against Hezbollah, including strikes in Beirut, even if that means clashing with Trump, who has made clear he wants the fighting in Lebanon to stop. Only 20.9% oppose that course, with the remaining 30.9% undecided. Israelis appear simultaneously convinced the last war was mishandled and eager for the next one. Just 12.2% of respondents believe Israel achieved most of the stated goals against Hamas and Hezbollah following the October 7, 2023 attacks while 61.3% say Israel achieved none of them, and 26.5% say only some were met.
Across the Atlantic, the reception looks entirely different. A Quantus national poll of 1,000 likely US voters found 43% strongly approve and another 13% somewhat approve of the preliminary US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding. Combined disapproval sits at just 13%.The Trump administration has been trying to respond to criticism of the deal, while Israeli cabinet members are talking mad shit about Trump – to the point where VP JD Vance came very close to asking if they’ve even said ‘pwease’ or ‘thank you.’
Vance defended the MOU during Thursday’s White House briefing, pushing back on what he said was misleading media coverage. “The simple fact is that the only way the Iranians get any of those resources – not a single penny, by the way, from the United States of America under any circumstances – but the only way that they would ever get any benefit of the bargain is if they comply fully, and change their behavior,” Vance said of Iran, adding that Tehran’s military and nuclear program “is still destroyed” if Iran refuses to change course. He also said that compliance would bring “a transformative relationship with the Middle East.”
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2067642712560689401?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2067642712560689401%7Ctwgr%5E3ba43edb00d551c7daaa6ef5f831958df7580c5f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fisraelis-are-livid-over-trump-ending-war-overwhelmingly-believe-iran-won-poll
The Hebrew University-Agam Institute survey was conducted June 17–20, using a weighted sample of 3,644 Israelis aged 17 and over, designed to reflect the broader population, and has a maximum sampling error of just 2.2% at a 99% confidence level. Maybe they’ll just keep attacking Lebanon to scuttle the peace deal?
https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2067192026118926766?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2067192026118926766%7Ctwgr%5E3ba43edb00d551c7daaa6ef5f831958df7580c5f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fisraelis-are-livid-over-trump-ending-war-overwhelmingly-believe-iran-won-poll
They immediately denied it.
• Iran Agrees To Invite Nuclear Inspectors Back; Vance Hails Great Progress (ZH)
Axios is reporting Monday morning Iran has agreed to invite IAEA inspectors back to the country, according to fresh words of Vice President J.D. Vance, who focused all day prior and much into the overnight on forging a path forward toward permanent peace. The two sides are seeking to hammer out a long-term nuclear agreement, now amid the technical talks process, as delegation heads depart Switzerland – leaving diplomatic teams behind. The 60-day roadmap begins. If indeed the UN nuclear inspectors are eventually let back into Iran, this would be a hugely significant step. This would be to verify compliance to the preliminary agreement, Vance further hails:Read more …
“Our hope is that we get to the final deal and a permanent settlement. But right now, I think we’ve made great progress and we should all celebrate that in terms of when the nuclear inspectors are going to start,” the American Vice President told reporters. He described that he phoned UN nuclear inspectors at 2am last night to update them on the developments, however, he said that no one picked up the call. “As you can expect, not many people are answering their phone at two in the morning,” said Vance. “I expect that will happen at the minimum this week, but we think even some of those conversations with the inspectors and with the IAEA could happen as soon as today.”Both warring sides appear to finally be in the same page in terms of issuing ‘positive’ and ‘encouraging’ assessments earlier. There were reports of last-minute disagreements, threats, and warnings that the process could collapse near the conclusion of yesterday’s formal round one of talks. “So they didn’t walk out, and their technical team is still here in Burgenstock working with our technical team,” Vance explained. “What we told the Iranians yesterday is, ‘When you guys exchange in what us millennials might call trash talk, you can’t expect the president of the United States not to respond and not to correct the record’.”
Vance conceded that in the end there was a “a little bit of threatening” and “whining but at the end of the day, the talks continued and we made great progress.” He further described that a mechanism had been established to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, while noting that significant work remained and that technical negotiations would continue. Also, importantly he said that a “very good foundation” was laid for a successful final agreement with Iran.
JD Vance:
— Clash Report (@clashreport) June 22, 2026
I can't stay here for the next 60 days. I will go back to the U.S.
