Menu Icon

Debt Rattle September 8 2026

Sep 082026
 
 September 8, 2026  Posted by at 10:15 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , ,  Add comments


Hokusai VIews of Mount Fuji: Ejiri in Suruga Province 1831


• USS Abraham Lincoln Returning Home After Being “Sunk” Three Times By Iran (ZH)
• AfD and the Most Dangerous Man in Germany (Charlie Martin)
• AfD’s Historic Win Shocks German Political Establishment (ZH)
• Happy Labor Day (CTH)
• Ukraine Cannot Be Settled Like A Business Deal ( Lukyanov)
• British Patriots Clash with Police as NGO Boats Arrive with Migrants (CTH)
• Democrats Have A Midterm Secret They Don’t Want Voters To See (Margolis)
• Good Faith v. Bad Faith (James Howard Kunstler)
• President Trump Lengthy Interview With U.K GB News (CTH)
• Sunday Fights: Energy Secretary Chris Wright vs CBS Margaret Brennan (CTH)
• When “Twelve Angry Men” Becomes One Angry Man (Turley)

 


 

 


 


How many other stories are being presented this way?

• USS Abraham Lincoln Returning Home After Being “Sunk” Three Times By Iran (ZH)

In yet another example of Iranian social media claims not matching up with reality, the nuclear powered Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln is returning home after a 286 day deployment and 5 days of rest at port in Thailand. The ship was untouched by any signs of combat, despite the IRGC claiming on at least three separate occasions that they had sunk the mighty vessel with drones and missile strikes.


Iranian aligned accounts even spread AI videos and video game clips of a ship sinking, arguing that the clips showed the Abraham Lincoln. Left wing commentators celebrated the news, only to scrub their posts after it was revealed that the information was fake.

Despite resounding evidence to the contrary, many conspiracy advocates asserted that the Lincoln had been hit and the US government was “covering it up.” This also turned out to be nonsense after the carrier arrived at Laem Chabang Port in Thailand for rest and cleaning.

The narrative then shifted, with people claiming that the Lincoln “looked damaged” and disheveled, which proved they were right about Iran hitting the vessel. In reality, the carrier had normal rust and residue caused by months at sea.

The posts exposed an embarrassing lack of basic knowledge when it comes to natural wear from sea water on naval ships facing long deployments.

The ship was cleaned at port with no signs of damage from attack. It has now left Thailand on a return trip to the US and the Naval Air Station North Island in Coronado (San Diego).

The carrier and all its sailors are accounted for. The return of the USS Abraham Lincoln highlights an incessant disinformation campaign by Iran and Iran supporters, flooding social media with false claims in an effort to win the war in the theater of public opinion. On the ground, the vast majority of supposed IRGC successes have proven to be fake.

The Iran War and the war in Ukraine have become case studies for a new era of digital warfare. Substantial efforts are being made to “play the algorithms” and manipulate consensus. Iran, perhaps more than any government so far, has relied heavily on digital guerrilla tactics as a way to demoralize US operations. They have, of course, received extensive help from sources in the west.

Whether or not one agrees with the reasons behind the war, it is clear that propaganda alone is not going to lead to victory. Tangible realities matter and Iran is being hit with those tangibles in the form of an inflation crisis, import/export crisis and fuel shortage crisis and foreign ships passing more freely through the Strait of Hormuz.

The lesson here is simple: Online discourse is rarely a reflection of the truth. All one has to do is wait a few months for the fog of war to clear and the majority of false claims will melt away.

Read more …

Is Merz the Most Dangerous Man?

• AfD and the Most Dangerous Man in Germany (Charlie Martin)

Ulrich Siegmund, the head of the party in Saxony-Anhalt, himself received 49% of the vote in his district. The German political press is not happy. Der Spiegel — sort of Germany’s Time — ran a cover story on August 14 calling him “the most dangerous man in Germany.”


The German press reaction was just short of panic. Tagesschau, the German news program, headlined its story “AfD heads see a clear government mandate.” Die Zeit said, “AfD wins state election in Saxony-Anhalt, but failed to win an absolute majority.” Siegmund took the seat from Thomas Staudt of the CDU (Christlich Demokratische Union). The CDU is the main center-right party — where “center-right” is a little to the left of the American Democratic Party.

