René Magritte La belle captive 1946
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1948832714456793580
Tulsi Gabbard:
Legacy media will not report the facts of this case honestly. If they did they will have to remind their viewers that they participated in the spreading of this historic lie. pic.twitter.com/Ftzq2ctonN
— Big Fish (@BigFish3000) July 25, 2025
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1948791933859508340
The sheer absurdity of Jen Psaki interviewing John Brennan can’t be overstated. She was Obama’s White House comms director at the exact moment Brennan and Obama were orchestrating the Russia collusion hoax against Trump. Now she’s playing journalist and he’s her guest. Shameless. https://t.co/MMZ20rkH0z
— Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) July 25, 2025
Trump in Scotland: I say two things to Europe. Stop the windmills. I really mean it. It's so sad. You fly over and you see these windmills all over the place, ruining your beautiful fields and valleys and killing your birds🤡
pic.twitter.com/aV1igGjTTQ— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) July 25, 2025
debt
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1949108419891225023
This is the most chilling admission I’ve ever seen from inside the FBI…
Deputy Director Dan Bongino says he’ll never be the same and is shocked to his core over the discoveries from their investigations into the Deep State.
It goes so much deeper than we ever thought.
“We… pic.twitter.com/sR0wIktywa
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) July 26, 2025
Little things. Devin Nunes is the former chairman of the House Intelligence Commitee, head of Trump Media, and now Chair of the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board. Through him, Sundance describes a March 2022 lawsuit filed by Trump vs a large group of individuals and entities. Only, it didn’t look like a lawsuit, lots of details were missing. Sundance figured out that it wasn’t meant as a lawsuit, it was “a legal transfer mechanism”. Trump needed evidence available to lawyers somewhere, things needed to be “on the record”, but ‘because of the construct of the lawfare being deployed against Trump, any lawyer would need a “reason* to review the evidence. The Trump -v- Clinton et al lawsuit becomes that ‘reason.’
Great conversation with Gaetz and Nunes.
• Devin Nunes Discusses the DNI Revelations Released by Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)
Former House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes appears on OAN with former Congressman Matt Gaetz to discuss the information released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. As noted by Nunes, why did it take this long for the information to surface? That question showcases how corrupt the DC system -the Intelligence Community- is in its effort to protect itself from accountability. Nunes also points to the raid on Mar-a-Lago as a possible entry point for investigative accountability.
Let me refresh on something that could potentially be a revelation down the road. In 2022 a Florida judge dismissed a lawsuit brought by President Trump against Hillary Clinton. [65-page Ruling Here] The media enjoyed ridiculing Trump using the words of the judge who dismissed the case. As noted by the Washington Times, “Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks, a Clinton appointee, said Mr. Trump’s filing was too lengthy, detailing events that “are implausible because they lack any specific allegations which might provide factual support for the conclusions reached.” When I originally read the 108-page Donald Trump lawsuit filed in March 2022, it took me a few moments, and then I realized this was not a lawsuit; this was a legal transfer mechanism created by lawyers to establish a proprietary information silo.
Here’s a totally different take on the issues surrounding the Trump -v- Clinton lawsuit, which -from the outset- I always believed was going to be dismissed because suing all of those characters under the auspices of a civil RICO case was never the objective. In the aftermath of the filing, the silo created by the lawsuit is grounded upon attorney-client privilege, a legal countermeasure to a predictable DOJ-NSD lawfare maneuver, which unfolded in the FBI Mar-a-Lago raid and the subsequent Jack Smith targeting operation. In March 2022 President Trump filed a civil lawsuit against: Hillary Clinton, Hillary for America Campaign Committee, DNC, DNC Services Corp, Perkins Coie, Michael Sussmann, Marc Elias, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charles Dolan, Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Robby Mook, Phillipe Reines as well as Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, Neustar Inc., Rodney Joffe, James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith and Andrew McCabe. [108-Page Lawsuit Here]
When I was about one-third of the way through reading the lawsuit, I initially stopped and said to myself this is going to take a lot of documentary evidence to back up the claims in the assertions. Dozens of attachments would be needed and hundreds of citations to the dozens of attachments would be mandatory. Except, they were not there. After reading further, while completely understanding the background material that was being described in the filing, I realized this wasn’t a lawsuit per se’. The 108-pages I was holding in my hands was more akin to legal transfer mechanism from President Trump to lawyers who needed it. The lawsuit filing was contingent upon a series of documents that would be needed to support the claims within it. Whoever wrote the lawsuit had obviously reviewed the evidence to support the filing. However, the attachments and citations were missing. That was weird.
That’s when I realized the purpose of the lawsuit. In hindsight, things became clear when the FBI later raided the home of Donald Trump, and suddenly the motive to confiscate documents, perhaps the missing lawsuit attachments and citations, surfaced. With the manipulative, and I said intentional, “ongoing investigation” angle created by the John Durham probe essentially blocking public release of declassified documents showing the efforts of all the lawsuit participants (Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax), in 2021 President Trump needed a legal way to secure and more importantly share evidence.
Think of it like the people around Trump wanting to show lawyers the evidence in the documents. However,because of the construct of the lawfare being deployed against Trump, any lawyer would need a *reason* to review the evidence. The Trump -v- Clinton et al lawsuit becomes that ‘reason.’ The “documents” (classified or not) were likely reviewed by lawyers in preparation for the lawsuit. This is their legal justification for reviewing the documents. In essence, the lawsuit was a transfer mechanism permitting the Trump legal team to review the evidence on behalf of their client, former President Donald Trump.
Why does Trump go there? “Clinton flew with a known predator, when to his island, and is seen in photographs with Epstein victims… yet the press won’t ask why..”
• Trump Goes There: Calls Out Bill Clinton in Epstein Scandal (Margolis)
In a political world where Democrats are scrambling to memory-hole every scrap of the Jeffrey Epstein disaster that is damaging to their own party, and trying to make it a Donald Trump scandal, the media is more than happy to help them rewrite history. And President Trump has had enough. After all the fake news and the bogus accusations, on Friday, Trump decided he’d had enough, and barreled right into the hornet’s nest and started torching it with a flamethrower. Reporters asked about the pervert financier’s infamous sex trafficking operation—and Trump didn’t dodge or deflect. He unloaded, pointing the finger straight at former President Bill Clinton. “You ought to be speaking about [former Treasury Secretary] Larry Summers. You ought to be speaking about some of, uh, his friends that are hedge fund guys. They’re all over the place. You ought to be speaking about Bill Clinton, who went to the island 28 times. I never went to the island.”