The technical teams will be working. pic.twitter.com/s9PSTRvMSR
“. . .They are running the Accords logic to its conclusion: every adversary becomes a counterparty, every conflict becomes a deal, every closed economy becomes an investable market.” —Patrick Wood
• Slouching Toward Peace (James Howard Kunstler)
That squawking you hear is Iran getting dragged kicking and screaming out of its jihad delirium into something that might look like reality-based relations with the rest of the world. They have to loudly declare that it’s not happening, even as it’s happening, to gaslight their own home folks, who might be getting a little sick of economic free-fall — and probably sick of the IRGC regime itself. And, of course, they know that the Lefty-left half of the USA is rooting for this whole business to fail so they can get their mitts back on the levers of power to avoid prison.Read more …
Things are at a pretty pass, all righty. The sticking point of the moment is Lebanon. Everybody is twanging on Israel to quit fighting Hezbollah. Okay, but does Hezbollah not have some obligation to quit its provocations? And is Iran, which controls Hezbollah, not responsibile to make Hezbollah stop?Notice, you don’t hear any of the kibitzers calling for that. That’s because getting Hezbollah to poke Israel in the eye with a sharp stick is Iran’s favored device for dragging out negotiations which, they apparently hope, will put POTUS in fear of the looming midterm election. But time is running out on their playing for time. What they’re actually playing is pretend — pretending to be living large and in-charge. They’ve got nothing else, really. They’ve driven their country into a ditch.
The US is in a straight-up good-cop / bad-cop mode. VP Vance, on-the-ground in Switzerland, presents the very picture of a smooth, cool, rational figure where it counts: face-to-face with Iranian leaders, after all these years. He calmly tells the world news media that “encouraging progress” has been made the first day toward a ceasefire in poor, sore-beset Lebanon. As of Monday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi concurred on “X.”
Meanwhile, President Trump was going mad-dog on social media. Of his relations with irksome Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu, POTUS said, “It’s good, but we have to keep him a little bit sane.” He added, “Iran must stop their highly-paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again. . . bomb the shit out of them.” He advised the Iranian negotiators that they “won’t even make if back” to their country if they keep playing games, and declared that the US will take over the Strait of Hormuz, if necessary. A bit harsh, admittedly. Any trouble parsing it out?
“Remember the Episode With Jerry and the Tennis Pro?”
• The ‘Seinfeld’ Theory of Iran Negotiations (Scott Pinsker)
This theory seems especially appropriate today: Between Schrödinger’s Strait being both open and closed, Hezbollah’s rockets bombarding Israel, and Iranian negotiators demanding billions in bribes, the ongoing drama at the Bürgenstock Resort in Switzerland is — very likely — “a show about nothing.” It’ll get great ratings. Lots of people will watch. (It’s Must-See TV!) But after all the hype and all the hoopla, DJT’s MOU is DOA. (There will be no TCB.) When all is said and done, the U.S.-Iran negotiations will be about as successful as Kramer’s lawsuit against Java World: JD Vance will get free coffee (I assume), but that’s pretty much it.Read more …
Sorry, but that’s the stone-cold truth. You can’t negotiate a peace deal with apocalyptic psychos whose bloodlust surpasses Newman’s waistline. These Iranian hardliners make Crazy Joe Davola look sane. Which is why our peace talks will sink like the 1956 SS Andrea Doria (but then again, “All vacations have to end eventually”). There is no hope! (Nor any hugging or learning.) Or, perhaps, the exact opposite is true — a Bizarro-version of “conventional wisdom,” if you will — and America has Iran by the short hairs.On Jan. 30, 1997, episode #147 of Seinfeld aired: “The Comeback.” It is, perhaps, the most prophetic episode in Seinfeld’s entire catalog. There were four major storylines:
First was George’s obsession with settling the score with a snarky coworker who made a mean-spirited comment: “Hey George, the ocean called. They’re running out of shrimp!” George went through hell and high water to get even, making himself look utterly preposterous in the process. This storyline, of course, is an allegory for the Tucker Carlson-Mark Levin feud. (Or maybe it’s the Ben Shapiro-Megyn Kelly feud? Or possibly the Candace Owens-Laura Loomer feud? At this point, it’s getting kinda difficult to keep track of who’s feuding with who.)
The second storyline was Kramer’s desperate attempt to annul his living will: He no longer wanted to have his life support terminated. (Thus, becoming pro-life, I suppose.) Yet his frantic attempts to find his attorney were thwarted at the last minute — a chilling commentary on Canada’s euthanasia policies, where a poor shlub with IBS at a Tim Hortons was just “canceled” by a Canadian doctor.
