Menu Icon

Raúl Ilargi Meijer

Debt Rattle July 24 2025

Jul 242025
 
 July 24, 2025  Posted by at 9:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  10 Responses »


Max Ernst Inspired hill 1950

 

• Gabbard Refers Obama for Criminal Investigation Over Russiagate (Margolis)
• Obama’s Role In ‘Russia Hoax Lies’ Exposed – Gabbard (RT)
• Tulsi Is About To Drop More Evidence Against Barack Obama (Margolis)
• Canada Accepts No Trade Deal Before 35% Tariffs Kick In (CTH)
• Trump Questions Kiev’s Use Of US Aid (RT)
• Western Media Reacts To Zelensky’s Crackdown On Anti-Corruption Bureau (RT)
• US Congresswoman Labels Zelensky ‘Dictator’ (RT)
• Zelensky’s End Goal Is In Sight, And So Is His End (Amar)
• Von der Leyen Warns Zelensky Over Risk To Ukraine’s EU Bid (RT)
• US State Dept Accuses EU of ‘Orwellian Censorship’ (RT)
• The Case For Media Transparency Within The EU Just Got Sexy (Jay)
• Biggest US Power Grid Sets Power Costs At Record High To Feed AI (ZH)
• Whose Politics Canceled Stephen Colbert? (Daniel McCarthy)
• Macron’s Popularity Hits Record Low (RT)
• Macron Sues Candace Owens For Defamation For Claiming His Wife Is A Man (ZH)

 

 

Treason

tulsi


Bannon

2020

Fed

Mearsheimer

 

 

 

 

CNN does mention Obama and Tulsi now -in passing-, but only to assert that this story serves one purpose only: to divert attention away from the real and infinitely BIGGER story, which is that Trump is connected to the Epstein files. And then it has five different stories about that.

“The evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment. There are multiple pieces of evidence and intelligence that confirm that fact.”

• Gabbard Refers Obama for Criminal Investigation Over Russiagate (Margolis)

Barack Obama has long pretended that he had no hand in the Russia collusion hoax, but that narrative is crumbling fast. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has just declassified a trove of explosive documents that reveal the Obama administration’s direct role in fabricating the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) — the cornerstone of the bogus claim that Donald Trump was a Russian asset.nOne key piece of evidence is a 2020 House Intelligence Committee report that flatly states that there was no Russian cyber interference connected to Trump’s win. Despite that, Obama demanded a rushed intelligence assessment in the final weeks of 2016, deliberately designed to push the false claim that Vladimir Putin helped install Trump. The goal? To sabotage the incoming president before he was even sworn in.

According to the documents, Obama and his top advisers — working hand in glove with Hillary Clinton’s campaign and their loyal media allies — staged a coordinated, calculated effort to weaponize U.S. intelligence for political warfare. What began as a smear campaign has now turned into something much bigger. On Wednesday, Gabbard confirmed during a White House press briefing that her office has officially referred Obama to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation over his leading role in the conspiracy. “Do you believe that any of this new information implicates former President Obama in criminal behavior?” a reporter asked. “We have referred and will continue to refer all of these documents to the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate the criminal implications of this,” Gabbard replied.

When asked point blank if that includes the former president himself, Gabbard didn’t flinch. “Correct,” she replied. “The evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment. There are multiple pieces of evidence and intelligence that confirm that fact.” A second reporter followed up, referencing Gabbard’s recent statement accusing Obama of helping to lead a coup against President Trump. “Do you believe President Obama is guilty of treason?” he asked. Gabbard stopped short of personally issuing a legal judgment but made it clear what she believes took place. “I’m leaving the criminal charges to the Department of Justice. I am not an attorney,” she said.

“But as I have said previously, when you look at the intent behind creating a fake manufactured intelligence document that directly contradicts multiple assessments that were created by the intelligence community, the expressed intent and what followed afterward can only be described as a years-long coup and a treasonous conspiracy against the American people, our republic, and an attempt to undermine President Trump’s administration.” The implications are staggering. For years, the media and Democrats insisted that Russia installed Trump; now, under the Trump administration’s own intelligence leadership, it’s Obama who stands accused of orchestrating the deception that fueled the entire narrative. On Tuesday, Obama’s office released a rare statement essentially denying Obama’s role in the scandal.

“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response. But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,” the statement read. “Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.” Obama can scoff all he wants and hide behind carefully worded denials, but the truth is catching up with him — and fast. The declassified evidence paints a damning picture: not only did Obama know about the Russia hoax, but he was also the one orchestrating it from the top.

This wasn’t some rogue effort by low-level staffers or overeager Clinton allies. This was a calculated, top-down operation to sabotage President Trump and deceive the American public using the full weight of the intelligence community. And now, for the first time, there are real consequences on the horizon.

Read more …

“..the most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history.”

• Obama’s Role In ‘Russia Hoax Lies’ Exposed – Gabbard (RT)

US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on Wednesday released a previously classified congressional report, which she claims debunks “Russia Hoax lies” – a coordinated effort by former President Barack Obama to distort intelligence regarding Moscow’s alleged role in the 2016 election. This marks Gabbard’s second major declassification move, following her earlier allegation of a “treasonous conspiracy” aimed at undermining Donald Trump’s presidency. The newly public document – produced by the House Intelligence Committee in 2020 under Republican leadership – challenges the analytical foundation for the conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help then-candidate Trump win the election.

It criticizes the CIA for failing to adhere to its own standards, citing “one scant, unclear, and unverifiable fragment of a sentence from one of the substandard reports” as the basis for its assessment that Putin favored Trump. In a post on X on Wednesday, Gabbard called the report a “bombshell,” asserting it reveals “the most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history.” She accused Obama and his senior officials of collaborating with media allies to delegitimize Trump through what she described as a deliberate disinformation campaign. “They conspired to subvert the will of the American people,” Gabbard wrote, claiming the effort amounted to a “years-long coup” against Trump.

The report also claims Obama issued “unusual directives” to accelerate the release of the intelligence assessment before Trump’s inauguration, bypassing normal interagency coordination procedures within the intelligence community. Gabbard has argued that these actions warrant a criminal investigation and accused Obama-era officials of manufacturing a false narrative to discredit a sitting president. Trump has endorsed her findings, calling for prosecutions of Obama and top members of his administration. She also claimed that internal US intelligence assessments consistently concluded Russia lacked both the capability and intent to interfere in the 2016 election – but that these findings were deliberately suppressed. Russia has denied any involvement in US elections, and President Putin has repeatedly stated that Moscow does not favor any particular American political candidate.

Read more …

This is from before Tulsi dropped her second batch of files yesterday.

• Tulsi Is About To Drop More Evidence Against Barack Obama (Margolis)

Barack Obama’s team is in full damage control mode after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified and released evidence that Obama and his top officials in his administration knowingly fabricated intelligence to push the false narrative that Trump was compromised by Russia—an operation designed to delegitimize his election and kneecap his ability to govern. On Tuesday, Barack Obama released a statement through a spokesman in response to the recent release of Russiagate documents implicating the former president in the effort to delegitimize Trump’s presidency. “Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” the statement read. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.”

But, Gabbard isn’t backing down. In an appearance on “Rob Schmitt Tonight” on Newsmax Tuesday, she announced that her team will be releasing documents that directly contradict Barack Obama’s latest attempt to rewrite the history of the Russia collusion hoax. “We will be releasing further documents tomorrow that will refute that statement,” Gabbard said, dismissing the statement outright as part of pattern of misinformation pushed by top Democrats and their allies in the media ever since the release of what she called the “manufactured intelligence document” in January 2017. She didn’t stop there. “We will be pulling a whole host of statements that were made by the Obama administration, by Hillary Clinton, by senior Democrat officials, by their friends in the media,” she said. “They state over and over again after this January 2017 manufactured intelligence document was created that repeat the narrative.”

Gabbard laid out a damning list of examples. “The New York Times says, ‘Russian hackers acted to aid Trump in the election,’” she quoted. “Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan says, ‘There is strong consensus among us… to support the CIA claim Russian hackers aided Donald Trump’s election.’” And of course, Hillary Clinton’s infamous refrain: “I would be president if not for the Russian hackers supporting Donald Trump.” “There is a vast body of evidence and intelligence that debunks and refutes this statement you’ve just read and others coming from some of the Democrat leaders in Congress today,” Gabbard concluded. With more documents expected to drop soon, Gabbard is making it clear she intends to expose the Obama-era narrative for what it was—an orchestrated political operation designed to undercut the legitimacy of a duly elected president.

Now that the truth is starting to trickle out, the Obama crowd is sweating—and for good reason. Tulsi Gabbard’s document drops are pulling back the curtain on what looks like a coordinated effort by Obama and his top brass to sabotage a duly elected president using fake intelligence and a complicit media echo chamber. The phony Russia narrative was a deliberate attempt to delegitimize Trump before he even took the oath. And now, the evidence is catching up. No matter how hard Obama’s lackeys try to spin it, accountability is coming. And they know it.

Read more …

“..Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc and Mark Carney’s chief-of-staff, Marc-André Blanchard are once again coming to DC to ride their bicycles in slow circles at the bottom of the White House driveway while staring in the windows.”

• Canada Accepts No Trade Deal Before 35% Tariffs Kick In (CTH)

I’ll repeat it as much as needed, until it sinks in. The U.S-Canada trade deal status is simply a no-brainer. President Trump will answer questions about Canada and tariffs, he’ll put people into seats to discuss trade with the Canadian delegation, and he’ll give every outward appearance of being favorable to Prime Minister Mark Carney…. BUT… In the background, Trump is simply waiting for the USMCA timeline to trigger a renegotiation. President Donald Trump is ambivalent to the trade partnership with Canada. This moot-status reality is why there’s no substantive engagement. ‘No deal’ -until USMCA redo- is a win for President Trump. For some bizarre reason that I simply cannot fathom, almost every Canadian politician seems entirely oblivious to this reality. Instead, Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc and Mark Carney’s chief-of-staff, Marc-André Blanchard are once again coming to DC to ride their bicycles in slow circles at the bottom of the White House driveway while staring in the windows.

An article in Politico notes the Canadian premiers are now accepting the August 1st deadline will pass without any agreement, and the 35% reciprocal tariffs on non-USMCA products (meaning a lot of stuff) is going to trigger. Literally, everything from Canada that has a non-USMCA component is going to be tariffed. Think about all the stuff from China, Asia (writ large) and Europe that Canada assembles for finished goods. All of that stuff will be subject to the tariffs. That said, there’s good news coming from the recent meeting between Prime Minister Carney and the Premiers. Within their statement they use the term “developing large infrastructure projects.” That’s Canadian political codespeak for them realizing they are going to have to get back to regular energy development, raw material use/refinement and ACTUAL MANUFACTURING.

Canada is going to have to bring back their ‘dirty’ industrial jobs. For our Treehouse friends in Canada, this is very good news. The Canadian assembly economic model has to change in order to get compliant with U.S. trade rules. THAT’S TRUMP’S ENTIRE POINT! The environmentalists within Canada will not like this, but economically they will have no choice; it’s the only way to avoid a complete economic depression.

HUNTSVILLE, Ontario — “Prime Minister Mark Carney and Canada’s premiers are tempering expectations that they’ll strike a new economic and security deal with Donald Trump by the end of the month. “We would like to have the ideal deal, as fast as possible. But what can we get?” Quebec Premier François Legault said Tuesday. “You almost need to ask Donald Trump, and I’m not even sure he knows himself what he wants.” It’s a shift in tone from the premiers and Carney, who ran for election on his economic record, arguing he’d be the best person to negotiate with the president. But Canada is finding it harder than it looks. Carney met the premiers in Muskoka, cottage country north of Toronto, to update them on Canada-U.S. negotiations. As the leaders emerged from a three-hour meeting, they downplayed hopes of an Aug. 1 deal, arguing that achieving a “good deal” is more important than hitting a deadline.”

[…] As the negotiations continue, the premiers spent Tuesday carving out a strategy to offset the economic impact of Trump’s tariffs on the aluminum, steel, auto and lumber sector. They spoke about developing large infrastructure projects, breaking down trade barriers between provinces and encouraging a “buy Canadian” approach.”

Canada is going to go into a deep economic recession; there’s no way to avoid it. However, if they restart their industrial base, drop the ridiculous ‘green’ energy stuff, start exploiting their own natural resources and train an apprentice generation -just like we are trying to do- then Canada can bounce back stronger than ever. We know there are Canadian wolverines who understand this concept; we saw thousands of them in the Truckers’ vaccine strike. Make Canada Great Again, by Making Dirty Jobs Great Again, eh?

Read more …

“They were supposed to buy their own equipment. But I have a feeling they didn’t spend every dollar on the equipment..,”

• Trump Questions Kiev’s Use Of US Aid (RT)

US President Donald Trump has claimed that billions of dollars in American aid given to Ukraine under his predecessor Joe Biden may have been misused. The US became Kiev’s top foreign backer under the Biden administration, allocating over $170 billion in military and financial aid, according to official data. Trump, however, has long argued the total is far higher, estimating $350 billion in “equipment and cash” and criticizing Biden for “giving away” money without returns. He reiterated the point at a Republican meeting at the White House on Tuesday, questioning whether Kiev had actually used US aid for defense needs.

“Biden gave away $350 billion worth of equipment or cash. Worse than equipment – cash… They were supposed to buy their own equipment. But I have a feeling they didn’t spend every dollar on the equipment,” Trump said. “We want to find out about that [money], someday, I guess, right?” Trump’s comments echo growing concerns over corruption in Ukraine. The country has long struggled with graft, and its Defense Ministry has faced multiple scandals since the conflict with Russia escalated in 2022. Both the US and EU have pressed for audits and stronger anti-corruption measures. In April, US National Security Adviser Michael Waltz urged tighter oversight of aid, calling Ukraine “one of the most corrupt nations in the world.”

Despite calls for transparency, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky signed a law this week reducing the independence of Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies, claiming it would streamline investigations. The legislation has triggered international scrutiny and protests across the country, with critics saying the move could be aimed at shielding Zelensky’s inner circle and concealing the embezzlement of military funds. Moscow has long argued that Western aid prolongs the fighting without changing the outcome of the conflict. Russian officials have also long accused Kiev of misusing foreign funds. UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia told RT last month that it’s “an open secret” Ukraine “stole billions of dollars out of the aid” and that Zelensky clings to power to avoid consequences.

Read more …

First, he effectively shut down the independent anti-corruption bureaus. That led to major protests in the streets, the first in years. So he (they) tweaked it all a bit and he claimed they’re independent again. These guys have embezzled billions and for some reason they’re now afraid of being found out.

• Western Media Reacts To Zelensky’s Crackdown On Anti-Corruption Bureau (RT)

Western news outlets have criticized Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky for stripping an independent anti-corruption bureau of its autonomy and placing it under the control of the prosecutor general. The move, carried out on Tuesday, drew widespread concern from journalists and observers. Zelensky signed legislative amendments on the subordination of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the office of the special anti-corruption prosecutor hours after they were rushed through parliament. The changes were enacted despite vocal opposition from the agency. Established in 2015 following the 2014 armed coup in Kiev, the NABU was a cornerstone of judicial reform conditions imposed by Western governments and international financial institutions.

The agency was intended to serve as a key check on official misconduct, along with Western-funded NGOs and media outlets. The move to “neuter” the NABU, as Axios described it, comes amid escalating tensions between the bureau and the Zelensky administration. Earlier this week, Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) executed search warrants against at least 15 NABU personnel and arrested a top investigator on suspicion of ties to Russia. Zelensky defended the measures, alleging that the NABU was ineffective and compromised by Russian influence, warranting what he called a necessary purge. The clampdown drew muted statements of concern from Western officials and warnings about its potential consequences from journalists.

”It is never a good sign when governments accused of corruption raid the agencies and activists trying to hold them to account,” wrote Bloomberg columnist Marc Champion. “It’s something the country cannot afford, just as it asks taxpayers across Europe to pump tens of billions of additional euros into its defense.” Champion also pointed to “an emerging pattern,” referencing the recent criminal charges filed against anti-corruption activist Vitaly Shabunin, who was accused of fraud and draft evasion. Axios noted that the assault on the NABU’s independence came after recent improvements in US-Ukraine relations. However, the outlet cautioned that Zelensky was “playing with fire,” recalling President Donald Trump’s characterization of him as a “dictator without elections” governing under martial law.

The Wall Street Journal accused Kiev of launching an “attack on anti-corruption institutions,” emphasizing the NABU’s role in assuring Western donors that financial support would be safeguarded from embezzlement. It also extensively cited criticisms by Ukrainian anti-corruption activists. Shabunin told the newspaper that the charges against him were meant to send a message: “Those who investigate corruption in Zelensky’s office will be punished.” Another person suggested Zelensky had grown emboldened by the West’s subdued response after Kiev rejected the independent selection of a NABU detective to lead another economic crimes agency. Foreign correspondents covering Ukraine expressed dismay at the developments on social media.

Oliver Carroll of The Economist called the legislation “shocking” and accused Zelensky of allowing “hubris” to jeopardize the goodwill of the foreign public. Yaroslav Trofimov of the Wall Street Journal claimed the crackdown represented “a gift of historic proportions to Russian propaganda” and to Western skeptics of further military aid for Ukraine. Financial Times correspondent Christopher Miller emphasized that the responsibility lay squarely with Zelensky and his chief of staff, Andrey Yermak. ”Orders came from the office of the president last night and the law enforcement committee passed it early morning in such great haste that members had to join over video,” Miller wrote. “This did not just happen overnight, even if it feels that way. This is a shift months in the making.”

Read more …

That Congresswoman can only be MTG.

• US Congresswoman Labels Zelensky ‘Dictator’ (RT)

US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has labeled Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky “a dictator” and called for his removal, citing mass anti-corruption protests across Ukraine and accusing him of blocking peace efforts. Her comments came after Zelensky signed a controversial bill into law that places the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) under the authority of the prosecutor general. Critics argue that the legislation effectively strips the bodies of their independence. The law has sparked protests across Ukraine, with around 2,000 people rallying in Kiev and additional demonstrations reported in Lviv, Odessa, and Poltava. “Good for the Ukrainian people! Throw him out of office!” Greene wrote Wednesday on X, sharing footage from the protests. “And America must STOP funding and sending weapons!!!”

Greene, a longtime critic of US aid to Kiev, made similar comments last week while introducing an amendment to block further assistance. “Zelensky is a dictator, who, by the way, stopped elections in his country because of this war,” she told the House. “He’s jailed journalists, he’s canceled his election, controlled state media, and persecuted Christians. The American people should not be forced to continue to pay for another foreign war.”Her statements come amid mounting speculation over Zelensky’s political future. Journalist Seymour Hersh has reported that US officials are considering replacing him, possibly with former top general Valery Zaluzhny.

Senator Tommy Tuberville also called Zelensky a “dictator” last month, accusing him of trying to drag NATO into the conflict with Russia. Tuberville claimed that Zelensky refuses to hold elections because “he knew if he had an election, he’d get voted out.” Zelensky’s five-year presidential term expired in 2024, but he has refused to hold a new election, citing martial law, which has been extended every 90 days since 2022.US President Donald Trump has also questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy, calling him “a dictator without elections” in February. Russian officials have repeatedly brought up the issue of Zelensky’s legitimacy, arguing that any agreements signed by him or his administration could be legally challenged by future leaders of Ukraine.

Read more …

“Western allies of Ukraine” still believe that Trump keeps seeing Russian President Vladimir Putin “as his main negotiating partner and Zelensky as the primary obstacle to a workable peace deal.”

• Zelensky’s End Goal Is In Sight, And So Is His End (Amar)

When the US picks clients, vassals, and proxies, it needs men or women ready to trade in the interests, even the welfare and lives of their compatriots. Vladimir Zelensky is such a man. A look at the elites of EU-NATO Europe shows he is not alone. But he is an especially extreme case. It is much less than a decade ago that the former media entrepreneur and comedian – often crude instead of witty – advanced from being a pet protégé of one of Ukraine’s most corrupt oligarchs to capturing the country’s presidency. As it turned out, never to let go of it: Zelensky has used the war, which was provoked by the West and escalated in February 2022, not only to make himself an indispensable if very expensive and often obstreperous American puppet but also as a pretext to evade elections.

And yet, now signs are multiplying that his days of being indispensable may be over. For one thing, Seymour Hersh, living legend of American investigative journalism, is reporting that Zelensky is very unpopular where it matters most, in US President Donald Trump’s White House. This is not surprising: Trump’s recent turn against Russia – whatever its real substance or marital reasons – does not mean a turn in favor of Ukraine and even less so in favor of Zelensky, as attentive observers have noted. According to the Financial Times, “Western allies of Ukraine” still believe that Trump keeps seeing Russian President Vladimir Putin “as his main negotiating partner and Zelensky as the primary obstacle to a workable peace deal.”

Time to go

And according to “knowledgeable officials in Washington” who have talked to Hersh, the US leadership is ready to act on that problem by getting rid of Zelensky. And urgently: Some American officials consider removing the Ukrainian president “feet first” in case he refuses to go. Their reason, according to Hersh’s confidants: to make room for a deal with Russia. Hersh has to make do with publishing anonymous sources. It is even conceivable that the Trump administration is leaking this threat against Zelensky to pressure him. Yet even if so, that doesn’t mean the threat is empty. Judging by past US behavior, using and then discarding other countries’ leaders is always an option.

Another, also plausible, possibility is that Zelensky will be discarded to facilitate not ending, but continuing the war, so as to keep draining Russian resources. In this scenario, the US would prolong the war by handing it over to its loyally self-harming European vassals. After, that is, seeing to the installation of a new leader in Kiev, one it has under even better control than Zelensky. Just to make sure the Europeans and the Ukrainians do not start understanding each other too well and end up slipping from US control. The Ukrainian replacement candidate everyone whispers about, old Zelensky nemesis General Valery Zaluzhny – currently in de facto exile as ambassador to the UK – might well be available for both options, depending on his marching orders from Washington.

Meanwhile, as if on cue, Western mainstream media have started to notice the obvious: The Financial Times has found out that critics accuse Zelensky of an “authoritarian slide,” which is still putting it very mildly but closer to the truth than past daft hero worship. The Spectator – in fairness, a magazine with a tradition of being somewhat more realistic about Ukraine – has fired a broadside under the title “Ukraine has lost faith in Zelensky.” The Economist has detected an “outrage” in Zelensky’s moves and, more tellingly, used a picture of him making him look like a cross between a Bond villain and Saddam Hussein. Even Deutsche Welle, a German state propaganda outlet, is now reporting on massive human rights infringements under Zelensky, with the impaired systematically targeted for forced mobilization.

Read more …

Don’t do it out in the open, you fool!

• Von der Leyen Warns Zelensky Over Risk To Ukraine’s EU Bid (RT)

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has requested explanations from Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky over the crackdown on the country’s anti-corruption agencies, which has sparked nationwide protests and international backlash. The agencies were seen as key conditions for Kiev’s EU membership bid and continued Western aid. Under the legislation, passed by the Ukrainian parliament on Tuesday and signed by Zelensky hours later, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP) were placed under the direct control of the Prosecutor General, a political appointee. The controversial law followed security raids on NABU in light of claims by Zelensky that the agency was subject to Russian influence.

Von der Leyen was in contact with Zelensky, her spokesman Guillaume Mercier told reporters on Wednesday, saying she “conveyed her strong concerns about the consequences” of the new law and requested “explanations.” The legislation “risks weakening strongly the competences and powers of anti-corruption institutions of Ukraine,” Mercier said. The EC chief has urged “respect for the rule of law” and the “fight against corruption,” he stated, adding “There cannot be a compromise.” European Council President Antonio Costa reportedly also voiced concern to Zelensky and asked for explanations. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul wrote on X that the development “hampers Ukraine’s way towards the EU.”

The creation of NABU and SAP was one of the requirements set by the European Commission and International Monetary Fund more than a decade ago to fight high-level corruption in Ukraine. Since then, the two bodies have led far-reaching investigations, including into Zelensky’s circle. The organizations say they now have been stripped of the guarantees that allowed them to operate effectively. EU Economy Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis told the Financial Times that financial aid to Kiev is “conditional on transparency, judicial reforms [and] democratic governments.” Ukraine was ranked 105th out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index.

Read more …

“All the DSA protects is European leaders from their own people.”

• US State Dept Accuses EU of ‘Orwellian Censorship’ (RT)

The EU’s online content regulations are an affront to free speech, the US State Department has said in response to France’s praise for the Digital Services Act (DSA). The State Department echoed earlier criticism from US Vice President J.D. Vance, who accused EU member states of attempting to quash dissenting voices and stigmatize popular right-wing parties such as the Alternative for Germany (AfD). “In Europe, thousands are being convicted for the crime of criticizing their own governments. This Orwellian message won’t fool the United States. Censorship is not freedom,” the State Department wrote on X on Tuesday. “All the DSA protects is European leaders from their own people.”

Earlier this month, France’s mission to the UN promoted the DSA on X, stating, “In Europe, one is free to speak, not free to spread illegal content.” Passed in 2022, the DSA mandates that online platforms remove “illegal and harmful” content and combat “the spread of disinformation,” according to the European Commission. Critics in both the US and Europe have likened the regulations to the creation of a ‘ministry of truth’. Earlier this year, prosecutors in Paris launched an investigation into Elon Musk’s platform X, on suspicion that it was being used to meddle in French politics and spread hateful messages. The company dismissed the probe as “politically motivated.”

In 2024, the French authorities detained Russian-born tech entrepreneur Pavel Durov on charges that he had allowed his Telegram messaging app to be used for criminal activities. Durov, who was later released on bail, denied any wrongdoing and accused France of waging “a crusade” against free speech. He also claimed that French intelligence officials attempted to pressure him into censoring content during Romania’s 2024 presidential election. France’s foreign intelligence agency, the DGSE, confirmed that it had “reminded” Durov of his responsibility to police content, but denied allegations of election interference.

Read more …

“A recent report has exposed the European commission guilty of bribing journalist to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars for favourable coverage..”

The EU taxpayer pays to be deceived…

• The Case For Media Transparency Within The EU Just Got Sexy (Jay)

A recent report has exposed the European commission guilty of bribing journalist to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars for favourable coverage. How long can this go on? While we witness the continuation of the European Commission chief’s anti-democratic control over the project but also a host of values like freedom of speech, a Brussels Eurosceptic think tank has revealed that the project bribes journalists for favourable coverage. In a recent report, MCC claimed that the EU was secretly pumping at least 80m euros a year into both print and broadcast outlets often under the guise of fighting fake news. Yet the figure of 80m euros is wildly underestimated and in reality is likely to be three or four times this as the accountability and transparency of such payments are unsurprisingly buried in opaque accountancy practices with both the EU and media outlets themselves unwilling to be open to their readers/viewers.

Funding programmes are often presented using buzzwords like “fighting disinformation” or “promoting European integration” yet the reality is that it is a fund which is simply there to push propaganda for the project itself. The truth is that the European commission in particular is advancing with a strategy to bribe media giants more and more to promote the EU with its tainted narrative. Ironically, it is Ursula von der Leyen who often talks about “facts” being important. Her pretence that she believes in the truth and an independent press is in itself an illusion on a grand scale and perhaps the greatest example of what “fake news” itself is, on the EU circuit. Just recently, the irony of her being close to losing her job as commission president gave her the opportunity to give us all a good laugh.

“Facts matter, the truth matters”, she said recently in her speech to the EU Parliament, just before a vote of no confidence was held against her. She said – stop laughing – she was willing to engage in debate — provided it was based on “facts” and “arguments”. Yet there has never been an EU commission president who believes and benefits more in the dark art of bunging journalists and media more than Ursula. Indeed, the very media outlets who rushed to her defence when she was facing the jaws of defeat by a group of Eurosceptic MEPs recently are fake news outfits which have been receiving millions of euros of cash in brown envelopes for decades. “Von der Leyen successfully defends against no-confidence vote and attacks right-wing extremists”, thundered Der Spiegel, while Deutsche Welle (DW) reported a failure by the right: “Right-wing extremists fail with no-confidence motion against von der Leyen”.

“Right-wing extremists”? Really? Perhaps it’s worth noting that DW, to date, has received around 35m euros from the EU slush fund, according to the Hungarian think tank’s report which is compiled by Thomas Fazi, an Italian hack whose work is published on Unherd and who recently has published impressive investigations into the salami sliced power grab that the EU has been executing from member states. Ursula, of course, plays a pivotal role in that, as does corrupt media outlets like Deutsche Welle which is so spectacularly shite that its own German language service had to be shut down as no Germans would watch such gobbledygook garbage which champions the EU and Germany’s foreign policy ambitions.

This slush fund, aimed at boosting the EU’s status and relevance, has been around for quite a while but the report was revealing as it explains exactly how the European Commission goes about distributing the cash.mTraditionally, a big way the EU gets artificially positive coverage from Brussels events is via broadcasters. Outfits like DW, Euronews and most of the major state broadcasters across the EU benefit from a subsidy here, whereby the European Commission, European parliament and other institutions like the Council of Ministers provide filming, editing and studio facilities at their state of the art studios which, themselves, are a murky pit of corruption and embezzlement on a grand scale.