When a reporter followed up by asking whether he had written a letter for Epstein’s birthday party, Trump flatly rejected the claim. “I don’t even know what they’re talking about,” he said. “Now, somebody could have written a letter and used my name, but that’s happened a lot. All you have to do is take a look at the dossier, the fake dossier.” He continued attacking Democrats, accusing them of spreading misinformation and fabricating evidence: “Everything’s fake with that administration. Everything’s fake with the Democrats. Take a look at what they just found about, about the dossier.” Repeating the theme, Trump added, “Everything is fake. They’re a bunch of sick people.”
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1948743571495899323
Clinton has spent years denying he ever visited Epstein’s island. In his 2024 memoir, he repeats the same tired line, pretending he barely knew Epstein, however, it’s public record at this point that Bill Clinton hobnobbed with Epstein, jetted off to his notorious island over and over. But the media has turned a blind eye to Bill Clinton’s deep, well-documented relationship with Epstein. Clinton wants America to take his word that he was just there for the sunshine and cocktails. However, Johanna Sjoberg, an Epstein accuser who testified under oath in 2016, says Epstein once told her “Clinton likes them young, referring to girls.” Meanwhile, Clinton’s team refused to answer questions about a birthday letter he reportedly sent to Epstein, and instead recycled the same tired statement that he cut ties with Epstein “more than a decade before” Epstein’s 2019 arrest—and supposedly knew nothing about his crimes.
Trump, meanwhile, has said plainly he never set foot on the island—and there’s no evidence to the contrary. But the press keeps hounding him, while running cover for Democrats. Working-class Americans see the double standard. Clinton flew with a known predator, when to his island, and is seen in photographs with Epstein victims… yet the press won’t ask why. There’s no outrage, no wall-to-wall coverage—just more selective silence, buried like the Hunter Biden laptop. The hypocrisy is obvious. If Trump sneezes, it’s a crisis. But Democrats can cozy up to monsters and never be called out for it. Well, Trump’s calling them out now.
“Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe obstructed the House Intel Committee by prohibiting interviews with more than 30 FBI employees involved in supporting Brennan’s notorious “fusion cell.”
“Brennan “knowingly used false intelligence” to try to undermine President-elect Trump, a federal offense that constitutes outright fraud against the American government..”
[..the Steele Dossier]: “When senior officers called out its obvious flaws in a Dec. 2016 Langley meeting, Brennan stubbornly insisted, “Yes, but doesn’t it ring true?”
• Obama’s CIA Chief ‘Knowingly Used False Intelligence’ To Undermine Trump (Margolis)
If you thought the Russian collusion hoax couldn’t get any uglier, think again. The circus orchestrated by Obama’s intelligence brass is unraveling in spectacular fashion, and John Brennan finds himself squarely in the crosshairs, not for a political dispute, but for criminal prosecution. This latest chapter, now marked by damning revelations, reeks of a conspiracy to subvert not only a presidency, but the very core of American democracy. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s recent confirmation hit like a thunderbolt: Barack Obama, the architect of this mess, has been named in an official criminal referral to the Justice Department. Brennan, Obama’s CIA chief and a man whose fingerprints are found all over this operation, is most likely staring down an indictment. James Comey isn’t far behind, either; both he and Brennan are already under extreme scrutiny by the FBI. It’s as if each turn yields another layer of deception and abuse of power. Even hardened law professors like Jonathan Turley recognize Brennan as a high-profile trophy for prosecutors—he’s now the “30-point buck out in the open,” primed to fall.
The scope of misconduct here borders on the surreal. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) dropped a 46-page bombshell report that systematically destroyed Brennan’s ICA (Intelligence Community Assessment), which Obama ordered up as a final act of sabotage against Donald Trump. According to Paul Sperry, an investigative reporter for RealClearInvestigations, the findings were so relentlessly damning that the CIA refused to cooperate, went as far as obfuscating evidence, and sabotaged committee investigators: Shockingly, two key developments torpedoed any last defense for Brennan.
DEVELOPING: The 46-page HPSCI report shredding Brennan's dossier-backed ICA ordered by Obama was so devastating, so damning, that the CIA aggressively obstructed committee investigators, even sabotaging their computers and possibly spying on staffers. HPSCI is weighing referrals.
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 25, 2025
First, Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe obstructed the House Intel Committee by prohibiting interviews with more than 30 FBI employees involved in supporting Brennan’s notorious “fusion cell.” Not a single FBI analyst connected to the ICA was allowed to testify; they were all silenced. Second, DNI Gabbard revealed that Brennan “knowingly used false intelligence” to try to undermine President-elect Trump, a federal offense that constitutes outright fraud against the American government. But perhaps the most grotesque twist in this saga is the beating heart of the Russian collusion hoax: the Steele Dossier. Long debunked, thoroughly discredited, and condemned by the same CIA Russia analysts Brennan himself supervised, the dossier was forcibly embedded in Obama’s handpicked ICA.
BREAKING: Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe blocked House Intel Committee investigators from interviewing the FBI analysts who supported Brennan's "fusion cell" and his drafters of the ICA. At least 30 FBI employees associated with the dossier were gagged from speaking to staff.
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 25, 2025
NEW: DNI Tulsi Gabbard said John Brennan "knowingly used false intelligence" to undermine the legitimacy of President-elect Trump and "subvert the will" of the American electorate. Defrauding the government — in this case the U.S. intelligence services — is a federal crime.
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 25, 2025
When senior officers called out its obvious flaws in a Dec. 2016 Langley meeting, Brennan stubbornly insisted, “Yes, but doesn’t it ring true?” In other words, narrative trumped evidence for Obama’s CIA. Despite heated objections, the ICA’s drafters, chosen by Brennan himself, followed marching orders to weaponize dubious rumor and produce a document that served political ends, not reality. As we’ve noted before, the original assessments from Obama’s own intelligence community found no evidence that Russia altered the outcome of the 2016 election. But that didn’t suit the narrative Obama wanted. So he ordered the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) to be rewritten—pressuring John Brennan and his allies to force their preferred conclusion into the official record.