Third was Elaine’s interest in a mysterious video store employee whose taste in cinema was sublime. Alas, when she went to meet him (bringing fireworks, cigarettes, and vodka), she learned he’s only 15. The kid’s mother shamed her, yet Elaine walked away without any legal consequences. Obviously, this was a clever callback to the shocking “industrial scale” sexual assaults that were (allegedly) committed by gangs of Muslim men against 250,000 UK little girls, yet the police declined to prosecute the evildoers. Fun fact: The name of Elaine’s 15-year-old love interest was Vincent — whose name is derived from the Latin word vincere, which means “to conquer.” (Hey, is Seinfeld good or what?)
But it’s the fourth storyline that’s most relevant today: A snooty, self-important employee at a tennis pro shop pressured Jerry into buying an expensive new racket. Later, Jerry learned the employee’s horrible secret: The guy can’t even play a lick of tennis! The desperate employee begs Jerry not to tell anyone — or his reputation will be ruined! His wife will leave him! Nobody at work will respect him! Eventually, Jerry agreed to let the employee beat him in a tennis match while his wife, friends, and coworkers all watched.
Behind-the-scenes, the employee gave Jerry everything he wanted: He refunded the racket. He apologized. He acknowledged how pathetic he is. He promised Jerry a full year of free club membership. He even offered Jerry a one-night stand with his wife! So Jerry decided to let the poor guy save face by giving him a “win” that didn’t really matter. The parallels here to the U.S.-Iran MOU are uncanny: Our military has inflicted between $1.5 and $2 trillion in damage to Iran. Its air force, navy, air defense, nuclear program, and Supreme Leader were all blown to bits.
Behind-the-scenes, Iranian negotiators are telling the Americans how weak and vulnerable they are — and how badly they want to make a deal. But to save face, they asked to “win” the MOU. From CNN: The officials described the text of the [MOU] agreement as incredibly vague, mainly intended to create a more favorable environment for the highly technical, in-person talks to come. They added that the framework is aimed at providing Iran the ability to sell it politically to their internal audience.
Additionally, the officials said that the text of the memorandum of understanding — which Vice President JD Vance told CNN Monday is one-and-a-half pages long — didn’t reflect critical back-channel commitments Iran has made to the US, which they argued gave them more confidence in signing on to the arrangement. “People shouldn’t read too much into the language of the MOU,” one of the officials said, describing the agreement as a “political document.”
[…]
The official added that the president’s team of negotiators “came up with language that allows (Iran) to say what they need to say for their domestic politics.” [emphasis added] When the Iran War began, plenty of Americans were cheering for regime change, hoping that freedom-loving Iranians would rise up and overthrow the mullahs. We assumed that they were the #1 threat to the Ayatollah’s power. But it’s entirely possible we misread the tea leaves — and Iran’s rulers are far more terrified of being killed by hardline Islamists than freedom-loving reformers.
When the Iranians talk about “saving face,” they mean it literally: Pissing off the hardliners is instant death. If so, it would explain the posture of the Trump administration: Iran has already committed to signing a one-sided peace deal, but only with the face-saving cover of an equally one-sided MOU. Otherwise, all the Iranian negotiators will be executed when they return home, and the White House will have to start the peace process all over again. On the outside looking in, it’s unclear how likely this explanation is, but it deserves careful consideration for two important reasons:
The Trump administration insists that it’s true. (And it knows more details than we do.It would certainly explain the administration’s behavior, patience, and tolerance for Iran’s tomfoolery.But even if it’s true, Iran had better tread very, very carefully. Because, as the Seinfeld prophecy foretells, the pro shop employee couldn’t resist gloating about “beating” Jerry. In the middle of their match, he called Jerry names. He mocked his ability. He invited others to laugh at him. He called Jerry a baby, a chicken, and “not a man.”
He won’t turn his back on either of the two. Let them fight it out.
• Trump May Have Given Us a HUGE Hint About His Successor (Margolis)
For more than a year, the corporate press has treated Donald Trump’s eventual successor like a riddle they alone can solve, parceling out clues from offhand remarks and body language. A new book suggests they’ve been chasing a story that doesn’t yet exist because Trump himself hasn’t made up his mind. Or has he?Read more …
The book, titled Regime Change, by New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, chronicles the first year of Trump’s second term. One notable anecdote is that once, during a walk-through with reporters, Trump showed off new flagpoles he had installed on the White House North and South Lawns, something he said he had wanted to do during his first term but had avoided for fear of bad press. Not this time. “You guys were after me,” Trump told the reporters. “I was the hunted. And now I’m the hunter.” That confidence extends to how he talks about who comes next.According to the book, Trump has repeatedly quizzed his own aides on whether Vice President JD Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio would make a better president after him. And Trump may have given a hint about his preference. Trump is also said to be impressed by the background of Rubio, who is the son of Cuban immigrants. The book describes how, after Trump redecorated the Oval Office to fill it with gold flourishes, someone asked the president about the likelihood that the next president would undo all that he had done. Trump retorted: “Cubans love gold.”