Siegmund was just one race, but the CDU suffered a real electoral bloodbath. The head of the state party, Sven Schulze, lost his seat to AfD’s Christian Mertens. German voters get two votes on the same ballot: one for a person in their district and one for a party. The district winner takes that local seat; the party vote decides how many seats the party gets overall, and the remaining seats are filled from a ranked party list published before the election, so Schulze will probably still have a seat from the party list.

Overall, CDU — which had control of the state — lost 41 seats. It won 0 district seats, so it fell from 40 to 15. The CDU can only retain control of the state’s legislature if it can form a coalition with every other party that won seats. That includes a new party, the BSW (Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht), which split from the left over migration and NATO/Ukraine skepticism. The FDP (Freie Demokratische Partei) — a classical liberal party, not what we call “liberal” — got no seats at all. This was a major defeat, as FDP has been part of the CDU-SPD-FDP coalition that had governed until the election.

N-tv, a private news network sort of like Germany’s CNN, had this to say: When the CDU loses a state election, it always feeds back into federal politics — especially when the CDU is the party in government. What happened in Saxony-Anhalt, though, blows past anything seen before. The CDU there was cut in half; the AfD doubled. That doesn’t just raise questions. It puts federal politics itself in doubt.

Friedrich Merz, after all, is a historically unpopular chancellor. That has to do with broken campaign promises, clumsy communication, and sloppy craftsmanship. Best example: his sparse campaign appearances in Saxony-Anhalt. Party colleagues there hid him on factory visits and carefully avoided any contact with actual people. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern recently showed what happens next: whistles and boos.

The current German government and associated NGOs are trying to formally ban the AfD. This started when the Verfassungsschutz, the domestic intelligence service, tried to classify the AfD as “confirmed right-wing extremist”, although it was blocked for the moment after the AfD sued. But several state branches — including Saxony-Anhalt — are already classified as confirmed extremist. An attempt was made in the Bundestag to examine formally banning AfD, and an NGO, the GFF (Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte), published a 1,500-page legal analysis supporting the potential ban. So far, the government hasn’t attempted to actually ban the AfD.

It’s easy to understand why Germany is suspicious of “right-wing” parties, especially after the National Socialist “Nazi” party was defined as “right wing.” But the AfD is more like the MAGA movement, and the AfD is certainly courting the link — which is naturally used by the legacy press as a smear. The curse “may you live in interesting times” should probably be translated to German.

Read more …

They hope it’s only in a small state.

• AfD’s Historic Win Shocks German Political Establishment (ZH)

The pro-Germany, anti-globalist, anti-mass migration right-wing populist party known as Alternative für Deutschland delivered its strongest election result ever in Saxony-Anhalt on Sunday, dealing a sharp blow to Germany’s political establishment. On Sunday, AfD secured 43.8% of the vote in Sunday’s regional election, exceeding polling estimates. Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democrats lost about 19 percentage points, while turnout surged to 77.8% from 60.3% in 2021.


According to Marion Mühlberger, a senior economist at Deutsche Bank, AfD’s weekend win leaves the party holding 39 seats in the 83-member legislature, three short of an absolute majority. The CDU, Social Democrats, Greens and Left also have a combined 39 seats. Mühlberger said there are two possible outcomes of what comes next: an AfD minority government tolerated by BSW, or a political stalemate that leads to a snap election, which would only give AfD a new opportunity to secure outright control.

Mühlberger explained:”At the time of writing, the two most likely options are i) an AfD minority government (supported by the BSW) or ii) a stalemate resulting in snap elections, with the AfD hoping to reach an absolute majority rather than attempting a minority government. AfD leadership for now appears undecided on their preference: while national co-leader Chrupalla last night indicated a willingness to try a minority government, AfD’s lead candidate in Saxony-Anhalt, Ulrich Siegmund, already suggested a snap election as his preferred option, saying that “the AfD is not prepared to make far- reaching compromise to form a coalition.”

We believe that even an AfD (minority) government supported by the BSW would have materially detrimental ramifications for the economic prospects of Saxony-Anhalt over the coming years. Direct investment in the state would likely decline amid significant policy uncertainty, and skilled worker shortages would likely become even more pronounced. However, Saxony-Anhalt contributes less than 2% of German GDP, and any structural damage done to the regional economy is unlikely to spill over to the rest of the German economy. While an AfD state government might test some of Germany’s federal institutions, it will have no leverage over national economic or fiscal policy, not even via the constitutional court.