These “studios” provide everything for national broadcasters who have “correspondents” in Brussels. TV production, particularly on location is expensive. The EU pays for everything saving state broadcasters like DW millions in production costs which is of course paid back by coverage from the outlet not only with a positive EU spin but often simply replicating the EU narrative. It’s propaganda on a level which would make Goebbels proud as the genius of it is that the relationship which forms between the broadcasters and the EU grows each day until the point where both realise they need one another more than they have previously realised. The result is that so-called “news events” in Brussels which are so boring and would never normally see the light of day if the editors back in Berlin, Paris or Rome would have their say, get air time. And quite a bit of it.

What the report didn’t cover was the contracts themselves with the private companies which run the studios who employ scores of technical staff. Curiously perhaps, it is the same Belgian company which gets the contract every six years when the budget is completed despite EU rules making this impossible. All the Belgian firm does is simply change its name. Corruption of course has to be the heart of this. Someone in the EU commission is getting a huge commission for this of course.

Read more …

All AI data centers should generate their own electricity. But that will come only after a first batch of blackouts.

• Biggest US Power Grid Sets Power Costs At Record High To Feed AI (ZH)

Very soon if you want AI (and even if you don’t), you won’t be able to afford AC. Just this morning we warned readers that America’s largest power grid, PJM Interconnect, which serves 65 million people across 13 states and Washington, DC, and more importantly feeds Deep State Central’s Loudoun County, Virginia, also known as ‘Data Center Alley’ and which is recognized as one of the world’s largest hubs for data centers… had recently issued multiple ‘Maximum Generation’ and ‘Load Management’ alerts this summer, as the heat pushes power demand to the brink with air conditioners running at full blast across the eastern half of the U.S. But as anyone who has not lived under a rock knows, the deeper issue is that there’s simply not enough baseload juice to feed the relentless, ravenous growth of power-hungry AI server racks at new data centers.

“There is simply no new capacity to meet new loads,” said Joe Bowring to Bloomberg, president of Monitoring Analytics, which is the independent watchdog for PJM Interconnection. “The solution is to make sure that people who want to build data centers are serious enough about it to bring their own generation.” Well, there is another solution: crank up prices to the stratosphere. And that’s precisely what happened. As Bloomberg reports, business and households supplied by the largest US grid will pay $16.1 billion to ensure there is enough electricity supply to meet soaring power demand, especially that from a massive buildout in AI data centers. The payouts to generators for the year starting June 2026 topped last year’s record $14.7 billion, according to PJM Interconnection LLC, which operates the grid stretching from the Midwest to the mid-Atlantic.

That puts the capacity price per megawatt each day at a record $329.17 from $269.92. In response to the blowout payout, shares of Constellation Energy and Talen Energy surged in late trading in New York on Tuesday.As millions of Americans will very soon learn the hard way, AI data centers are driving the biggest surge in US electric demand in decades, leading to higher residential utility bills. That’s a key reason why PJM’s auction, once only tracked by power traders and plant owners but now increasingly a topic for general consumption as electricity bills are about to hit an all time high, has also become closely watched by politicians and consumer advocates.

As Bloomberg notes, this is the first auction that included both a price floor and cap, setting the range at $177.24 to $329.17, which of course was the clearing price level reached in this auction. Why even bother pretending there is an auction: just set the price at the max and be done with it. Last year’s 600% jump in capacity prices set off a political firestorm, resulting in PJM reaching a settlement with Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro to essentially cap gains for two years and make auction prices more predictable after wild swings in recent years. Despite the increase in costs across the grid, the price cap trimmed costs for consumers who saw the biggest hikes in the last auction. Exelon’s Baltimore area utility reached a $466 last time, while Dominion Energy’s Virginia territory came in at about $444.

Payouts to generators stayed at high levels due to surging demand from big data centers coming online swiftly, said Jon Gordon, policy director of non-profit clean energy advocacy Advanced Energy United. New facilities are consuming as much power as towns or small cities, coinciding with a wave of older power plants shutting down and lagging investment in new supplies and grid upgrades, he said.The per-megawatt price exceeding the 2024 auction, and well closing at an all time high, is bullish for independent power producers including NRG, Talen, Constellation and Vistra, Barclays analyst Nick Campenella had forecast. These generators have spent more than $34 billion so far this year on deals to mainly buy up power plants fueled by natural gas to feed the AI boom especially in PJM.

Read more …

“The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” reportedly loses $40 million a year..”

“..the average age of Colbert’s viewers is 68..”

Jon Stewart revived late night comedy. He had no successors.

• Whose Politics Canceled Stephen Colbert? (Daniel McCarthy)

Stephen Colbert is at the center of a conspiracy theory. It was born last week, when news broke of CBS canceling Colbert’s late-night talk show. The network’s move wasn’t hard to understand: “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” reportedly loses $40 million a year, and Colbert is already in the final year of his contract. Viewership for all the late-night gabfests is evaporating; there’s no recovery in sight. Colbert is No. 1 in his time slot, but his show costs $100 million a year to produce and doesn’t bring in nearly enough eyeballs to attract the ad revenue to cover that. So in what universe does CBS renew Colbert and keep losing tens of millions of dollars? The conspiracy theory instantly popular among Democrats and many in the media who ought to know better, however, says Colbert is really being taken off air to please President Donald Trump.

If the Federal Communications Commission allows it, Paramount Global, owner of CBS, will soon merge with Skydance, a company owned by David Ellison, whose father is a major Trump supporter. The president doesn’t like being lampooned by Colbert; he’s happy to see his show end. Trump benefits, so Trump must be to blame—right? For those who suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome, there are no coincidences. The truth is as clear as if Trump had been caught with his arms around the president of CBS Studios at a Coldplay concert. You see, if not for Trump’s FCC leverage over the network, CBS would have been content to keep losing millions on Colbert for years to come. That’s the crackpot view, and it’s politically convenient for Democrats, who’ve done their utmost to promote it.

Sen. Adam Schiff was a guest on the show the night Colbert announced its cancellation, and along with fellow Democrat Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, he took to X that evening to plant the seeds of conspiracy. “If Paramount and CBS ended the Late Show for political reasons, the public deserves to know. And deserves better,” Schiff wrote, feeling no need to offer evidence for the insinuation. “CBS canceled Colbert’s show just THREE DAYS after Colbert called out CBS parent company Paramount for its $16M settlement with Trump—a deal that looks like bribery,” Warren posted, referring to CBS’ settlement of a lawsuit over “60 Minutes.” “Do I think this is a coincidence? NO,” Sanders chimed in. The party instantly had its line, with shouty caps to drive it home.

It worked—Bluesky and Facebook lit up with liberals saying free speech was under attack by Trump, while CNN’s Brian Stelter, even as he reported the dismal financial reality of the “unfortunately unprofitable” show, packed his story with the conspiracy narrative. Stelter devoted more than a third of his report titled “Inside CBS’ ‘agonizing decision’ to cancel Colbert’s top-rated late-night show” to speculation about how the pending sale to Skydance might have influenced CBS, with heavy emphasis on the Trump angle, which he brought elsewhere in his story, too. Stelter even added his own spin, attempting to patch up one of the conspiracy tale’s obvious holes by suggesting CBS could have kept Colbert on air by cutting costs since Colbert had produced a much cheaper show, “After Midnight With Taylor Tomlinson,” that CBS was willing to renew.

But that’s absurd—“After Midnight” is already canceled; CBS canned it when Tomlinson announced her departure to return to stand-up comedy, and while she might well love the live stage, it’s obvious that running a late-night show on the cheap means paying hosts less: too little to keep Tomlinson. How little would Colbert, currently raking in a reported $15-$20 million a year, settle for? Colbert loses viewers and advertisers even with a $100 million budget—how poorly would a Colbert show more than 40% cheaper do? Hollywood Reporter notes the average age of Colbert’s viewers is 68. According to CNBC, the average age of David Letterman’s viewers when he handed his time slot to Colbert in 2015 was 60.

All the data points in the same direction:“The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” was a long time dying. That’s true of late-night talk as a whole, too. “I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next,” Trump predicted on Truth Social. The president doesn’t have to pressure ABC to make that happen; the market will do that on its own, as it did with Colbert. Colbert had a hit when he played a parody conservative on Comedy Central. Once he stopped playing and presented his true face and politics to the country, he crashed. Donald Trump didn’t get Stephen Colbert canceled; everything Democrats like about him did. And the late-night host’s fate will also be theirs if they don’t heed this market lesson.

Read more …

The President sinks below 20%.

Odd math: “Macron’s approval rating has fallen to 19%, with Bayrou at just 18%, making a combined approval of 37% ..”

• Macron’s Popularity Hits Record Low (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron’s approval rating has dropped below 20% for the first time since taking office, as criticism mounts over rising defense spending and cuts to social programs. Prime Minister Francois Bayrou also performed poorly in the same poll, with the two forming the most unpopular executive pair of the Fifth Republic. Macron’s approval rating has fallen to 19%, with Bayrou at just 18%, making a combined approval of 37% – the lowest in modern France, according to a new IFOP survey published on Monday. Even during the Yellow Vest protests – a major anti-government movement that began in 2018 over fuel taxes and economic inequality – the French leader’s lowest rating was 23%.

Macron’s support has dropped sharply among his 2022 voters, with only 49% still backing him – down 12 points. His approval has also declined among business leaders and executives, falling by 18 and 8 points, respectively. Bayrou, who was appointed after Michel Barnier’s government collapsed in late 2024 following months of coalition infighting and public backlash over mishandled pension reforms, is now advancing a controversial austerity plan. Last week, he introduced new tax measures on high-income earners to help close a €43.8 billion ($48 billion) budget gap. The austerity package includes a freeze on pensions and social benefits, healthcare spending caps, and the scrapping of two national holidays to increase productivity and reduce government spending.

Left-wing leader Jean-Luc Melenchon has called for Bayrou’s resignation, calling the measures “intolerable injustices.” Despite cuts in social services, defense spending continues to rise. Macron has pledged €6.5 billion more for the military over two years, citing heightened threats to European security. This comes as France’s public debt reaches €3.3 trillion – around 114% of GDP. A new French defense review has warned of a potential “major war” in Europe by 2030, identifying Russia as a leading threat. The Kremlin has denied having any intention to attack the West, and has accused NATO countries of exploiting perceptions of Russia to justify their military build-up.

Read more …

Candace has sunk her teeth in this for quite a while. She doesn’t fool around.

“[I]..stake my entire professional reputation on the fact that Brigitte Macron is in fact a man.”

• Macron Sues Candace Owens For Defamation For Claiming His Wife Is A Man (ZH)

French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron launched legal proceedings against conservative podcaster Candace Owens in a Delaware court, seeking damages for what they characterize as a sustained defamation campaign targeting the French president’s wife. The 218-page complaint, filed Wednesday in Delaware’s Superior Court where Owens’ company is incorporated, encompasses 22 counts including defamation, false light invasion of privacy, and defamation by implication. The lawsuit centers on Owens’ repeated claims across multiple platforms that Brigitte Macron was born male, claims the Macrons’ legal team describes as “outlandish, defamatory, and far-fetched fictions.” The conservative commentator has disseminated these allegations through social media posts and an eight-part YouTube series titled “Becoming Brigitte,” which the plaintiffs allege has generated significant online harassment.

Tom Clare, the Macrons’ high-profile attorney, said the case is a straightforward defamation in a statement accompanying the filing. “Relying on discredited falsehoods originally presented by a self-proclaimed spiritual medium and so-called investigative journalist, Ms. Owens both promoted and expanded on those falsehoods and invented new ones,” Clare said. The legal filing indicates the Macrons’ representatives made multiple requests for retractions before pursuing litigation. In a joint statement, the presidential couple said they concluded that “referring the matter to a court of law was the only remaining avenue for remedy” after Owens allegedly “systematically reaffirmed these falsehoods.” Owens has maintained her position despite calls for retractions, declaring in a 2024 social media post that she would “stake my entire professional reputation on the fact that Brigitte Macron is in fact a man.”

The French first couple has consistently disputed these claims, citing official birth records. The lawsuit alleges the false statements have resulted in “relentless bullying on a worldwide scale” and caused “tremendous damage” to their reputations. BCC Communications, the public relations firm representing Owens, told Mediaite that the podcaster would address the lawsuit during her program Wednesday. The U.S. lawsuit follows mixed results for the Macrons in French courts addressing similar allegations. On July 11, a Paris appeals court overturned lower court convictions against two French women who had made comparable claims about the first lady’s gender identity.

The appellate ruling reversed a September 2023 decision that had ordered defendants Amandine Roy, a self-proclaimed spiritual medium, and Natacha Rey, a self-described independent journalist, to pay €8,000 in damages to Brigitte Macron and €5,000 to her brother. The women had produced a four-hour YouTube video in December 2021 promoting theories that Brigitte Macron was previously known as Jean-Michel Trogneux. The appeals court determined the defendants had acted in “good faith” despite making false claims, including allegations of “grooming a minor.” The decision eliminated their financial liability.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

elon 2024

Starship

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 23 2025

Jul 232025
 
 July 23, 2025  Posted by at 9:09 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  63 Responses »


VIncent van Gogh Weeping woman 1883

 

• Clinton Camp Worked With Obama White House On Trump-Russia Smear (Margolis)
• The Media Ignores Declassified Documents on the Russian Conspiracy (Turley)
• Trump Just Shattered Every Modern Presidential Record (Margolis)
• Lutnick: Trump Will Renegotiate Trade Pact With Canada, Mexico Next Year (ET)
• Tulsi Gabbard Releases Long-Classified MLK Jr. Assassination Files (ZH)
• Trump’s Team Sees Netanyahu As ‘Madman’ – Axios (RT)
• Trump Wants to Distance Himself From Ukraine Conflict – Bolton (Sp.)
• Orbán: 20% of EU’s New 7-Year Budget Would Go To Ukraine (RMX)
• Zelensky Defends Clampdown On Anti-Corruption Agencies (RT)
• Zelensky Complains Western Backers Too Slow To Send Money (RT)
• Hungary Unveils Joint Pipeline Project With Russia (RT)
• A Safe Path To A Civil War’ – Majority of Germans Against An AfD Ban (RMX)
• Hunter Biden Goes On Expletive-Laced Rant About… Everything (ZH)
• Florida Surgeon General Highlights Vaccine Injuries, Calls on NIH to Act (BI)
• A New Nuclear Age Is Coming, But This Time It’s Different (Bordachev)

 

 

Russia

VDH

Hunter

Hoax

Mike Davis

Juile Kelly

 

 

 

 

“It’s rare to see such slam-dunk evidence of a conspiracy.”

• Clinton Camp Worked With Obama White House On Trump-Russia Smear (Margolis)

In recent days, new evidence has emerged showing that the Obama administration intentionally manipulated and politicized intelligence to advance the Russian collusion hoax — despite conflicting assessments from within the intelligence community itself. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has accused former President Barack Obama of orchestrating a “manufactured, politicized piece of intelligence” to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency before it began. A cache of over 100 declassified documents that her office released includes a December 2016 President’s Daily Brief reportedly confirming that Russia had neither the intent nor capability to alter the outcome of the 2016 election. According to Gabbard, Obama’s political appointees deliberately suppressed that document.

The next day, Obama convened a National Security Council meeting and instructed top intelligence officials, including James Clapper, John Brennan, James Comey, and Susan Rice, to produce an assessment that would support a predetermined conclusion: that Russia interfered in the election to help Trump. Gabbard called the effort a “years-long coup.” She noted that professionals objected to the inclusion of the discredited Steele dossier in the final assessment, but those warnings were ignored. The dossier, which Hillary Clinton’s campaign funded, became a central part of the intelligence assessment, and the Obama White House used it to justify FISA warrants targeting Trump aide Carter Page, effectively giving Obama’s team access to Trump’s campaign and transition. Gabbard said these actions merit criminal investigation and warned that restoring trust in American institutions depends on real consequences for those who abused their power.

There’s now mounting evidence — texts, emails, and corroborating testimony — that senior Obama officials and Clinton campaign aides knew the Russian “interference” narrative was bogus yet pushed it anyway as a calculated smear campaign to protect their political power. According to reporting by Paul Sperry at Real Clear Investigations, damning communications reveal direct coordination between Clinton operatives and top figures across the Obama administration, including the White House, National Security Council, State Department, and intelligence agencies. The fix wasn’t just suspected; it was orchestrated from the very beginning.

The emerging narrative makes Watergate look like amateur hour. At the helm of Crossfire Hurricane were the now-infamous Brennan (CIA), Comey (FBI), and fellow travelers whose fingerprints are smeared all over the operation. These men are not just facing historical scrutiny; they are now under criminal investigation for a conspiracy that could tear open the deepest fissures in our government. Sperry also cited a former Washington Post investigative reporter who was stunned by the evidence Gabbard declassified and released. “The [Russiagate] documents that came out in the past week are jaw-dropping,” the former WaPo reporter said. “It’s rare to see such slam-dunk evidence of a conspiracy.”

Gabbard revealed that whistleblowers within the intelligence community are now “coming out of the woodwork,” disgusted at what they witnessed, and she expects more explosive details soon. She’s vowed to refer all evidence to the DOJ and said there must be indictments, warning that no one — no matter how powerful — should be above the law. “This wasn’t just political dirty tricks,” she said. “It was a coup.” The tables have turned. The press and political class who once screamed “collusion” now find themselves in the stark glare of actual evidence as the real conspiracy’s enablers. Trump, long the target of scorn, stands wholly vindicated. With the ground shifting beneath their feet, Brennan, Comey, and their co-conspirators are finally facing the reckoning Americans were promised, and justice, however late, looks to be closing in fast.

Read more …

Not everyone would agree:

“I disagree with the use of the charge of treason being thrown around with this release. Based on this evidence, it would be hard to make a criminal case against Obama..”

• The Media Ignores Declassified Documents on the Russian Conspiracy (Turley)

Consider this story: An outgoing president and his top officials are told that there is no evidence of Russian collusion or influence in the national election. The White House then moved to suppress the intelligence assessment and reverse the conclusions, while false claims were leaked to the press. That is not just a major but a Pulitzer-level story, right? Apparently not. The legacy media has largely ignored the declassified evidence and possible criminal referral on the Obama administration seeding the Russian collusion narrative just before the first Trump Administration. It supports allegations in the real Russian conspiracy: the conspiracy to create a false Russian collusion scandal to undermine the election and administration of Donald Trump in 2016.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard suggested last week that intelligence was “manufactured and politicized” despite countervailing conclusions from American intelligence that there was no collusion or influence on the election. Critics have noted that CBS only covered the story to refute it. The release of this information is historically significant, as it finally allows the public to see how this effort began with the Clinton campaign and was then actively cultivated by Obama officials. We previously learned that the Clinton campaign spend millions to create the infamous Steele dossier and then hid their role from the public.Attorney Marc Elias, the general counsel to the Clinton presidential campaign, pushed the false Alfa Bank conspiracy. (His fellow Perkins Coie partner, Michael Sussmann, was indicted but acquitted in a criminal trial.)

During the campaign, reporters asked about the possible connection to the campaign, but Clinton campaign officials denied any involvement in the Steele Dossier. When journalists discovered after the election that the Clinton campaign hid payments for the Steele dossier as “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to Perkins Coie, they met with nothing but shrugs from the Clinton staff. New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said at the time that Elias denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”

Elias was back when John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, was questioned by Congress on the Steele dossier and denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the misleading information given to Congress. Not only did Clinton reportedly spent over $10 million on the report, but Obama was briefed that she was going to create a Russian collusion narrative as part of her campaign. Aware of that Clinton effort, these new documents suggest that Obama and his aides actively sought to affirm the allegations just before Trump’s inauguration. The FBI then ramped up its own efforts despite also being told that the Steele dossier was unreliable and contradicted.

I disagree with the use of the charge of treason being thrown around with this release. Based on this evidence, it would be hard to make a criminal case against Obama, let alone the specific charge of treason. However, there are good-faith allegations raised about prior congressional testimony of key players in the Obama Administration. There may be viable criminal allegations ranging from perjury to obstruction to making false statements to federal investigators.

It is too early to gauge the basis for possible criminal charges. However, the release of this new evidence is both historically and legally significant. There is now a legitimate concern over a conspiracy to create this false narrative to undermine the incoming Administration. It proved successful in derailing the first Trump Administration. By the time the allegations were debunked, much of the first term had been exhausted. That is worthy of investigation and the public has a right to expect transparency on these long withheld documents. The silence of the legacy media is hardly surprising, given the key role the media played in spreading these false claims. Most media outlets find themselves in an uncomfortable position, having fostered an alleged conspiracy for years. Most reporters are not keen on making a case against themselves in spreading of these false claims.

Read more …

“Newsweek’s analysis was conducted with the help of AI.”

• Trump Just Shattered Every Modern Presidential Record (Margolis)

The corporate media has spent years twisting itself in knots to diminish Donald Trump’s record and legacy. But reality, as it often does, has punched through the leftist narrative. On Sunday, I wrote about Trump’s historically successful first six months back in office, and while it’s true, it may not mean much coming from me. However, it means something when the legacy media admits the same thing. In a direct rebuke to the talking heads who spent Trump’s campaign and early presidency warning of chaos and ineptitude, Newsweek has conceded a historical truth: Trump’s first six months back in the Oval Office have been nothing short of extraordinary, outpacing every president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

“The first six months of Donald Trump’s second presidency have been the most ‘successful’ of any American president since Franklin D. Roosevelt,” the outlet reported. Newsweek’s analysis was conducted with the help of AI. There’s no shortage of spite from establishment outlets when it comes to Trump, but the raw facts have forced even Newsweek to acknowledge that President Trump has racked up more concrete accomplishments than any of his postwar predecessors at the six-month mark. Hard data doesn’t lie, even when pundits wish it would. Newsweek asked ChatGPT to rank the accomplishments of 20th and 21st century U.S. presidents in their first six months, taking account of the level of support they enjoyed in Congress.

The model gave Trump an overall score of “very high,” thanks to legislation such as the One Big Beautiful Bill and Laken Riley Acts.The analysis found that the first six months of Donald Trump’s second term were the most productive since Franklin D. Roosevelt’s in 1933, when FDR pushed through 15 major New Deal laws in his first 100 days. Joe Biden ranked third, with his early legislative wins including the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act, and the law making Juneteenth a federal holiday, which passed thanks to Kamala Harris’s tiebreaking vote in a 50-50 Senate. At the bottom of the list were Theodore Roosevelt, who passed no major laws in his first half-year, and Bill Clinton, whose only early achievement was the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act.

The Newsweek headline isn’t an act of charity or an opinion column gone rogue. It’s a reluctant admission from a publication that, while never in Trump’s corner, can’t escape the evidence: Trump’s policy victories keep stacking up. That didn’t stop it from trying to pooh-pooh its own findings: “While Donald Trump has achieved some legislative successes, they are more reflective of the partisan support in Congress. Not every president in the modern era has had such a one-dimensional party to support his legislative agenda. The Democratic Party has long been a coalition of diverse voices, making it difficult to appease every member of Congress. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama found this out during their first term in office.”

That is, of course, a bogus excuse because, according to an analysis from Roll Call, both parties have enjoyed symmetrical patterns of party unity depending on which party was in power, though currently, Senate Democrats are the most unified in history. But I digress. Six months rarely define a presidency, but Trump’s pace — and the substance of his reforms — stand as a rebuke to the cynics and the self-satisfied legacy press. Unlike past presidents who concerned themselves mostly with legacy-building gestures and ponderous commissions, Trump is delivering results that matter to real Americans: jobs, safety, security, and renewed pride in the nation itself.

Read more …

“Nothing stops countries from talking to us after August 1, but they’re going to start paying the tariffs on August 1..”

• Lutnick: Trump Will Renegotiate Trade Pact With Canada, Mexico Next Year (ET)

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on July 20 that President Donald Trump will renegotiate the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) when the trade pact is due for review next year. The USMCA, enacted during Trump’s first term in July 2020, replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement. The agreement requires that 75 percent of automobile components be made in the United States, Mexico, or Canada for a vehicle to qualify for tariff-free treatment. The trade agreement also mandates that up to 45 percent of parts and components be made by workers earning at least $16 per hour, according to the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office. It also includes a provision requiring the three nations to review the deal every six years from its enactment.

In an interview with CBS News that aired on July 20, Lutnick said that it would make “perfect sense” for Trump to renegotiate the deal as part of an effort to protect U.S. workers. “He wants to protect American jobs. He doesn’t want cars built in Canada or Mexico when they could be built in Michigan and Ohio. It’s just better for American workers,” he told CBS’s “Face The Nation.” Lutnick said about 75 percent of imports from both countries are covered under the USMCA, which exempts those imports from tariffs. “I think the president is absolutely going to renegotiate USMCA, but that’s a year from today,” the commerce secretary said. Trump has announced 35 percent tariffs on Canadian imports and 30 percent on Mexican goods, which are set to take effect on Aug. 1.

Lutnick called the date “a hard deadline” for implementing those tariffs and the rates imposed on other trading partners, including the European Union. Lutnick noted that the United States will continue to engage in trade negotiations with other nations even after the new tariff rates take effect. che said. Trump told Fox News in October 2024 that he plans to invoke the six-year review provision of the USMCA upon taking office for a second term, pledging to make it “a much better deal.”

Since returning to the White House for a second term, Trump has imposed a universal 10 percent baseline tariff on U.S. trading partners, alongside reciprocal tariffs announced in April that vary depending on each country’s trade barriers with the United States. Initially, he applied a 90-day pause on most of these reciprocal tariffs and later extended that reprieve to Aug. 1 through an executive order. Over the past week, Trump has sent letters to more than 20 U.S. trading partners, notifying them of the tariff rates they will face on exports to the United States if they fail to reach trade deals with his administration.

Read more …

“There’s a lot to dig through in the 243,496 pages..”

• Tulsi Gabbard Releases Long-Classified MLK Jr. Assassination Files (ZH)

Just days after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard dropped a bombshell report recommending criminal prosecution for several Obama-era officials over their role in a “treasonous conspiracy” tied to the 2016 election, she has now released the long-classified Martin Luther King Jr. files—a staggering 243,496 pages across 6,301 PDFs and one MP3 audio file. The MLK Jr. files have been under a court-imposed seal since 1977, when the FBI first gathered the records and turned them over to the National Archives and Records Administration. DNI Gabbard made the files available at archives.gov/mlk. DNI Gabbard’s office stated in the press release:

“This unprecedented release follows through on President Trump’s commitment to fully release previously-classified records related to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy (JFK), Senator Robert F. Kennedy (RFK), and MLK, and was carried out in coordination with the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the National Archives.” “The documents include details about the FBI’s investigation into the assassination of MLK, discussion of potential leads, internal FBI memos detailing the progress of the case, information about James Earl Ray’s former cellmate who stated he discussed with Ray an alleged assassination plot, and more,” DNI Gabbard stated on X.

Here are the key highlights:
• Internal FBI memos on leads and investigation progress.
• Evidence of alleged assassination plots discussed with James Earl Ray in prison.
• Canadian and CIA foreign intelligence records tied to Ray’s international flight.

“I am grateful to President Trump and DNI Gabbard for delivering on their pledge of transparency in the release of these documents on the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.,” stated Dr. Alveda King, niece of MLK Jr. King noted, “My uncle lived boldly in pursuit of truth and justice, and his enduring legacy of faith continues to inspire Americans to this day. While we continue to mourn his death, the declassification and release of these documents are a historic step towards the truth that the American people deserve.”

DNI Gabbard stated, “The American people have waited nearly sixty years to see the full scope of the federal government’s investigation into Dr. King’s assassination,” adding, “Under President Trump’s leadership, we are ensuring that no stone is left unturned in our mission to deliver complete transparency on this pivotal and tragic event in our nation’s history. I extend my deepest appreciation to the King family for their support.” Earlier this year, President Trump signed an executive order to declassify records related to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. So far, it appears he’s kept his word. There’s a lot to dig through in the 243,496 pages—and X sleuths are already searching through it.

Read more …

“This could undermine what Trump is trying to do.” “The president doesn’t like turning on the television and seeing bombs dropped in a country where he’s seeking peace..|”

• Trump’s Team Sees Netanyahu As ‘Madman’ – Axios (RT)

The administration of US President Donald Trump increasingly views Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “madman” undermining Washington’s diplomatic efforts in the Middle East, Axios has reported. Israel conducted airstrikes last week on Syrian government forces and military headquarters in Damascus in response to bloody clashes between the Druze and Bedouin communities in southern Syria. A ceasefire announced on Saturday appears to be holding. “After several bloody days in Suwayda Province, the Internal Security Forces have succeeded in calming the situation following their deployment in the northern and western areas,” Syrian Interior Minister Anas Khattab wrote on X.

Despite the truce, US officials have become “significantly more alarmed” by Netanyahu’s behavior and policies, Axios reported on Sunday, citing people familiar with the matter. “Bibi acted like a madman. He bombs everything all the time,” the outlet quoted a White House official as saying. “This could undermine what Trump is trying to do.” “The president doesn’t like turning on the television and seeing bombs dropped in a country where he’s seeking peace and has made a monumental announcement to help rebuild,” the official added.

On Monday, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt confirmed that Trump “was caught off guard” by both the strikes in Syria and a recent Israeli attack on Gaza’s only Catholic church. “In both cases, the president quickly called the prime minister to rectify these situations,” Leavitt said. Netanyahu’s office said on Thursday that it “deeply regrets” the strike on the Holy Family Church, which killed three people, and pledged to investigate the incident. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said the strikes in Syria were intended to protect the Druze population from atrocities.