But, Haberman and Swan write, Rubio and Vance are also friends. An example they offer is Rubio texting Vance after the 2024 Republican vice presidential nominee’s comments about “ childless cat ladies ” became a scandal. Rubio offered to campaign with Vance to show his support. Speculation about who Trump prefers as his successor has been rampant pretty much since Trump took office again. In February 2025, Fox News anchor Bret Baier asked Trump if he sees Vance as his successor and the 2028 Republican nominee. Trump’s answer wasn’t the easy yes everyone expected. “No, but he’s very capable,” he said, before pivoting to praise. “I think you have a lot of very capable people. So far, I think he’s doing a fantastic job. It’s too early; we’re just starting.”
That answer rattled plenty of people who had assumed that Vance would simply inherit the MAGA movement when Trump’s term ends. A Mediaite report the following month claimed that Trump wants his political dynasty to outlive his own presidency, and three high-level sources claimed that Donald Trump Jr. was seriously weighing a 2028 run of his own.
Donald Trump Jr. wasted no time torching that theory. “I accurately predicted that my buddy JD would be an instant power player in national GOP politics, so your theory is that I worked my a** off to help get him the VP nomination because I want to run for president in 2028?” he said. “Are you f****g retarded? I’m actually glad you’re printing this b******t, though, because at least now the rest of the press corps will see how s****y your ‘sources’ are and how easily you’re played by them. Congrats, moron.”
That’s not the response of a man choosing his words carefully for a future campaign launch. It’s the response of someone who finds the entire premise absurd. So after a year of speculation, here’s what the evidence actually shows: Trump is weighing Vance against Rubio on the merits, and probably seems to be leaning toward Rubio right now.
Don’t sound good.
• Fail, Britannia: Meet the New Commie, Worse Than the Old Commie (Green)
The U.K.’s most destructively feckless prime minister (since the last one) is history, but Keir Starmer’s likely successor could prove Britain’s final undoing — if the radical Liberian-born advisor who serves as Andy Burnham’s “brains” gets her way. Burnham, former Mayor of Greater Manchester, won the Makerfield by-election on June 18 with an impressive 55% of the vote — a full rebuke of Reform U.K., too — sending him to Parliament where he’ll make a run at Number 10 Downing St. At least one potential rival, Wes Streeting, stood aside and endorsed Burnham on Monday, pretty much clearing his path.Read more …
In his endorsement, Streeting said he wants Labour to pursue “a progressive capitalism focused on wealth creation as much as wealth distribution,” but nobody seems to have told the “brains” behind Burnham: the Liberian-born daughter of lefty radicals, Miatta Fahnbulleh. CutMyTaxUK reported last year that Fahnbulleh “was born in Liberia as part of a prominent leftist revolutionary family, has served as a junior energy & housing minister in the Starmer government before resigning to support Burnham.” Previously, as the “former head of the far-left New Economics Foundation,” she proved “adept at churning out socialist policy proposals.”Or as CMT-UK put it, “Keir Starmer has appointed a Housing Minister who hates private housing.” Another U.K. publication, Guido Fawkes, put all of Fahnbulleh’s most radical proposals in one handy list on Sunday:
• A wealth tax and yet another windfall tax on oil and gas.
• Mass nationalization e.g. of land, transport, and energy.
• Extending national [welfare] insurance [tax to include] to investment income.
• A cap on interest rates and charges on every form of consumer credit.
• Hiking capital gains tax to income tax levels.
• Hiking the dividend tax to income tax levels.
• Abolition of the upper earnings limit for national insurance.
• Huge expansion of the benefits system, including a “minimum income guarantee” paid to everyone apart from the rich.
• Nationalization of banks and creation of new “green” banks with taxpayer funds.
• Block on private banks lending to anyone with a “large amount of greenhouse gas emissions” and “penalization of banks that provide too many carbon-intensive loans.“
• Forced sale of existing businesses to employees.
• A tripling of the stamp duty [property tax, basically] surcharge to 9% for multiple homeowners and an increase to 6% for non-residents.