NEW: When senior CIA officers specializing in Russia analysis confronted Brennan w/ the Steele dossier's many flaws during a Dec 2016 meeting at Langley, Brennan agreed, but wanted to still keep it in the ICA b/c it SOUNDED true. "Yes, but doesn't it ring true?" Brennan responded
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 25, 2025
It wasn’t about accuracy or national security. It was about sabotage. They leaked their distortions to a compliant media and set out to delegitimize a duly elected president. The damage they caused to the American republic was—and still is—immeasurable. Now, the truth tumbles out into the open. Brennan’s strategy of “just making it ring true” has collapsed. Those responsible must be held accountable—not because of partisanship but because weaponizing U.S. intelligence agencies to undermine the will of the people is one of the gravest threats imaginable. Americans deserve justice, and the reckoning for Brennan and his Obama-era co-conspirators cannot come soon enough.
“The legacy media is once again doing damage control—this time by rolling out anonymous Obama allies to accuse Trump and Gabbard of fabricating “treason” claims to distract from the Epstein scandal..”
• Team Obama Is Running Scared as Russiagate Cover Story Collapses (Margolis)
Team Obama is panicking. You can see it in every flailing move, every desperate media blitz, and every attempt to deflect from the deep, unresolved questions about the origins of Russiagate. The architects of the infamous hoax—Barack Obama, John Brennan, James Clapper, and James Comey—have all been exposed, thanks to the tenacity of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who recently dropped declassified documents implicating the Obama-era intelligence cabal in concocting and perpetuating the false Russia narrative that hounded President Donald Trump throughout his first term. The stakes are real. Gabbard’s release didn’t just shine a light on the feverish efforts to smear Trump; it laid bare how these intelligence heavyweights cobbled together artificial intel on Trump while deliberately concealing explosive evidence that raised grave concerns about Hillary Clinton’s fitness for office.
Yeah, we’re not forgetting about that. The legacy media is once again doing damage control—this time by rolling out anonymous Obama allies to accuse Trump and Gabbard of fabricating “treason” claims to distract from the Epstein scandal. It’s a transparent attempt to spin the narrative and pressure Republicans into ignoring the growing pile of evidence. I previously wrote about how former State Department spokesperson Ned Price, an Obama White House veteran and ex-CIA analyst, wrote a panicked op-ed for Fox News, lashing out at Tulsi Gabbard, accusing her of pushing revisionist history and dangerously inflating the 2016 Russia collusion narrative. Remarkably absent from his piece is any substantive defense of the narrative he once championed, namely, that Russia tried to influence the election. Of course, he’s not alone.
Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has not only hit the media circuit but has also revealed he’s lawyered up. Former CIA Director John Brennan slammed the Trump administration’s findings about the 2016 Russia assessment as “unsurprising, very troubling, and very dangerous.” He called the administration’s defense “ludicrous,” comparing it to “a third-rate lawyer who realizes she has nothing to defend her client and is going to put together an absurd brief that’s laughable on its face.” Brennan claimed the original report was “very carefully worded, meticulously done,” and “stands up to scrutiny,” and continued to lean on the claim it showed Russia acted “at President Putin’s direction” to influence the election in favor of Trump. Susan Miller, a retired CIA officer who helped craft the 2017 intel assessment on Russian election interference, is accusing Gabbard and the Trump White House of “lying” about the intel report’s findings.
Speaking to NBC News, Miller claims the intelligence clearly showed Russia aimed to help Trump win in 2016—though she acknowledged there was no evidence of collusion between Trump’s team and Moscow. Her remarks appear to be a defensive pushback against growing scrutiny of the intel community’s role in shaping the now-discredited Trump-Russia narrative. Team Obama’s panic is nothing short of palpable. The exposure of their manufactured narrative is unraveling before their eyes. Each frantic appearance, each attempt to discredit their critics, only serves to confirm what the American public is starting to see: The hoax was real, and its architects are running out of places to hide. The more they scramble, the more obvious it becomes—Obama’s team is scared, and for the first time, genuinely unsure of what awaits them next.
$100 million dollars was raised through a FireAid concert for victims of California’s January wildfires. $100 million dollars is missing.
• Democrats Let California Burn While Aid Went Missing – Trump (RT)
US President Donald Trump has accused Democrats of mishandling $100 million raised through a FireAid concert for victims of California’s January wildfires, calling the initiative “a total disaster” and alleging the money has not reached those affected. Wildfires broke out in early January across Southern California, killing at least 31 people, destroying more than 18,000 structures, leaving tens of thousands displaced, and causing total property losses between $76 billion and $131 billion. The FireAid concert, held January 30, was said to have raised approximately $100 million for wildfire relief. During the broadcast, host Samuel L. Jackson told viewers that “all the money will go directly to people who need help.”
However, in a Truth Social post published on Friday, Trump slammed FireAid as a “total disaster” and “another Democrat inspired scam.” “100 million dollars is missing. Was supposed to go to the Los Angeles fire victims, fires that, with proper management, would never have even happened,” Trump wrote. His comments come after several investigations found that the FireAid funds never reached the wildfire victims. David Howard, who lost two homes in Pacific Palisades, told Fox News, “I have not seen any benefit from the FireAid money, and I am very involved here and neither have my neighbors.” Another victim, Mark Jones, said he expected help after the concert but was never contacted.
FireAid has since stated that it does not distribute funds directly to individuals and has reported that $75 million has been granted so far to 188 nonprofits, with the remaining $25 million scheduled for release in August for long-term recovery, environmental resilience, and rebuilding. While no evidence of fraud has been disclosed, Trump has said that he would be referring the case of the missing funds to the US attorney general, telling reporters that “I think they are going to act very strongly.” Trump has repeatedly blamed California Governor Gavin Newsom and his policies for the fires, accusing him of restricting access to water in the state. Newsom has repeatedly denied the allegations, calling the claims “pure fiction.”
Zelensky is losing “it”. The tide is turning.