Over the course of today, we will see leaders of the coalition parties in Berlin officially react to their parties’ weak electoral performance. Chancellor Merz is expected to give a press statement today at 13.30 CET. There will likely be considerable political noise over the couple of weeks ahead of the state elections on 20 September in Berlin and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. There may be some criticism of party leadership and reform proposals. However, once these final state elections of the year are over, we believe that an AfD government in Saxony-Anhalt is likely to provide an additional impetus for the federal government coalition to double down on reforms.”

Mühlberger said the five seats held by the populist BSW will be decisive: “Thus, the populist BSW, with its 5 seats, has a key role to play in the upcoming coalition negotiations as potential kingmakers. While the AfD missed their 45+% / absolute majority election target, they missed it so narrowly that it seems difficult for them to not aim for governing Saxony-Anhalt


As no single party reached an absolute majority needed to govern alone, coalition negotiations for entering a formal coalition or receiving ad hoc support for a minority government will kick off today. The BSW has theoretically three options once the new parliament has convened and the next state premier is to be elected. First, they could elect the AfD lead candidate as state premier (without entering a formal coalition), second they could elect the CDU lead candidate or third they could abstain in the first two ballots for state premier. Judging from statements of BSW co-leaders (at the federal level) Wagenknecht and Ali yesterday night,1 we deem the first option the most likely. What comes next? There are two options:

Option 1 – BSW abstains in third round facilitating an AfD minority government This morning, BSW leader Wagenknecht called for a “political reset” in Saxony- Anhalt, especially when it comes to energy policy, sanctions against Russia (which however are set at the EU level), education, and public broadcasting. Thus, there is a certain overlap of political priorities with the AfD. However, the BSW does not want to enter a formal coalition with the AfD.

With the AfD rejecting the BSW’s proposal for an independent state premier, an AfD minority government tolerated by the BSW seems to be a possible outcome. This means that the BSW would not enter a formal coalition with the AfD, but elect the AfD lead candidate as state premier in an informal cooperation.

Option 2 – The route to snap elections The newly elected parliament must convene for the first time by 6 October at the latest. But the regional constitution does not set a deadline for electing a state premier. Until a new government is elected, Sven Schulze will remain in office leading the caretaker government. As government formation could turn out to be complex, snap elections may be a possible way out. The AfD’s lead candidate Siegmund already suggested this as a potential option, saying that the AfD is not prepared to make far-reaching compromise to form a coalition.

There are three routes to snap elections: If the newly elected parliament does not elect a state premier with an absolute majority after two ballots, it can decide with an absolute majority to dissolve itself before a third ballot. Six months after the election, the new parliament can decide with a two- thirds majority to dissolve itself. A newly elected state premier could call a vote of confidence. This could be a viable option for an AfD minority government, confident of winning an absolute majority in snap elections.

It is highly uncertain that snap elections would generate clear majorities. What could help the AfD is the narrative that the other parties want to keep them out of power, and that they now need a clear mandate. Moreover, smaller parties would again be at risk of not making the 5% hurdle, which would help the AfD. On the other hand, the strong AfD performance could again mobilise the centrist forces to avoid the AfD winning an absolute majority.

Mühlberger’s assessment was that an AfD majority in Saxony-Anhalt could weaken investment and aggravate skilled-worker shortages. She cited policy uncertainty, the party’s anti-mass migration agenda, and potential conflict with the civil service. For Merz, the most consequential challenge is containing AfD’s momentum in the upcoming elections in Berlin and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern on Sept. 20.

Read more …

Sorry, day late.

• Happy Labor Day (CTH)

Labor Day hits a little different this year, as there are elements outside our assembly seeking to fracture the coalition of pragmatic conservatives. The noise is louder, the distractions more intense and the stakes of resetting the economic balance sheet in favor of Main Street are higher. For all of those reasons and more, it seems more difficult to keep moving forward with economic nationalism as the roadmap.


However, we remind ourselves that everything of great purpose comes from within, and from a loving God. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn famously said: “The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie. One word of truth outweighs the world.”

It’s Labor Day in America. We pause and celebrate work, productivity, problem solving, and the value of our workforce. A nation built on ingenuity – so long as we tend the flickering flame of liberty. So, to all of you who do not take part in the grand lies and manipulations that surround us, THANK YOU!