Read more …

“..his decision highlights larger concerns about America’s lackluster defense spending and its economic readiness to boost military production,”

• Trump Wants to Distance Himself From Ukraine Conflict – Bolton (Sp.)

US President Donald Trump wants to distance himself from the conflict in Ukraine both diplomatically and militarily, Trump’s former National Security Adviser John Bolton believes. “Unfortunately, Mr. Trump seems more interested in extricating himself from Ukraine, diplomatically and militarily. And his decision highlights larger concerns about America’s lackluster defense spending and its economic readiness to boost military production,” Bolton wrote in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal. “Mr. Trump is building his own off-ramp from Ukraine. He satisfied immediate demands for aid by Ukraine’s beleaguered defenders but avoided long-term commitments,” Bolton added.

Trump, who has repeatedly criticized his predecessor Joe Biden for providing multibillion-dollar military aid to Ukraine, announced a new scheme last week to supply weapons to Kiev through NATO allies. According to Trump, the United States will sell European countries a large batch of weapons worth billions of dollars — including missiles, air defense systems and ammunition — after which the allies will transfer them to Ukraine and replenish their stockpiles through new purchases from American manufacturers. Trump emphasized that the scheme was fully agreed upon and would be implemented in the near future with funds from NATO countries.

Read more …

And “10-12 percent of previously taken out loans go to loan repayments..”

• Orbán: 20% of EU’s New 7-Year Budget Would Go To Ukraine (RMX)

The European Commission’s seven-year budget is already facing backlash, with Ursula von der Leyen’s request for €2 trillion from member states being slapped down by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and other leaders. One of the main voices against the budget is Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who says it is designed to bring Ukraine into the EU as a member and hand Kyiv billions of euros. “If we look only at financial aspects, we should see that in addition to the 20-25 percent of budget resources allocated to Ukraine, 10-12 percent of previously taken out loans go to loan repayments,” said Orbán in an interview with Kossuth Radio’s “Good Morning, Hungary” program. Adding up money to Ukraine and debt repayments, 30 percent of the budget goes to areas that were not included in the previous seven-year budget, said the Hungarian prime minister.

“That’s why everyone in the European Union is shouting,” he added. “The budget is a great science to understand, you have to be able to read not only what is written in it, but also what is hidden behind the lines,” Orbán said. The Hungarian prime minister said the problem with the budget is that it does not have a clear strategic basis. “If we do not know what it is for, then it cannot be good, because we must first answer what goals we want to achieve with it,” he said. As far as Orbán is concerned, the main goal of the budget is to admit Ukraine into the EU. “The EU budget has only one obvious purpose: to bring Ukraine into the EU, and these funds are transferred to Ukraine,” he said. According to the prime minister, the right move would be not to accept the Ukrainians but to instead develop a kind of cooperative relationship with them.

He also said that not only is there uncertainty about Ukraine, but money is also being lost for agriculture. The prime minister asked the question: “What will happen to farmers if the EU does not support them in the future?” According to Orbán, this budget will not survive, with EU countries lining up to reject it. This may be much more than bravado, as it is widely reported at the moment that a number of key EU leaders are coming out against the budget, most notably German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “A comprehensive increase in the EU budget is unacceptable at a time when all member states are making considerable efforts to consolidate their national budgets,” said Stefan Kornelius, spokesperson for Merz’s government. “We will therefore not be able to accept the Commission’s proposal.”

A path forward will not be easy, as Orbán notes that any EU budget agreement requires unanimous approval from all member states. Given that the Commission is trying to tie rule-of-law sanctions to a variety of expanded areas, which countries like Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia are certain to reject, negotiations are expected to be intense. During the last seven-year budget, many conservatives and those on the right criticized the previous Orbán government and their then Polish conservative allies for agreeing to the rule-of-law sanctions in exchange for signing off on the budget. The move turned out to be a bad one for Hungary, Poland, and other sovereignist-minded political parties. The EU froze tens of billions for both nations, and for Poland, only unfroze the money once the left-liberal Tusk government came to power. For Hungary, approximately €10 billion still remains frozen.

Read more …

The “Anti-Corruption” came too close to the Corruption. Which includes him.

He blames…Russia?!

• Zelensky Defends Clampdown On Anti-Corruption Agencies (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has defended a controversial reform targeting the country’s anti-corruption agencies, which has sparked street protests and raised concerns among EU officials. On Tuesday, Zelensky signed a bill into law granting the Prosecutor General’s office the authority to intervene in the activities of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO). The move followed a raid by security officials on NABU offices and the arrest of a senior employee accused of spying for Russia. Zelensky rejected accusations of creeping authoritarianism, which have been voiced by opposition politicians, including frequent critic and Kiev Mayor Vitaly Klitschko. “The anti-corruption infrastructure will work – just without Russian influence. It needs to be cleared of that. And there should be more justice,” Zelensky said in his daily video address early Wednesday.

He added that it was “not normal” for some officials to live abroad “without legal consequences,” and criticized the failure to investigate corruption cases “worth billions” over the years. “There is no explanation for how the Russians are still able to obtain the information they need,” he said. Vasily Malyuk, head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), whose agents conducted the searches involving NABU personnel, denied that the measures amounted to dismantling the anti-corruption system. He insisted that the agencies “continue to function effectively.” The NABU and SAPO were established following the US-backed 2014 coup in Kiev and promoted as key components of reforms intended to align Ukraine with Western governance standards and international financial institutions.

However, some Western officials, including US Vice President J.D. Vance, have argued that the decade of transformation has failed to eliminate entrenched corruption. Darya Kalenyuk, executive director of the Kiev-based NGO Anti-Corruption Action Center, linked the government’s clampdown to recent investigations involving members of Zelensky’s team, including former Deputy Prime Minister Aleksey Chernyshov and media executive Timur Mindich. “NABU has been closing in on members of Zelensky’s inner circle and friends,” Kalenyuk said, as cited by the US state-funded outlet Current Time. She adding that the reform may be aimed at concealing the embezzlement of military funds.

Read more …

Hey! Pay up! I don’t work for nothing!

• Zelensky Complains Western Backers Too Slow To Send Money (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has complained that his country has yet to see any benefits from NATO’s plan to ramp up military spending. At a recent summit in The Hague, most members of the US-led bloc committed to raising security-related expenditure to 5% of GDP. Kiev seeks to benefit from the surge, even as reluctance to commit to long-term funding of Ukraine is dwindling in the West. “The EU has opened access to €150 billion. Member states can assume obligations to draw these funds and then transfer them to Ukraine,” Zelensky told Ukrainian ambassadors on Monday, according to remarks released by his office. “Ten countries have already expressed readiness to take this money, but we have not yet seen the result – that they have actually taken it and transferred it to us.”

Zelensky appeared to be referring to the EU’s Security Action for Europe (SAFE), a €150 billion ($175 billion) borrowing instrument introduced in May to support the European Commission’s efforts for rapid militarization across the bloc. SAFE offers member states and select partner countries access to low-interest loans for national defense efforts or joint weapons procurement. The program is part of a broader EU strategy to borrow €800 billion for military readiness investment. It is not designed to provide direct financial aid. EU officials say the bloc is preparing for the possibility of Russian aggression – a claim Moscow has rejected as fearmongering based on false assumptions.

This month, the US offered to sell weapons to Ukraine, with other NATO nations covering the costs. While the proposal was hailed by Brussels, some major EU economies, including France and Italy, have reportedly opted out citing financial limitations or political reasons. Brussels’ handling of the Ukraine conflict has exposed growing divisions within the EU. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a longtime critic of the pro-Kiev approach, denounced the European Commission’s draft seven-year budget, saying it appears primarily tailored to Ukraine’s needs. “This budget would destroy the European Union,” Orban said last week, predicting that the Commission will likely have to withdraw or significantly revise the proposal within a year.

Read more …

“We are building new sources, not shutting them down.”

• Hungary Unveils Joint Pipeline Project With Russia (RT)

Hungary has announced progress on a new pipeline with Serbia to transport Russian oil. Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said the project is “moving forward” and vowed to defy Brussels’ efforts to cut Budapest off from Russian energy. The 300km-long pipeline, which will have an expected annual capacity of 4-5 million tons, will enable Serbia to receive Russian oil via the Druzhba pipeline and position Hungary as a transit hub. Szijjarto made the announcement on Monday after meeting with Russian Deputy Energy Minister Pavel Sorokin and Serbian Minister of Mining and Energy Dubravka Dedovic-Handanovic. Szijjarto said all sides support the project, which could be operational by 2027, and have reviewed investment and construction details.

“We’re moving forward with Serbian and Russian partners to build a new oil pipeline between Hungary and Serbia,” Szijjarto wrote on X. Speaking to reporters, he accused Brussels of seeking “to cut us off from Russian oil and gas, forcing Hungarian families to pay two to four times more.” “We won’t allow that. We are building new sources, not shutting them down.” Szijjarto did not disclose Moscow’s exact role in the project, but Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum last month that the country was ready to both aid in construction and supply oil to the planned pipeline.

Russian oil supplies to the EU have plunged due to Ukraine-related sanctions, including a 2023 embargo on seaborne crude and a price cap on Russian oil. Brussels now aims to eliminate Russian energy imports entirely by 2028 under its RePowerEU plan. Hungary, which is heavily dependent on Russian energy, opposes the plan and recently blocked new sanctions targeting Moscow’s energy but lifted its veto in July after securing national exemptions. The 18th sanctions package includes a dynamic price cap on Russian oil and curbs on imports of oil products made from Russian crude in third countries. Moscow has condemned the Western sanctions as illegal and self-defeating, especially those targeting energy, citing price spikes in the EU and warning the bloc will eventually have to turn to costlier alternatives or indirect Russian imports through intermediaries.

Read more …

“..many Germans view the banning of the AfD as anti-democratic. They hold the belief that parties advocating for a ban are looking to eliminate the political opposition.”

• A Safe Path To A Civil War’ – Majority of Germans Against An AfD Ban (RMX)

New polling shows that Germans are firmly against a ban of the Alternative for Germany (AfD), with one historian even warning in the wake of the results that a ban of the AfD would lead to a civil war. The poll, which was conducted by the prestigious Allensbach Institute for Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), is sure to come as a shock for the liberal wing of the German elite promoting a ban of the party. It shows that 52 percent of Germans are against a ban of the AfD, while only 27 percent are in favor. Among East Germans, two-thirds are opposed to a ban, while in the West, 49 percent are opposed to a ban. There are now even warnings that a ban could lead to a civil war, and not from an AfD politician. CDU member and historian Andreas Rödder told Euronews that an AfD ban represents a serious threat.

“A ban procedure that leads to the loss of all votes for the AfD and thus to red-red-green parliamentary majorities across the board would be the sure path to civil war,” he warned. The Allensbach poll results also come despite a concerted media and government spy campaign to demonize the party. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) has already labeled the AfD as having “right-wing extremist elements.” In some German states, the AfD is “confirmed right-wing extremist.” One of the main reasons why Germans are against an AfD ban is that many Germans know an AfD supporter in their social circle.

The poll shows that 67 percent of West Germans say they know an AfD supporter, and 88 percent of East Germans say they know an AfD supporter. These acquaintances are viewed differently from the party itself. While 54 percent of Germans believe the AfD is right-wing extremist, only 5 percent believe their AfD supporter friends and family are also right-wing extremist. Another reason is that many Germans view the banning of the AfD as anti-democratic. They hold the belief that parties advocating for a ban are looking to eliminate the political opposition.

In fact, these were the words of the chancellor of Germany, with Friedrich Merz stating that efforts to ban the AfD are essentially undemocratic. Speaking to Die Zeit in May, Merz said, “Working ‘aggressively and militantly’ against the free democratic basic order must be proven. And the burden of proof lies solely with the state. That is a classic task of the executive branch. And I have always internally resisted initiating ban proceedings from within the Bundestag. That smacks too much of political competition elimination to me.”The poll also shows that banning the party in Germany would not solve the country’s political problems, with 54 percent saying that the AfD party would just reform under a different name with the same ideology.

However, the poll results are not deterring the left. In fact, they may only serve to hasten the left’s anti-democratic efforts as the AfD grows in popularity. A number of recent polls show the AfD is supported by 25 percent of the population, including a YouGov poll from last week. Minister President of Rhineland-Palatinate Alexander Schweitzer (SPD) said he remains in favor of preparing a ban procedure against the AfD. He told Welt am Sonntag, “I’m for preparing ban proceedings against the AfD, and I am against quick fixes, so I hope that it is well prepared and not set in motion too quickly.”

He emphasized that “our state must be able to defend itself against those who want to abolish it,” and that AfD approval ratings are not an argument against a ban, but rather about “consolidating and protecting our democracy. You can’t say there are many, so we’d rather leave it alone.” So far, the CDU, the SPD’s coalition partner, is against the ban. In fact, the CDU may have good reason to be against such a dramatic move. For one thing, with the AfD eliminated, the left will then set its sights on the CDU, potentially even labeling the CDU the “new right.” Furthermore, the CDU may want to leave the door open to future cooperation with the AfD, or at least keep the threat open against left-wing parties like the SPD, which helps the CDU drive its own agenda.

Read more …

Hookers, minors, blow, booze. He’s forgotten why he’s walking around free.

• Hunter Biden Goes On Expletive-Laced Rant About… Everything (ZH)

Hunter Biden, the scandal-plagued son of former President Joe Biden, launched into an unhinged, expletive-filled meltdown during a recent interview, attacking his own party’s elite establishment while defending illegal immigration and making shocking admissions about his drug-fueled past. In what can only be described as an unglued performance on Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan, the younger Biden lashed out at top Democrats, calling George Clooney a “fucking brand” rather than an actor, dismissing James Carville as irrelevant, and exposing the Pod Save America hosts as grifting “junior fucking speech writers” who have been “making millions” off their Obama connections. Obama advisor David Axelrod wasn’t spared either, with Biden dismissing his entire career: “David Axelrod had one success in his political life and that was Barack Obama and that was because of Barack Obama.”

Biden even turned his venom on powerful Democrat consultant Anita Dunn, revealing the stunning amounts of money these political parasites have extracted from the party: “Anita Dunn has made $40-$50 million off the Democratic Party.” And in a final insult to the failing mainstream media, Biden called out CNN host Jake Tapper over his poor ratings. “What influence does Jake Tapper have over anything? He has the smallest audience on cable news,” he said. The disgraced Biden son also unleashed a barrage of F-bombs while ranting about illegal immigration and taking direct aim at hardworking Americans who support border security.

“All these Democrats say, ‘you have to talk about and realize that people are really upset about illegal immigration’,” Biden said. “Fuck you. How do you think your hotel room gets cleaned? How do you think you have food on your fucking table? Who do you think washes your dishes? Who do you think does your fucking garden? Who do you think is hear by the fucking sheer fucking, just, grit and will that they figured out a way to get here because they thought that they could give thereselfses and there family a better chance?” The disgraced Biden son didn’t stop there, launching an attack on President Donald Trump’s common-sense approach to immigration enforcement. “He’s somehow conviced all of us that these people are the fucking criminals?” the former president’s son fumed.

Perhaps most disturbing were Biden’s casual admissions about his drug-manufacturing activities. In a stunning revelation that raises serious questions about what the Biden family was really up to, Hunter described in chilling detail how he became his own drug dealer. “Places that you can go get it are some of the most dangerous places in whatever location you happen to be in. And it’s everywhere,” Biden said. “Mainly for that reason, I learned how to make my own.” This bombshell admission reveals the depths of depravity the Biden family has sunk to, with the president’s son openly bragging about manufacturing illegal narcotics while his father occupied the nation’s highest office. Despite claiming sobriety since June 2019, Biden flew into a rage when confronted about the cocaine scandal that rocked the Biden White House, desperately trying to distance himself from the drugs found in the West Wing.

“They’ve convinced themselves it had to be me,” he said. “I have been clean and sober since June of 2019 and I have not touched a drop of alcohol or a drug and I’m incredibly proud of that. And why would you bring cocaine to the White House? Why would I bring it to the White House and stick it into a cubby outside the situation room in the West Wing?” The Biden crime family’s legal troubles are well known. Hunter was convicted by a Delaware jury in June 2024 for illegally purchasing and possessing a firearm while strung out on drugs – charges directly related to his well-documented substance abuse problems. In a brazen display of the two-tiered justice system, Joe Biden immediately pardoned his corrupt son, proving once again that Democrats believe they’re above the law.

https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1947456739823022438

Read more …

“..resources devoted to “long Covid” should equally address post-vaccine syndromes, which many believe share overlapping symptoms and mechanisms.”

• Florida Surgeon General Highlights Vaccine Injuries, Calls on NIH to Act (BI)

I was invited to Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo’s press conference in Tampa on July 17, 2025. In contrast to how some mainstream outlets later portrayed it, the event centered on a call to recognize and research Covid-19 vaccine injuries, rather than a mere anti-vaccine screed. Dr. Ladapo – a physician and Florida’s top health official since 2021 – emphasized the urgent need to support those suffering adverse effects from mRNA Covid-19 shots. He praised recent federal moves to scale back mRNA vaccine recommendations for certain groups, but went further by asserting that these products “should not be used in any human beings,” given their safety profile. From my front-row perspective, Dr. Ladapo’s tone was measured yet resolute. He recounted how unusual it is, in his experience, to encounter so many post-vaccination issues.

“When was the last time that you had a vaccine that literally almost every single person knows someone who had a bad reaction from it?” Ladapo asked pointedly. Before the Covid era, he noted, he never personally knew a patient who was clearly vaccine-injured. “Now,” he continued, “there are very few people that I run into who either themselves have not had a bad reaction from these mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, or who don’t know someone who’s had a bad reaction.” This was a striking report that hung in the air – one supported anecdotally by nods from some attendees sharing their own stories. Dr. Ladapo stressed that adverse reactions have become distressingly commonplace, and he even bluntly called the Covid shots “terrible vaccines” as a result.

Rather than simply condemning the vaccines, Dr. Ladapo dedicated much of his speech to advocating for the victims of vaccine injury. He applauded Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s May announcement removing mRNA Covid-19 shots from recommended use in healthy kids and pregnant women – a policy Florida itself adopted earlier. But crucially, Dr. Ladapo said this must be followed by concrete support for those already harmed. He called on federal agencies, especially the National Institutes of Health (NIH), to expand their research into vaccine injuries and long-term post-vaccine complications. “Today, I want to call on the federal government, [on] NIH, to expand the work that they are doing in long Covid to genuinely and wholly include vaccine-injured people – specifically, people who have been injured by mRNA Covid-19 vaccines,” Dr. Ladapo urged.

In his view, resources devoted to “long Covid” should equally address post-vaccine syndromes, which many believe share overlapping symptoms and mechanisms. He outlined areas where federal leadership is needed: funding clinical care for vaccine injury patients and scientific studies to understand and mitigate these conditions. “We need to study this better,” he insisted, “We need to fund physicians who are caring for these patients clinically and who are doing scientific work in this area.” The Surgeon General’s message was clear: people suffering adverse effects – whether myocarditis, neurological issues, autoimmune reactions, or other chronic post-vaccine syndromes – deserve acknowledgment and a commitment of research dollars toward treatment and recovery.

Florida’s stance, as presented by Dr. Ladapo, is that public health authorities have a responsibility to those individuals, just as much as to those affected by Covid-19 itself. It’s worth noting that Dr. Ladapo’s own background as a physician informed his plea. He remarked that since receiving his M.D. in 2008 and treating countless patients, he had never encountered the volume of serious vaccine-related injuries that he sees now. Real-world observation aligns with reports from other doctors now specializing in Covid vaccine injury. This formed the basis of his argument that federal health agencies must take action: the scale of the issue appears unprecedented and thus demands urgent attention.

Read more …

Balamce the new balance.

• A New Nuclear Age Is Coming, But This Time It’s Different (Bordachev)

The question of nuclear proliferation is no longer hypothetical. It is happening. The only uncertainty now is how quickly it will proceed. In the not-too-distant future, we may see 15 nuclear powers instead of today’s nine. Yet there is little reason to believe this development will fundamentally upend international politics, or bring about global catastrophe. The invention of nuclear weapons was a technological breakthrough that reshaped global affairs. More than anything else, nuclear weapons define the military hierarchy of states, creating a threat that no government can ignore. Perhaps their most profound consequence is the emergence of states that are essentially immune to external aggression. This was never true in the long history of war.

No matter how powerful a state was, a coalition of rivals could always defeat it. The great empires were vulnerable to invasion. The Enlightenment-era monarchies – including Russia – depended on a balance of power system where no single nation could dominate the rest. But with nuclear weapons, that balance shifted. Two countries – Russia and the US – now possess such overwhelming destructive capability that neither can be seriously threatened, let alone defeated, even by a coalition. China, too, is gradually joining this exclusive tier, though its arsenal is still a fraction of Moscow’s or Washington’s. In this sense, nuclear weapons have brought a strange kind of peace: Not from trust, but from terror. War between nuclear superpowers is not only unthinkable, it is politically irrational.

Becoming a nuclear superpower, however, is extremely expensive. Even China, with its vast resources, has only recently begun to approach the scale of Russian and American stockpiles. Few others can afford the same path. Fortunately, most countries don’t need to. Major regional powers like India, Pakistan, Brazil, Iran, Japan, and even smaller ones like Israel, do not seek military invincibility on a global scale. Their nuclear ambitions, where they exist, are regional in nature – aimed at deterring neighbors, not conquering continents. Their limited arsenals do not upset the global balance of power. Nor do they need to. For decades, serious scholars – Western theorists as well as Russian strategists – have argued that limited nuclear proliferation may actually enhance international stability. The reasoning is simple: Nuclear weapons raise the cost of war. Nations become far more cautious when the price of aggression could be national annihilation.

We’ve seen this play out already. North Korea, with a modest nuclear arsenal, feels emboldened in its dealings with Washington. Iran, by contrast, delayed too long and was attacked by Israel and the US in June 2025. The lesson was clear: In today’s world, non-nuclear states are far more vulnerable to attack. This has exposed the weakness of the current non-proliferation regime. Countries like India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea have all violated it, yet none have been meaningfully punished. Iran tried to comply and paid the price. It’s no wonder others are watching and drawing their own conclusions. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan – each may be tempted to pursue nuclear weapons, either independently or with quiet American support. Washington has already shown it cares little about the long-term consequences for its East Asian allies. It is willing to provoke instability if it helps contain China.

In this context, a wave of new nuclear powers is not just likely – it is practically inevitable. But it will not mean the end of the world. Why? Because even with more nuclear states, the true balance of power remains intact. No emerging nuclear country will soon reach the scale of Russia and the US. Most will build modest deterrents, enough to shield themselves from invasion but not to threaten global security. Their arsenals may be enough to inflict horrific damage on a rival – but not to destroy humanity. A regional war – between India and Pakistan, Iran and Israel, or others – would be a tragedy. Millions could die. But the catastrophe would be geographically limited. These are not world-ending scenarios. And in cases such as these, the nuclear superpowers – Russia and the US – would likely act to impose peace before escalation spirals out of control.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Malhotra

RFK

Indians

Branches

Fenton

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 22 2025

Jul 222025
 
 July 22, 2025  Posted by at 9:01 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  60 Responses »


Saul Leiter Man in straw hat 1955

 

• Barack Obama Personally Planted the Seeds of the Russia Hoax (Margolis)
• New Intelligence Authorization Act Seeks to Curb Power of DNI (CTH)
• The Deep State Is in Real Trouble Now (Margolis)
• Merry Pranksters on Parade (James Howard Kunstler)
• 100% Chance of Nuclear War – Martin Armstrong (USAW)
• UK Wants ‘50-Day Drive’ To Arm Ukraine (RT)
• Boris Johnson ‘Quite Sad’ Brits Losing Interest In Ukraine (RT)
• German Opposition Slams Ukraine Aid (RT)
• Russia Sanctions Have ‘Completely Backfired’ – German Ex-EU Commissioner (RT)
• Putin Speaks of Threat To Russian Sovereignty (RT)
• FDA Approved Moderna COVID Shot for Kids Behind Kennedy’s Back (Fleetwood)
• X Blasts French Criminal Probe As ‘Politically Motivated’ (RT)
• EU Prepared To ‘Stomach’ Uneven Deal With Trump – Bloomberg (RT)
• Trump Posts AI Video of Obama Being Arrested (RT)
• Trump Wants Washington Commanders To Change Name Back To Redskins (JTN)
• Five Israeli Soldiers Kill Themselves In Two Weeks (RT)

 

 

V
https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1947075656967176203

Tucker

Bessent

Fed

BTC

Arno

 

 

 

 

Tulsi Gabbard has laid it all out, and promises more is on the way. But she can’t arrest or indict anyone. The DOJ and FBI will have to do that. Do Pam Bondi and Kash Patel/Dan Bongino have the same strength and conviction that Tulsi has, and can they defeat the resistance inside their agencies? Which are full of people who worked with the conspirators, and may also be indicted? It’s not so easy. At a minimum, they will need Trump’s full support going forward. It’s encouraging that Tulsi says people in the agencies are coming out of the woodwork.

• Barack Obama Personally Planted the Seeds of the Russia Hoax (Margolis)

When he spoke to the media on December 16, 2016, a week after receiving a classified intelligence assessment that Russian interference had no impact on the election outcome, Obama stepped before the press to quietly plant the seeds of what would become the Russia collusion hoax. With carefully chosen words and insinuations, he laid the groundwork for Democrats, the media, and the intelligence bureaucracy to spend the next four years undermining a duly elected president. Asked directly whether “Clinton lost because of the hacking,” Obama didn’t say “no”—he dodged. “I’m gonna let all the political pundits in this town, uh, have a long discussion about, uh, what happened in the election,” he said, feigning detachment. Then came the bait-and-switch: “We will provide evidence that we can safely provide, that does not compromise sources and methods.”

Translation? Trust us, but don’t expect proof. And that was the essence of the Obama playbook—demand trust in the narrative, even as no concrete evidence was made public. “If we’re gonna monitor this stuff effectively going forward,” Obama insisted, “we don’t want them to know that we know.” He offered a false binary: either trust the CIA and FBI “many of whom, by the way, served in previous administrations and who are Republicans,” or trust the Russians. “Unless the American people genuinely think that the professionals… are less trustworthy than the Russians, then, uh, people should pay attention to what our intelligence agencies say.”

However, based on prior reports, we know that multiple assessments delivered to the administration found no evidence of Russian manipulation of vote counts or election infrastructure, with a September intelligence report and a subsequent Presidential Daily Briefing on December 8 explicitly stating foreign adversaries could not covertly overturn the vote. According to multiple sources familiar with the December 8 briefing, the intelligence community found no evidence that Russia changed any votes or affected the outcome. Their interference amounted to some phishing emails and propaganda—nothing remotely close to altering the electoral result. Obama knew that, yet he pressed ahead with a narrative designed to delegitimize Trump.

Even more revealing was the moral preening that followed. Obama didn’t just imply that Trump had benefited from Russia; he accused Republicans of embracing foreign adversaries out of partisan spite. “You start to see certain folks in the Republican Party and Republican voters suddenly finding a government and individuals who stand contrary to everything that we stand for as being okay because that’s how much we dislike Democrats,” he said. It was a sly way of saying: Republicans who support Trump are betraying America. He drove the point home by alluding to Trump’s campaign rhetoric. “Some of the people who historically have been very critical of me for engaging with the Russians… also endorsed the president-elect, even as he was saying that we should stop sanctioning Russia… and was very complimentary of Mr. Putin personally.”

It was classic Obama—passive-aggressive, vague, with a twist of plausible deniability. There was no outright accusation, but rather a dark insinuation that Trump was too cozy with Putin and that Republicans were complicit. Political operatives, complicit media outlets, and Obama’s own intelligence holdovers would magnify any hint of treason in the coming months. And then came the dagger. Asked directly if Putin authorized the hack to help Trump, Obama chose not to confirm that there was no evidence that there even was a hack. “I think what I wanna make sure of is that, um, uh, I give the Intelligence Community the chance to gather all the information,” he said. But then he added, “Not much happens in Russia without Vladimir Putin.” Again, no direct claim—just a loaded suggestion designed to hang over Trump like a cloud.

Obama framed the issue not as foreign interference but as a weakness in America’s political system: “Our vulnerability to Russia… is directly related to how divided, partisan, dysfunctional our political process is.” The implication? Trump and his voters, by being too partisan, were making America more vulnerable to attack. He even equated conservative media with Kremlin propaganda: “If fake news… is almost identical to reports… through partisan news venues… it’s not surprising that foreign propaganda will have a greater effect.” This wasn’t a press conference. It was the soft launch of a lie that would consume Washington, cripple a presidency, and erode public trust. Barack Obama didn’t just sit back and let the Russia collusion hoax unfold—he helped plant the seeds.

Even after receiving intelligence assessments that confirmed Russia had no impact on the 2016 election outcome, Obama chose to play politics. He stood before the cameras, dodging direct answers, carefully framing the narrative, and hinting just enough to give the media and the Democrats a green light to pursue this fake story. He knew the facts but encouraged the fiction, knowing full well it would cast a shadow over Trump’s presidency.

Read more …

On whose payroll is Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas?