So, apart from urging the destruction of the energy industry, banking, and investment, ending private ownership of industry and housing, and a massive expansion of Britain’s welfare state, she’s practically a right-winger. Cough, cough. Here’s a quick look at Fahnbulleh’s background:
This article introduces the new ‘Slightly Dark Svengali’ figure ‘intellectually influencing’ Andy Burnham from the shadows – Miatta Fahnbulleh. Unlike previous ‘Slightly Dark Svengali’ figures like say Dominic Cummings or Sue Gray this one has a fun Yookay twist. Her actual… https://t.co/NlAB3zB4SL pic.twitter.com/9cwVRgyYqK
— ɖʀʊӄքǟ ӄʊռʟɛʏ 🇧🇹🇹🇩 (@kunley_drukpa) June 20, 2026Britain isn’t just importing mass numbers of Third Worlders; it’s importing Third World lefty radicalism that the West once pounded into smithereens under Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan during the last years of the Cold War. The New Statesman’s Nick Plumb describes Fahnbulleh’s governing philosophy as “radical co-operativism,” but all these generations later, Karl Marx couldn’t help but notice the family resemblance. But what’s the big deal about a former Housing Minister with a radical laundry list of ways to destroy what’s left of the British economy?
As CMT-UK also put it, there are “two worrying aspects to this New Statesman article.” The first is that “Burnham apparently doesn’t have many brains,” and the second is that “Fahnbulleh is filling the gap.” Fahnbulleh is one of Burnham’s key allies, campaigned for him in last week’s big by-election win, and previously helped shape policy for a potential Burnham government, according to the BBC. By trading Starmer for Burnham, Britain very well may be going out of the frying pan and into the fire.
Elizabeth was popular. That was it.
• Support For UK Monarchy Hits Record Low (RT)
Public support for the British monarchy has fallen to its lowest level in over three decades, a new poll has suggested. Just under half of Britons still favor removing the monarchy, with support particularly weak among younger people. Support for the monarchy has steadily declined since reaching a peak of 80% in 2012 and fell to 55% in 2026, according to data published by Ipsos on Friday. The figure is the lowest recorded by the market research and polling company since it began tracking the issue in 1993 and is well below the long-term average of 71%.Read more …
Support has declined across all age groups but is particularly low among Britons aged 18-34, where only a third of respondents said they favor the monarchy – roughly half the level recorded in 2013. According to Ipsos, 45% of people in that age group would prefer the UK to become a republic instead. Satisfaction with King Charles and his heir, Prince William, remains high, the poll suggested as 60% and 71% of respondents respectively said they liked the way the king and the prince were doing their jobs.The monarchy’s popularity took a hit over one of the Royal family member’s long-standing association to late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The now former Prince Andrew, King Charles’ brother, was initially accused in 2014 of being one of the persons the disgraced financier sex-trafficked woman to. Andrew settled a civil lawsuit with one of the sex-trafficking victims, Virginia Giuffre, in 2022, while still denying all the allegations. In 2026, the British police opened a criminal case against him after a release of additional files in the Epstein case suggested that he allegedly provided confidential government information to the convicted sex offender.
Buckingham Palace commented on the case in February by saying that the Royal family was ready to support the probe “if we are approached by Thames Valley Police” and adding that the king’s “thoughts and sympathies have been, and remain with, the victims of any and all forms of abuse.” According to a poll conducted by YouGov in April, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor remains the most disliked member of the family by a wide margin, with over 90% of Britons having a “negative” or “very negative” view of him.
The influence of the British monarchy abroad has also declined in recent years, with some former British colonies considering severing their remaining ties to the Crown. Barbados became the most recent Caribbean nation to become a republic in 2021 while remaining within Britain’s Commonwealth. A survey conducted by former Conservative Party deputy chairman Michael Ashcroft in 2023 suggested that six of the 14 overseas countries within the Commonwealth realm – including Canada and Australia – would prefer to ditch the monarchy.
7 prime ministers in 10 years.
American Democrats have nowhere to turn to. The US system prohibits a third party.