No other nation on earth was conceived to allow people to manifest their own destiny while keeping government out of their lives. The vision, the premise and the purpose, was to allow you the freedom to determine your place in life; and even, at any time, change that determination and strike off in an entirely new direction. Our American labor and aspirations would not be pre-determined by caste, tier, creed or social status; but rather by our personal vision for our own future. The right of self-determination. This is a uniquely American attribute.

Labor Day is a moment when we reflect on the value of work, the great benefit of endeavors achieved, the pride in accomplishment -regardless of scale- amid this thing we call life. But ultimately, all of these considerations have absolutely nothing to do with the money we assemble in the process. We ain’t taking any of it with us folks.

When you hold open the door, you make a difference. When you choose to stand against fraud and deceit, you make a difference. When you pray with purpose you make a difference. When you hold no tolerance for chaos, you make a difference. When you show up, even when you are not sure what comes next, you make a difference. When you achieve in silence because silence is not a mistake, you make a difference.

It is who you are that makes a difference. That is the currency of our life. Regardless of your chosen occupation or effort, you do it well. You live your standard. You have paid the price for your peace. Be proud of yourself. Allow the method of your labor to express the value of who you are and celebrate the accomplishment.

You matter!

Thank you for your fellowship and for your kindness.

With warmest personal regards,

Happy Labor Day!

Read more …

“Why American peace diplomacy keeps going in circles..”

Lukyanov thinks US is not capable of understanding Russia’s ways.

• Ukraine Cannot Be Settled Like A Business Deal ( Lukyanov)

Diplomatic efforts to end an acute and bloody armed conflict should always be welcomed and the persistence of Donald Trump’s administration, which has pursued this goal for more than a year and a half, also deserves recognition, even if the results so far can hardly be called outstanding.


At the very least, the White House remains the only actor in the West both attempting to change the situation and possessing significant leverage over it. Trump and his closest associates probably do genuinely want the war to end as its continuation distracts Washington from foreign policy priorities they regard as more important. But why, then, does Trump’s diplomatic initiative keep going round in circles, with each new attempt ending in another disappointment?

Trump and his principal envoys tend to approach the conflict as an extraordinarily difficult but essentially technical problem, as a puzzle to be solved in isolation from the wider international system. This reflects the worldview of the current White House, where international affairs are a collection of practical problems to be resolved in ways that strengthen America’s position, preferably with some commercial benefit attached. Given the professional backgrounds of the president and his two principal intermediaries, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, this is hardly surprising.

Such an approach can be useful as an instrument, but it becomes less useful when it substitutes for an understanding of the processes that produced the conflict in the first place and, to use the Russian formulation, its root causes. Any durable settlement requires some understanding of what must change in relations between the major powers if similar confrontations are to be avoided.

Trump repeatedly insists that the war would never have begun had he been president in 2022 with the implication that Joe Biden and the Democrats were simply too incompetent to prevent it. Trump has occasionally acknowledged that NATO’s long expansion eastward contributed to the crisis, but he generally shows little interest in the broader military and political processes behind it.

Yet American and NATO policy towards Ukraine wasn’t created by one administration or a handful of officials in Washington and Brussels, rather it developed over decades from a particular conception of Western strategic interests. The crisis that entered its most acute phase in 2022 was, from Moscow’s perspective, the culmination of processes underway since the end of the Cold War.

This helps explain why Washington continues to underestimate how much the outcome matters to the principal participants. For both Russia and Ukraine, too much is at stake for the conflict to be settled through the kind of transaction Trump instinctively favors, given their interests are obviously opposed, but both regard the outcome as fateful. Western Europe, having invested heavily in Ukraine’s cause, also has a direct political stake in the result, so every new attempt by Washington’s two brokers therefore encounters the same obstacle in that none of the parties sees this as simply another deal.

There’s another contradiction in the American position because Washington wishes to become the principal mediator in a conflict whose continuation it has materially supported.The US position has certainly changed under Trump as Washington’s previous fixation on Ukraine has diminished considerably. Trump would prefer America to step back while retaining decisive influence over what happens next, but that is precisely where the difficulty begins.

Transferring the financial burden, political responsibility and risks to the Western Europeans while continuing to dictate the terms requires a degree of obedience from junior partners that Washington can no longer guarantee. EU governments and Kiev have also learnt how to deal with this unconventional president and when they can’t persuade him, they have become increasingly adept at circumventing his pressure.