• New Intelligence Authorization Act Seeks to Curb Power of DNI (CTH)

The response from Chairman Tom Cotton and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to the action of DNI Tulsi Gabbard was predictable. The SSCI has now framed the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 to modify the “responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence.” [Section 402] We knew this was coming. The Intelligence Community does not like rogue actors amid their ranks, especially if those people have cross-silo access. The silo system is designed to protect the Deep State. Any entity who can cross reference the inserted information becomes a risk to the enterprise.Senator Cotton cannot directly oppose Tulsi Gabbard without exposing himself. Thus someone, not the SSCI, writes the legislative changes to the Intelligence Community rules and procedures and Tom Cotton simply advances them. That’s the way DC operates.

Additionally, Chairman Cotton does not want the DNI to investigate or generate its own intelligence. Cotton demands the ODNI just accept and regurgitate the intelligence Tulsi Gabbard would be given by the other agencies; no independent review of analysis permitted. All of these actions push the Intelligence Community power center back into the CIA and away from the prying eyes of the DNI. That’s the SSCI motive.

WASHINGTON DC – “A top Republican senator is proposing a sweeping overhaul of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, slashing the workforce of an organization that has expanded since it was created in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. Under a bill by Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, the chair of the Intelligence Committee, the ODNI’s staff of about 1,600 would be capped at 650, according to a senior Senate aide familiar with the proposed legislation. ODNI’s workforce was about 2,000 in January, but National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard has already overseen a reduction of about 20% as part of the Trump administration’s drive to shrink the federal workforce. The reduction in the staff Gabbard oversees could weaken her role in the intelligence bureaucracy.

[…] The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, exposed a failure to share information across spy agencies with catastrophic results. As a result, Congress established the ODNI to oversee all of the country’s 18 intelligence services, including the CIA, and manage bureaucratic turf wars from a complex outside Washington, D.C. What started as a relatively small office under the national intelligence director in 2005 has expanded over the last 20 years to include in-house analysis teams and centers focused on counterterrorism and counterintelligence. Cotton has described the ODNI as a bloated bureaucracy that should return to its original mission of coordinating the work of other spy agencies instead of producing its own reports and duplicating other agencies’ efforts.

“Congress in no way wanted yet another unruly bureaucracy layered on top of an already bureaucratic intelligence community,” Cotton said at Gabbard’s confirmation hearing in late January. “Unfortunately, 20 years later, that’s exactly what the ODNI has become.” Gabbard herself expressed support for downsizing the ODNI’s workforce at the hearing, saying she would work with Cotton and other lawmakers to eliminate “redundancies and bloating.” In the lead up to the election I outlined what the DNI could do with untapped power already given to the office. DNI Tulsi Gabbard has been following a path close to that outline. Now, we see Washington DC responding to that affirmed power structure and actively working to neuter the DNI. A very predictable outcome. The only intelligence silo more corrupt than the CIA is the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that oversees it.

Read more …

“For nearly a decade, the media, the Democrats, and yes—Barack Obama—have treated the Constitution like a speed bump..”

• The Deep State Is in Real Trouble Now (Margolis)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard just lit a fuse under the deep state—and it’s about time. Appearing Sunday on “Sunday Morning Futures” with Maria Bartiromo, Gabbard dropped a stunning accusation: that Barack Obama personally directed a “treasonous conspiracy” to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency before it even began. And now, according to Gabbard, the floodgates are opening—whistleblowers who were sickened by what they witnessed are starting to come forward.n“The implications of this are frankly nothing short of historic,” Gabbard said. She pointed to more than 100 newly released documents that she says show how Obama, just weeks before leaving office, greenlit a coordinated effort to sabotage Trump—after he was elected. “This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an issue that is so serious it should concern every single American.”

According to Gabbard, Obama and his inner circle simply refused to accept the outcome of the 2016 election. Instead of stepping aside and respecting the will of the people, they weaponized the intelligence community and pushed a phony Russia narrative to kneecap Trump before he even took office. “They decided that they would do everything possible to try to undermine his ability to do what voters tasked President Trump to do,” she said. “So, creating this piece of manufactured intelligence that claims Russia had helped Donald Trump get elected contradicted every other assessment… that said exactly the opposite—that Russia neither had the intent nor the capability to ‘hack’ the United States election.”

That “manufactured intelligence” became the foundation for the infamous Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that Obama ordered to be published in January 2017—a political hit job disguised as a national security report. Gabbard didn’t hold back in describing just how dangerous that deception really was. “There’s no question in my mind that this Intelligence Community Assessment… contained a manufactured intelligence document,” she said. “It’s worse than even politicization of intelligence—it was manufactured intelligence that sought to achieve President Obama’s and his team’s objective, which was undermining President Trump’s presidency and subverting the will of the American people.” This wasn’t politics—it was a coup. And Gabbard says more is coming.

“Next week we will be releasing more detailed information about how exactly this took place and the extent to which this information was sought to be hidden from the American people,” she said. But the most explosive revelation? The dam may be breaking inside the Intelligence Community. After years of silence, people who saw this treachery unfold are starting to step forward. “We have whistleblowers, actually, Maria, coming forward now, after we released these documents,” Gabbard said. “There are people who were around, who were working within the Intelligence Community at this time, who were so disgusted by what happened. We are starting to see some of them coming out of the woodwork.”

Gabbard says she’s committed to handing over all evidence to the DOJ. “There must be indictments. Those responsible, no matter how powerful they are and were at that time… they all must be held accountable.” She’s absolutely right. For nearly a decade, the media, the Democrats, and yes—Barack Obama—have treated the Constitution like a speed bump. They lied, they manipulated intelligence, and they tried to nullify a lawful election because they didn’t like the result. Now, the truth is starting to catch up with them. And if there’s any justice left in Washington, the days of these Deep-State plotters skating by unpunished may finally be numbered.

Read more …

“The forces behind this coup have done and will do anything to protect their grasp on illegal & illegitimate power.” — Stephen Miller

• Merry Pranksters on Parade (James Howard Kunstler)

Let’s not pretend that RussiaGate was ever anything but a “treasonous conspiracy” and a “years’ long coup” as bluntly labeled by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) on Friday. The election prank launched by Hillary Clinton’s campaign turned into an overt sedition op led by President Barack Obama to overthrow his elected successor, Donald Trump. DNI Tulsi Gabbard went even further and proffered criminal referrals on all this to the US Attorney General. If you think this is not extremely serious, you are not paying attention.

The New York Times was not paying attention in its Sunday edition. Not a word about this historic action on the paper’s website landing page. So now you know why the Harvard law professors, the Martha’s Vineyard chardonnay widows, and all the creative class hipsters of Brooklyn persist in their personal globes of political delusion. Instead, The Times dwelt on the Epstein business, still haplessly hoping to catch the Golden Golem in its golem trap. (Mr. Trump’s lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize committee for rewarding the Time’s RussiaGate coverage is still pending, by the way.)

Meanwhile, DNI Gabbard went on Maria Bartiromo’s Sunday confab and warned of more info releases coming this week. Sooner or later AG Pam Bondi will have to announce that a case based on that referral is under construction. My guess is that this is exactly what Kash Patel’s FBI has been preoccupied with for months with no leaking — you can imagine severe penalties against that. You might also note that there are no higher crimes under our law than treason, as explicitly spelled out in the DNI report. The DNI also stated flatly on Sunday, “There must be indictments.” If you think DNI Gabbard went forward without consulting some crack constitutional lawyers, you’ll be disappointed.

And also meanwhile, Deputy AG Todd Blanche has applied for release of the sealed grand jury transcripts on the 2019 Epstein case from the DOJ’s Manhattan outpost (SDNY). And consider: all that info was completely segregated from the Epstein files that former FBI Director Christopher Wray controlled for years and years, meaning it was not subject to editing and manipulation. You may finally get to see the difference between the “hoax” elements of the story and the actual evidence.

The Russian meddling and collusion story might have seemed like “a thing” to many in the early January days of 2017 before Mr. Trump’s first inauguration. But when they went after the newly appointed National Security Advisor, General Mike Flynn, for having a conversation with the Russian ambassador, you had had to know that something sketchy was afoot. As this blog asked at the time: why are ambassadors from foreign lands here, if not to speak with our government officials? The story was preposterous but, of course, the news media helped run Gen. Flynn out of office and then led the cheering for the DOJ’s malicious prosecution of him afterward in Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s DC district court.

You also have to wonder if anyone in the news media might be subject to indictment above and beyond the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press. Is there a line between that and acting as an accessory to treason? What did New York Times editor (at the time) Dean Baquet think he was doing, publishing all that patent garbage? Or the producers of CNN and other network news?

The DNI called these activities a “treasonous conspiracy” for a reason. A conspiracy charge that encompasses a skein of persons in a continuous series of crimes extends the statute of limitations to the latest criminal act for all involved. You might also wonder how wide a net the DOJ could cast. Will it include such obvious players as Senator Mark Warner, who schemed to play along on RussiaGate as Vice-chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence? Or then-Congressman Adam Schiff on the House Intel Committee when, for years, he pretended to have “proof” of (i.e., lied about) Trump-Russia collusion? Or FBI Director Wray, who hid evidence, might have tampered with evidence, and apparently lied to Congress about many of these connected matters?

Or Andrew Weissmann, who virtually ran the phony Mueller Investigation as a RussiaGate cover-up op because Robert Mueller was mentally infirm? Or Lawfare Ninjas Marc Elias, Norm Eisen, and Mary McCord who appear liable for 2020 election hackery and the Jan 6 “insurrection” op (including the House J6 Committee fakery afterward) along with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi? Or former AG William Barr, who sat on the Hunter Biden laptop during Trump Impeachment No. 1, when the device was stuffed with exculpatory evidence withheld from Mr. Trump’s lawyers? Or CIA agent Eric Ciaramella, Lt. Col Alex Vindman, and Intel Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who conspired with Rep. Adam Schiff on the “Ukraine phone call” operation that was the basis of impeachment No. 1?

Or DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who botched his investigation (on purpose?) of FISA court criminal irregularities, or Judge James Boasberg who presided over those criminal irregularities and issued many of them? Or Special Counsel John Durham who took years to overlook the salient elements of the RussiaGate coup? Or many other figures involved one way or another. . . McCabe, Strzok, Page, Pientka, Thibault, Baker, Rice, Yates, Rummler, Halper, Pompeo, Haines, Bruce and Nellie Ohr. . . . Are they all rounded-up and sent to court together, like a Nuremberg proceeding? Or do they get their own separate cases? Or will the DOJ only go after the top dogs: Obama, Brennan, Clapper, and Comey?

Finally, consider this: demonizing Vladimir Putin set the stage for the Ukraine War — which was initially kicked off in 2014 under President Obama and his State Department / CIA group led by Victoria Nuland orchestrating the Maidan revolt. The official disclosures now by the DNI should make it clear that Mr. Putin did not deserve the treatment he got for years on end, and that the overall effect of it has been catastrophic for world peace. Half the people in the USA still believing all the manufactured bullshit about Mr. Putin has made it extremely difficult for President Trump to end the war in Ukraine that has killed millions.

RussiaGate had the gravest consequences, and now there can be consequences for the merry pranksters who started it and kept it going, one way or another, for a decade.

Read more …

“This is all about preparing for war. Everybody should start getting ready for drafts, to start going that way.’ They want war. They are not backing off.”

• 100% Chance of Nuclear War – Martin Armstrong (USAW)

Six weeks ago, legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong was signaling a big turn toward war. Now, Armstrong says, “The chances of war with a nuclear exchange is at 100%. . .. Plan on it, this is coming.” Can the world avoid nuclear war with President Trump’s 50-day deadline given to Russia to make peace in Ukraine? Armstrong says, “You do not threaten your adversary that is at your same level, publicly. If you want to say something like that, you do it privately in a phone call…” “Now, what will happen is Putin cannot possibly sign a peace deal. What, are you crazy . . . to do this in 50 days? We have staff in Germany, and I was told by my staff that a friend 60 years old was told to report to duty.

I had a friend who was at the Vienna Peace Conference, and he called me when it was over and said, ‘Holy crap, this has nothing to do with peace anymore. This is all about preparing for war. Everybody should start getting ready for drafts, to start going that way.’ They want war. They are not backing off.” Armstrong’s computer “Socrates” is signaling war as early as next month. Armstrong says, “Starting in August, this whole thing is going to be escalating up. Our computer has what we call a ‘Panic Cycle’ with our war cycles for 2026. That is not good. I don’t know what the hell Trump is smoking… My computer has been projecting war, and it is projecting war going into 2026. This is not looking good, and Europe will lose. It is as simple as that.”

The other big event that happened that will change the economic system forever is the House just passed the so-called GENIUS Act (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins). The bill is now headed to President Trump to sign into law. Armstrong contends that US debt is being sold by big holders of Treasuries, and we have to find a new market for our huge Treasury debt or we default. Treasury bonds will supposedly backstop stablecoins that the banks will control. Armstrong says, “This is really a repeat of 1863. In the Civil War, they issued national bank notes. The banks were told to buy the bonds. They could buy bonds to fund the war, and they were allowed to issue currency backed by the bonds. This is the same exact thing. These stablecoins are the same thing as the 1863 National Bank Act.”

Stablecoins and the GENIUS Act are not good news for financial freedom or any other kind of civil liberty. Armstrong says, “The government will say we don’t like this guy, debank him. The government cannot do it directly. So, they indirectly do it the other way…””I know guys that are gun dealers and bullion dealers, and they have been debanked. This is the world we are going into. They know they are losing power. Europe is far worse. Spain now says you cannot take out $3,000 without government permission. They are trying to eliminate cash. . .. The forms of government we have today are going to collapse. Republics are the most corrupt form of government — period.”

Read more …

“..a ‘50-day drive’ to arm Ukraine on the battlefield and force Putin to the negotiating table..”

• UK Wants ‘50-Day Drive’ To Arm Ukraine (RT)

UK Defense Secretary John Healey is set to urge Ukraine’s backers to launch a “50-day drive” to arm Kiev, local media have reported. The plan follows US President Donald Trump’s threat to impose secondary sanctions on Russia’s trading partners within 50 days if no progress is made on resolving the conflict. Healey is expected to make the appeal when he leads a virtual session of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG) on Monday. The minister is also poised to back Trump’s plan and pledge the UK’s support to “bolster Ukraine’s immediate fight.”

“The US has started the clock on a 50-day deadline for [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to agree to peace or face crippling economic sanctions… We need to step up in turn with a ‘50-day drive’ to arm Ukraine on the battlefield and force Putin to the negotiating table,” he is expected to say. Earlier this month, Trump imposed a 50-day ceasefire deadline on Russia, warning of “very severe” new sanctions, including 100% “secondary tariffs” on countries buying Russian oil. He also announced new weapons deliveries to Ukraine, noting that the EU will foot the bill. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Trump’s remarks “will be perceived by the Ukrainian side not as a signal toward peace, but as a signal to continue the war.” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov stressed that Moscow will not cave in to any ultimatums but is still open to talks.

While the UK has been one of Ukraine’s staunchest supporters, Luke Pollard, the country’s armed forces minister, warned last autumn of dwindling stockpiles due to years of military deliveries. Moscow has consistently denounced Western arms deliveries to Ukraine, warning they only prolong the conflict without changing its outcome. It has also accused the EU and UK of impeding ongoing peace efforts. Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Saturday voiced concern over what he described as declining interest among the British public in the Ukraine conflict. He added that the current government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer is “distracted” by “a lot of domestic issues.”

Read more …

“There are a lot of domestic issues that are very difficult right now, and you can see why they’re distracted.”

• Boris Johnson ‘Quite Sad’ Brits Losing Interest In Ukraine (RT)

Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said he is “quite sad” about what he describes as waning interest in the UK in supporting Ukraine. Speaking to The Telegraph at the Ukrainian embassy in London on Saturday, he lamented that support for Ukraine in the UK is declining. “The interest in Ukraine and the appetite is so low nowadays. I find it quite sad,” Johnson said. When asked to evaluate how well current Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s administration has handled the Ukraine conflict, he responded: “There are a lot of domestic issues that are very difficult right now, and you can see why they’re distracted.” Support among the British public for aid to Ukraine has fallen in recent years, polls suggest.

A YouGov poll from February 2023 showed that nearly three-quarters of respondents believed the UK was not providing Kiev with enough aid, whereas only 3% thought it was giving too much. However, an Ipsos survey from this past February indicated that just over half of Britons supported the current level of aid, whereas nearly one in five said too much support was being provided. The UK has committed £18.3 billion ($24.5 billion) in total aid to Ukraine, including £13 billion ($17.4 billion) in military assistance. London has increasingly lobbied to deploy “peacekeeping” troops to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire as part of a so-called “coalition of the willing.”

Last week, Starmer’s government announced that the coalition would set up permanent headquarters in Paris to coordinate with Kiev to “regenerate land forces” for Ukraine and “secure” its skies with fighter jets if there is a cessation in the hostilities. Moscow has stressed that it views the initiative as preparation for a military intervention and warned that it views any NATO troops – under the guise of peacekeepers or not – in Ukraine as hostile. Johnson resigned as UK prime minister in 2022, a few months after the escalation of the conflict. He torpedoed the first peace talks between Moscow and Kiev in Istanbul that year by convincing the latter to withdraw from the negotiations, according to the Ukrainian head negotiator at the time, David Arakhamia.

Read more …

This is why they want to ban them: they have common sense.

• German Opposition Slams Ukraine Aid (RT)

Frustration is growing in Germany over increased aid to Ukraine while domestic spending lags, co-chair of opposition party Alternative for Germany (AfD) Alice Weidel has said. Berlin has been one of Kiev’s largest military backers since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Earlier this year, the German Defense Ministry announced that it would provide €5 billion ($5.6 billion) to finance long-range weapons production in Ukraine. In an interview with the broadcaster ARD on Sunday, Weidel criticized the allocation of funds to Kiev, citing unmet domestic needs. Asked about alternative uses for public funds, she pointed to a shelved proposal to abolish electricity taxes, which would have cost the state €5.4 billion – comparable to what Berlin is spending on weapons for Ukraine, she argued.

“And then our government, the Friedrich Merz government, gives Ukraine nine billion in German tax money and now wants to buy Patriot missiles for Ukraine for five billion. Nobody understands that anymore,” Weidel said. She was referencing a US-backed plan to funnel Patriot air defense systems to Kiev via NATO members, with Germany covering the costs. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said after meeting US counterpart Pete Hegseth in Washington last week that the terms of the arrangement could be finalized “within days or weeks,” though the actual transfer of the missile systems to Ukraine might take months. Berlin has indicated its readiness to cover the cost of at least two Patriot batteries to Ukraine – estimated at approximately $1 billion each.

Since taking office in May, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has pursued a hardline stance against Russia. Earlier this month, he declared that diplomatic options in the Ukraine conflict were “exhausted” and doubled down on his policy of providing weapons to Kiev. In response, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused Merz of choosing escalation by abandoning diplomacy. Last week, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova suggested that European nations are funding the “death” of Ukraine by paying for weapons sent to Kiev. Russia has consistently denounced Western weapons deliveries, saying they do not change the overall course of the conflict and merely serve to prolong the bloodshed and risk further escalation.

Read more …

“..the attempt to “ruin” Russia is a “life-threatening idea.”

• Russia Sanctions Have ‘Completely Backfired’ – German Ex-EU Commissioner (RT)

The EU’s sanctions aimed at crippling Russia’s economy and isolating it politically have backfired, instead harming their architects, former European Commission Vice President Gunter Verheugen has said. Western governments have imposed an unprecedented slew of sanctions on Moscow since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Last week, the EU imposed its 18th sanctions package, targeting the country’s energy and banking sectors. The restrictions include bans on transactions with 22 additional Russian banks and the Russian Direct Investment Fund, as well as prohibiting the use of the damaged Nord Stream pipelines.

Verheugen, who served as EU commissioner for enterprise and industry from 2004 to 2010, said the EU’s sanctions have rebounded on their creators, with the West bearing the heaviest costs. “There are few examples of a political goal – namely, bringing an adversary to its knees economically and wreaking havoc in a ‘warlike’ manner – backfiring so completely. The economic war against Russia is one such example,” Verheugen wrote in an op-ed for Switzerland’s Die Weltwoche journal, published on Friday.

“Objective data shows that the sanctions policy primarily harmed its originators, especially Germany,” he noted, warning that the attempt to “ruin” Russia is a “life-threatening idea.” The EU has not acknowledged this outcome, he added. Moscow has condemned the sanctions as illegal, arguing they have inflated EU energy prices and forced reliance on costlier imports, undermining the bloc’s competitiveness. Germany, which prior to the Ukraine conflict sourced 55% of its energy from Russia, remains mired in a two-year recession.

Some European officials have conceded that the EU’s sanctions on Russia have inflicted greater damage on European businesses than on their Russian counterparts, industry leaders say. Ferdinando Pellazzo, head of the Italian-Russian Chamber of Commerce, warned that the measures have severely impacted small and medium-sized enterprises. Siegfried Russwurm, president of Germany’s BDI industry association, cautioned that the country faces growing deindustrialization risks as high energy costs – driven by the cutoff of cheap Russian supplies – squeeze competitiveness.

Read more …

“..If we buy everything with the oil and gas [revenues] – and now they [the West] are trying to cut us off from oil and gas – then Russia will simply lose its competitiveness, and with it, its sovereignty..”

• Putin Speaks of Threat To Russian Sovereignty (RT)

Russia would inevitably lose its sovereignty if it relies solely on oil and gas revenues and abandons domestic production in favor of imports, President Vladimir Putin has said. In an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin released on Sunday, Putin defended Russia’s decades-long effort to localize automobile manufacturing, saying it was essential for protecting the country’s economic and political autonomy. He recalled that in the 1990s many of his government colleagues wanted to abandon efforts to develop the car industry and instead rely on foreign-made vehicles, a view that he opposed. “We must talk about technological independence… If we buy everything with the oil and gas [revenues] – and now they [the West] are trying to cut us off from oil and gas – then Russia will simply lose its competitiveness, and with it, its sovereignty,” he said.

According to Putin, efforts to improve the domestic car industry began with cooperation with Western partners that were licensed to build assembly plants in Russia. Starting in the early 2010s, the authorities gradually tightened localization requirements, demanding that automakers produce more components domestically. “This was serious work. We were essentially creating our own cars,” Putin remarked, adding that the effort paid off after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, which saw an exodus of Western companies from Russia as Kiev’s backers introduced sanctions against Moscow.

Russia sold about 1.571 million new passenger cars in 2024 (up 48%), with Lada accounting for roughly 28% (436,155 units) and remaining the market leader, according to the analytical agency Autostat. However, all others spots in the top ten were occupied by Chinese brands. Russia’s Kamaz also distributed the most trucks in the country last year, despite an overall drop in sales, the agency said. Putin has personally promoted the domestic automobile industry and has often been seen driving Lada and Kamaz vehicles. He also uses a limousine from the Russian luxury brand Aurus as his presidential car. In 2024, he gifted Aurus limos to North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa.

Read more …

“Anderson was “walked off the premises and was so upset that she crashed her car into the Secretary’s government-provided vehicle.”

NOTE: what is Marty Makary doing? He was brought in by RFK.

• FDA Approved Moderna COVID Shot for Kids Behind Kennedy’s Back (Fleetwood)

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) quietly granted full approval to Moderna’s mRNA COVID-19 injection for children while Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was on vacation—and without his knowledge or consent. As head of the department overseeing the FDA, Kennedy should have been directly informed of any decision involving pediatric mRNA shots—especially one as politically and medically sensitive as full approval for children as young as six months. On July 10, Moderna, Inc. announced the FDA approved the supplemental Biologics License Application (sBLA) for Spikevax®, the Company’s COVID shot, in “children 6 months through 11 years of age who are at increased risk for COVID-19 disease.”

The approval was made despite Moderna’s own scientists’ admission that there are “unacceptable toxicity” levels in mRNA vaccines, and that “lipid nanoparticle structural components, production methods, route of administration and proteins produced from complexed mRNAs all present toxicity concerns.” It was also made without Secretary Kennedy’s knowledge. According to multiple sources, neither Kennedy nor his Deputy Chief of Staff Stefanie Spears were briefed or consulted ahead of the decision, raising alarm over internal operations at one of the nation’s most powerful health agencies. Only July 16, White House correspondent and media host Emerald Robinson reported on Twitter/X that FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary “did not inform @RobertKennedyJr (who was on vacation) or his office that FDA was going to approve the mRNA shots for children,” citing sources familiar with the matter.

On July 17, CNN reported that Secretary Kennedy had fired two of his top aides “in an abrupt shakeup of the leadership at the nation’s sprawling health department,” also citing unnamed sources. “Kennedy’s chief of staff, Heather Flick Melanson, and deputy chief of staff for policy Hannah Anderson left HHS after only a handful of months on the job, following internal clashes that culminated in both of their removals this week,” the report explained. The CNN article didn’t connect the firings to the FDA’s decision to approve Moderna’s jab for kids. However, the MAHA PAC (Make America Healthy Again Political Action Committee)—a pro-Trump super PAC founded by RFK Jr.’s former staff to promote his health-focused agenda—corroborated Robinson’s account and connected the firings to the FDA’s Moderna decision.

On July 20, MAHA PAC cited Dr. Robert Malone—now serving on the newly restructured ACIP vaccine panel—as confirming that neither Kennedy nor Spears were informed of the FDA’s decision regarding Moderna and that a major HHS leadership purge unfolded upon their return. “The unfortunate facts are that this decision… was made public when both the Secretary of HHS and his trusted deputy Chief of Staff Stefanie Spears were on vacation,” said Dr. Malone, citing insider knowledge. “Neither Sec. HHS nor his deputy Chief of Staff (dCOS) were briefed or read in on this decision.” The move apparently set off a chain reaction. According to Malone, shortly after Kennedy and Spears returned, “a major reorganization of HHS leadership occurred.”

Anderson was “walked off the premises and was so upset that she crashed her car into the Secretary’s government-provided vehicle.” Melanson, a veteran of the Trump-era HHS, claimed she resigned voluntarily. CNN sources say otherwise, alleging she was fired after Kennedy lost confidence in her leadership following the dismissal of Anderson. A spokesperson for HHS said that Matt Buckham, the department’s White House liaison, will serve as acting Chief of Staff. The FDA’s end-run around Kennedy not only signals potential deeper insubordination within HHS, but also highlights a promising shift under his leadership—one where incompetence, secrecy, and disloyalty are no longer tolerated, and where restoring integrity, transparency, and public trust could be the new standard.

Read more …

The little emperor strikes again.

• X Blasts French Criminal Probe As ‘Politically Motivated’ (RT)

Social media network X has accused the French authorities of a “politically motivated criminal investigation,” over a probe launched against the platform for alleged algorithm manipulation and “fraudulent data extraction.” X’s Global Government Affairs team said on Monday that the investigation was instigated by Eric Bothorel, a French MP and member of President Emmanuel Macron’s Renaissance party. The probe itself kicked off in January after Bothorel and another senior French official alleged that the company’s algorithm was being used for the purposes of “foreign interference.” X has denied all of the accusations against it. Bothorel has previously been critical of X, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, claiming that the network spreads “an enormous amount of hateful, racist, anti-LGBT+ and homophobic political content” which allegedly influences France’s political discourse.

According to the platform, French authorities had asked X to grant them a “recommendation algorithm and real-time data about all user posts” to be handed over to experts who were overtly hostile to the platform.X also protested being investigated as an “organized gang,” a classification that allows French police to use extensive powers, including wiretapping employees’ devices. The platform stressed it has refused the authorities’ demands. X remains in the dark as to the specific allegations made against the platform. However, based on what we know so far, X believes that this investigation is distorting French law in order to serve a political agenda and, ultimately, restrict free speech.

The probe echoes another high-profile case in France involving Telegram founder Pavel Durov. The Russian-born tech billionaire was arrested in the country last summer and charged with offenses linked to Telegram’s handling of illegal content, including child exploitation material and narcotics trafficking. Durov has dismissed the allegations as “baseless.” Commenting on the reports on X being in the crosshairs of the French authorities, Durov accused Paris of pursuing a “crusade” against free speech and progress itself while warning that the probe could end up damaging the French economy.

Read more …

When you’re losing, find a sympathetic victim role. BTW: who made the deal uneven?

• EU Prepared To ‘Stomach’ Uneven Deal With Trump – Bloomberg (RT)

EU officials are ready to “stomach” an unbalanced tariff agreement favoring the US in order to resolve the standoff between the two sides before a deadline set by President Donald Trump, Bloomberg reported on Monday, citing people familiar with the matter. Negotiations between Brussels and Washington have been ongoing since early April, when Trump announced a series of measures – dubbed “Liberation Day” policies – aimed at shielding American manufacturers. The plan included a sweeping 10% tariff on all imports from the EU and most other US trading partners. While the duties have been put on hold pending the talks, Trump warned they could escalate to 30% if no deal is reached by August 1.

]The new tariffs would be in addition to existing sector-specific levies, including 50% duties on steel and aluminum and 25% on auto imports, which the US imposed earlier this year. With the risk of a no-deal outcome rising, the EU is accelerating preparations for potential retaliatory measures, the outlet said. EU envoys could meet as early as this week to draft a response in case talks with the US collapse, the sources familiar with the discussions told the outlet. The move comes as Trump’s stance on tariffs appears to have hardened ahead of the August 1 deadline, leaving Brussels bracing for a potential trade confrontation.

“These negotiations are difficult,” French Finance Minister Eric Lombard said ahead of a meeting with business federations in Paris, as quoted by Bloomberg. “If we do not reach a balanced agreement with the United States of America, then we reserve the right to take countermeasures that are balanced, of course, but aimed at upholding the interests of the European Union.” Any significant countermeasures could escalate the transatlantic trade conflict, as Trump has warned that targeting US interests would prompt even stronger retaliation from his administration, the outlet noted.