“He has been completely immune from any criticism in the west, with all allegations dismissed and labelled as Kremlin talking points. Yet, in an instant, that illusion has been shattered.”
• From Hero to Zero (Ian Proud)
Since the start of the war in Ukraine, in February 2022, Volodymyr Zelensky has been elevated to the status of a hero King, pure in thought and deed, interested only in saving humble Ukraine from the onrushing hordes of Russian Orcs. Like Aragorn from Lord of the Rings, but short, thin-skinned and with a gravelly voice. He has been completely immune from any criticism in the west, with all allegations dismissed and labelled as Kremlin talking points. Yet, in an instant, that illusion has been shattered. For the first time since February 2022, Zelensky has been revealed as, in practical terms, no different from other Ukrainian Presidents who have preceded him since the country gained independence in August 1991; corrupt and authoritarian. This comes as no surprise to most realists, but will be a devastating blow to the neo-liberal true-believers who have invested their reputations and cash into defeating Russia.
This week, President Zelensky signed a law that strips two important anti-corruption bodies – the National Anti-Courrption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) of their independence, making them report to the Prosecutor General, who he appointed. Let’s be clear, corruption is and has been a hugely totemic issue in Ukraine, right back to the onset of the Maidan protests in late 2013. During my visits to Ukraine, while posted to Russia, it was absolutely clear that young people believed tackling corruption to be a top priority for the government. This formed part of their desire for Ukraine to move towards European Union membership, for their country to integrate into a community more clearly governed by democracy and the rule of law.
Whether they might consider the European Union to be democratic today, as unelected Commission President Ursula von der Leyen centralises ever more powers, is another question. But that European and anti-corruption aspiration was very real back in 2013. Yet scant progress has been made in tackling corruption since that time. In February 2015, one year after the heigh of the Maidan protests, the British Guardian newspaper published a long piece entitled ‘Welcome to Ukraine, the most corrupt country in Europe’. The Ukrainian Prime Minister, Arseny Yatseniuk, who had been personally selected by Victoria Nuland at the U.S. State Department, was forced to resign in April 2016 in the face of allegations of widespread corruption within his government.
In 2021, the European Court of Auditors produced a report entitled Reducing Grand Corruption in Ukraine: several EU initiatives, but still insufficient results. It defined Grand Corruption as ‘the abuse of high-level power that benefits the few, and causes serious and widespread harm to individuals and society’. In January 2023, an article in the Hill remarked on the need to defeat corruption as Ukraine’s ‘other enemy’. Shortly after that article, a piece, again in the Guardian, discussed the challenges faced by the Head of Ukraine’s National Agency for Corruption Prevention (NACP), which works closely with the now de-clawed NABU and SAPO.
That report in particular talked about specific examples of corruption in President Zelensky’s inner circle. Occasionally, Zelensky has purged his cabinet, to show his commitment to governmental reform, for example, sacking his former Defence Minister, Oleksii Reznikov, in the face of widespread accusations that the Ukrainian Defence Ministry was siphoning off foreign donations on an industrial scale. But the occasional show trial has never taken the whiff away that Zelensky’s administration is every bit as corrupt as those that preceded it. And President Zelensky was voted into office in 2019 on a platform to eradicate corruption in Ukraine. In truth, he has done nothing to tackle it.
“The Washington Post reported: “Ukrainians protest as Zelensky cracks down on corruption watchdogs.” Ditto, among others, The New York Times, Time, CNN, France 24, The Economist, BBC, and even the usually supportive CIA-run Radio Free Europe. With remarkable uniformity, the Western media were condemning their erstwhile favorite “Churchillian figure”..
• Kiev Kleptocracy… Stench of Corruption Fouls NATO Regime’s Endgame (SCF)
Previously, any observer who had pointed out the rampant corruption that is endemic in the Kiev regime was automatically denounced by Western governments and media as a peddler of Russian disinformation. Hilariously, though, this week, the Kiev kleptocracy burst open in such a spectacular way that even the American and European apologists for the regime could no longer maintain the worst-kept secret of their charade. The fiasco exploded after the self-appointed President of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky, passed a law that stripped two anti-corruption agencies of their independent powers. Citizens took to the streets of Kiev and other cities in furious protest against what they openly lambasted as an autocratic regime trying to prolong its corrupt racketeering. The demonstrations were the largest seen on the streets of Ukraine despite the country being at war with Russia for over three years.
As the Wall Street Journal reported: “The protests exposed long dormant divisions between the government and society.” Zelensky, whose official presidential mandate expired last year, was stunned by the upsurge in public anger. By the end of the week, he was backtracking on the move to close the anti-graft agencies and was claiming, somewhat unconvincingly, that he was drafting a new bill to return the investigative powers. It was damage-limitation mode and largely prompted by the alarm of his Western backers. It is not clear if the U-turn will appease the Ukrainian public, who appear to have reached a pivotal level of disgust with the Kiev regime, not just over its endemic corruption but also over the grinding war with Russia and forced mobilization of reluctant military recruits.
Significantly, the Western governments and media also reacted with extraordinary contempt towards Zelensky and his ruling circle. Western media headlines highlighted the problem of corruption in Ukraine and Zelensky’s brazen attempt to curb the anti-corruption organizations. The Washington Post reported: “Ukrainians protest as Zelensky cracks down on corruption watchdogs.” Ditto, among others, The New York Times, Time, CNN, France 24, The Economist, BBC, and even the usually supportive CIA-run Radio Free Europe. With remarkable uniformity, the Western media were condemning their erstwhile favorite “Churchillian figure”. Even the slavishly supportive U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham rebuked Zelensky. Were they all of a sudden drinking Russian Kool-Aid?
The Wall Street Journal reported: “Ukrainians ramp up protests as Zelensky tries to find a way out.” Likewise, the BBC headlined: “Zelensky backtracks on law over anticorruption bodies after protests.” There are signs that the scandal has gone too far for Zelensky to now try to put the stench back in the bottle. This is what the staunchest backers of the Kiev regime are really worried about. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer were among the European leaders who vigorously remonstrated with Zelensky over the corruption debacle. Von der Leyen chided Zelensky that anti-corruption was key to the country’s path towards eventually joining the EU, if it ever does, which, like its aspiration to join NATO, is doubtful.