The one American instrument against which there would be little defence is a complete cessation of military support, but Trump is unlikely to take that step, even if he were personally inclined to do so because facilitating an outright Russian victory isn’t his objective. He may care less than his predecessor about the precise shape of the eventual settlement, but a complete Ukrainian defeat would be another matter. Nor would abandoning Ukraine enjoy much support across the American political establishment, where there is virtually no constituency for a fundamental rapprochement with Russia.

Read more …

Goverment treason.

• British Patriots Clash with Police as NGO Boats Arrive with Migrants (CTH)

Apparently, there was an organized boatlift of north African migrants crossing from France into the U.K earlier today. Various non-governmental organizations were in place with tents and supplies to assist the migrants upon arrival. By most accounts the influx appears to have been facilitated by NGO’s working with British authorities. However, at various ports where the migrants arrived, they were met with hundreds of young British men who attempted to blockade the activity of the police and nefarious human traffickers.


Telegraph – Hundreds of protesters have clashed with police in Portsmouth after a mega-dinghy carrying 140 migrants reached the UK from Normandy.Around 500 demonstrators are believed to have joined a protest in the area on Sunday night, with some dressed in all black – similar to those who joined an anti-illegal migrant protest which blocked the Port of Dover on Saturday.The large boat of migrants – believed to be the longest-ever Channel crossing by people-smugglers – was intercepted in the Solent between the Isle of Wight and Portsmouth earlier on Sunday.

Police used riot shields and pepper spray to force the crowds back, but the line broke through the weight of numbers. Protesters then made their way inside the marina compound. Earlier, George Madgwick, the leader of Reform UK in Hampshire, wrote in a post on X that “over 100 migrant men” had arrived on the Portsmouth shore.The French coastguard said it had detected the mega-dinghy, which was shadowed by a number of rescue boats in case it got into difficulties. Authorities estimated that up to 140 people were on board the vessel, 90 short of the record 230 who crossed on a similar boat last month.

[…] In a livestream from the scene, Daniel Thomas, known as Danny Tommo – an associate of Right-wing activist Tommy Robinson – encouraged viewers to travel to Portsmouth to join the protest.Thomas could be seen standing in the sea at the Eastney shingle beach, alongside a small group of other protesters, with police officers looking on.“Roads are all blocked, they are never going to be able to leave here,” Thomas said. He added: “It was only yesterday (at the protests in Dover) when we warned them that we will not accept this any more, and that this is no longer an option to tell us that the boat numbers are down.

“This isn’t about the numbers being down… this is about understanding that this has to come to an end now.” The mega-dinghy – launched from a beach east of Cherbourg in the Baie de la Seine – reflects a change in tactics used by people-smugglers, who have started loading more migrants on to fewer and larger vessels, partly because of the success of law enforcement in disrupting boat and equipment supply chains. (read more)

Read more …

“They don’t even put anything out because it’s so unpopular. What are they going to say? ‘We’re going to abolish ICE’? No one wants to do that, Harold.”

• Democrats Have A Midterm Secret They Don’t Want Voters To See (Margolis)

With roughly two months left before the midterm elections, Democrats still don’t have a lock on winning back the majority, despite nearly everything in the political environment supposedly being in their favor. Between history, President Donald Trump’s approval ratings, and gas prices, polls should consistently give them a huge edge. Yet the most recent Harvard-Harris poll showed the GOP ahead by two points among likely voters on the generic congressional ballot.


The reason isn’t complicated once you look at what Democrats are actually campaigning on: nothing.Think about it. Their entire pitch is about resisting Donald Trump. Ask what they would do with a majority, and you’ll get vague talking points about affordability (something they failed miserably at when they were in power) instead of an actual policy agenda. That’s deliberate, and it’s the same playbook Democrats ran in 2020: sound moderate enough to win the general election, then govern like radicals when you’re in power.

Jesse Watters spelled out exactly why during a heated back-and-forth with Harold Ford Jr. on The Five last week, and it was more revealing than anything Democrats have said about their own strategy. “Your party is nuts, all right,” Watters told Ford. “They don’t even put anything out because it’s so unpopular. What are they going to say? ‘We’re going to abolish ICE’? No one wants to do that, Harold.” Ford insisted that the DSA, not the DNC, supports abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which isn’t true. “No. The DNC voted to get rid of ICE last week. I think you were on vacation,” Watters quipped.