The EU has already approved €21 billion ($24.5 billion) in retaliatory tariffs on US goods – including soybeans, poultry, and motorcycles – targeting politically sensitive states such as Louisiana, home to House Speaker Mike Johnson. It has also drafted €72 billion in additional tariffs on products such as Boeing aircraft, cars, and bourbon, should Trump impose reciprocal or auto levies. Beyond tariffs, the bloc is considering export controls and procurement restrictions. Washington has so far largely avoided retaliation for its tariffs, while collecting a record high of $64 billion in customs duties in the second quarter of 2025, according to the US Treasury.

Read more …

Not sure he should. Then again, they’ve haunted him for 10 years. Let him have his fun.

• Trump Posts AI Video of Obama Being Arrested (RT)

US President Donald Trump has posted an AI-generated video depicting former President Barack Obama being arrested and jailed. The post comes amid allegations that Obama and his senior officials had intentionally fabricated the Trump-Russia collusion narrative. Last week, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified over 100 pages of documents, which are described as “overwhelming evidence” that officials in the Obama administration manipulated intelligence to initiate the Russiagate investigation. She alleged that the aim was to delegitimize Trump’s 2016 election win. According to Gabbard’s memo, the officials involved included former CIA Director John Brennan, former DNI James Clapper, and Obama himself.

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1947083821293482197

On Sunday, Trump shared a video on his Truth Social account featuring real footage of Obama and other Democratic leaders saying, “No one is above the law.” The scene then shifts to an AI-generated sequence showing FBI agents handcuffing Obama in the Oval Office while Trump watches and laughs. The video ends with an animated Obama pacing in a jail cell. Trump also posted fake mugshots of Obama and members of his former cabinet under the caption “The Shady Bunch.”

Trump endorsed the DNI’s calls to investigate the former president, praising Gabbard and her team as “fantastic on prosecuting Obama and the ‘thugs’ who have just been unequivocally exposed on highest level Election Fraud.” According to Gabbard, internal intelligence assessments in 2016 repeatedly found that Russia lacked both the capability and intent to influence the US election. These conclusions were later suppressed, she said, when Obama ordered a new intelligence assessment that blamed Russia for helping Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. This assessment was based on discredited sources such as the Steele Dossier, according to Gabbard.

“This was not intelligence gathering. It was narrative building,” the DNI said, asserting that Obama officials leaked false claims to the press and politicized classified information. “Every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” she stated. Russia has consistently denied allegations that it interfered in the 2016 US election. The Kremlin has described the Russiagate affair as a politically motivated smear campaign intended to justify sanctions and worsen relations with Moscow.

Read more …

“Trump signaled on Sunday that the stadium deal could be tied to the team name. “I may put a restriction on them that if they don’t change the name back to the original ‘Washington Redskins…'”

• Trump Wants Washington Commanders To Change Name Back To Redskins (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Sunday called on the Washington Commanders owners to return to their Redskins name and floated linking the change to the new stadium deal. The team recently announced a new stadium to be built on the shuttered RFK Stadium site. “The Washington ‘Whatever’s’ should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team. There is a big clamoring for this. Likewise, the Cleveland Indians, one of the six original baseball teams, with a storied past. Our great Indian people, in massive numbers, want this to happen,” Trump wrote on Sunday on Truth Social.

“Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We are a Country of passion and common sense. OWNERS, GET IT DONE!!!” he added. In April, the owner of the team, Josh Harris, said the Redskins name would not come back with the new stadium. Trump signaled on Sunday that the stadium deal could be tied to the team name. “I may put a restriction on them that if they don’t change the name back to the original ‘Washington Redskins,’ and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, ‘Washington Commanders,’ I won’t make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington,” he wrote. “The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone,” he added.

Trump called for the Cleveland Guardians to do the same. “The Owner of the Cleveland Baseball Team, Matt Dolan, who is very political, has lost three Elections in a row because of that ridiculous name change. What he doesn’t understand is that if he changed the name back to the Cleveland Indians, he might actually win an Election,” Trump wrote. “Indians are being treated very unfairly. MAKE INDIANS GREAT AGAIN (MIGA).”

Read more …

Killing women and children on command is not for everyone.

• Five Israeli Soldiers Kill Themselves In Two Weeks (RT)

At least five Israeli soldiers have taken their own lives over the past two weeks, including conscripts and reservists recently discharged after extended combat deployments in Gaza and other active conflict zones. Suicides within the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ranks have surged since the Jewish state deployed troops to Gaza following the deadly Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. Seven soldiers died by suicide by the end of 2023, followed by 21 cases confirmed in 2024, and at least 20 incidents since the start of this year. The most recent case, confirmed on Sunday, involved a 19-year-old Norwegian immigrant who immigrated to Israel to join the IDF less than a year ago and was still undergoing training.

Four others have ended their lives in the past two weeks, including a Golani Brigade serviceman who shot himself at the Sde Teiman base, and reservist Daniel Edri, who self-immolated after being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. Most cases involve active-duty reservists, with military officials attributing the rise to combat-related trauma rather than personal or family circumstances. “One cannot breathe in the face of this statistic,” opposition leader Yair Lapid said. “This war also kills souls.” The IDF has confirmed that thousands of reservists have withdrawn from combat roles due to psychological stress. The true number of suicides due to service-related mental health issues may be higher, with Haaretz reporting at least 12 non-combat veterans whose deaths were not included in the army’s official statistics in recent years.

Now in its 21st month, the Gaza conflict has placed intense strain on Israeli forces, with prolonged deployments and mounting losses. Since the start of the operation, 893 Israeli soldiers have been killed, according to official data, in addition to nearly 1,200 Israeli civilians killed during the October 7 Hamas raid. The retaliatory offensive has resulted in nearly 59,000 Palestinian deaths, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Beyond Gaza, Israel has conducted airstrikes and limited ground operations in Lebanon, expanded its military presence in Syria, and bombed Iran. It has also escalated its activities in Iraq, Yemen, and the West Bank. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel is fighting on seven fronts “to defend ourselves against… barbarism.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Shiong

Caretaker

Peyo

Great escape

Bench

https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1947177291697541242

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 21 2025

Jul 212025
 
 July 21, 2025  Posted by at 9:11 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  42 Responses »


Saul Leiter Harlem 1960

 

• Tulsi Gabbard To Release More Obama Russiagate Files (ZH)
• DNI Gabbard on Obama’s Effort to ‘Subvert the American People’s Will’ (Hoge)
• Director Gabbard Explains Her Motive (CTH)
• Tulsi Gabbard Releases Background Information of Trump-Russia Op (CTH)
• Tulsi Gabbard Expands Power of DNI Office – Now Comes the Counter Attack (CTH)
• Trump Endorses Gabbard’s ‘Russiagate’ Coup Claims (RT)
• Kremlin Rules Out Imminent Putin-Trump Meeting (RT)
• Russiagate Only Tip pf Iceberg In Western Demonization of Russia (RT)
• EU Working Hard To Portray Russia As ‘Devil Incarnate’ – Kremlin (RT)
• Putin Did Better Job Than Any German Leader – Tucker Carlson (RT)
• Full Assault On The Media Machine: Trump Slashes USAID (Kolbe)
• Judge Orders Trump Admin To Restore Funding To US Propaganda Outlet (RT)
• Ukraine Unlikely To Join EU In The Near Term – Merz (RT)
• German General Urges Ukraine To Strike Russian Airfields (RT)
• France Wants To Nuke Holidays To Fund A Fantasy War With Russia (Marsden)
• Europe’s Online Censorship Laws Could Restrict Americans Too (ET)
• EU Hatching Secret Electric Car Plan – Bild (RT)
• Banning Alternative für Deutschland: A Nightmare Scenario (Eugyppius)

 

 

 

 

Nunes

Flynn

farage

Benz Brazil
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1946696591173390593

Bibi

Sachs

 

 

 

 

Inevitably, a lot of Tulsi and Obamagate today. Watched some CNN yesterday, and it hasn’t dawned there yet. It will. Much of our coverage here comes from Sundance, at Conservative Tree House/The Last Refuge, who has ben focusing on Tulsi and her DNI post for a long time, because he saw the potential. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was established years ago to bring info from agencies such as FBI AND CIA together, but these agencies have protected their “turf” of course. Tulsi is the first to put ODNI in a position where it oversees the other intel offices, instead of being some sort of subsidiary to them. Plus, obviously, they were all involved in Obamagate. They were integal parts of the treasonous conspiracy.

• Tulsi Gabbard To Release More Obama Russiagate Files (ZH)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says she’ll release more information next week to follow up on her bombshell declassification of documents that show “overwhelming evidence” of the Obama administration laid the groundwork for the years-long Trump-Russia collusion investigation after President Trump won the 2016 election. “We will be releasing more detailed information about how exactly this took place, and the extent to which this information was sought to be hidden from the American people, hidden from officials who would be in a position to do something about it,” Gabbard told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo. “Accountability is essential for the future of our country, for the American people to have any sense of trust in the integrity of our democratic republic.”

“Accountability, action, prosecution, indictments for those who are responsible for trying to steal our democracy is essential for us to make sure that this never happens to our country again,” Gabbard continued. Gabbard told host Maria Bartiromo; “I really cannot fathom” how special counsels Robert Mueller and John Durham missed evidence of this “years-long coup against President Trump.” “There is no rational or logical explanation for why they failed,” she said, adding “The only logical conclusion that I can draw in this … is that there was direct intent to cover up the truth about what occurred and who was responsible and the broad network of how this seditious conspiracy was concocted and who exactly was responsible for carrying it out.”

Among other things, Gabbard’s team unearthed a Sept. 12, 2016 intelligence community assessment that “foreign adversaries do not have and will probably not obtain the capabilities to successfully execute widespread and undetected cyber attacks” on election systems. At the time, Russia was being accused of setting up troll farms and hacking the DNC email servers (Seth who?). And of course, once legitimized by the Obama administration, a steady stream of leaks suggesting that Russia was behind Trump’s 2016 victory started appearing in the Washington Post and other outlets in “sweeping and systemic fashion.”

Mueller, of course, found ‘insufficient evidence’ that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, while Durham – appointed by Bill Barr (son of the guy who hired Jeffrey Epstein for a teaching job & then oversaw Epstein’s death as AG) – accomplished nothing more than a strongly worded letter about the FBI’s handling of the Trump-Russia probe. “I don’t know what excuse there is for those who supposedly investigated this previously, whether it was Durham or others, that they were not able to put together the dots and ultimately show the truth to the American people,” said Gabbard, who then stressed that AG Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel will need to now gather up evidence and decide whether to press charges. (lol. lmao even)

“There must be indictments of those responsible, no matter how powerful they are and were at that time, no matter who was involved in creating this treasonous conspiracy against the American people. They all must be held accountable,” Gabbard continued. “For the American people to have any sense of trust in the integrity of our democratic republic, accountability, action, prosecution, [and] indictments for those who are responsible for trying to steal our democracy is essential for us to make sure that this never happens to our country again.”

Jeffrey Who?

Read more …

“..it’s still stunning to hear her directly accuse former President Obama of what some would call treason..”

• DNI Gabbard on Obama’s Effort to ‘Subvert the American People’s Will’ (Hoge)

We’ve been reading about it for years, listened to countless segments on cable news and talk radio, and yet in a way, some people have almost become inured to it. Nothing will ever happen, they say. No one will ever be held to account. I’m talking about the Deep State’s multi-year effort to take down Donald Trump, of course. As we reported, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard dropped bombshell claims Friday and issued a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, saying that former president Barack Obama and miscreants in his intelligence circle tried to subvert the will of the American people and in effect stage a coup in 2016 and beyond. The DNI appeared on Fox News’ “Hannity” on Friday night, and although some of what she had to say is similar to her Friday statement which our Susie Moore reported on, it’s still stunning to hear her directly accuse former President Obama of what some would call treason:

“This is such an important issue, and I just want to start by saying that this is an issue that is important to every single one of us as Americans. This is not a partisan issue. It has to do with the integrity and the strength of our Democratic Republic, and it [her report] lays out this over 100 documents that you’re referencing that I released—declassified and released—spells out in great detail exactly what happens when you have some of the most powerful people in our country, directly, leading at the helm, President Obama and his senior most national security cabinet, James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper, and Susan Rice and others, essentially making a very intentional decision to create this manufactured politicized piece of intelligence with the objective of subverting the will of the American people…”

https://twitter.com/SaveUSAKitty/status/1946385400664084717?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1946385400664084717%7Ctwgr%5E9750053197695824b9a9850d5fac65fd53735614%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fbobhoge%2F2025%2F07%2F20%2Fdni-gabbard-details-jaw-dopping-info-detailing-obamas-effort-to-subvert-the-american-peoples-will-n2191863

Gabbard’s boss Donald Trump has been appreciative of her efforts:

In another post on Truth Social, the president wrote, “Congratulations to Tulsi Gabbard. Keep it coming!!!” In a Saturday appearance on “Fox and Friends,” she called the efforts a “treasonous conspiracy.” In her “Hannity” segment, meanwhile, she flat-out accused Obama and Co. of attempting what was essentially a coup: “Their goal was to essentially not accept the decision of the American people, and to use this manufactured politicized intelligence as a means to enact what would become essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.”She went to describe how Obama told his intelligence folks to jump, and they said, “How high?”

“Then DNI James Clapper took the lead on what President Obama wanted done, and which was essentially create a document that tells us not if, but how Russia interfered with the election. President Obama delivered the conclusion that he wanted the Intelligence Community to reach, and directed them to find and essentially create and manufacture the intelligence to support the conclusion that President Obama wanted to deliver to the American people.” Once they reached their desired conclusion, the Deep State and their lackeys in the media leapt into action, she said, and the rest is history (impeachments, special counsel reports, FISA warrants, increased tensions with Russia… the list goes on). Asked if she thought there were prosecutable crimes in evidence here, Gabbard had a one-word answer. “Yes.” But she did elaborate: “I’m referring all of these documents that we have that we have found and uncovered, referring them to the Department of Justice for further investigation, accountability and action, not just investigation, but action.

Accountability has to take place. The American people’s ability to have faith and trust in the integrity of our Democratic Republic is literally what’s at stake, and therefore the future of our ability to exist as the country that we know it.” Even after all this time, it’s still amazing to me that this went on in our own country—and that many who rely on the nation’s corrupt media for their information are hearing about it for the first time. The “Hannity” clip is a little over eight minutes, but I encourage you to listen to the whole thing and soak in what Tulsi has to say. Questions remain: Will Obama respond? Will Adam Schiff suddenly appear with the Russia-collusion evidence he’s been promising for so many years now? What are the DOJ’s next steps? Things are likely to get very interesting indeed in the months ahead.

Read more …

“Many in Washington DC do not like Tulsi Gabbard for exactly the reasons she explains in this interview. Her motives to release all the information are the opposite of former AG Bill Barr who wanted to see it remain hidden.”

• Director Gabbard Explains Her Motive (CTH)

Tulsi Gabbard does an excellent job explaining exactly why the information about who constructed the Trump-Russia collusion narrative needs to be in the spotlight. In this interview DNI Tulsi Gabbard outlines how damaging it is to our constitutional republic when we allow systemic corruption to go unaddressed. Many in Washington DC do not like Tulsi Gabbard for exactly the reasons she explains in this interview. Her motives to release all the information are the opposite of former AG Bill Barr who wanted to see it remain hidden. Bound by no other agenda, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is doing something very few people have the fortitude to continue doing. Listen carefully to her words because they have been backed up by action. What people do speaks so loudly, often we cannot hear a word they are saying. In this example, her words and actions are exactly the same. Let’s hope Attorney General Pam Bondi is influenced by Tulsi Gabbard.

Read more …

“Tulsi Gabbard is not under any restriction on her review. That’s the difference. Where Durham was not permitted to go, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is going. Her release of the information is specifically because she is empowered to look at this information and release it..”

• Tulsi Gabbard Releases Background Information of Trump-Russia Op (CTH)

The Trump-Russia collusion story was always a targeted false smear intended to generate a special counsel and hamstring the surprising winner from the 2016 election, Donald Trump. The Russia-Collusion narrative was always an Intelligence Community op against Donald TRump. Yesterday, Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard released a tranche of background information, [114 pages of information], showing how the Obama administration intentionally and with great purpose fabricated the entire story. Staying focused on the trail of evidence held deep within the ODNI office, is why Tulsi Gabbard has been targeted for removal over the past several weeks. Kudos to Tulsi Gabbard for staying on mission – Great job.

What the evidence shows is a focused targeting operation intended to fabricate a false premise by the United States Intelligence Community, through the Office of former DNI James Clapper. The op was green-lighted by Barack Obama as a way to impede the agenda of incoming President Donald Trump. All three branches of government collaborated on the scheme. WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Friday, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard revealed overwhelming evidence that demonstrates how, after President Trump won the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton, President Obama and his national security cabinet members manufactured and politicized intelligence to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.

• In the months leading up to the November 2016 election, the Intelligence Community (IC) consistently assessed that Russia is “probably not trying … to influence the election by using cyber means.”
• On December 7, 2016, after the election, talking points were prepared for DNI James Clapper stating, “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome.”
• On December 9, 2016, President Obama’s White House gathered top National Security Council Principals for a meeting that included James Clapper, John Brennan, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe and others, to discuss Russia.
• After the meeting, DNI Clapper’s Executive Assistant sent an email to IC leaders tasking them with creating a new IC assessment “per the President’s request” that details the “tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election.” It went on to say, “ODNI will lead this effort with participation from CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS.”
• Obama officials leaked false statements to media outlets, including The Washington Post, claiming, “Russia has attempted through cyber means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of an election.”
• On January 6, 2017, a new Intelligence Community Assessment was released that directly contradicted the IC assessments that were made throughout the previous six months.

After months of investigation into this matter, the facts reveal this new assessment was based on information that was known by those involved to be manufactured i.e. the Steele Dossier or deemed as not credible. This was politicized intelligence that was used as the basis for countless smears seeking to delegitimize President Trump’s victory, the years-long Mueller investigation, two Congressional impeachments, high level officials being investigated, arrested, and thrown in jail, heightened US-Russia tensions, and more. “The issue I am raising is not a partisan issue. It is one that concerns every American. The information we are releasing today clearly shows there was a treasonous conspiracy in 2016 committed by officials at the highest level of our government.

Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people,” said DNI Tulsi Gabbard. “Their egregious abuse of power and blatant rejection of our Constitution threatens the very foundation and integrity of our democratic republic. No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to ensure nothing like this ever happens again. The American people’s faith and trust in our democratic republic and therefore the future of our nation depends on it. As such, I am providing all documents to the Department of Justice to deliver the accountability that President Trump, his family, and the American people deserve.”

Is there new information within the release? Yes and No. All of the outlined activity, the release of the emails and communication within the scheme team, is not new. However, the new part is the evidence. The facts now public to support all previous claims made here and by others, this time with greater detail that cannot be refuted. If you have been reading here for a while THE DOCUMENTS tell a story that is well known. We were able to piece this together even without knowing how the corrupt actors were talking to each other about their specific roles, responsibilities and motives. The documents provided by Tulsi Gabbard are the evidence of a serious coup against incoming President Trump by actors within government. The end of their IC effort culminated in the Robert Mueller investigation. Tulsi is providing the path to the avatar Mueller represented and all of the actors who participated with him.

Some will ask why John Durham never found this information, and/or shared it publicly. The answer to that question is not hard to understand. John Durham was NEVER allowed to look at the government actors in the Trump-Russia narrative. Durham was not allowed to look at how the U.S. Intelligence Community participated. Durham was ham-strung from the outset of his review and investigation, by Attorney General Bill Barr. Bill Barr never let John Durham focus on the govt side of the Trump-Russia collusion story. Tulsi Gabbard is not under any restriction on her review. That’s the difference. Where Durham was not permitted to go, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is going. Her release of the information is specifically because she is empowered to look at this information and release it. Special Counsel John Durham never had that authority. Gabbard provides a top cover memo on Page #67 that highlights who were the “Principal” actors in the scheme: This list of names is key.

Many of them will be familiar to you from all of the research we have poured into the Trump-Russia conspiracy. I would draw attention to the “Justice” participants. Main Justice Attorney General Loretta Lynch and DOJ-NSD head Mary McCord. Again, confirmation that Mary McCord was one of the key participants. McCord is still one of the Lawfare leads against Trump with her friend, Norm Eisen. Interestingly, Deputy AG Sally Yates was not a participant. Instead it was left to AG Loretta Lynch and more importantly Mary McCord. I would also draw attention to the “Chair” of the organization, Susan Rice. This memo released by DNI Gabbard outlining Rice’s participation as Principal and Chair of the op, in combination with her infamous Jan 5, 2017, memo, puts context to Rice’s legal exposure.


Why do I say legal exposure, because Susan Rice is on record saying she was not a participant and never heard of the FBI investigation underpinning the Trump-Russia collusion narrative. Obviously everything above is now a provable lie. Look at that highlighted box from Susan Rice’s lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, and remember in his March 20, 2017, testimony Comey said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC).FBI Director James Comey was protecting himself against the spygate surveillance of Trump, by leveraging his prior notification to the White House. Comey was signaling, ‘you cant get me for spying on Trump without getting Susan Rice and Barack Obama’, who knew about it.

Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now? I would also draw attention to the “FBI” lead on the Trump-Russia collusion meeting, former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe. McCabe was entrenched in Crossfire Hurricane, and it makes sense for him to lead the Trump-Russia collusion story as a cover for the prior fraudulent investigation.Factually, everyone listed in that participation memo for their various agencies (silos) is a co-conspirator in the scheme; an intelligence operation to manufacture a false premise, a Trump-Russia collusion story.Tulsi Gabbard deserves appreciation for her efforts on releasing these background documents. However, information without accountability should not be the objective. Attorney General Pam Bondi needs to put some teeth into these findings.

Read more …

“..the DNI *CAN BE* deployed like a super strong cross-silo inspector general’s office. Force the other IC silos to comply with the demands of the DNI. This has never been done. But the DNI has this unique power..”

• Tulsi Gabbard Expands Power of DNI Office – Now Comes the Counter Attack (CTH)

Many people are questioning why Tulsi Gabbard is able to discover and expose activity by the Obama administration and the Intelligence Community, yet prior office holders did not. Last year, when asked for approaches that could assist a Trump Term-2, I outlined the possibilities for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). What we are seeing today is running in direct parallel to that original outline. As our conversation expands, and we await the counter attack against her, perhaps it is worth a revisit. I will explain the predictable counter attack at the end.

August, 2024 – The ODNI was created as an outcome of the 9-11 Commission recommendations. In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose. Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01. DHS came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed. When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.

Here is the weird part. The ODNI was formed in 2004, with the intent for the office to be the pivot point of a national security radar. The DNI was intended to provide information to domestic agencies about foreign terror networks that would prevent something like 9-11 from happening again. However, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has never, not for one day, operated on this intent. This is why they are such a critical position from my perspective. The office was new, not established yet as a functioning silo, when Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived in 2009. They quickly dispatched an idiot, James Clapper, into the operation so they could weaponize around the offices’ fulcrum point. Prior to the DNI office existing, the CIA radar would sweep externally and then report to the Office of the President.

The DNI was intended to take external radar sweep (CIA) and make it a full 360° circle, adding a sweep inside the USA that would be handled by the Dept of Homeland Security. The DHS sweep and the CIA sweep would then be combined into a central collection hub called the ODNI. Everyone with responsibility for “national security” could access the ODNI material. Essentially and presumably, post 9-11 nothing like jihadists practicing to fly airplanes would be missed again; at least that was the intent. The weird part is that because the DNI was immediately weaponized, the office has never functioned to the purpose of its intent. No one truly knows what the office possibilities consist of, because no one has ever seen anyone try to functionally control the hub. If you think I’m joking about the intent of Obama and John Brennan using the DNI, watch this video. This is before Brennan became CIA Director; this is when Brennan was helping Barack Obama put the pillars into place.

For the intents of this outline, the takeaway is how the DNI office has never been used for good. In a strategic way, that can be used to our advantage if you are talking about leveraging silos against each other. Example: The DNI can assemble material from any silo. Meaning the DNI can reach into any IC silo and extract anything they want. Under the original authorities given to the DNI, this authority exists. So, let’s spread the wings on this office and do exactly what it is permitted to do, only this time extract for the purpose of showing the President what is happening in every silo. In essence, the DNI *CAN BE* deployed like a super strong cross-silo inspector general’s office. Force the other IC silos to comply with the demands of the DNI. This has never been done. But the DNI has this unique power.

The DNI can make the FBI, DOJ, DOJ-NSD, DoD, DoS and CIA provide anything and everything they demand. Instead of the other silos using blocks and threats against the office of the President, use the authority of the DNI to get them without confrontation. Then use the DNI to declassify the documents (if requested by POTUS), instead of the originating silo. Can you see how the DNI office can be repurposed to be a seriously strong weapon in the toolbox of the President, against the schemes of those inside the various IC silos? The DNI becomes much more important than the CIA Director, NSA Director, FBI Director, Attorney General, etc, because the DNI can just show up and say, “give me this.” That’s the whole functional purpose of the DNI office that has never been exerted; let’s flippin’ use it.

Let’s use the office of the DNI as the central information hub that takes information from inside the corrupt silos, then provides that information to the President who puts sunlight upon it. Each corrupt silo penetrated with disinfectant. This could begin a process to pull down the shadow operations and let the American public see what has been happening inside our IC apparatus. To accomplish this approach, the National Security Advisor to the President (NSA), would be the person who tells the DNI exactly what they are looking for.

Read more …

“Trump hailed Gabbard and her team as “fantastic on prosecuting Obama and the ‘thugs’ who have just been unequivocally exposed on highest level Election Fraud.”

• Trump Endorses Gabbard’s ‘Russiagate’ Coup Claims (RT)

US President Donald Trump has praised National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard for “exposing” a coup plot against him by the administration of former President Barack Obama. On Friday, Gabbard unveiled over 100 pages of newly declassified documents detailing what she described as a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials – spearheaded by Obama himself – to politicize intelligence and falsely accuse Trump of colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election. The operation led to the launch of the years-long Trump-Russia collusion probe known as ‘Russiagate,’ which Gabbard described as “a years-long coup against [Trump].” In a Truth Social post on Saturday, Trump hailed Gabbard and her team as “fantastic on prosecuting Obama and the ‘thugs’ who have just been unequivocally exposed on highest level Election Fraud.”

Trump, who has long rejected allegations of Russian ties as fake and unproven, congratulated Gabbard and urged her to “keep it coming!!!” Gabbard’s disclosures include documents indicating Obama ordered officials to discard prior intelligence assessments that found no evidence of Russian involvement in Trump’s campaign or victory and replace them with new claims blaming Russia that were based on discredited sources and fabricated data. She said these false claims were then leaked to the media. The result, she argued, led to the two-year probe by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which found evidence of Russian interference but did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Trump’s team and Moscow, as well as Trump’s impeachments, indictments, and escalating tensions with Russia.

White House deputy press secretary and presidential aide Harrison Fields said on Fox News the documents were the “predicate” for a decade of attacks on Trump. He labeled the Obama presidency “the most corrupt we’ve ever seen” and criticized the mainstream media for pushing the Russiagate story. Fields noted that Gabbard’s announcement coincides with an ongoing probe into the Russiagate hoax but declined to elaborate. The documents name several officials Gabbard alleges participated in the “conspiracy,” and she vowed to hand all evidence to the Justice Department, warning that “no matter how powerful, every person involved… must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Read more …

“..it is possible, and in time it will definitely happen. It is essential.”

Trump will have to profoundly apologize to Putin for 10 years of fake US accusations.

• Kremlin Rules Out Imminent Putin-Trump Meeting (RT)

A face-to-face meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, will definitely happen, but the time has not yet come, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. The Times reported earlier this week that a trilateral meeting between Putin, Trump, and Chinese President Xi Jinping could take place in September during a military parade in Beijing, marking the 80th anniversary of victory over imperial Japan in World War II. The Russian president has already confirmed that he will attend. The Kremlin, however, said it has no knowledge of a potential meeting between the leaders. Speaking about potential talks between Putin and Trump in a clip from an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin released on Sunday, Peskov said, “it is possible, and in time it will definitely happen. It is essential.”

A meeting might be necessary “for signing some major agreements that will be reached over time after a huge amount of work has been done. But this time has not yet come, this work still needs to be done,” he stated. The two leaders have talked on the phone several times in recent months, mainly focusing on ways to resolve the Ukraine conflict, with Trump saying earlier this month that he is “unhappy” and “disappointed” in Putin. Regarding Trump’s comments about Putin, Peskov said, “everybody has already gotten used to his rather tough and straightforward rhetoric. At the same time, he confirms his intentions to continue to do everything possible to facilitate a peaceful settlement” between Russia and Ukraine.

“In fact, President Putin has repeatedly spoken about his desire to switch the Ukrainian settlement onto a peaceful path as quickly as possible. This is a long process; it requires effort and it is not easy, and apparently in Washington there is an increasing understanding of this.” The Kremlin has said the third round of Russia-Ukraine negotiations will likely take place in Istanbul, though a date has not yet been set.

Read more …

“..to “fully comprehend” Russiagate, it must be viewed as only a small part of a broader Western campaign to demonize Russia, “that goes decades back.”