What worries the NATO sponsors of the proxy war against Russia is that the corruption in Kiev will hasten a disorderly collapse of the regime. And with that, their long-term geopolitical game to confront and weaken Russia is over. The news of corruption is hardly new, and the Western governments know that. Pentagon auditors have long noted the vast amount of money that has disappeared unaccountably under Zelensky.
The racketeering has become even more brazen since Zelensky declared martial law and cancelled elections last year, making him a self-appointed president indefinitely. The Ukrainian people have had it with his crony rule, while thousands of men are killed and maimed every week on the front lines. Adding to the public anger and resistance are the goon squads that the regime dispatches to drag men off the streets to be sent to the front lines and certain death. Videos increasingly show Ukrainian communities standing up to snatch squads who are terrorizing them.
“Over time, it became clear that Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies served not only their official mission but also the political interests of a specific faction – namely, the US Democratic Party.”
• Zelensky Thought He Was Killing It. He Was (Loginov)
Ukrainians have had plenty of reasons to take to the streets: the cancellation of elections, forced mobilization, the refusal to demobilize soldiers who’ve been on the front lines for over three years, the persecution of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, corruption in the construction of fortifications, the state’s failure to have the bodies of fallen soldiers returned, and – above all – the complete absence of a plan for ending the conflict with Russia. This list could go on. And yet, none of these issues has triggered large-scale protests. What we’ve seen instead are isolated outbursts: in towns and villages, women block draft officers from entering their neighborhoods; churchgoers physically defend their parishes; the wives and mothers of Ukrainian soldiers stage small rallies to draw attention to their plight.
And yet, even in this atmosphere of fear and suppression, Vladimir Zelensky has managed to ignite a political crisis. The hasty passage of Bill No. 12414 – which stripped the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) of their independence – sparked a wave of demonstrations that haven’t let up for days. It’s the first major popular protest since the start of Russia’s military operation, and it poses a serious challenge to Zelensky’s grip on power. Rallies have broken out in Kiev, Lviv, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, Rovno, and Nikolayev. While officials have tried to frame them as spontaneous, local expressions of concern about anti-corruption institutions, the scope and coordination suggest otherwise. The message to Zelensky is simple: the pressure is just beginning.
To understand why the anti-corruption issue struck such a nerve, we need to go back to the beginning. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) were established in 2015 with active backing from the United States – just a year after the coup in Kiev. At the time, Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin openly stated that the idea for NABU came directly from then–Vice President Joe Biden. From the outset, these agencies functioned as tools of external oversight over the post-Maidan Ukrainian government. President Petro Poroshenko, who was still consolidating power and ideology, did not resist Washington’s involvement. NABU’s early targets included oligarchs like Igor Kolomoysky and Rinat Akhmetov, who controlled major media holdings. This suited Poroshenko, whose own business interests, notably, remained untouched.
Over time, it became clear that Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies served not only their official mission but also the political interests of a specific faction – namely, the US Democratic Party. A prime example is the Paul Manafort case. In 2016, The New York Times, citing NABU sources, published claims that Manafort – then campaign chairman for Donald Trump – had received undisclosed payments from Ukraine’s Party of Regions under President Viktor Yanukovych. These claims prompted a US investigation into possible Ukrainian interference in the American election. In 2019, the Senate ultimately found no evidence – but the episode left a lasting impression. That same year, NABU played a role in deflecting scrutiny from the Burisma scandal – the energy company whose board included Joe Biden’s son, Hunter.
Over time, the link between these anti-corruption institutions and the US Democratic Party became apparent to many Ukrainians. And with Republicans now back in power in Washington, Zelensky appears to have decided it was time to free himself from external control. Zelensky likely assumed that the new American administration wouldn’t go out of its way to defend the Democratic Party’s proxies in Ukraine. Judging by Washington’s muted response, that calculation may have been correct. What he failed to consider, however, was the level of domestic resistance to his growing concentration of power.
Ukraine today is full of pressure points. Discontent is widespread – but scattered and disorganized. Zelensky’s opponents simply lack the means to unseat him. Moreover, Zelensky remains the centerpiece of the West’s anti-Russian strategy – a leader willing to accept any domestic cost in service of that agenda. Even policies that threaten the foundations of Ukrainian statehood are tolerated, so long as the broader project of an “anti-Russia” continues.
“If there are extraterrestrials somewhere out there, they may not know much about Earth, except for the fact that von der Leyen is obsessed with Russia – a phenomenon easily visible from space.”
• The Kremlin Hates von der Leyen About As Much As EU Lawmakers Do (Marsden)
Apparently, trying to hold Ursula von der Leyen accountable is now a Russian op, reports Der Spiegel, citing a new NATO-linked think tank report. The study treats elected oversight and European lawmakers whose job, ideally, involves more than clapping like trained seals every time an unelected Eurocrat lights public money on fire, like elements of some kind of Russian infiltration plot. “Massive support for this effort was also found by pro-Kremlin media outlets, bloggers, and online influencers, as the Lithuania-based organization Debunk.org specializes in analyzing disinformation and Russian propaganda, which is seen as part of Russia’s hybrid warfare against the EU,” Spiegel wrote, describing Russian-linked media “fueling” a recent von der Leyen non-confidence vote in the EU Parliament. “Among the larger portals were those of the Russian propaganda channel RT…”
According to the advance copy of this report seen by Spiegel, the study reviewed 284 articles from Russian-linked media. Exactly how many of those articles expressed something like only von der Leyen’s ouster could save Europe? 90%? 75%? Maybe half? Nope, just 35%. Roughly the same percentage of voting EU lawmakers who favored ejecting her (32.7%). So by this logic, the Kremlin is about as supportive of Ursula as Brussels is. Awkward. Spiegel said that was the most common so-called Kremlin-backed narrative that the study found. Others included the suggestion that von der Leyen is part of a corrupt elite that robbed citizens to fill Big Pharma’s pockets. Because apparently, saying that hey, maybe EU contracts shouldn’t be inked via disappearing text messages with the CEO of a company, means that you’re doing Putin’s bidding. Real democracy means that you shut your mouth when you see your overlords doing shady stuff.