Watters then brought up the example Democrats should be embarrassed to have avoided: Newt Gingrich’s 1994 Contract with America, a written, public, specific policy platform that Republicans ran on and that preceded their historic victory in which they won a House majority. “Remember Newt’s Contract [with] America?” Watters asked. “Put it out. I mean, I dare you guys to put it out.” They won’t take him up on it. Why? Because if Democrats actually laid out their real agenda and demanded that voters hold them to it, they’d never win.

“You guys want to nationalize the $2 trillion health insurance industry. You can’t do it because it’s stupid, Harold. You guys want to do the Green New Deal again? It didn’t work, you can’t do it,” Watters said. Both ideas failed to pass even when Democrats held the House, the Senate, and the White House at the same time. A party doesn’t campaign on ideas this unpopular.


That leaves House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) squeezed between two factions that want opposite things. The activist wing of his caucus wants confrontation: impeachment votes, government shutdowns, investigations into anything connected to Trump. The party’s presidential hopefuls want the opposite because they know the general-election electorate has no appetite for it. Jeffries doesn’t have enough control over his own caucus to make either side back down, which is exactly why the Democrat Party’s message heading into November amounts to three words: “orange man bad.”

If their ideas were popular, they’d run on them the way Gingrich did in 1994. The fact that they won’t tell you what they’re planning is the clearest evidence yet that they already know you wouldn’t vote for it.

Read more …

“In conditions of mass democracy, the soft and the infantilising will be preferred over the hard and the necessary again and again.” —Eugyppius on X

• Good Faith v. Bad Faith (James Howard Kunstler)


Massachusetts Women Demonstrating in Favor of Triple Child Homicides

Clusterfuck Nation never sleeps, even while everybody else lays aside their labors. Later today we’ll light up the ceremonial grill, but for now it’s onto the tribulations of this dolorous moment in history.


It was just such a sparkling September morning twenty-five years ago when those hijacked airliners knifed into the World Trade Center towers (plus the Pentagon + a field outside Shanksville, PA). Despite all the forensic debate since then, I go with the original explanation that four teams of jihadi maniacs did the 9/11 deed. And also, yet, despite all the official defenses mounted since then — the Patriot Act, etc. — here we are allowing a massive Islamic infiltration and even takeover of many places in America, proving, at least, that history is trickster.

After the trauma of 9/11, you can’t deny our country went off the rails psychologically, along with the rest of Western Civ, as if its immune system broke down and the body politic admitted all kinds of malevolent parasites into itself. They have induced disease in most of society’s organs — our institutions — the main political parties, the news media, the government agencies, the foundations, the schools, the arts & letters. The West’s collective brain got badly damaged in the process.

The disease is identifiable, though some of its mechanisms remain mysterious. The disease is called bad faith: acting or speaking falsely, and knowingly so. Pretending one thing as a cover for meaning something else, such as hollering about “justice” when you really mean vengeance; “inclusion” when you mean to cancel others out of careers and livelihoods; “diversity” when you won’t tolerate disagreement; “democracy” when you just want to push everybody else around.

The forces behind all this give off an odor of the occult. You can perhaps name and locate some of the engines driving it — the “Globalists,” the Marxists, the London banks, the EU, the WEF, the São Paulo Forum, the CCP — but their motives remain obscure. Angela Merkel has stated plainly why she allowed the mass immigration of the Third World into Germany (and thereby into all Europe due to the Schengen agreement that erased the EU nations’ borders): “to counter right-wing extremism,” she said. That sounds pretty clear, but it also seems quite crazy. And why on earth does Ursula von der Leyen do everything possible to keep that going? Have the migrants not sufficiently demonstrated their antipathy to Western society? How many rapes, knifings, beheadings, café massacres, and Christmas Village drive-throughs does it take?

It’s also hard to fathom how the London bankers (whoever they are?) have any sympathy with the Marxist revolutionaries who want to end the concept of private property and the instrumentalities of money that go with it. Or how the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations became so enamored of socialism. Or why the CIA seems bent on betraying the American common good. Or how come the League of Women Voters stridently opposes common sense election reform.

The race hustle is more comprehensible. It operates within a permission-structure built on the agonizing differential between success and failure. It’s just plain extortion: our failure is your fault, so pay up. And meanwhile, thanks for no-bail-and-no-jail, and for permission to shoplift, rape, murder, loot, and riot when we feel like it. (And cry harder about it.) It’s an obvious sado-masochistic setup.