The UK has Nigel Farage waiting in the wings,
• Keir Starmer Reveals How Much Labour Resembles American Democrats (Queen)
I counted, and during my lifetime, the UK has had 13 prime ministers. The count is likely to jump to 14 soon now that Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced his resignation as leader of the Labour Party on Monday. Labour is now set for a leadership challenge, with newly elected MP Andy Burnham, formerly mayor of Manchester, as the main challenger. Starmer’s resignation may give rank-and-file Britons (many of whom are discovering the joys of American life during the World Cup) some whiplash, as Noa Hoffman pointed out on Monday’s Coffee House Shots podcast:Read more …
I think a lot of people who are not in tune with the day-to-day ins and outs of Westminster politics are going to think, “What the hell is going on?” I think that’s actually going to reflect quite poorly on the Labour Party, because, as Tim said, there was no one major scandal or one major failure that really led to this resignation.It was sort of a litany of errors, many of them unforced, but nowhere near to the extent of what sort of preceded the big resignations of a lot of Tory prime ministers, so no one is going to say Keir Starmer was doing a great, perhaps even good job, but was he literally the worst thing on earth, or so bad to the extent that everyone thought, given even given the volatile state that the world is in right now, the best thing to do is for you to stand down and bring in a man who nobody, apart from the people of Makerfield voted for, nobody in the general election voted Labour on the basis of Andy Banham leading the party and being a prime minister, and now he’s promising all these big radical changes, unless he U-turns on them, as he has been doing frequently, without a mandate.
So this is going to come as a shock to a lot of people, and I don’t think Labour MPs really understand that. She later said, “But I think the overall question that history will ask is, was that reason enough for him to go and bring on the next sort of big left-wing agenda that we’re about to see that the public did not vote for, and I’m not sure the answer to that is necessarily yes.”
This isn’t an apples-to-apples comparison since the UK’s parliamentary system doesn’t exactly line up with the American democratic republic, but it feels like an echo of the Democrats replacing Joe Biden with Kamala Harris. It’s not clear yet how Labour’s rank and file will take to Burnham’s leadership and policies, so it may drive the country closer to a general election sooner rather than later. In the podcast, the question of Starmer’s legacy came up. Editor Tim Shipman characterized Starmer as one who was good at campaigning but bad at governing — you know, like Barack Obama. Shipman also identified Starmer’s legacy as being much about himself:
The innate thing is that Keir Starmer fundamentally thinks that if you’re a decent chap and you’re going to work and want to do decent things, then decent outcomes will follow. Well, that’s not how politics or government works.
And the other thing he thought was that winning a landslide was some great, massive endorsement of himself, and it was not. It was one of the great two-fingers-to-you [akin to a middle-finger gesture], anyone but the previous lot voters have ever seen in British politics, and that miscalculation, I think, made his government very difficult, and it meant a lot of what he thought he was going to achieve quite easily, like a reset with the European Union. “Oh, which will be fine, because we’re not these wicked Tories. We’re going to go in, and it’s all going to be great, because we’re nice and we’re Labour.”
The Spectator’s Madeleine Grant had another brutal assessment of Starmer’s legacy. In her view, Starmer represents the great gulf between the elites and the great unwashed. There will be much commentariat-painting of Starmer as exhibiting decency, competence and integrity. It probably doesn’t feel like that if you were one of the people he pushed under the bus to save himself, it probably doesn’t feel like that to the pubs and businesses and farms and schools shutting down, it probably doesn’t feel like that if you’re a Chagossian, or a military veteran, or a rape gang victim. Indeed, aside from vibes and the fact that he is ‘like them’, it is very difficult to see where those who laud Starmer as decent, competent, and having integrity have got the idea from.
That perhaps is Starmer’s real legacy: to be the man who embodied more than anyone else the vast gap between those who govern and the governed. The prime minister we were told the nation needed turned out to be the one it deserved. Most deliciously of all, Starmer has embodied the absolute reversal of Blair by proving, even in his departure, that things can, and will, only get worse.
The analogies between Labour and U.S. Democrats are plenty, but Starmer and the upcoming leadership challenge highlight two big comparisons. At the party level, Labour and the Dems are ready to go as far left as they can, and Labour leadership sees itself as an elite class that knows better than the governed, much like Democrats today. It’ll be revealing to watch how this will play out over the next few weeks and what the next general election, whenever it may happen, will bring about.
I still find this strange.
• Tucker Carlson No Longer Supports The Republican Party: ‘I’m Out’ (JTN)
Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson said recently that he is leaving the Republican Party and will no longer support it because the party allegedly “betrayed” Americans with its alliance with Israel. Carlson, who was previously an ally of President Donald Trump, has split with the “Make America Great Again” movement and the Republican Party over the latter’s ties to Israel. “I’m out,” Carlson said on an episode of the “Can’t Be Censored” podcast that aired Thursday but gained traction Monday. “If I’m out, then I think a lot of other people are out. I would not support the Republican Party.Read more …
“How could I or any American voter support a political party that’s not loyal to the United States,” he continued. “That puts the interests of a foreign country above those of its own citizens. It’s not possible to vote for people like that, and I’m not going to.” Carlson, who has supported Republican causes for 35 years, clarified that he would not be supporting Democrats moving forward and was not sure who he would be voting for in future elections. The president and Carlson have been at odds in the second Trump administration, with Trump claiming Carlson has a “low IQ,” and the former Fox host has accused the president of trying to “play God” with the conflict in the Middle East.