Another alleged Kremlin line? That Ursula, despite her presidential title, was never elected. As someone who personally refers to her as “Queen Ursula,” I’m actually surprised that one didn’t rank higher. It’s not like she won a popular vote or anything. She was handpicked in shady backrooms and then subjected to a simple confirmation by EU lawmakers. Her sole opponent in this so-called “election” was literally just “not Ursula.” Only the EU, in all its dystopian delusion, would call that an “election”. Then there was the claim that she’s obsessed with confronting Russia. Which is just, uh, objectively true? I mean, come on. If there are extraterrestrials somewhere out there, they may not know much about Earth, except for the fact that von der Leyen is obsessed with Russia – a phenomenon easily visible from space.
Even right before the vote, she accused the lawmakers subjecting her to democratic accountability of being Kremlin stooges just because they wanted her to explain herself. “There is ample proof that many are supported by our enemies and by their puppet masters in Russia or elsewhere. What we hear from you are movements fueled by conspiracies, from anti-vaxxers, to put in apologists and you only have to look at some of the signatories of this motion to understand what I mean,” she pleaded.
Let’s back up here. Why exactly did she face this no-confidence vote? Because no one who’s elected and accountable at the EU has actually been able to provide concrete details of contract terms for the tens of billions of euros in Covid jabs that she strong-armed European governments into paying for. Jabs that are now so useless they’re being dumped in landfills all over Europe, where one-eyed stuffed animals, soggy pizza boxes, and a moldy futon just got their third booster, courtesy of the EU taxpayer. One of those contracts followed a flurry of text exchanges between Ursula and Pfizer CEO, Robert Bourla, which she bragged about to the New York Times right before they pulled a Houdini.
The courts have so far politely asked her to explain herself. And that’s where we’re stuck right now. So frustrated lawmakers figured that they could at least make her publicly squirm with a non-confidence vote in an attempt to get her to cough up at least some of the answers for taxpayers. The result? Ursula’s interpretive song and tap-dance routine in Parliament: “Putin Did It: Paranoia in Three Acts.” She ultimately survived the vote thanks to some budget crumbs thrown at the lefties who were otherwise saying that they would have voted against her. But even they told Politico that it was her “absolute last chance.”
“The €2 trillion ($2.17 trillion) 2028–2034 [budget].”
“..analysts who estimate up to 25% of the budget could end up being spent on Kiev.”
That’s $500 billion. Fool’s gold.
• Hungary Opposes Turning EU’s Budget Into Ukraine’s (RT)
Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has slammed the European Commission’s proposed seven-year EU budget as a “budget for Ukraine,” in an interview with RIA Novosti published on Friday. The €2 trillion ($2.17 trillion) 2028–2034 spending plan published by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, which includes around €100 billion in aid for Ukraine and funds for potential EU accession, is “unacceptable,” according to the top Hungarian diplomat. The budget must be approved unanimously by all 27 member states, giving Hungary the power to block it. “We will not give it support or consent,” Szijjarto told RIA Novosti, adding, “this isn’t even the budget of the European Union – it’s a budget for Ukraine.”
Budapest has also warned that the draft shifts funds from cohesion policies and agricultural subsidies, which are vital to Central Europe. The proposal could undermine EU food security by forcing farmers out of business and increasing import reliance, Hungarian officials have said. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has also denounced the draft budget, warning it could “destroy the EU” and claiming its only purpose is “to admit Ukraine to the EU.” He has also cited analysts who estimate up to 25% of the budget could end up being spent on Kiev.
Germany has likewise rejected the plan, calling it “unacceptable” amid efforts by EU members to reduce their national deficits. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has noted that Ukraine is unlikely to even join the bloc before 2034, when the current budget cycle ends. Ukraine has designated EU accession as a national priority. While Brussels has suggested Kiev could join by 2030, all existing members must approve its entry. Hungary, Slovakia, and Poland remain opposed, citing concerns about Ukraine’s readiness and its potential financial burden on the bloc. While the Kremlin initially said Ukraine had the sovereign right to join the EU, Russian officials have since hardened their stance, accusing the bloc of undergoing “rabid militarization” and becoming an offshoot of NATO.
“He argued that Kiev’s full membership would come with “war risks.” “Ukraine is a buffer state, and we do not wish to share its fate. We understand what that means, having once been on the western periphery of the Soviet Union..”
• Ukraine’s Accession Will Bring War To EU – Orban (RT)
Ukrainian membership in the European Union would threaten Hungary’s security and raise the risk of war in the region, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said. Ukraine, which was granted EU candidate status in 2022, has made joining the bloc a national priority. While Brussels has floated 2030 as a possible accession date, all current member states must approve the move. Hungary, Slovakia, and Poland remain opposed, citing concerns over the country’s preparedness and the financial strain its membership could place on the EU. Warsaw has additionally insisted that Kiev come to terms with war crimes committed by Ukrainians during WWII. In an interview with Kossuth Radio on Friday,
Orban said that Hungary, which shares a border with Ukraine, would be especially vulnerable to any escalation resulting from the EU’s expansion. He argued that Kiev’s full membership would come with “war risks.” “Ukraine is a buffer state, and we do not wish to share its fate. We understand what that means, having once been on the western periphery of the Soviet Union,” he said. “If Ukraine’s membership is accepted, then we will become the battlefield. The war will geographically affect the neighboring region. This is unacceptable. A lot of young Hungarians would also die. This is not a tactical issue, but an existential one,” Orban added. He proposed a strategic partnership with the EU as an alternative to full accession.
Earlier this week, Orban – a frequent critic of EU leadership – rejected the European Commission’s proposed seven-year budget, warning that it could “destroy the European Union.” He claimed the proposal was designed primarily to finance Ukraine’s membership, citing estimates that up to 25% of the budget could be allocated to Kiev. Budapest has blocked multiple EU military aid packages for Kiev and has repeatedly called for an immediate ceasefire with Russia. Hungary has also warned that the financial and security implications of Ukraine’s integration could outweigh any potential benefits, framing the issue as a matter of national survival rather than political preference.
Trump will not like this one bit.