The gender game gets more complicated, but it also comes out of a permission-structure based on success / failure, aggravated by a mutual shortage of marriageable males and females forced to compensate for any combination of bad luck and bad choices that lead to failure in life. But that dynamic has been neatly hijacked by groups seeking to create as much social chaos as possible. Why else would the Democratic Party get so avid for drag queen story hours in the early school grades? Is it not obvious that this isn’t really comedy, as claimed? Rather, it’s the presentation of women as monsters. Have you ever stopped to wonder how many of the kids watching these exhibitions are actually terrified by the disturbed adult males acting-out in their faces?

And now, the gender lunacy has climaxed — in Massachusetts, arguably the craziest US state — where mobs of deranged women chant and blubber in sympathy outside the courthouse where a mother who strangled her three kids just got off the hook. The kids were unfairly cluttering up Lindsey’s life, you understand. . . .If anything is an apt tipping point for a society to go one way or another, there it is.

Read more …

FYI

• President Trump Lengthy Interview With U.K GB News (CTH)

Against the popular uprisings currently taking place in Great Britain, this interview takes on additional context. Last week, just before the civil protests broke out on the shores of the U.K, President Trump sat down for an interview with GB News about issues and current events that hit both sides of the Atlantic.


President Trump answers questions about topics that pertain to both the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as well as the interconnectivity of the relationship to the United States. The interview is pragmatic, focused and deliberate as President Trump presents his perspectives on the challenges that face both nations.

Obviously one of the key policy issues facing the U.K is the topic of migration, and President Trump puts the issue into a factual framework of government accepting the problem. These are choices being made by political leadership against the interests of their citizens. The interviewer, Bev Turner, is fraught with political correctness and somewhat stunned by President Trump’s lack of pretense. WATCH:

Read more …

“It’s the western hemisphere, Margaret”

• Sunday Fights: Energy Secretary Chris Wright vs CBS Margaret Brennan (CTH)

The Sunday pearl clutching begins with CBS’s Margaret Brennan directing her adversarial prose toward U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright.


Secretary Wright is such a pro in this interview. “It’s the western hemisphere, Margaret”

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We begin today with the U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, who joins us from Denver. Mr. Secretary, it is Labor Day, and Secretary Bessent had predicted we’d see three-dollar gas by September 20th, depending on the Iran talks. Do you think we’re going to be back at three bucks in the next two weeks?

SECRETARY OF ENERGY CHRIS WRIGHT: Well, we’ve passed peak demand time with Labor Day tomorrow, the end of the summer driving season, and the Trump administration a couple weeks ago rolled out a change in regulations that’ll allow American refiners to produce more gasoline and diesel with their existing equipment. So, seeing demand likely go down in the next few weeks and supply going up, I think prices headed downward is- is not an unreasonable expectation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: What about the diesel fuel that trucks and trains rely so heavily on? We saw that record high price of $5.89 a gallon this week. Is for example, an export ban off the table?

SEC. WRIGHT: You want to keep as much energy flowing as possible. The diesel situation has been challenging because Russian refineries have suffered significant damage. Russia used to be a meaningful exporter of diesel. Today, today they don’t export any diesel, and in fact, they’ve become a meaningful importer of gasoline. So its global refining capacity is why gasoline and diesel prices are high, even more than oil prices. And this is- for 17 years, Democrat policies have been attack hydrocarbons, get as many refineries and coal plants closed. You could summarize their energy and climate policies in two words, expensive energy.

[..]

Read more …

Weird.

• When “Twelve Angry Men” Becomes One Angry Man (Turley)

“I hope that guy can sleep well at night.”


Those words from Kevin Reddington on the steps of the Plymouth, Massachusetts Courthouse were part of a diatribe against the “guy” who was reportedly the sole holdout in the Lindsay Clancy trial. The scene was a fitting end to a visceral trial, but it added a vindictive element that should prompt Judge William Sullivan to call out the seasoned defense attorney.

After declaring that the 11-1 mistrial was “no time to gloat,” Reddington bragged repeatedly about “crushing” District Attorney Tim Cruz, whom he also attacked. He insisted that, in the trial, no one said a single negative thing about his client as a mother — ignoring that little matter of the three young children whom she had strangled to death, one by one.