“Paul is expected to question Fauci on whether he lied to Congress during the pandemic about whether his office had funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.”
• Rand Paul Subpoenas Fauci For Testimony in COVID Origin Probe (JTN)
Senate Homeland Security Chairman Rand Paul issued a subpoena Monday to force former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci to testify in front of his panel after the Biden administration official declined to do so voluntarily. The senator claimed Fauci previously agreed to testify in front of the panel, but former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on her last day in office last week declassified a several-hundred-page agency report on Fauci related to when he was NIAID director, the COVID-19 pandemic and the continuing, unresolved issue of the origin of the deadly virus.Read more …
Paul said the new hearing will take place in a public forum next month. “Last week, Anthony Fauci notified us he will NOT voluntarily testify before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, even though he had previously agreed to do so,” Paul said on X. “Therefore, today I have issued a subpoena requiring him to testify before the Committee, in public, next month.” Paul is expected to question Fauci on whether he lied to Congress during the pandemic about whether his office had funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.Despite the evidence of a potential lab leak sickening workers at the Wuhan lab, Fauci has continued to double down on his claim that the COVID-19 virus had emerged naturally from a wet-market in the same areas as the lab, not a leak from the lab itself. No date for the new hearing has been released.
Rand Paul can use Tulsi’s material,
• Tulsi Gabbard Biolab Releases (CTH)
Promethean Action PAC’s Barbara Boyd takes a look at the last two declassification releases from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard prior to her resignation. Boyd argues that outgoing DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s recent document releases reveal a global, US-funded biolab network centered on Dr. Anthony Fauci, traced back to January 2014—the same start date cited in Joe Biden’s pardons of Hunter Biden and Fauci. She claims Obama’s 2014 gain-of-function ban pushed the research overseas, with NIH funding routed through EcoHealth Alliance to Wuhan, while Pentagon-backed contractors—especially Metabiota—expanded work in Ukraine after the Maidan coup.Read more …
Boyd also highlights a May 2020 Lawrence Livermore assessment describing Wuhan as fitting criteria for an accidental release of an engineered coronavirus and alleges Anthony Fauci steered Biden-era COVID origins reviews toward natural origin while lying to Congress. She links Ukraine lab inventories and broader COVID-era policies to a larger geopolitical and technocratic agenda.
He wants to invite in 500,000 people for starters?! Not everyone’s happy with that.
• Spanish PM’s Wife Faces Trial On Corruption Charges (RT)
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s wife, Begona Gomez, will stand trial before a jury on corruption-related charges, EFE news agency reported on Saturday, citing a ruling issued by the investigating judge following preliminary hearings held earlier this week. Gomez was formally charged in April with embezzlement, influence peddling, corruption in business dealings, and misappropriation of funds. Prosecutors are reportedly seeking a 24-year prison sentence for the 55-year-old university director, who was also ordered to surrender her passport and appear in court twice a month pending the subsequent proceedings.Read more …
Her adviser, Cristina Alvarez, who is accused of similar offenses, and businessman Juan Carlos Barrabes will also stand trial. The investigation into Gomez was launched in 2024 following a complaint filed by anti-graft campaign group Manos Limpias, whose leader is reportedly linked to Spain’s far right. The organization alleged that Gomez used her position as the prime minister’s wife to influence government contracts given to a group of tech companies.The scope of the probe later expanded after additional accusations that Gomez misused public funds in the hiring of a consultant and improperly used software while working at Madrid’s Complutense University, where she co-directed an academic chair.Her legal team denied any wrongdoing and argued that the proceedings are politically motivated.Sanchez, the leader of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party, has not been implicated in the case.
However, after the probe became public, he suspended public engagements “for a few days” and said he was considering stepping down, denouncing what he described as a campaign of political and personal harassment against his family. Sanchez later announced that he would remain in office and continue leading the government. Former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Zapatero also became the subject of a corruption investigation in May over the alleged misuse of €53 million in state aid granted to Plus Ultra airline in 2021. Earlier this week, a court rejected the request of prosecutors to impose precautionary measures, including the surrender of his passport and a travel ban.
South Florida.