• Russiagate Only Tip of Iceberg In Western Demonization of Russia (RT)

US National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard’s revelations about the role of former President Barack Obama’s administration in the Russiagate scandal are “shocking,” but they expose only the surface of a broader Western anti-Russia campaign, Professor Oliver Boyd-Barrett has told RT. On Friday, Gabbard released newly declassified documents describing a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials – led by Obama himself – to falsely accuse Donald Trump of colluding with Russia during the 2016 election. The documents indicate that Obama ordered officials to discard intelligence assessments that found no Russian involvement in Trump’s campaign and replace them with claims blaming Moscow based on fabricated data.

The scandal led to the years-long Trump-Russia probe known as ‘Russiagate.’ “This is an extraordinary moment, that the head of intelligence in the US has made such a bold, in some ways shocking, statement of the truth,” Boyd-Barrett, a professor at Bowling Green State University and author of an in-depth study of Russiagate, said on Saturday. He noted the moment was especially striking as Gabbard called for prosecution of those involved in what she described as a “coup” attempt. Boyd-Barrett, however, emphasized that to “fully comprehend” Russiagate, it must be viewed as only a small part of a broader Western campaign to demonize Russia, “that goes decades back.”

“It’s part of a much deeper agenda – we’re talking Russia narrative… the broader context of an anti-Russian campaign that was stoked artificially around the time of the late 90s when the West had so clearly decided that NATO was going to move eastwards regardless of whatever anyone in Russia or anyone in the US had to say,” he said. He also warned against reducing Russiagate to a personal political ploy, noting that blaming it solely on Obama or Hillary Clinton’s election anxiety is “too simple an explanation.” Moscow has repeatedly denied interfering in the US electoral process.

Read more …

Brussels is no fan of Tulsi.

• EU Working Hard To Portray Russia As ‘Devil Incarnate’ – Kremlin (RT)

The EU is demonizing Russia in order to keep the Ukraine conflict running as Brussels still has not given up hope of suppressing Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. In May, the EU adopted the €150 billion Security Action for Europe (SAFE) instrument to support members that are willing to invest in defense. The move came as part of a larger military buildup drive that began in the bloc after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022 with the goal of countering what it perceives as the ‘Russian threat’. Moscow has dismissed claims that it intends to attack NATO countries as “nonsense,” saying that Western politicians are seeking to scare their populations to justify increased military spending.

In an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin released on Sunday, Peskov said the EU “is creating an enemy for itself, doing focused, professional work both in their own society and abroad in order to portray Russia as the devil incarnate… in order to ensure the continuation of the conflict, in order to suppress Russia.” The Kremlin spokesman added that there are discussions underway in the EU “about who will be paying for the feast.” Earlier this week, several EU countries rejected a plan proposed by US President Donald Trump for European NATO member states to buy American weapons for Ukraine. “Thank God the anti-Russian and militaristic ecstasy does not have universal backing” in the bloc, Peskov said.

Moscow has warned against supplying Western weapons to Ukraine, arguing that they only prolong the conflict and increase the risk of a direct clash between Russia and NATO. In the interview, Peskov noted that Russian President Vladimir Putin “has repeatedly spoken about his desire to bring the Ukrainian settlement on to a peaceful path as quickly as possible.” Russia has stated that it is ready to negotiate peace with Ukraine, though it has accused Kiev and its Western backers of not being interested in finding a long-term solution that addresses the root causes of the conflict.

Read more …

“Your country is a mess because your leaders suck..”

• Putin Did Better Job Than Any German Leader – Tucker Carlson (RT)

The German people should be angry at their own government that ruined their country rather than at Russian President Vladimir Putin, US journalist Tucker Carlson has told the Berlin-based newspaper Bild. A large portion of the two hour interview released on Saturday was devoted to Carlson’s interview with Putin from February 2024. During the exchange, the US journalist repeatedly curbed Bild deputy editor-in-chief Paul Ronzheimer’s attempts to condemn the Russian leader over the Ukraine conflict. After Ronzheimer referred to Putin as a “criminal,” Carlson replied: “I am not defending Putin, who I think has done a great job for Russia. Much better job than any German leader. That is for sure.”

“Your country is going down, Russia is going up. You should be mad at your own leaders. You are mad at Putin instead,” he argued. According to Carlson, Angela Merkel – who served as German chancellor from 2005 to 2021 – was far more deserving of being branded a “criminal” because “she wrecked your country through mass migration… It will not recover in your lifetime or mine.” Carlson suggested that the current authorities in Berlin are attacking Putin and Russia in order to distract the public from migration and economic problems in Germany, which is expected to end 2025 in recession for the third year in a row. Your country is a mess because your leaders suck. That is the fact. You are mad about that. So, they take your anger and they are like: ‘Oh no, it is Putin’s fault. It is Putin’s fault.’ Ok, got it,” he said.

Earlier this month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Germany was becoming “dangerous again” for Russia, after German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius stated that Bundeswehr troops must be prepared to “kill” Russian soldiers if necessary. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said earlier that by supporting Kiev in the conflict with Moscow “Germany is sliding down the same slippery slope it already followed a couple of times in the last century – down toward its own collapse,” referring to the defeats suffered by the country in the First and Second World Wars.

Read more …

“Driven by the spirit of liberty, future citizens will demand the return of what defines sovereign individuals: the right to property, to free expression, to personal autonomy. ”

“Trump’s government is also dismantling its overseas media empire. That includes defunding over 1,000 journalism-related NGOs worldwide that previously received USAID support. In the U.S. alone, up to 19,500 USAID employees and contractors could lose their job..”

• Full Assault On The Media Machine: Trump Slashes USAID (Kolbe)

After fierce internal disputes and the resignation of Elon Musk as a government advisor, the United States has now entered a new phase of fiscal consolidation. On Friday, the House of Representatives cleared the way for the first major round of budget cuts. And it’s a heavy hitter. If you believe the steady drumbeat of European media coverage, the U.S. is on the verge of sovereign default. At first glance, the numbers do indeed resemble a fiscal horror show: After the devastating Biden years, federal debt has ballooned to 120 percent of GDP. The current deficit stands at a glaring 6.5 percent. In the coming months, $9 billion in outstanding debt must be refinanced—Washington has little room to maneuver. What’s routinely omitted in media coverage, however, is the fact that the U.S. remains the issuer of the world’s reserve currency, and can, if necessary, print its way out of the mess.

Europe’s hope for a premature American collapse—as both a justification for its own policy failures and a welcome distraction—will likely end in bitter disappointment. At first glance, it might seem odd that President Trump prioritized sweeping tax cuts over budget discipline. But look more closely, and the move reveals itself as part of a deliberate offensive strategy. In Trump’s America, the motto is: green light for the private sector first, then clean house in the bureaucratic stables. Anyone seriously doubting that Americans are capable of implementing fiscal cuts has not yet grasped the political force of the Trump administration. Even Elon Musk—the founder of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), created to deepen budget reform efforts—lost patience with the slow grind of bureaucracy and quit in frustration. But in the bigger picture, that’s a mere footnote.

Because now, it gets serious. Building on DOGE’s groundwork, the first multi-billion-dollar rescission package is now being deployed: NPR reports that $9.4 billion in spending will be slashed with the stroke of a pen. Trump’s first real punch in the fight over federal expenditures goes straight to the heart of the left’s media apparatus—USAID. Though nominally a humanitarian agency funding foreign aid projects, USAID has functioned in practice as a massive subsidy engine for the progressive media ecosystem operating worldwide. That era now appears to be over. This propaganda leviathan stretched its tentacles across the globe, reinforcing and exporting the globalist green-left agenda that Europeans know as the Green Deal, the “green transformation,” or the politics of open borders.

Like in Europe, paternalistic structures have gradually taken hold in America—but better camouflaged, given the poor reputation of state control in the land of liberty. Media outlets bankrolled by USAID opened the floodgates to government messaging, constructing a vast machine to manipulate public opinion. How else could the American public be kept in the dark for four years about Joe Biden’s mental decline? Such a sustained deception requires close coordination between political and media actors, with the latter willingly co-opted into state control. That Trump is starting his fiscal consolidation by targeting the beating heart of this media leviathan is no coincidence. Trump 2.0 is not a mere replay of 2016. Inside the White House, they’ve got the enemy and its structures clearly in their sights.

The intensity of the trade battles with Brussels shows Trump has identified the core of green-socialist globalism exactly where many suspected: Brussels, London, and Davos. And Trump appeals to those yearning for freedom, for open markets—including in the media—with steadfast resolve. With the stroke of his pen, The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB)—America’s equivalent of ARD and ZDF—has been stripped of its $1.1 billion in federal funding. The blow to PBS and NPR is severe. A historic day for freedom of speech—and a precedent Germany can only dream of. In Germany, a self-absorbed, taxpayer-funded media aristocracy holds the reins—merged with political power into a unified cartel of opinion. In contrast, in the U.S., a single signature is enough to start dismantling media manipulation, climate-hysteria weather maps, and perverse woke pedagogy—as if the madness had never happened.

Future generations will ask how it was possible that taxpayers funded such a cynical, parasitic opposition with their own money—day after day—broadcast into their homes, where they were lectured with hypermoralistic fervor. But those same generations will also hold in their hands a manual of libertarian reform—a playbook for liberation from neo-feudal control. In the offices of the statists and central planners—in Brussels, Paris, and Berlin—this development is being watched with alarm. Once the message of Milei’s success in Argentina or Trump’s reforms in the U.S. spreads, it will trigger a wave of uncomfortable questions. Driven by the spirit of liberty, future citizens will demand the return of what defines sovereign individuals: the right to property, to free expression, to personal autonomy.

They will demand a lean state—a mere administrator of essentials—that neither educates nor intrudes upon individual lives. That’s the dream. But on the road to the Isles of the Blessed, hard work lies ahead. Budget reform will require a lumberjack’s resolve. And the axe is already swinging in the White House. The cuts don’t stop at domestic public media. Trump’s government is also dismantling its overseas media empire. That includes defunding over 1,000 journalism-related NGOs worldwide that previously received USAID support. In the U.S. alone, up to 19,500 USAID employees and contractors could lose their jobs. These are the days of reckoning.

Read more …

There’s always a judge out there somewhere willing to play Preident.

• Judge Orders Trump Admin To Restore Funding To US Propaganda Outlet (RT)

A federal judge has ordered the administration of US President Donald Trump to restore funding for state-run Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), ruling that the decision to stop the support was “unprecedented” and lacked any basis. RFE/RL was a key tool for spreading Western propaganda in the Soviet bloc during the Cold War and was funded by the CIA. The outlet currently receives nearly all of its funding from Congress. The Trump administration has sought to cut funding for RFE/RL and several other state-linked outlets. It has denounced the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the body that oversees state-funded media, saying it is “not salvageable,” while indulging in “obscene overspending.” The administration also claimed it is crawling with “spies and terrorist sympathizers.”

Consequently, the USAGM essentially froze funding for RFE/RL and refused to enter into a new contract with the outlet after the previous agreement expired in March. This led to staff furloughs and programming cuts, though the EU stepped in to fill the budgetary gap. On Friday, Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Trump administration lacks the legal authority to refuse Congress-approved funding of more than $70 million, arguing that they provided no clear basis for the move. ”It is unprecedented for an agency to demand that entirely new terms govern its decades-old working relationship with a grantee entity,” he wrote.

He went on to rebuke the USAGM for a lack of responses to RFE/RL to negotiate a new agreement, describing it as “stonewalling” and adding that the agency went dark for days or even weeks. The “USAGM’s flagrant disregard for its funding responsibilities” caused RFE/RL to suffer “mass furloughs, cancelation of programming, and inevitable damage to the global influence that RFE/RL has built over decades,” the ruling said. RFE/RL President and CEO Stephen Capus welcomed the court’s decision. “This victory provides our journalists with the momentum necessary to continue reaching the nearly 47 million people each week… With this ruling, RFE/RL can continue to advance US national security interests.”

Read more …

Next 10 years.

• Ukraine Unlikely To Join EU In The Near Term – Merz (RT)

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has downplayed the prospect of Ukraine joining the EU in the near future, saying it is unlikely to happen during the bloc’s current budget cycle, which runs through 2034. Some EU officials had suggested the country could become a member much earlier. Ukraine made EU accession a national priority in 2019, formally applying in 2022 shortly after the escalation of the conflict with Russia. It was granted candidate status later that year, with the European Commission suggesting Kiev could join by 2030 if it made sufficient progress in areas such as political and judicial reforms, as well as in combating organized crime and corruption. Merz made the remarks on Friday during a press conference with Romanian President Nicusor Dan in Berlin.

“For us, the absolute top priority is, first and foremost, to do everything possible to end this war,” he said, adding, “then we’ll talk about the reconstruction of Ukraine.” That process, he said, would take “a number of years” and likely fall outside the EU’s current medium-term financial outlook. EU membership requires the unanimous approval of all 27 member states. While Brussels supports Kiev’s bid, some of the bloc’s nations – including Hungary, Slovakia, and Poland – remain opposed, arguing that Ukraine’s institutions and economy are unprepared and that membership would place an unbearable financial strain on the union. Moscow strongly opposes Ukraine’s NATO ambitions, but initially took a neutral stance on EU membership. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in March that Kiev had the “sovereign right” to join, as long as the bloc remained focused on economics.

However, amid a broader drive among European NATO states to boost their militaries, Russian officials have grown more critical. In June, the EU redirected approximately €335 billion ($390 billion) in Covid relief funds towards military uses. The month before that, Brussels introduced a €150 billion debt and loan instrument to back its members’ armed forces and military industrial sector. The funding will also be made available to Kiev. Russia has condemned those steps, accusing both NATO and the EU of “rabid militarization.” Former President Dmitry Medvedev said the EU now poses “no less of a threat” to Russia than US-led NATO.

Read more …

10 years too late.

• German General Urges Ukraine To Strike Russian Airfields (RT)

Ukraine should consider striking Russian airfields and weapons factories deep inside the country to alleviate pressure on the front, a senior German general has suggested. Speaking during a Bundeswehr podcast on Saturday, Major General Christian Freuding, who oversees Germany’s military assistance to Ukraine, gave Kiev advice on weakening Russia’s offensive power.“You can also indirectly affect the offensive potential of Russian strike forces before they are deployed,” Freuding said. “Use long-range air warfare assets to strike aircraft and airfields before they are used. Also, target weapons production facilities.” Freuding also lamented that despite Western sanctions, Russia has increased its production of drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic systems.

“We must reconsider whether our economic measures have been sufficient and where we can apply further pressure, particularly to limit Russian production capabilities,” he said. The general also pointed to the limitations of US-made Patriot air defense missiles against waves of Russian drones. “It [a drone] costs around €30,000-50,000 ($34,000–58,000) depending on the model. It’s wasteful to shoot it down with a Patriot missile costing over €5 million. We need countermeasures that cost €2,000–€4,000, especially as Russia aims to further increase its production capacity,” he explained. Last year, the administration of former US President Joe Biden authorized Ukraine to use American long-range weapons to strike inside Russia, though with significant restrictions on range and target selection. Media reports at the time indicated that Kiev was not allowed to hit major Russian airfields.

Meanwhile, Freuding confirmed earlier this month that Ukraine would receive the first batch of long-range missiles financed by Berlin before the end of July. Germany, however, has been reluctant to send Taurus long-range missiles due to escalation concerns. Earlier this month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Germany was becoming “dangerous again,” after German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said that Bundeswehr troops must be prepared to “kill” Russian soldiers if necessary. Moscow also accused the German leadership of supporting “confrontation” and pursuing an “aggressive mobilization of Europe against Russia.”

Read more …

France is (going) bankrupt.

• France Wants To Nuke Holidays To Fund A Fantasy War With Russia (Marsden)

The day after French President Emmanuel Macron said that, in the year 2027 alone, he would blow another roughly €60 billion on weapons for some fantasy war with Russia that France isn’t even in, the French prime minister proposed axing some statutory holidays in an effort to balance the books.Dude just hit a third rail and electrocuted his political career. There are two things the French hold sacred. The first is their sprawling social safety net, which they fund with sky-high taxes and from which they get diminishing returns. And the other is their numerous beloved paid vacation days. Macron’s handpicked prime minister, longtime establishment centrist fixture François Bayrou, has chosen to mess with the one thing that unites the nation more than even football: their time off.

Why would he want to do that? So the French can work more. So the activity generated can be taxed. Because the government is super broke. Bayrou says that he has to find another €44 billion in the state’s couch cushions to keep France’s ballooning debt and borrowing costs from setting off more investor panic and bond-dumping. Normally, the government doesn’t even touch the budget until September, when legislators return from their sacred summer break, which of course they’re not being asked to sacrifice in the interests of austerity. But Bayrou says that he wants to get a head start because the public needs time to digest his ‘let’s cancel holidays’ pitch.

Or maybe he just needs a running start at the cliff that he’s about to hurl himself off. Because both the anti-establishment right and left will almost certainly vote non on his holiday cuts, possibly triggering a no-confidence vote. Or rather, another one. He’s survived eight so far. But with a proposal so ludicrously unpopular, this cat’s ninth political life may be about to bite the dust. It’s been a year since the last election, so France could legally have another one anytime now. Which would make it three elections in as many years. And it’s not like those are free either, by the way.

So here he is, Prime Minister Bayrou, waxing all poetic about national sacrifice, while at the same time proposing to axe the Easter Monday state holiday in April, and the one that falls on France’s WWII Victory Day on May 8: “I think this is the last station before the cliff and the crushing by the debt. We must call it by its name. It is a mortal danger for a country,” Bayrou said. Hear that, Frenchies? Accept his proposal or the country gets fatally knifed. No mention of cutting anything else from the budget, huh? Not a whiff of trimming that €170-billion deficit from any of the other more glaring bloated line items? He said that he has zero interest in messing with Macron’s new 5% of GDP for NATO defense spending, despite France not actually being in a war.

“We planned to double the budget by 2030, we are actually going to double it by 2027,” Macron had just announced. “To this end, a review of the military planning law will be presented in the autumn. And I call on the National Assembly to vote on it,” he said. Look, I’m no Inspector Clouseau, but I think I just may have an idea of where they can find a super big line item so they don’t have to keep nickel and diming French workers.As one might imagine, this is going over like canned Cheez Whiz with the average French citizen who depends on those clustered April-May-June holidays to build “bridges” from midweek days off to weekends – or maybe even use them to dig full-blown “tunnels” under entire work weeks.

The government is now asking ordinary people to surrender rest so it can look fiscally responsible without touching bloated defense budgets or elite entitlements. It has decided that its taxpayers’ time, and ultimately, their lives are less valuable than its agenda. And what does it say about a country when it kills a peace holiday commemorating the end of a world war to pay for hypothetical ones? France isn’t under siege, but its leadership is acting like it is. “Since 1945, freedom has never been so threatened, and never so seriously,” Macron told French soldiers in a speech around the Bastille Day national holiday. “To be free in this world, we must be feared. To be feared, we must be powerful,” he said.

Read more …

This is where tariff threats may come in handy.

• Europe’s Online Censorship Laws Could Restrict Americans Too (ET)

For many Americans, talk of a crackdown in Europe on “hate speech” and “misinformation” may seem a faraway issue, but legal experts say that Europe’s online censorship laws could affect Americans, too. Starting July 1, social media companies and internet service providers operating within the EU that do not comply with laws that ban content deemed illegal there could be fined up to 6 percent of their global revenue, according to the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). The European Commission states that the DSA, originally passed in 2022, “protects consumers and their fundamental rights online by setting clear and proportionate rules.”

On July 1, the DSA integrated its Code of Conduct into the act, requiring online platforms and search engines to comply with the censorship laws of all member states or face punitive fines. Proponents of the DSA state that the law was passed in response to escalating cases of anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim statements in Europe. Meanwhile, critics, like Virginie Joron, a French member of the European Parliament, have called it a “Trojan horse for surveillance and control.” “What was sold as the Digital Services Act is increasingly functioning as a Digital Surveillance Act,” Joron told attendees at a May conference hosted by the Alliance Defending Freedom. Joron accused the European Commission and some parliamentarians of having “seized upon the DSA as a political tool to control speech, particularly targeting platforms like X, Facebook, and Telegram.”

The concern among policy experts is that Europe’s speech laws could compel online platforms to institute restrictive policies worldwide, in order to comply. “The DSA generally cannot directly compel technology companies to censor American speech, but it creates an incentive to do so,” David Inserra, a fellow for free expression and technology at the Cato Institute, told The Epoch Times. “At some point, companies may find it easier just to change their policies to align with more restrictive laws, thus having American speech effectively regulated by Brussels—thus the name the ‘Brussels effect.’” Legal analysts say that the Digital Services Act is open to political manipulation because of its imprecise language regarding what is illegal for people to say, as well as a complex and ever-changing array of online speech prohibitions.

“Through very vague and loose definitions of illegal content and ‘hate speech’ and ‘misinformation,’ this becomes a blueprint for restricting speech online,” Adina Portaru, senior counsel for ADF International, told The Epoch Times. “If you take the narrow definition of ‘hate speech—incitement to hatred—then you realize that, once again, whoever has the power to define ‘hatred’ is the one who defines if you are breaching the law or not.” According to a September 2024 analysis by Therese Enarsson, a European attorney, “the DSA provides a very broad legal definition for illegal content,” which it defines as speech that does not comply with the laws of the EU or any member state. “Similarly to illegal content, the DSA does not attempt to define what constitutes hate speech,” Enarsson states. “This is unfortunate, seeing that platforms must adapt their systems to combat such speech.”

This means that content posted by someone in Romania would have to be taken down if it conflicts with speech laws in France, creating a lowest-common-denominator threshold for suppressing content. The DSA also states that it “specifically recognises the role of trusted flaggers to identify and flag hate speech online and to allow action against it”—a role that’s analogous to the collaboration between “fact-checkers” and social media companies in the United States to police online speech. “We’re speaking about Europe, but of course we can also speak of situations whereby you have an American citizen posting something here in the U.S. and with the internet being an online environment globally, somebody can flag that in Europe, and according to the DSA, that speech will be removed from the entire platform,” Portaru said.

In addition, this process of flagging and fact-checking often includes a left-leaning bias, studies show. A 2023 survey of 150 “experts on misinformation” published in the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review found that nearly 85 percent of the respondents were on the political left.

Read more …

WE will decide what you can drive..

• EU Hatching Secret Electric Car Plan – Bild (RT)

The EU is drafting legislation that could force rental and corporate fleets to switch to electric vehicles (EVs) by 2030, Bild reported on Saturday, citing sources in Brussels. The directive is reportedly being quietly discussed by the European Commission and could be unveiled as early as late summer before going to the European Parliament. The regulation is seen as a backdoor to accelerate the green transition and enforce the bloc’s combustion-engine ban, which mandates a 100% cut in CO2 emissions from new cars by 2035, effectively outlawing gasoline and diesel vehicles. Car manufacturers have criticized the plan as too costly and requiring full conversions of production lines.

The new rules will reportedly apply to all rental companies and businesses with car fleets across the bloc. If approved, such entities will only be allowed to purchase EVs, thus impacting around 60% of new car sales, Bild said. A Commission spokesperson confirmed that work is underway on such a plan but declined to provide details. Lawmakers warn the measure could harm Europe’s rental sector: companies such as Enterprise, Hertz, and Sixt already scaled back EV fleets in 2024, citing poor charging infrastructure, high repair costs, and weak resale values. EU MP Markus Ferber urged the Commission to drop the plan, calling it “unrealistic.” Sixt CEO Nico Gabriel agreed, warning that few vacationers rent EVs and that mandatory electrification would drive up rental costs due to charging infrastructure needs.

Critics say Europe’s green push is straining its auto industry and wider economy. Carmakers face penalties if they fail to boost EV sales and must spend heavily on new production lines, batteries, chargers, and grid upgrades. The transition also threatens jobs: automaker Stellantis warned this month it could close plants if it fails to meet EU deadlines. Former EU commissioner Thierry Breton warned the shift to EVs could cost 600,000 jobs. Manufacturers have called for subsidies and state support to avoid losing more market share to rivals in China and the US. Other sectors face similar problems, especially as Brussels phases out Russian energy, imports of which have dropped sharply in light of Ukraine-related sanctions. Russian officials have warned that rejecting its supplies will force the EU to rely on costlier alternatives or rerouted Russian energy via intermediaries.

Read more …

But also done in France, and almost the US.

• Banning Alternative für Deutschland: A Nightmare Scenario (Eugyppius)

As all of my readers know, the Social Democrats (SPD) are fighting hard to force two hard-left justices onto the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe. Although the vote failed last week because Friedrich Merz messed it up, the SPD remain determined to give Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf and Ann-Katrin Kaufhold the red robes. They might still succeed. This matters because Brosius-Gersdorf and Kaufhold have both argued in favour of ban proceedings against Alternative für Deutschland. What is more, both candidates would be appointed to the second senate of the Constitutional Court, which is the division responsible for banning political parties. And as if that were not enough, the SPD nominated both candidates in the wake of their party congress, where SPD chairman Lars Klingbeil said that banning the AfD was his party’s “historical duty.”

Many have therefore concluded that the SPD are trying to stack the court in advance of an application to prohibit Germany’s second-strongest political party, banish all of its elected politicians and seize all of its assets.I’m far from a sensationalist, and I’ve repeatedly discounted the likelihood of an AfD ban – not least because the German establishment and the left in particular have good reasons to keep the AfD around. Lately, however, I’ve begun to appreciate that there are deeper, systemic forces working against the AfD in this case. These forces are beyond anybody’s control and if nobody does anything, they may well end in political catastrophe that is much bigger than any single party.

Since the end of the Merkel era, the German left has become thematically scattered, and so they have retreated to the only coordinating issue the German left has ever had, which is hating the right. As climatism started to fade, the social welfare state exceeded its limits and mass migration went sour, AfD bashing became the sole unifying principle for much of the SPD, Die Linke and the Greens. Hating the right is particularly important because it keeps leftist politicians and their activist class on the same page. Without a crusade against the right, a great chasm opens between the antifa thugs who want to smash the state and destroy capitalism on the one hand and the schoolmarm leftoid establishment functionaries in the Bundestag who want to mandate gender-neutral language for the civil service on the other hand. What is more, the firewall against the AfD splits the right and keeps the shrinking left in government. It is a win-win for leftoids everywhere.

Recent events, however, show why things cannot continue as they are now indefinitely. Over time, our Constitutional Court will begin to fill with leftist justices supported by the left parties, who like the rest of the left will also want to ban the AfD. Brosius-Gersdorf and Kaufhold are omens here. Right now the system is held in perfect balance; the left talks a big game about wanting to stamp out the AfD, but they can always justify their hesitation by saying the outcome of ban proceedings is too uncertain. When the necessary judicial majority for an AfD ban is finally secured in Karlsruhe, everything changes. At that point, there will be no excuse for not proceeding with a ban. The activists and the NGOs will take to the streets if their political masters in Berlin don’t begin the process. The CDU will be brought around by media smear campaigns and antifa intimidation.

Keep in mind that this is not about the AfD, but about imperatives within the left itself. No amount of moderation, polite messaging or triangulation on the part of the AfD can get the left to stop or pursue other goals. Unless some exogenous force introduces a new unifying obsession for the left parties and their activists, they will never stop gnawing on this particular chew toy. Practically, this probably means that the AfD has an expiration date. If they can’t get into government at the federal level and if nothing else changes, they will find themselves facing ban proceedings before a court stacked with leftists who hate them in the next 10 or 15 years. The federal elections in 2029 seem like the last opportunity to normalise the AfD before this final escalation.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

60 minutes

US debt

gazelle

Cucsumber
https://twitter.com/Cat5SMASHICANE/status/1946671107739680959

Desert

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 20 2025

Jul 202025
 
 July 20, 2025  Posted by at 9:43 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  52 Responses »


Saul Leiter Man with flowers, NY 1950s

 

• Obama Admin Engineered The Russia Hoax To Undermine Trump (Margolis)
• China’s Economic Demise And Its Impact On The US (Lance Roberts)
• Zelensky May Not Last Much Longer – Seymour Hersh (RT)
• Zelensky Wants Personal Meeting With Putin (RT)
• Putin and Trump Need To Meet – Orban (RT)
• Putin, Trump and Xi Could Meet In September – The Times (RT)
• Trump Toughens Stance In EU Trade Talks – FT (RT)
• Trump Issues New Threat To BRICS (RT)
• Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia Is Bluster and Bluff (SCF)
• DOJ Asks Court To Unseal Jeffrey Epstein Grand Jury Testimony (JTN)
• The Epstein Enigma (James Howard Kunstler)
• And It’s One, Two, Three, What Are We Fighting For? (Pepe Escobar)
• Russia Will Target Multinational Forces in Ukraine (Kyle Anzalone)
• The World Woke Up (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Red, White, and Bitcoin (Beirne)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/PU28453638/status/1946338084833923411


Clint

Comey

PDB

 

 

 

 

Tulsi Gabbard nuked the entire US political system with her report on Friday. It will take time for it to sink in. She doesn’t merely accuse Comey and Brennan, she says former president Obama is guilty of treason. An accusation lifted at Trump many times over the past 10 years of course, but the difference is Tulsi brings the receipts. Even then, it will be hard to get the MSM to report on all the court cases we will see, in anything like a neutral fashion. If only because the media, too, will be among the accused.