But it was his attack on the holdout juror that was a breathtaking abandonment of restraint and decency. Reddington knows it is very likely that the name of this juror (he has already been identified as one of only three males on the jury) will eventually be uncovered by Internet sleuths. He effectively put a target on the back of a juror who committed the unpardonable sin of not being convinced by his arguments.The fact that this is one of the three male jurors only ramped up the rage. This case prompted a striking gender divide between men and women, with many women expressing sympathy for Clancy and anger at the system for failing her.

For Reddington and many viewers, the hung jury was less “Twelve Angry Men” and more like “One Angry Man.” Indeed, in addition to attacking the juror, women outside of the courthouse heckled Cruz as he tried to speak to the press, shouting that he “only cares about the three children. What about the Mom?” Reddington followed up by saying that Cruz really did not care about the children (because he looked down to read their names). He also accused the holdout jurors of wasting the time of the jury, complaining “that guy stole seven weeks from those jurors.”

It was an ironic twist on the 1957 classic. In that movie, Juror number eight (Henry Fonda) was repeatedly attacked for “wasting time” and not yielding to the majority — until he ultimately convinced all of his peers.

Earlier in the day, Reddington had asked a Massachusetts Supreme Court justice for an emergency order to force Sullivan not to declare a mistrial, and instead to remove the holdout in favor of an alternate. It was an utterly meritless effort, but Reddington used the filing to further denounce the juror. He compared the juror’s refusal to vote for his client as akin to leaving a racist on a jury. In this case, he suggested that the “guy” was a virtual anti-disability version of “Bull” Connor or some deranged “ableist.”

The rising hatred toward this juror reflects how an act deemed noble in one context can be denounced as craven in another.Take the 1957 classic movie. Viewers love to watch Henry Fonda stand alone against his fellow jurors to raise reasonable doubt in favor of the young defendant. But in this version, the sole juror believed that his fellow jurors were ignoring the defendant’s culpability. Imagine the movie’s outcome if Reddington’s approach had been accepted in 1957, where Fonda could be pulled into court, questioned about his intransigence, and ultimately replaced with an alternate in order to flip the vote.

For all of the anger it has generated, the Clancy trial shows the best of our justice system. We have a system in which a single juror can stand against not only the rest of the jury, but against the world. The trial showed zealous counsel on both sides and a conscientious judge who ensured a fair trial despite the powerful emotions in society. You can disagree with this juror and the outcome but still celebrate that our legal system comes down not to judges or lawyers, but to simple citizens doing justice in thousands of cases a year. It comes down to whether every juror can vote not for a popular choice, but for a moral one.

That is why some of us were so shocked by Reddington’s public attack on this one juror. This is not who we are supposed to be as officers of the court. We stand in the path of the mob, not leading it. In another great movie, “To Kill a Mockingbird,” Gregory Peck captured that role from the novel most vividly as Atticus Finch, standing before a jail to stop a lynch mob. Finch showed that the strength of any legal system is ultimately only as strong as each individual’s ability to stand alone. He tells his daughter Scout, “The one thing that doesn’t abide by majority rule is a person’s conscience.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Home › Forums › Debt Rattle September 8 2026

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • September 8, 2026 at 10:15 am #249361
    Raúl Ilargi Meijer
    Keymaster

    Hokusai VIews of Mount Fuji: Ejiri in Suruga Province 1831 • USS Abraham Lincoln Returning Home After Being “Sunk” Three Times By Iran (ZH) • AfD and
    [See the full post at: Debt Rattle September 8 2026]

    September 8, 2026 at 11:14 am #249379
    Michael Reid
    Participant

    Pravin Sawhney:Iran FIRES at US Carrier, Hormuz WAR Escalates,Warning Shot at America’s Carrier

    September 8, 2026 at 11:18 am #249380
    Michael Reid
    Participant

    Labor Day Post Spree: Trump Renames New Mexico While Israel Burns Lebanon Again | Iran Lego

    September 8, 2026 at 11:22 am #249381
    Michael Reid
    Participant

    TRUMP’S CANADA TARIFF WAR BACKFIRES as LABOR DAY RANT EXPOSES GOP MIDTERM PANIC | Iran Lego

    September 8, 2026 at 11:27 am #249382
    Michael Reid
    Participant

    ‘Flee KIEV, before it’s too LATE’: Russia issued a Tough Warning to Western Diplomats and Servicemen

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.