• Go East, Young SpaceX Millionaire! (Stephen Green)
Aside from fueling Elon Musk’s orbital data center ambitions, the recent SpaceX initial public offering minted thousands of new millionaires — and where they put their money will have ripple effects lasting a generation. Can you guess where that money won’t go? In a charmingly outdated New York Post piece from May, Lydia Moynihan predicted that the SpaceX IPO would create “dozens, if not hundreds” of millionaires, including one anonymous early investor who told Moynihan that “she’s already hired someone to run her newly created family office, which manages her investment portfolio.”Read more …
“There are going to be a lot of single family offices that come out of this IPO,” founder of the Family Office Division at Compass, Cindy Scholz, told the Post. The paper reported that with dozens or hundreds of SpaceX millionaires, “Family offices have already grown 25% over the last five years, and she expects to see that number skyrocket in the coming month.” The actual number of new millionaires (and even a few billionaires) created was a bit north of 4,400. Of those, Moynihan’s “hundreds” had eight-figure net-worth paydays when SpaceX went public. That’s a lot of new family offices and whatnots.Scholz, according to the Post, also said last month that the SpaceX windfall will “accelerate the exodus from California.” Well, guess what? Here comes Kristen Altus from Fox Business, who reported Monday that a “fresh wave of Silicon Valley wealth could soon flow into South Florida.” “With OpenAI quietly filing for a confidential IPO alongside market debuts from aerospace giant SpaceX and AI rival Anthropic,” she wrote, “billions of dollars in overnight liquidity are about to be unlocked for executives and middle management alike.”
However, Altus reported, “Instead of reinvesting in the Golden State, this incoming class of newly minted tech multimillionaires is already flooding Florida real estate brokers with calls — triggering what experts say could be a rapid-fire ‘Tech Exodus 2.0’ measured in months, not years.” Nobody tell Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has already spent all those new income tax dollars.
And Another Thing: I was able to buy exactly one (perhaps overpriced) share of SpaceX the day it went public, and then went into waiting mode. When SPCX share dropped from IPO-hysteria highs on Wednesday, I started buying just a little. I’m now the proud owner of 10 (!!!) whole shares, and am a couple hundred dollars poorer as the shares keep falling. But I don’t care, because I own 10 whole shares of the world’s most exciting company.
Even before SpaceX went public, Frank Jacobs went through the numbers for Big Think in May and found that since 2018, “around 103,000 millionaires moved out of California,” and that “133,000 millionaires moved in to Florida,” mostly from the Formerly Golden State and New York. “Wealthy Americans are migrating in large numbers from high-tax states to lower-tax ones and reshaping the nation’s economic geography,” Jacobs wrote, concluding that “steep marginal tax rates may be counterproductive, driving away the very revenue” Albany and Sacramento hoped to get their greedy blue fingers on.
So it’s no stretch to predict that all these SpaceX/Anthropic/OpenAI IPO winners will follow suit. “The California area codes have already started showing up,” Fort Lauderdale Downtown Development Authority CEO and President Jenni Morejon told Altus. “It’s just that the conversations are evolving.” As it turns out, Florida’s appeal isn’t just about friendly tax and regulatory environments — it’s about the culture. “Silicon Valley is absolutely a boring place to live compared to Miami,” Naftali Group CEO Miki Naftali told Fox. “How can you even compare between living in Miami and Silicon Valley?”
But it’s the lost business opportunities that might come to haunt California and New York the most. “I think you see that this isn’t just a lifestyle narrative,” Morejon added, “it’s actually an operating environment for new businesses. And we have the engineering and infrastructure emerging to prove that.” The money is nice, too — especially when it isn’t flushed down another one of Sacramento’s money pits.
Let's celebrate the resignation of Keir Starmer with this wonderful song. Bye-bye, Keir! We will remember you as the biggest wanker of all UK leaders. Donald Trump and his band are performing this song for your pleasure. The Spotify version is coming soon. pic.twitter.com/id88G2yqJA
— Sith Daddy (@sithdaddyx) June 22, 2026
Interesting article from 2022.
— Andrew Bridgen (@ABridgen) June 21, 2026
Peter Sutherland was a special representative of the UN for Migration.
The replacement of the English people is part of the UN plan for their New World Order. pic.twitter.com/dYUYabS6kW
https://twitter.com/WikiLeaksQ/status/2068771868018901445?s=20Starting October 2026, @SpaceX will be generating ~$2.32 billion per month in AI compute revenue from its major deals with Anthropic, Google, and now Reflection AI. pic.twitter.com/mM7RLoxmcR
— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) June 22, 2026
Sums it up. pic.twitter.com/upAlumkxmg
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) June 22, 2026
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
Home › Forums › Debt Rattle June 23 2026