• Obama Admin Engineered The Russia Hoax To Undermine Trump (Margolis)

Fox News Digital has uncovered damning evidence that the Obama administration deliberately “manufactured and politicized intelligence” to push the now-debunked Russia election interference narrative, despite contradictory assessments from within the intelligence community itself. According to newly declassified documents that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released Friday, there’s “overwhelming evidence” that Barack Obama and his national security inner circle went to work immediately after Donald Trump’s stunning 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton. Their goal? Lay the foundation for the Trump-Russia hoax that would consume the nation for years. This wasn’t a matter of bad judgment; it was a calculated operation to delegitimize Trump’s presidency before it even began.

“Documents revealed that in the months leading up to the November 2016 election, the intelligence community consistently assessed that Russia was ‘probably not trying…to influence the election by using cyber means,’” the report reveals. “One instance was on Dec. 7, 2016, weeks after the election, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s talking points stated: ‘Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the U.S. presidential election outcome.’” Fox News Digital obtained a declassified copy of the Presidential Daily Brief, which was prepared by the Department of Homeland Security, with reporting from the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, FBI, National Security Agency, Department of Homeland Security, State Department and open sources, for Obama, dated Dec. 8, 2016.

“We assess that Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure,” the Presidential Daily Brief stated. “Russian Government-affiliated actors most likely compromised an Illinois voter registration database and unsuccessfully attempted the same in other states.” But the brief stated that it was “highly unlikely” the effort “would have resulted in altering any state’s official vote result.” “Criminal activity also failed to reach the scale and sophistication necessary to change election outcomes,” it stated. Declassified documents reveal that the FBI raised serious concerns about a 2016 Presidential Daily Brief (PDB), which claimed that Russia was trying to undermine the U.S. election.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence had assessed that Russia’s efforts were likely aimed at sowing doubt in the process — not disrupting it — and noted that cyberattacks on election infrastructure failed to cause any real impact. Internal FBI communications show agents pushed back, drafting a formal dissent and warning the brief shouldn’t move forward until their objections were heard. As a result, the brief’s release, originally slated for Dec. 9, 2016, was delayed following “new guidance” from ODNI. “It will not run tomorrow and is not likely to run until next week,” wrote the deputy director of the Presidential Daily Brief at Office of the Director of National Intelligence, whose name is redacted. The following day, Dec. 9, 2016, a meeting convened in the White House Situation Room, with the subject line starting: “Summary of Conclusions for PC Meeting on a Sensitive Topic (REDACTED.)”

The meeting included top officials in the National Security Council, Clapper, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice, then-Secretary of State John Kerry, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, among others, to discuss Russia. The declassified meeting record shows that Obama administration officials agreed to recommend sanctions against members of Russia’s intelligence agencies — if their cyber activities met the legal threshold under an executive order targeting foreign cyber interference. But that wasn’t all. Following the meeting, then-DNI James Clapper’s executive assistant instructed intelligence agencies to produce a new assessment “per the president’s request,” specifically aimed at detailing how Moscow allegedly tried to influence the 2016 election. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence would lead the effort, with help from the CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS, effectively setting the wheels in motion for the Trump-Russia narrative.

The story confirms what many long suspected: Obama-era officials deliberately leaked false claims to the media about Russian interference in the 2016 election, pushing a narrative they knew wasn’t supported by actual intelligence. According to documents obtained by Fox News Digital, a Jan. 6, 2017, Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) was politically weaponized, contradicting prior assessments and burying evidence that Russia lacked both the intent and ability to hack the election. Officials revealed that the ICA suppressed internal dissent — such as FBI and NSA skepticism about Russia’s role in the DNC leaks — and was based on debunked sources like the Steele Dossier. Despite this, the flawed report triggered a chain reaction: media smears, the Mueller investigation, two impeachments, and deep damage to U.S.-Russia relations. Intelligence officials now say this entire operation was designed to delegitimize President Trump and overturn the will of the voters.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard called the plot “a treasonous conspiracy” to subvert the Constitution and called for full accountability. She confirmed that all related documents have been handed over to the DOJ. Meanwhile, former CIA Director John Brennan and ex-FBI Director James Comey are under criminal investigation for their roles in pushing the phony narrative. As President Trump put it: “I think they’re crooked as hell… maybe they have to pay a price for that.” This wasn’t the work of a few rogue officials freelancing their partisan vendettas; it was a coordinated effort that implicates the highest levels of the Obama administration, including Barack Obama himself. The declassified documents lay out a damning paper trail: Obama was personally briefed on intelligence that debunked the Russia-collusion claims, yet his team deliberately buried those facts, rewrote assessments at his request, and fed a false narrative to the press that ultimately ignited a multi-year witch hunt against his successor.

This was no accident. It was a deliberate abuse of power, an attempt to sabotage the incoming president before he even took office, all under the guise of “protecting democracy.” From Obama to Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Rice, and Lynch, this wasn’t just dirty politics; it was a subversion of the peaceful transfer of power. And now, with criminal investigations underway and the full truth coming to light, we know that the real election interference operation wasn’t run from Moscow — it was orchestrated in Washington, D.C., at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Read more …

“This particular real estate bubble, which is unprecedented in magnitude, is bursting. This creates deflationary pressures and undermines the value of collateral supporting large portions of China’s shadow banking system.”

• China’s Economic Demise And Its Impact On The US (Lance Roberts)

Few are as candid and historically accurate as hedge fund manager Kyle Bass when identifying structural breaks in the global economy. In a recent interview, Bass painted a grim but telling picture of China’s economic condition, warning: “We are witnessing the largest macroeconomic imbalances the world has ever seen, and they are all coming to a head in China.” While China has long been touted as the next great economic superpower, its recent trajectory reveals a far different story, one marked by policy missteps, systemic financial rot, and a rapidly eroding growth engine. Bass didn’t mince words either: “China’s economy is spiraling with no end in sight.” China’s GDP deflator, the broadest measure of prices across goods and services, continues to decline as economic activity erodes.

For investors around the globe, this isn’t just a regional concern; it’s a seismic macroeconomic event that will ripple through capital markets. The implications are significant for U.S. investors because when global economies falter, especially one as large and interconnected as China’s, capital doesn’t just vanish. It moves. That movement will significantly impact U.S. assets as flows transfer back into U.S. dollars and Treasury bonds. This global repositioning of capital isn’t merely a symptom of market volatility; it reflects a profound reevaluation of risk in the face of deteriorating confidence in China’s financial system. We must examine what’s breaking in China to understand why this matters so profoundly. Bass emphasized that the issue’s core lies in the real estate sector, which accounts for roughly 30% of China’s GDP.

This massive share of economic activity is under severe strain, with property developers defaulting, sales volumes collapsing, and home prices declining across major cities. However, this should be unsurprising as, after the financial crisis, we wrote many times about the mass overbuilding of “ghost cities” that were responsible for China’s growth at the time. However, the “bullwhip” effect of that massive overbuilding was inevitable. “They’re sitting on 60 to 70 million vacant homes. It’s a Ponzi scheme that is finally collapsing.” – Kyle Bass. This particular real estate bubble, which is unprecedented in magnitude, is bursting. This creates deflationary pressures and undermines the value of collateral supporting large portions of China’s shadow banking system.

Adding to the concern is the Chinese Communist Party’s refusal to implement reforms that would bring greater transparency, capital discipline, and market-based corrections. Rather than allow markets to clear, Beijing is opting for control through capital restrictions, state intervention, and increased surveillance of financial activity. “China is experiencing a slow-motion banking crisis, and capital is doing everything it can to escape.” – Kyle Bass. That capital flight is inevitable and, as noted, will significantly impact the U.S. economy and financial markets. This exodus of domestic and foreign capital will reshape the global macro landscape. We recently discussed that the “Death of the Dollar” narrative was vastly exaggerated. While that post goes into more detail, there are five primary reasons why the dollar will remain the reserve currency of the world:

• Lack of a viable alternative currency
• Strength of the U.S. economy
• Network effects and global financial inertia
• Limited scope of de-dollarization efforts
• Resilience amid policy changes.
Most importantly, the dollar dominates the composition of global currency transactions.

China’s economic collapse only exacerbates the world’s dependence on the U.S. dollar for trade and storing reserve assets to support that trade. In times of crisis, investors don’t seek yield; they seek safety. Despite the U.S. running its fiscal imbalances and maintaining high levels of debt, the U.S. dollar and Treasury bonds remain the world’s premier safe havens. There is no alternative with the same depth, liquidity, and perceived security.

Read more …

From a Sputnik piece on the same topic: “..the delivery of F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine has been a “total bust,” as Ukrainian pilots have only managed to learn how to take off, not how to land.”

• Zelensky May Not Last Much Longer – Seymour Hersh (RT)

The political future of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky appears increasingly uncertain, according to officials in Washington cited by legendary journalist Seymour Hersh. The prospect of the politician being replaced by former armed forces commander Valery Zaluzhny is reportedly growing amid waning domestic support and mounting frustration in Washington. Zelensky suspended national elections under martial law and opted not to step down after his presidential term officially ended in 2024. His former top military commander, who was dismissed earlier this year and later appointed ambassador to the UK, has reportedly long been considered a potential successor. “Zelensky is on a short list for exile, if [US] President Donald Trump decides to make the call,” the veteran reporter wrote on Friday.

One US official familiar with internal discussions suggested that if Zelensky refuses to step down — which they believe is the most likely scenario — he may ultimately be removed by force. Zaluzhny is currently seen as the most credible successor to Ukraine’s leader, according to “knowledgeable” officials in Washington cited by Hersh, who added that the “job could be his within a few months.” Zelensky’s popularity, which soared to 90% in the early months after the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022, has steadily declined due to battlefield setbacks and ongoing economic difficulties. The latest polls suggest that only 52% of Ukrainians still trust him, while around 60% would prefer he not seek another term.

Western media outlets have recently shifted their tone, with some portraying Zelensky as increasingly authoritarian. Others have reported that officials in Washington believe “it’s time for an election and new leadership.” Russian officials have also raised concerns about Zelensky’s legitimacy, arguing that any international agreements signed under his leadership could be legally challenged. While Moscow has expressed a willingness to negotiate with Zelensky, it remains skeptical of his authority to finalize any lasting deal.


Read more …

Putin has zero reason to meet.

• Zelensky Wants Personal Meeting With Putin (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has once again called for a personal meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying this is the only way to secure a lasting peace. Moscow considers this pointless until the countries’ delegations find some common ground. Putin offered in May to resume direct negotiations – from the point at which Ukraine unilaterally abandoned talks in 2022. However, Zelensky challenged him to come and meet in Istanbul personally. Ukraine eventually agreed to send a delegation amid reported pressure from Washington, and since then the sides have held two rounds of talks, resulting in prisoner exchanges but no breakthrough toward ending the conflict.

The talks stalled in June after Kiev dismissed Moscow’s peace proposals. It later declared the process “exhausted” and indicated it had only taken part to avoid appearing dismissive of US President Donald Trump’s diplomatic initiative. On Saturday, Zelensky stated that the “pace of negotiations must be increased,” offering to hold a new round of talks next week – and once again demanded a personal meeting with Putin. “A meeting at the level of leaders is needed to truly ensure a lasting peace,” he said, adding: “Ukraine is ready.” Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, but he has cited martial law, which he imposed, as grounds for remaining in office. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova recently accused the Ukrainian actor-turned-politician of pushing for a personal meeting with Putin to reaffirm his political legitimacy, claiming he “is insanely afraid of being forgotten, of becoming unnecessary for the West.”

Despite Zelensky’s dubious legal status, Putin previously said he is open to a potential meeting – but questioned Zelensky’s authority to sign binding agreements. “I am ready to meet with anyone, including Zelensky. That’s not the issue,” the Russian president stated in June. “The question is different: Who will sign the documents?” According to Moscow, legal authority in Ukraine now resides with the parliament, not with Zelensky. On Tuesday, Ukrainian lawmakers once again extended martial law and general mobilization for another 90 days, with just a single dissenting vote.

Read more …

“Everyone says they want peace, but there’s still war. That means someone is lyin..,”

• Putin and Trump Need To Meet – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has called for an in-person meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump, describing it as the only realistic path to ending the Ukraine conflict. In an interview with the Ultrahang YouTube channel published on Thursday, Orban called Trump “the man of peace” but voiced skepticism about the sincerity of other Western governments and officials in Kiev. “Everyone says they want peace, but there’s still war. That means someone is lying,” he said, accusing some parties of having a vested interest in prolonging the bloodshed. “They want the war to continue, no matter what they say.” A deal won’t come from Kiev. It must come from Washington and Moscow. Until then, there will be no peace.

“The conflict will not stop until the Russian and American presidents sit down at the negotiating table,” Orban added. He expressed hope that such a meeting could lay the foundation for a broad agreement addressing not only Ukraine, but also global trade and arms control. Earlier this week, Trump said he was “very, very unhappy” with Putin and threatened Moscow’s trade partners with “severe” secondary tariffs if no diplomatic progress is made within 50 days. Budapest has consistently criticized efforts to arm Kiev and opposes its EU and NATO ambitions, warning that it prolongs the conflict at growing cost to European economies and taxpayers.

Trump has indicated that Washington will no longer fund Kiev’s war effort, but has allowed other NATO members to continue purchasing US-made weapons for Ukraine. Since returning to office in January, Trump has held several phone calls with Putin and has alternated between assigning blame to Moscow and Kiev for the lack of progress. In May, Ukraine agreed to resume direct negotiations with Russia under pressure from Washington. However, talks stalled after two rounds, with Kiev declaring the process “exhausted” and indicating it had only participated to avoid appearing dismissive of Trump’s diplomatic initiative. Moscow has said it remains committed to achieving its core objectives in Ukraine but prefers a diplomatic solution. The Kremlin has expressed hope that, despite his public statements, Trump is also applying private pressure on Kiev.

Read more …

That would be great. If Trump doesn’t get all braggadocious about his part.

• Putin, Trump and Xi Could Meet In September – The Times (RT)

US President Donald Trump could meet his Russian and Chinese counterparts, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, at an upcoming event marking the 80th anniversary of victory over imperial Japan in World War II, The Times has reported. China has announced plans to honor the date with a military parade in Beijing in September, and Moscow has confirmed that Putin will attend. The Soviet Union, China and the US cooperated in the fight against Japan during World War II. Both analysts and ordinary Chinese have called on Xi to “seize the opportunity,” invite Trump and host a three-way summit during the upcoming victory celebration, The Times wrote on Friday.

“Why not align Trump’s visit with the September 3 commemoration?” Renmin University of China Professor and popular Chinese opinion leader Jin Canrong told the Guancha news outlet last month. “If the leaders of China, the US, and Russia were to stand together during the military parade, it would be a great positive signal to the world,” he suggested. According to The Times, Beijing “tacitly encouraged speculation” on the subject by refusing to deny a report by Japan’s Kyodo News released last month, which claimed that the decision to invite Trump had already been made. Relations between Washington, Beijing, and Moscow have soured in recent years over the Ukraine conflict, accusations of Chinese cyber warfare, and what the US describes as “unfair” market practices.

Since the start of his second term in January, Trump has moved to thaw diplomatic ties with Russia and pushed for a settlement in the Ukraine conflict. However, on Monday, he expressed exasperation with the pace of the talks and threatened 100% secondary tariffs on Russian trading partners if the hostilities aren’t resolved within 50 days. Trump has also reignited a trade war with Beijing, which earlier this year rattled global financial markets. The tit-for-tat tariff standoff peaked with 145% US duties on Chinese imports and 125% retaliatory levies from Beijing. Tensions appear to have eased following a trade deal last month under which China relaxed restrictions on key rare earth mineral exports.

Read more …

Brussels has nothing.

• Trump Toughens Stance In EU Trade Talks – FT (RT)

US President Donald Trump has ramped up his demands in trade talk with the EU and is pushing for a minimum tariff of between 15% and 20% in any deal with Brussels, the Financial Times reports, citing informed sources. The negotiations between Brussels and Washington have been underway since early April, when Trump announced a set of measures aimed at protecting American manufacturers he called the ‘Liberation Day.’ They included a blanket 10% tariff on all imports from the EU and most other US trading partners. The duties have been put on hold pending the talks, but the US president warned that they would grow to 30% if no deal is reached between Washington and Brussels by August 1. The tariffs would be applied on top of the existing sector-specific duties, such as 50% on steel, aluminum duties and 25% car imports levies introduced by the US earlier this year.

The Trump administration is hardening its stance in talks with the EU in order to test the bloc’s “pain threshold,” the FT said in an article on Friday. According to the paper’s sources, the president was also “unmoved” by an offer from Brussels to reduce the 25% car tariffs and wants them to stay as they are. EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic provided a “downbeat” assessment of his recent discussions with the Americans during the meeting of the bloc’s ambassadors on Friday, two people briefed on the matter said. An EU diplomat has told the paper that if Trump insists on 15% to 20% duties, the EU would be forced to retaliate. Brussels has prepared several packages of counter-tariffs against Washington, but delayed their implementation until August 1.

“We do not want a trade war, but we do not know if the US will leave us a choice,” the source said. A second EU diplomat stressed that “the mood has clearly changed” in Brussels in favor of retaliation, adding that “we are not going to settle at 15% percent.” Washington has so far largely avoided retaliation for its tariffs, while collecting a record high of $64 billion in customs duties in the second quarter of 2025, according to the US Treasury.

Read more …

For now, this is simply about the reserve currency. Stop the threats and they will let you keep it.

• Trump Issues New Threat To BRICS (RT)

President Donald Trump has claimed that BRICS is “fading out fast,” while warning that any attempts by the group to challenge the US dollar will be met with a harsh economic backlash. Speaking at the White House on Friday, Trump denounced what he called BRICS’ attempts to weaken the dollar. “They wanted to try and take over the dollar, the dominance of the dollar… And I said, anybody that’s in the BRICS consortium of nations, we’re going to tariff you 10%.” Trump stressed that Washington will spare no effort to preserve the dollar’s hegemony. “The reserve currency is so important. You know, if we lost that, that would be like losing a World War.” Washington “can never let anyone play games,” Trump said, adding that he has decided to “hit them [BRICS] very, very hard.” “If they ever really form in a meaningful way, it will end very quickly,” he said.

Trump also claimed his threat to impose 10% tariffs on imports from the BRICS had completely derailed the group’s summit in Rio de Janeiro earlier this month. “They had a meeting the following day and almost nobody showed up,” he said. However, the BRICS summit featured broad participation at the highest level. While China’s President Xi Jinping was absent from the meeting, his country was represented by Chinese Premier Li Qiang. Russian President Vladimir Putin was also absent, but addressed the summit remotely. Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa and Indonesia’s President Prabowo Subianto, as well as leaders from Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the UAE attended in person.

In October, Russia’s Finance Minister Anton Siluanov stated that the share of national currencies in trade among BRICS countries has reached 65%, with the share of the dollar and euro plunging below 30%. Earlier this week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov explained that BRICS countries are exploring dollar alternatives “to shield themselves from US arbitrariness.” However, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has said that BRICS has never been meant as a rival to the US, although warning that “the language of threats and manipulation… is not the way to speak to members of this group.”

Read more …

“Resolving a conflict like Ukraine requires deep historical understanding and genuine commitment to due diligence.”

• Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia Is Bluster and Bluff (SCF)

What’s behind Trump’s angry ultimatum to Russia this week? The short answer: failure and frustration. Donald Trump promised American voters that he would end the Ukraine war in 24 hours upon his election in November 2024. Six months into his presidency, Trump has failed to deliver on his boastful promises. This week, Trump flipped his pacemaker image by pledging billions of dollars worth of new American weaponry to Ukraine. He also issued a warning to Russia to call a ceasefire within 50 days or else face severe secondary tariffs on its oil and gas exports. The tariffs, quoted at 100 percent, will be applied to nations purchasing Russian exports, primarily Brazil, China, and India. The latter move indicates that the U.S.-led proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is really part of a bigger geopolitical confrontation to maintain American global hegemony.

In any case, Moscow dismissed Trump’s ultimatum. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Moscow would not comply with pressure and that Russia would not back down from its strategic goals in Ukraine to counter NATO’s historic aggression. It is clear that Trump and his administration have failed to understand Russia’s strategic position and the root causes of the conflict. Trump’s supposed diplomacy is seen to operate on a superficial basis more akin to showbiz, with no substance. He wants a peace deal with Russia to show off his vaunted skills as a business negotiator and to grab the limelight, headlines, and adulation.

Resolving a conflict like Ukraine requires deep historical understanding and genuine commitment to due diligence. Moscow has repeatedly stated the need to address the root causes of the conflict: the expansion of NATO on its borders, the CIA-sponsored coup in Kiev in 2014, and the nature of the NATO-weaponized Neo-Nazi regime over the past decade. Trump and his administration have failed to appreciate Russia’s viewpoint. Thus, expecting a peace deal based on nothing but rhetoric and vacuous claims about “ending the killing” is futile. It won’t happen.

This failure, based on unrealistic expectations, has led Trump to adopt an increasingly bitter attitude towards Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent weeks. Ironically, Trump has accused Putin of duplicity and procrastination when, in reality, it is Trump who has shown no serious commitment to resolving the conflict. Now, with chagrin and bruised ego, Trump has reacted with frustration over what are his own failings by issuing ultimatums to Russia. Trump’s 50-day deadline for a Russian response to his demands has a similarity to the 60-day deadline he threatened Iran with, after which he carried out a massive bombing attack on that country. Trump’s aggression towards Iran has turned out to be a fiasco and failure. Threatening Russia is even more useless.

This proclivity for threatening other nations has the hallmark of a Mafiosa megalomaniac. It is also causing Trump to lose support among his voter base, who believed he was going to end “endless wars.” It’s shambolic. Biden’s war is becoming Trump’s war because, at the end of the day, it is the U.S. imperial deep state that rules. Trump’s mercurial switch from professing peace in Ukraine to ramping up the promise of weapons shows that his previous aspirations were always hollow and contingent on other interests. It seems that the 47th American president did not want peace after all. What was driving his apparent desire to end the conflict in Ukraine – what he deprecated as “Biden’s war” – was simply to cut American financial costs.

2016

Read more …

“..related to the late financier’s alleged “client list,” which the administration says does not exist…”

• DOJ Asks Court To Unseal Jeffrey Epstein Grand Jury Testimony (JTN)

The Justice Department on Friday afternoon formally asked a federal judge to unseal grand jury testimony related to the prosecution of the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, fulfilling President Donald Trump’s directive on Thursday. Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to file the request in a Truth Social post, where he criticized the news media for its focus on the administration’s handling of the Epstein case. Bondi vowed to do so. The Justice Department claimed in its filing that the release of the additional information in the case was “a matter of public interest.”

“The public’s interest in the Epstein matter has remained,” the filing reads. “Given this longstanding and legitimate interest, the government now moves to unseal grand jury transcripts associated with Epstein.” The department said it will file a similar motion in the case against former Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, CNN reported, though Trump did not direct the publication of testimony in her case. The Trump administration has faced heavy backlash for its handling of the case, particularly related to the late financier’s alleged “client list,” which the administration says does not exist.

Read more …

Epstein is so last week…

• The Epstein Enigma (James Howard Kunstler)

Do you detect the signs of Rope-a-Dope in Mr. Trump’s recent blasts against the Epstein mess? It must be obvious that anything he says will be violently opposed by his Democratic Party enemies. So, now he’s got them slavering for release of the Epstein files, whatever they are, or rather, whatever’s left after former FBI Director Christopher Wray & Co. curated them, shall we say. (They had many years to get it done.)

I’m not the first to point out that the president’s most rabid enemies ignored the Epstein case during the entirety of “Joe Biden’s” four-year ectoplasmic visitation in the White House. (They were up to their eyeballs siccing Fani Willis, Letitia James, and Alvin Bragg on Trump.) “Squad” stalwart Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) said the other day that she was “too busy” to delve into Epstein. Everybody else from Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) to Jamie Raskin (D-MD) just barfed up word salad on MSNBC to excuse themselves for overlooking the matter. But since Mr. Trump affected to quash the whole psychodrama in the harshest tones, they’ve got all the time in the world to pore over Epstein docs. Well, maybe they’ll get what they asked for.

So, yesterday, the president ordered AG Bondi to release the grand jury testimony that has been under seal for years and years, and she has promised to do that today, Friday, July 18, subject to the court approval, meaning it could invite a months-long legal battle. Gawd knows what’s in there, but at least it was kept out of Christopher Wray’s clutches. So, it’s separate from the videos and other stuff alleged to be in the FBI possession. Many say, not altogether convincingly, that the names of “victims” and witnesses must be protected. There’s much confused public controversy as to whether girls allegedly trafficked by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were children or young adults (who would be middle-aged now), and that issue is apparently separate from whatever commercial “child porn” was in the FBI’s Epstein file cabinet that AG Bondi has referred to.

Anyway, Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure says: “Disclosure is permitted to government attorneys or personnel (including state or tribal officials) deemed necessary to assist in enforcing federal criminal law, such as in complex investigations involving organized crime or public corruption.” The current state of the Epstein scandal looks a little like a ruse by Mr. Trump to hang his enemies out to dry and sell them the clothes-line to do it with. In all their garish attempts to get Trump, the Democrats have only ended up Wile E. Coyote’d every single time. Why would this round be any different?

Meanwhile, Naomi Wolf by way of Eric Weinstein has come up with quite an original view of what Jeffrey Epstein was about in the strange role he played among the so-called elite. I will link to her recent substack entry below this blog so you can see for yourself. For Ms. Wolf, it was all about the Silicon Valley “network” of tech moguls, their vast power and influence, and an effort by this group, using Epstein as a broker, to steer science generally in the direction that benefited them and their companies. Epstein served as a middleman between politicians, the weapons industry, the big research universities (all those grants!), and linked intel services such as CIA, Mossad, and MI6.

This is what Eric Weinstein means when he describes Epstein as “a construct.” He was less a person than a function. Epstein cultivated the “list” of elite scientists, tech entrepreneurs, academics, and movie stars with lavish parties and trips to his various compounds in Manhattan, Florida, the US Virgin Islands, and his New Mexico ranch — all in the service of building this tech-and-science network that would become a gigantic mutual aid-and-allegiance society advancing the interests of themselves and their institutions. In the process, certain goodies in the form of young ladies groomed in the sexual arts were made available. Some members of this elite network indulged and some did not, the theory goes.

Read more …

Pepe travels a lot, but his mind is stuck in place.

• And It’s One, Two, Three, What Are We Fighting For? (Pepe Escobar)

All of you Vietnam vets and draft resisters will recognize where this column’s headline is coming from. Oh yes, this ain’t the late 1960s anymore, so it’s time to revamp it – no AI needed – and expand it: from now on, be assured everyone in the wild, wild West will be forced to fight and/or endure three overlapping NATO wars.

War number 1
It’s Europe v. Russia, of course. Not proxy anymore: hot ‘n nasty, direct. Considering the advanced rottenness of the whole Ukrainian front, new fronts are already proliferating: the South Caucasus; clandestine ops in the Baltic Sea; MI6 recruiting frenzy across Central Asia; fresh terrorism ahead in the Black Sea, especially Crimea. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson succinctly nailed it: we are already on WWIII. Actually we are already deep in the extended preamble to WWIII. Circus Ringmaster in D.C. and the billionaires/donor class behind him are of course clueless. Re-reading Keynes – The Economic Consequences of the Peace – is an absolute must like never before. History does repeat itself. Yet this ain’t 1914 or 1935; now nuclear weapons may come into play.

The Kremlin and Russia’s Security Council are very much aware of the high stakes. In his recent interview to Kommersant, Sergei Shoigu even rolled out some key NATO numbers to stress the threat Russia faces: over 50,000 tanks and armored vehicles; over 7,000 combat aircraft; over 750 warships; 350 military and civilian satellites; an immense offense (italics mine) budget. Well, what sly Shoigu did not say is that when push comes to shove, it only takes Mr. Khinzal, Mr. Sarmat, Mr. Zircon and Mr. Oreshnik to deliver a few strategic business cards to paralyze the whole NATO machinery in a matter of minutes.

War number 2
It’s the Empire of Chaos v. Iran in West Asia, with Eretz Israel as much as proxy as a lead actor. The Circus Ringmaster – whose only “strategy” is to concoct shady deals to enrich himself and shysters in his close circle – dreams of an Israeli-centric West Asia, a toxic crossover of the Abraham Accords 2.0 with the IMEC corridor, creating, as Alastair Crooke defined it, “a business-led West Asia, centered on Tel Aviv (with Trump as its de facto ‘President’), and via this business connectivity corridor, be able “to strike further beyond – with the Gulf States penetrating into BRICS’ south Asian heartland to disrupt BRICS connectivity and corridors.”

Using the Arabs against BRICS won’t cut it even with MbZ in the UAE and MbS in Saudi Arabia, who have both realized the business scam will only work if there is real peace in Gaza; some sort of humanitarian solution for the Palestinians; and rebuilding the Gaza strip. The death cult in Tel Aviv will never allow any of the above: their plan is to kill them all, steall all their land, and eradicate their culture. And as the genocide goes on – totally legitimized by the NATO sphere – the death cult keeps bombing anything in sight, perpetrating the balkanization of Syria, and expanding Eretz Israel.

Read more …

And the countries that send the forces will use it as a casus belli.