• EU Secretly Pressures US Firms To Censor Immigration Criticism: House GOP (JTN)
The European Union is secretly leaning on tech platforms to censor routine political speech and even jokes as a legal obligation under its Digital Services Act, according to an interim staff report Friday by the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee, which has also probed Brazil’s censorship, Biden administration jawboning and ideological advertiser boycotts. Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said it was prompted by then-EU Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton’s threat against X last summer, later disavowed by the European Commission, that owner Elon Musk’s scheduled livestream with then-presidential candidate Donald Trump might constitute “illegal content” under the DSA. Though Breton resigned “under pressure from EU President Ursula von der Leyen” after Jordan demanded a briefing from Breton on his threats, his successor, Henna Virkkunen, “remains strongly supportive of the DSA’s censorship provisions and continues to enforce them against American companies,” the report says.
“Camouflaged as a regulation to increase online safety,” the DSA lets European regulators “suppress speech globally” by threatening fines up to 6% of global revenue against platforms, based anywhere, that refuse to censor “humor, satire, and core political speech” that offends bureaucrats and align content moderation with EC preferences, it says. The law empowers them to “temporarily shut down platforms within the EU” if “extraordinary circumstances lead to a serious threat to public security or public health in the Union.” Platforms must allow “certified third-party arbitrators to resolve content moderation disputes,” who “do not need to be independent from the European regulators who certify them, incentivizing arbitrators to heed regulators’ censorship demands,” the report says.
Because “platforms bear the cost when they lose at arbitration,” they are also incentivized to censor flagged content “before arbitration begins.” The DSA has an “arbitrary threshold” of 45 million monthly users to qualify as a strictly regulated “very large online platform,” seemingly chosen to “sweep in major American companies while carving out Europe’s top tech companies,” with only Booking.com and “pornography websites” qualifying, the report says. The EC “invented workarounds” to exempt other European companies from VLOP classification, for example Spotify, which gets to split its products between music and podcasts “for the purpose of counting EU users,” the report says. It cites a critic that alleges a “clear discrepancy” between “self-declared” monthly users and “reality.”
“Absolutely nothing in the DSA requires a platform to remove lawful content,” EC spokesperson Thomas Regnier told Politico EU in response to the staff report, claiming freedom of expression is “a fundamental right in the EU” and “at the heart of our legislations.” Regnier said “content removals based on regulatory authorities’ orders to act against illegal content account for less than 0.001 percent” of the content moderation decisions, with platforms “proactively” deciding the rest based on their own terms and conditions. ‘I’m not racist, but …’ is ‘coded language to express anti-Muslim sentiment’
The committee’s subpoenas revealed content from the EC’s May 7 workshop with DSA stakeholders, which unlike its “contemporaneous” Digital Markets Act workshops was closed to the public and operated under the Chatham House Rule, banning participants from describing “exercise scenarios” or naming or quoting participants without permission. It also obtained emails between EC staff and tech companies on purportedly “voluntary” codes of conduct on hate speech and disinformation, showing “regulators repeatedly and deliberately reached out to pressure reluctant platforms to join” and retaliated against resisters, opening a probe of X for refusing to use purported fact-checkers. “The censorship is largely one-sided, almost uniformly targeting political conservatives,” the report’s press release says.
“The proffer immunity granted to Maxwell allowed her to answer questions without her responses later being used against her in a criminal case..”
• Ghislaine Maxwell Gets Limited Immunity, Gives DOJ ‘100 Different People’ (NYP)
Notorious sex criminal Ghislaine Maxwell answered questions from Justice Department officials about “100 different people” linked to late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, an attorney for the disgraced socialite claimed Friday following two days of interrogation led by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche during which she was reportedly granted limited immunity. David Oscar Markus told reporters that his client, currently serving a 20-year sentence after being convicted in Manhattan of federal sex trafficking and conspiracy charges in December 2021, was “asked about every possible thing you could imagine – everything.” “This was the first opportunity she’s ever been given to answer questions about what happened,” Markus added. “The truth will come out about what happened with Mr. Epstein and she’s the person who’s answering those questions.”
Blanche had “every single question” answered during the sitdown, Maxwell’s attorney also said, with the British-born convict declining to plead the Fifth Amendment. “If she lies they could charge her with lying,” Markus noted. “They did charge her with lying,” a reporter challenged him, referring to two perjury counts that Markus noted were dropped by the feds after her conviction. “No one is above the law — and no lead is off-limits,” Blanche posted on X Tuesday in announcing he would speak with Maxwell. Maxwell, 63, is appealing her conviction and sentencing, and legal observers have speculated her willingness to answer questions is tied to a potential clemency grant by President Trump. Her attorney described the commander in chief Friday as “the ultimate dealmaker” and claimed his client had “been treated unfairly for the past five years” and “didn’t get a fair trial.”
“We hope he exercises that power in a right and just way,” Markus added. Trump, 79, told reporters after landing in Glasgow, Scotland that “I don’t know anything about the conversation” between Blanche and Maxwell because “I haven’t really been following it.” “This is no time to be talking about pardons,” the president added after saying hours earlier while leaving the White House that “I haven’t thought” about the idea. Maxwell reportedly initiated the sitdowns with the DOJ and answered questions for roughly nine hours, according to ABC News. The proffer immunity granted to Maxwell allowed her to answer questions without her responses later being used against her in a criminal case, sources told the outlet. Proffer immunity is typically granted to individuals prosecutors want cooperation from in a criminal case.
In 2022, the Department of Justice expressed doubts that Maxwell could be truthful, writing in court filings that she displayed a “significant pattern of dishonest conduct” and failed to take responsibility for her heinous crimes. Court papers the prior year revealed that prosecutors never seriously entertained the prospect of offering the women dubbed “Epstein’s madam” a plea agreement after the financier was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell while awaiting his own federal trial on Aug. 10, 2019. According to Markus, Epstein’s attorneys had been informed that “no potential co-conspirators would be prosecuted” as part of his talks with government lawyers following his July 2019 arrest on sex trafficking charges. “I don’t think President Trump knows that the Justice Department took the position that that promise should not be upheld,” he claimed.
Go to Moscow. Leave the European and US warmongers alone.
• Rubio Shares Trump’s Feelings About Russia-Ukraine Conflict (RT)
US President Donald Trump is growing impatient with Russia over resolving the Ukraine conflict, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. Moscow maintains it is open to diplomacy, but has said any settlement must take into account its security concerns. Speaking to Fox News on Saturday, Rubio claimed that while Trump is focused on peace and has done his best to bring hostilities to a close, his overtures to Russia appear to be yielding little result so far. “He’s done everything possible to bring it to an end. I think he is growing increasingly frustrated,” he said. According to Rubio, despite “good interactions with [Russian President] Vladimir Putin and phone calls, it never leads to anything.”
“He is losing patience, losing his willingness to continue to wait for the Russian side to do something to bring an end to this war that wasn’t his, but he wants to see it come to an end,” Rubio added, accusing Moscow of using “delaying tactics.” His comments come after Trump imposed a 50-day ceasefire deadline on Moscow, warning of “very severe” new sanctions, including 100% “secondary tariffs” on countries buying Russian oil.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned that the sanctions threat would be interpreted by Kiev as a “signal to continue the war” rather than to seek peace. He has also described Trump’s style as “rather harsh,” while confirming that “Moscow intends to continue dialogue with Washington” and follow “a line of repairing the significantly broken bilateral relations.”Earlier this week, Russia and Ukraine held a third round of direct talks in Istanbul, with Moscow proposing short ceasefires for retrieving wounded and fallen soldiers. Additionally, the Kremlin offered to continue prisoner exchanges and return the remains of fallen soldiers. However, the two sides remain far apart on a potential peace settlement, with Moscow insisting that Ukraine should recognize the loss of five of its former regions that joined Russia in public referendums, withdraw its forces from them, commit to neutrality, and limit its own military capabilities. Kiev has dismissed the terms as an “ultimatum.”
“China is encouraging BRICS nations and partners to use the yuan “for trade settlement, thereby creating a self-sustaining cycle” driven by “real trade demand.” This is the system those clowns want to regime-change.”
• Destroy Russia. Fail? No Problem: Let’s Destroy China! (Pepe Escobar)
[..] On the American ability to maintain the US dollar’s reserve currency status, Miao points to two factors: “whether the United States can continue to lead the technological revolution”; and “whether it can preserve the advantages of its financial system, such as the Federal Reserve’s independence and the self-regulating and corrective capabilities of its financial markets.” Yet what’s accelerating now is rather the “fragmentation of the international monetary system”. So we should expect increased use of yuan in payment settlements and as “a store of value”; that’s already happening all across BRICS. Miao points to the key vector: the yuan is now “a low-interest currency, while the US dollar is high-interest.” Trump 2.0 tariffs “on all countries have contributed to the appreciation” of the yuan.
This high-speed train is now leaving the station: “By leveraging China’s manufacturing strengths in sectors such as machinery, electronics, and new energy equipment”, China is encouraging BRICS nations and partners to use the yuan “for trade settlement, thereby creating a self-sustaining cycle” driven by “real trade demand.” This is the system those clowns want to regime-change. Well, they did not learn anything out of the collective West humiliation in the proxy war in Ukraine. A top old school hand of the Deep State, now retired, and familiar with the glory days of the OSS, sums it all up. Relevant excerpts of our conversation: “The US and Europe are already at war with Russia and they are losing it. The US has 20,000 armed troops in Europe to face Russia. NATO forces are largely a figment of the imagination.
Ukraine is nothing but a front in the US battle for control of the Eurasian land mass a la Mackinder. The US cannot supply both Israel and Europe at the same time. It has overstretched itself. As for Europe, it has no army of any consequence and most of its equipment is antiquated. All of it is pure bluff.” He adds, “the Europeans are waking up to the fact that the US has a moat around it so that it can be reached only by ICBMs and submarine missiles but Europe is in itself indefensible as short range conventional missiles can destroy it. Nukes are not required to destroy Europe in one day but a rain of Russian missiles.” Now compare that with Russia’s top negotiator in the Istanbul kabuki, historian Medinsky, when asked whether Moscow fears new sanctions by the EU and the US:
“This is not a question for us, not for the negotiating group. I can tell you this. After the revolution and civil war in 1920, again, another historical reference, we had not only sanctions, we had an absolute diplomatic and economic blockade of Soviet Russia from everyone. Everyone! It did not prevent us from winning World War II (…) Nothing will prevent Russia from winning now, The only question is the price of victory and the time it takes to achieve it.” This is something that will never sink in amongst Think Tankland in D.C. As much as the technological accomplishments – now visible – of the Made in China 2025 plan will never sink in. Enter bluster, hubris, the regime change obsession – and worse. Because if the US ruling class psycho killers finally conclude they cannot maintain their unilateral world hegemony even via war, they will abandon their cherished Think Tankland “reports” for good and even resort, in despair, to a Samson option.
Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong Exposes the Harsh Truth About Chemotherapy: A Legacy of Profit Over Progress
For decades, chemotherapy has been the cornerstone of cancer treatment, hailed as a life-saving intervention. Yet beneath the surface lies a troubling reality—one rooted in… pic.twitter.com/ceK2pBOasG
— Camus (@newstart_2024) July 26, 2025
Bill Gates, through his backing of Flagship Pioneering, has been given the green light to secretly spray synthetic RNA on America’s food products, with their new venture, Terrana Biosciences, designed to infiltrate crops and rewrite their biological functions, raising chilling… pic.twitter.com/gSr2GpsssM
— “Sudden And Unexpected” (@toobaffled) July 26, 2025
vibrate
Nikola Tesla was trying to tell us:
“If you wish to understand the universe, think of energy, frequency, and vibration.
pic.twitter.com/6nu4deLzqg— Interesting STEM (@InterestingSTEM) July 25, 2025
NY
Evolution of New York
📹loumak4 (AI)
— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) July 26, 2025
foal
The foal, given a 1% chance of survival, clings to life with love… pic.twitter.com/DzKEzZeRgI
— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) July 26, 2025
scott
DilbertCalendar 7/26/25 pic.twitter.com/64YKTchdvb
— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) July 26, 2025
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
Home › Forums › Debt Rattle July 27 2025