• Russia Will Target Multinational Forces in Ukraine (Kyle Anzalone)

The Russian Foreign Ministry said any troops from third countries deployed to Ukraine will become targets. European nations have discussed plans to send their soldiers to Ukraine if a ceasefire with Russia is reached. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova explained that any country that joins a coalition of the willing and deploys troops to Ukraine will become targets. “We have repeatedly stated that a deployment of armed forces of other countries in Ukraine under any pretense would be absolutely unacceptable,” she said. “We regard this as preparations for foreign military intervention. We will consider these so-called ‘multinational forces’ as legitimate military targets,” she added.

Several European countries have said they would be willing to join a “coalition of the willing” to deploy soldiers to Ukraine after a ceasefire with Russia is reached. Earlier this month, UK Defense Minister John Healey said, “The prime minister has always been clear that he’s ready to put troops into Ukraine to help reinforce a ceasefire.” “The coalition of the willing” is an infamous phrase used by the George W. Bush administration to try to sell the Iraq War. Moscow says it is unwilling to enter into a ceasefire with Ukraine and is seeking a permanent end to the conflict that addresses the Kremlin’s security concerns.

Multiple leaks throughout the war have exposed that a small number of American and NATO troops are inside Ukraine. However, Europeans are now discussing a large-scale deployment meant as a deterrent to a future Russian invasion. The escalating support for Kiev has led some in the Kremlin to argue for Moscow to take a more aggressive position against Ukraine’s Western backers. Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian President and current deputy head of the National Security Council, suggested launching preemptive attacks. “What is happening today is a proxy war, but in essence it is a full-fledged war,” Medvedev, who is now a senior Russian national security official, told the Tass news agency.

“We need to act accordingly. Respond in full. And if necessary, launch preventative strikes.” However, Medvedev also acknowledged that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ruled out attacking more European countries. “Let me remind you that our president stated unequivocally: Russia does not intend to go to war with NATO or ‘attack Europe’. Such claims by Western politicians are utter nonsense.” He continued, “I would also like to add that this kind of drivel is deliberately injected into the information space to destabilize an already difficult situation. It is yet another front in the West’s open war against us.”

Read more …

Anything written before Friday is old.

• The World Woke Up (Victor Davis Hanson)

In less than six months, the entire world has been turned upside down. There is no longer such a thing as conventional wisdom or the status quo. The unthinkable has become the banal. Take illegal immigration—remember the 10,000 daily illegal entries under former President Joe Biden? Recall the only solution was supposedly “comprehensive immigration reform”—a euphemism for mass amnesties. Now, there is no such thing as daily new illegal immigration. It simply disappeared with commonsense enforcement of existing immigration laws—and a new president. How about the 40,000-50,000 shortfall in military recruitment? Remember all the causes that the generals cited for their inability to enlist soldiers: generational gangs, obesity, drugs, and stiff competition with private industry? And now?

In just six months, recruitment targets are already met; the issue is mostly moot. Why? The new Pentagon flipped the old, canceling its racist DEI programs and assuring the rural, middle-class Americans—especially white males—that they were not systemically racist after all. Instead, they were reinvited to enlist as the critical combat cohort who died at twice their demographic share in Iraq and Afghanistan. How about the “end of the NATO crisis,” supposedly brought on by a bullying U.S.? Now the vast majority of NATO members have met their pledges to spend 2% of gross domestic product on defense, which will soon increase to 5%. Iconic neutrals like Sweden and Finland have become front-line NATO nations, arming to the teeth. The smiling NATO secretary-general even called Trump the “daddy” of the alliance.

What about indomitable, all-powerful, theocratic Iran, the scourge of the Middle East for nearly 50 years? Although it had never won a war in the last half-century, its terrorist surrogates—Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis—were supposedly too dangerous to provoke. Now? Most of their expeditionary terrorists are neutered, and their leaders are in hiding or dead. Iran has no air force, no real navy, no air defenses, and no active nuclear weapons program. Its safety apparently depends only on the mood of the U.S. or Israel on any given day, not to fly into its airspace and take out its missiles, nuclear sites, generals, or theocrats at will. What happened to the supposedly inevitable recession, hyperinflation, stock market collapse, unemployment spikes, and global trade war that last spring economists assured us would hit by summer?

Job growth is strong, and April’s inflation rate is the lowest in four years. GDP is still steady. The stock market hit a record high. Trade partners are renegotiating their surpluses with the U.S. It turns out that staying in the U.S. consumer market is the top priority of our trading partners. It seems their preexisting and mostly undisclosed profits were large enough to afford reasonable U.S. symmetrical tariffs. For now, news of tax cuts, deregulation, “drill, baby, drill” energy policies displacing Green New Deal strangulation, and $8-$10 trillion in potential foreign investment has encouraged—rather than deterred—business. Then there were our marquee elite universities, whose prestige, riches, and powerful alumni made them answerable to no one. And now, after the executive and congressional crackdown on their decades of hubris?

Supposedly brilliant university presidents have resigned in shame. The public has caught on to their grant surcharge gouging. Campuses have backed off their arrogant defiance of the Supreme Court’s civil rights rulings. They are panicked about the public exposure of their systemic antisemitism. They are scrambling to explain away their institutionalized ideological bias and their tawdry profit-making schemes and mass recruitment of wealthy foreign students from illiberal regimes. So, the mighty Ivy League powerhouses are now humbling themselves to cut a deal to save their financial hides and hopefully return to their proper mission of disinterested education. What happened to the trans juggernaut of sex as a social construct and its bookend gospel that biological men could dominate women’s sports?

People woke up. They were no longer afraid to state that sex is binary and biologically determined. And biological men who dominate women’s sports are bullies, not heroes. Where are the millionaire-scamming architects of Black Lives Matter now? Where is the “DEI now, tomorrow, and forever” conventional wisdom? Where is professor Ibram X. Kendi and his $30,000 Zoom lessons on how to fight racism by being racist? They have all been exposed as the race hustlers they always were. Their creed that it is OK for supposed victims to be racist victimizers themselves was exposed as an absurd con. So, what flipped everything?

We were living in an “emperor has no clothes” make-believe world for the last few years. The people knew establishment narratives were absurd, and our supposed experts were even more ridiculous. But few—until now—had the guts to scream “the emperor is naked” to dispel the fantasies. When they finally did, reality returned.

Read more …

“.. it is just the latest chapter in a 2,600-year story of value, trust, and human ingenuity..”

• Red, White, and Bitcoin (Beirne)

Bitcoin may feel futuristic, but when you peel away its digital veneer, it is just the latest chapter in a 2,600-year story of value, trust, and human ingenuity. Having reached record highs, Bitcoin has been making headlines as nations declare strategic stockpiles and corporate America embraces the new asset class. Why now? The answer lies in a pattern as old as civilization itself: When governments corrupt a currency, people innovate their way to something better. As the saying goes, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” When the first coin clanked into existence in 600 B.C., it was not merely a gold and silver alloy stamped with the face of the Lydian king.

It was a financial revolution. For the first time, people could move past the inefficiencies of barter and instead use a medium of exchange to trade. But this value was not in the sparkle; it was the individuals’ collective understanding that these coins have worth. The integrity of that system has waxed and waned over the ensuing millennia, typically driven by governmental spending policies. The silver-backed Roman denarii enabled the empire to flourish, but as subsequent emperors diluted its value – reducing their silver content to fund wars and build grand palaces – citizens lost faith in their currency. When Emperor Nero reduced silver content from 98% to 83% in A.D. 64, Romans began hoarding old coins and rejecting new ones. By A.D. 260, the denarius contained just 5% silver. Inflation spiraled and commerce crumbled, contributing to the eventual fall of the empire.

The United States has battled currency crises since our nation’s birth, but unlike Rome, America has consistently innovated solutions along the way. After we declared independence from Britain, the Continental Congress printed the nation’s first paper money. Called “Continentals,” it was backed by neither gold nor silver – simply by belief in its value. While gold and silver are at least relatively scarce metals that constrain supply, paper can be printed. And that is precisely what the first U.S. government did. Desperate to pay troops and buy supplies necessary to wage the Revolutionary War, Congress turned to making more Continentals. Bills flooded the market, driving down value as Americans questioned whether the new nation could honor its promises.

In 1777, one patriot complained to his father as inflation spiked by an estimated 200%, writing, “America has much more to fear from the effects of large quantities of paper money than from the operations of British Generals.” Prices climbed so rapidly that George Washington himself came to refuse Continentals as payment. In fact, it became common to describe something of little value as “not worth a Continental.” The currency became such a laughingstock that sailors paid in the bills would sew them onto their clothes and parade through town to mock it. But rather than crumble like the Roman Empire, the U.S. innovated: This currency crisis was a driving force that led our Founding Fathers to scrap the American government under the Articles of Confederation and draft our current Constitution.

This change represented more than political reform – it was monetary advancement, shifting from discretionary to rule-based money. The new U.S. government adopted a bimetallic standard in 1792, which tied the value of dollars to both gold and silver. The country eventually simplified its approach by shifting to a de facto gold standard in 1834, which lasted until 1971 when President Nixon abandoned it in favor of fiat currency. Like the Continentals before it, the dollar has since been backed by belief in its value: full faith and credit of the U.S. government. And then came the 2008 financial crisis. Lehman Brothers fell, banks wobbled, and the public? They started asking: “What is money?”

It was then, from the digital shadows, that an anonymous figure – Satoshi Nakamoto – dropped a whitepaper like a patriot dropping a leaflet on the eve of the Revolutionary War: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. No emperors. No banks. Just math, cryptography, and an unbreakable record called the blockchain. A new kind of trust was born – not in a ruler, but in code. What was initially viewed as an interesting hypothetical idea was quickly put to real-world use. Users beget more users. Trust grows. Entrepreneurs dream. It’s a full-blown historical saga unfolding in real time.

Bitcoin has risen above the other cryptocurrencies it inspired, in large part due to its scarcity: no longer could an Emperor add bits of cheap copper to silver coins or Congress print more paper because it is hardcoded that only 21 million Bitcoin will ever exist. Further, all Bitcoin transactions are verified by a decentralized network of approximately 20,000 individuals’ computers across the world, all checking one another beyond politicians’ control. In an age of runaway government spending, investors have turned to those scarce Bitcoin that no government can dilute. A decentralized system that guards the people from government domination – how American is that!

It is no coincidence that Bitcoin has skyrocketed to a $2 trillion valuation just as the U.S. national debt has reached record highs. Researchers debate how long fiat currencies last on average throughout history, with some placing time of death at between 27 and 35 years. Since the U.S. has been off the gold standard for over 50 years, history suggests the dollar is poised for decline. People are simply asking the age-old question: What is money, really? As trust is shaken in paper money due to inflation and ballooning federal spending, many are turning to innovation. Even nations themselves have begun to set up strategic reserves. In fact, the United States is the largest known state holder of Bitcoin – once again positioning America at the forefront of monetary evolution.

As John Adams advised in 1787, “All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from the defects of the Constitution, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.” It is incumbent upon Americans to arm themselves with knowledge and engage in the age-old American tradition of challenging broken systems with better ideas in the pursuit of liberty.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Aaron Siri
https://twitter.com/newstart_2024/status/1946312859824099353

Letterman

CBDC

lipitor

Yellowstone

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 19 2025

Jul 192025
 
 July 19, 2025  Posted by at 9:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Paul Gauguin Tahitian scene 1892

 

• Tulsi Gabbard: ‘Overwhelming Evidence’ Of Obama Coup Plot Against Trump (RT)
• FBI Allegedly Told Agents to Flag Mentions of Trump in Epstein Files (Sp.)
• Guess Who’s Behind WSJ’s Trump-Epstein ‘Bombshell’? (Margolis)
• RFK Jr. Rejects Dystopian WHO Pandemic Amendments (Salgado)
• White House Explains Trump’s Swollen Ankles and Bruised Hand (RT)
• Navarro: Why Retail Sales Growth Exceeds all Wall Street Projections (CTH)
• Trump Eyes Executive Order To Open Up Retirement Funds To Crypto: FT (CT)
• Ukraine’s ‘Rout’ Will Continue – Medvedev (RT)
• EU Reveals 18th Sanctions Package Against Moscow (RT)
• Putin Aide Gives Verdict On New EU Sanctions (RT)
• Brussels Budget Plan Could Destroy EU – Orban (RT)
• France a ‘Fiscal Time Bomb’ For EU – Bloomberg (RT)
• Freedom Caucus Attempts to Block Central Bank Digital Currency (Caldwell)
• Release Ghislaine Maxwell (Paul Craig Roberts)
• American AI Could Die in Court Before It Ever Takes Off (Rotella)
• Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity (RCW)

 

 

 

 

tucker

letter

 

 

 

 

Obama, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, Susan Rice, Andrew McCabe, Loretta Lynch. At a meeting in the White House. Start there.

Q: what effect has the made up smear had on today’s relations with Russia?

• Tulsi Gabbard: ‘Overwhelming Evidence’ Of Obama Coup Plot Against Trump (RT)

Former President Barack Obama’s administration deliberately manipulated intelligence to frame Russia for interfering in the 2016 presidential election, according to newly declassified documents released on Friday by America’s Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Gabbard unveiled more than 100 pages of emails, memos, and internal communications, which she described as “overwhelming evidence” of a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials to politicize intelligence and launch the multi-year Trump–Russia collusion investigation. She dubbed it “a treasonous conspiracy to subvert the will of the American people.” The scandal severely damaged relations between Moscow and Washington, leading to sanctions, asset seizures, and a breakdown in normal diplomacy.

https://twitter.com/DNIGabbard/status/1946271402971312514?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1946271402971312514%7Ctwgr%5E5e032d175c5299fac3a017ebc97f6cb0f695d014%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F621667-russiagate-probe-trump-obama%2F

”This intelligence was weaponized,” Gabbard said. “It was used as a justification for endless smears, for sanctions from Congress, and for covert investigations.” She added: “When key internal assessments found that Russia ‘did not impact recent U.S. election results,’ those findings were suppressed.” “For months before the 2016 election, the Intelligence Community maintained that Russia lacked both the intent and capability to hack U.S. elections,” Gabbard noted. “But once President Trump won, everything changed.” One document — a draft President’s Daily Brief dated December 8, 2016 — stated Russia “did not impact recent U.S. election results” through cyberattacks. The report, prepared by the CIA, NSA, FBI, DHS, and other agencies, found no evidence of voting interference.

Yet Fox News reported on Friday that the document was pulled — “based on new guidance,” according to internal emails. Hours later, a high-level Situation Room meeting took place, attended by officials including DNI James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan, National Security Adviser Susan Rice, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

According to declassified notes, attendees agreed to produce a new intelligence assessment at President Obama’s request. That report, released on January 6, 2017, claimed Russia had intervened in the election to help Donald Trump — directly contradicting earlier assessments. Gabbard claims the revised assessment leaned on the discredited Steele Dossier — compiled by a former British spy — while sidelining dissenting views within the intelligence apparatus. “This was not intelligence gathering,” Gabbard stated. “It was narrative building.”

Confirmed as DNI earlier this year — after a contentious process — Gabbard says she has forwarded the documents to the Department of Justice. She has urged investigations into former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey, who are reportedly facing criminal inquiries. “No matter how powerful, every person involved must be brought to justice,” she stressed. “Our nation’s integrity depends on accountability.” “The integrity of our democratic republic depends on full accountability,” Gabbard concluded. “Nothing less will restore the public’s trust — and ensure nothing like this ever happens again.”

Read more …

“..1,000 staff to work 24-hour shifts in March to review 100,000 Epstein-related records for rapid release..”

Q: why does Kash Patel’s FBI look for mentions of Trump?

• FBI Allegedly Told Agents to Flag Mentions of Trump in Epstein Files (Sp.)

The FBI allegedly urged the agents to track US President Donald Trump references in the Epstein case, US Senator Dick Durbin said in a letter addressed to Attorney General Pam Bondi. Durbin claimed the FBI was pressured to assign around 1,000 staff to work 24-hour shifts in March to review 100,000 Epstein-related records for rapid release, with untrained personnel from the New York office reportedly assisting in the process. “My office was told that these personnel were instructed to “flag” any records in which President Trump was mentioned,” Durbin said. Durbin went on to say that despite weeks of intensive review, it took the US Department of Justice (DOJ) over three more months to conclude there was no incriminating “client list.”

He added that the July 7 memo omitted any mention of a whistleblower or promised documents, and suggested public trust was further eroded by the release of allegedly altered surveillance footage from outside Epstein’s cell. Durbin questioned the accuracy of previous public statements regarding Epstein-related records and said the lack of transparency may undermine trust in the DOJ’s July 7 conclusion that no incriminating “client list” exists. In his letter, Senator Durbin requested answers by August 1, including whether all Epstein files have been personally reviewed, why a “client list” was publicly claimed in February but not released, and details about a whistleblower’s disclosure of additional records. He also asked for the names of ethics officials consulted, reasons for assigning 1,000 FBI staff to 24-hour shifts, and why mentions of Trump were flagged and how those records were handled.

Read more …

Russiagate all over again.

• Guess Who’s Behind WSJ’s Trump-Epstein ‘Bombshell’? (Margolis)

The Wall Street Journal embarrassed itself Thursday by hyping a so-called Trump-Epstein “bombshell” that amounted to nothing more than a disputed birthday card from 2003 that they won’t show, and that Trump denies writing and is now suing over. The rest of the story was recycled material long in the public domain. Desperate to revive the left’s failed narrative tying Trump to Epstein, the Journal grasped at straws while ignoring Epstein’s far more substantial connections to powerful Democrats like Bill Clinton, who flew on Epstein’s jet multiple times and visited his island — facts the media still downplays to this day. Joe Palazzolo, one of the Wall Street Journal reporters who broke the “blockbuster” story, previously worked for Main Justice, which is his only prior reporting experience listed in his bio.

Joe joined the Journal in 2010 from trade publication Main Justice, where he covered the U.S. Justice Department. Before moving to the investigations team in 2019, he reported on national legal affairs for the Journal for seven years, focusing on the nation’s prisons, courts, gun laws and law enforcement. Why does this matter? Well, Main Justice is a publication founded by Mary Jacoby. That name may not be familiar to you, but she is the wife of Glenn Simpson — the guy who founded Fusion GPS. That’s the outfit Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid to concoct the infamous Steele Dossier that fueled the Russian collusion hoax. Guess where Glenn and Mary cut their teeth before exporting their political dirty tricks to the broader media? That’s right —The Wall Street Journal.

The incestuous relationships aren’t even hidden; they practically serve them up on a silver platter and still expect us to act surprised when another so-called “bombshell” arrives containing every DNC talking point, T’s crossed and I’s dotted. President Trump isn’t playing along this time. He’s suing the Wall Street Journal, calling the Epstein birthday letter story complete fiction, and arguing that basic journalistic integrity—like letting him respond to an accusation—was discarded in the left’s rush to get another “scandal” published. Considering the history here, it’s not just plausible, it’s likely. How many times have we watched these operatives masquerade as journalists, deliver a conveniently-timed anti-Trump narrative, and then retreat behind the thin veil of press freedom when challenged?

Jacoby’s not just media-connected; her father is a longtime executive at Stephens Investments, whose attorney back in the day was none other than Hillary Clinton at the Rose Law Firm. It’s all part of the same Clinton-DNC-Fusion GPS web that keeps resurfacing every time there’s a new “scandal” targeting Trump. Once again, a Trump “bombshell” traces back to the same partisan ecosystem that gave us the Steele Dossier. The deeper you look, the clearer it becomes: This isn’t journalism; it’s narrative warfare. And after this stunt from the Journal, it’s no wonder Americans are tuning the media out in record numbers.

Read more …

Sounds like a narrow escape. What about EU countries?

• RFK Jr. Rejects Dystopian WHO Pandemic Amendments (Salgado)

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. just announced the defeat of authoritarian World Health Organization amendments that tended toward an anti-freedom, unhealthful, unscientific dystopia. Kennedy joined with Secretary of State Marco Rubio to formally reject the amendments. Critics have long warned these modifications would essentially have given the WHO total control to dictate the United States’ national response to anything it arbitrarily labeled a pandemic.

“The proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations open the door to the kind of narrative management, propaganda, and censorship that we saw during the COVID pandemic,” Kennedy said in a Friday press release. “The United States can cooperate with other nations without jeopardizing our civil liberties, without undermining our Constitution, and without ceding away America’s treasured sovereignty.” This follows Trump’s withdrawal from the WHO, as the press release noted: “The amended IHR would give the WHO the ability to order global lockdowns, travel restrictions, or any other measures it sees fit to respond to nebulous “potential public health risks.” These regulations are set to become binding if not rejected by July 19, 2025, regardless of the United States’ withdrawal from the WHO.”

Rubio also issued a statement. “Terminology throughout the amendments to the 2024 International Health Regulations is vague and broad, risking WHO-coordinated international responses that focus on political issues like solidarity, rather than rapid and effective actions,” he said. “Our Agencies have been and will continue to be clear: we will put Americans first in all our actions and we will not tolerate international policies that infringe on Americans’ speech, privacy, or personal liberties.” Dr. Robert Malone, mRNA pioneer and critic of the WHO’s disastrous COVID-19 policies, celebrated: “Big win indeed. The worm turns, and elections have consequences.” They certainly do.

The IHR amendments would have allowed the WHO to dictate lockdowns and other policies to the United States if it determined that there were “potential public health risks.” And the WHO got to define exactly what constituted a requisite health risk. That could be a cold virus, bird flu, even potentially obesity — there was a lot of latitude for the WHO, which proved itself untrustworthy during COVID. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) also praised the news. “WHO is an unaccountable international organization that hands individuals’ healthcare freedoms to corrupt bureaucrats,” he stated. “I’m thankful for Secretary Kennedy’s firm stance against WHO’s Pandemic Agreement that will protect Americans’ health freedom and privacy. Let’s Make America Great and Healthy Again.”

Read more …

Shaking so many hands you get bruises on yours.

• White House Explains Trump’s Swollen Ankles and Bruised Hand (RT)

The White House has released a memo from President Donald Trump’s physician explaining recent visible changes in his limbs, which some observers had taken as indicators of a serious health condition. In a memo issued Thursday, Dr. Sean P. Barbabella said Trump has been diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency, a condition he described as “benign” and common among people over the age of 70. Trump, 79, was recently seen with swelling in his legs, which Dr. Barbabella attributed to the condition. Chronic venous insufficiency is typically age-related and involves malfunctioning of one-way valves in the veins, which are responsible for returning blood to the heart.

The legs are often affected because the veins there must work harder against gravity. People who spend extended periods standing are more susceptible to the disorder. According to the statement, no signs of more serious vascular conditions – such as deep vein thrombosis – were found. Barbabella also explained that recurring bruising on the back of Trump’s right hand was the result of “soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking” and preventive aspirin use. While swelling in Trump’s ankles gained attention last week, the bruises on his hand have been visible since at least October, fueling speculation that he was undergoing intravenous treatment.

Trump and his staff have repeatedly said the marks are due to vigorous handshaking. Many senior US officials are of advanced age. Critics argue that the country’s political system favors seniority and has effectively turned into a gerontocracy. President Joe Biden’s age became a major campaign issue during last year’s presidential election. His aides were accused of hiding signs of cognitive decline to keep him in the race. Biden dropped out of the campaign less than four months before Election Day after a disastrous debate performance against Trump.

Read more …

“With inflation low, retail sales high, and with a previously reported drop in U.S. imports, the second quarter GDP is likely to be much stronger than anyone previously predicted..”

• Navarro: Why Retail Sales Growth Exceeds all Wall Street Projections (CTH)

White House Trade and Economic Advisor Peter Navarro takes a well deserved victory lap on the latest U.S. consumer sales news. The Census Bureau report yesterday highlighted that consumer sales remain strong at +0.6%, significantly higher than all economists forecast. Retail sales growth is important because approximately two-thirds of the U.S. GDP growth is driven by consumer sales. With inflation low, retail sales high, and with a previously reported drop in U.S. imports, the second quarter GDP is likely to be much stronger than anyone previously predicted. Thus, Peter Navarro is leaning forward against the naysayers. This is essentially a repeat of the 2017/2018 economic outcome from President Trump’s first term in office.

The tariffs, which are applied to the ‘cost’ side of the dynamic, are mostly being absorbed by major producing nations who are reliant upon export to the U.S. market. Simultaneously, the tariffs are generating income – essentially exfiltrating foreign wealth and returning those funds to the USA; a complete reversal of the rust-belt dynamic. What Peter Navarro outlines is the core of MAGAnomics. This is also the baseline for our CTH assembly in support of economic nationalism, which is why we ended up in conflict with the Chamber of Commerce Republicans. Tariffs are a tool to leverage reciprocal trade, and as long as nations like China continue taking measures to subsidize their exports, the tariffs simultaneously take wealth (those subsidies) from Beijing and return it to the USA.

This reality has always been the model we predicted would be successful for Americans, and I will remind everyone that ONLY DONALD TRUMP could deliver this MAGAnomic program. Everything else, Epstein, Musk, etc. is chaff and countermeasures deployed by both Democrats and Republicans in an effort to take back control of the money flow. Remember, Democrats want power – Republicans want money. Democrats use money to get power, while Republicans use power to get money. This is how the two-wings of the DC UniParty vulture maintain status. You can see that if you take away the money, democrats lose power.

Simultaneously if you take away control of the money, the republicans go bananas. This dual reality forms the baseline of the elite club opposition against President Trump. At the core of the opposition you find money, control of the USA treasury as a weapon. When you understand that aspect, you understand the motives of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. FED Chair Powell’s refusal to lower interest rates is an attempt to assist both wings of DC by trying -and failing- to influence the money flows. Democrats support Powell’s approach because they want power. Republicans are willfully blind to Powell’s approach because they want to get back in control of the money. Pro-America economic policy, MAGAnomics, is like kryptonite to Washington DC.

Read more …

People easily get nervous about their pensions.

• Trump Eyes Executive Order To Open Up Retirement Funds To Crypto: FT (CT)

US President Donald Trump is reportedly set to sign an executive order that could allow American 401(k) retirement plans to invest in alternative assets outside of stocks and bonds, such as cryptocurrencies. The executive order could be signed sometime this week, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, citing three people who have been briefed on the plans. The new 401(k) investment options could run across a broad spectrum of assets, including digital assets, metals and funds focused on infrastructure deals, corporate takeovers and private loans. The executive order would instruct Washington regulatory agencies to investigate the best path forward for 401(k) plans to start investing in crypto, and investigate any remaining obstacles to making it a reality, according to the Financial Times.

However, in a statement to Cointelegraph, White House spokesman Kush Desai said nothing should be deemed as official unless it comes from Trump himself. “President Trump is committed to restoring prosperity for everyday Americans and safeguarding their economic future,” he said. “No decisions should be deemed official, however, unless they come from President Trump himself.” In May, the US Labor Department rescinded guidance issued during the Biden administration that limited the inclusion of cryptocurrency in 401(k) retirement plans. Meanwhile, in April, Cointelegraph reported that financial services company Fidelity, which has $5.9 trillion in assets under management, introduced a new retirement account allowing Americans to invest in crypto.

A 401(k) is a retirement savings plan offered by many US employers that allows employees to save and invest a portion of their paycheck in the funds before taxes are taken out. Typically, investments focus on mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, stocks and bonds, depending on the plan. The 401(k) market held $8.9 trillion in assets as of Sept. 30, 2024, in more than 715,000 plans. At a state level, in March, North Carolina lawmakers already introduced bills in the House and Senate that could see the state’s treasurer allocate up to 5% of various state retirement funds into crypto like Bitcoin. In November last year, the United Kingdom-based pension specialist Cartwright reported that an “unnamed scheme” had made a 3% allocation of Bitcoin into its pension fund. Meanwhile, Japan’s Government Pension Investment Fund was also considering Bitcoin as a potential diversification tool in March last year.

Read more …

“Strikes against objects in the so-called Ukraine, including Kiev, will be carried out with increasing force..”

• Ukraine’s ‘Rout’ Will Continue – Medvedev (RT)

Russia will continue to rout Ukrainian forces on the battlefield despite the EU’s decision to impose its 18th package of sanctions against the country, former President Dmitry Medvedev said on Friday. The EU member states had approved the sweeping economic restrictions earlier in the day, mostly targeting Russia’s energy and financial sectors, in another attempt to pressure the country over the Ukraine conflict. Moscow has repeatedly condemned the sanctions as “illegal.” The measures will not derail Moscow with regards to the conflict any more than the previous 17 packages did, according to Medvedev, who now serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council.

“Our economy will, of course, survive, and the rout of the Banderite regime will continue. Strikes against objects in the so-called Ukraine, including Kiev, will be carried out with increasing force,” he wrote on Telegram. Moscow should politically steer away from the EU and distance itself from the bloc, he added. Brussels’ new sanctions bar all transactions with 22 additional banks, as well as with the Russian Direct Investment Fund. The package also imposes a ban on utilizing the Nord Stream gas pipelines, which were mostly disabled by sabotage in 2022 and have remained unused since.

The ban also bars the provision of goods and services for the pipeline, “thus preventing the completion, maintenance, operation and any future use” of the gas infrastructure, the European Council said in a statement on Friday. Additionally, the new restrictions add a further 105 ships to a blacklist of what Brussels calls the “shadow fleet” engaged in transporting Russian crude and bypassing the bloc’s “price cap” on Moscow’s oil exports. The sanctions lower the price ceiling and add a mechanism for adjusting to future changes in market conditions. Russia has “built up a certain immunity” to sanctions and “adapted to life” under them, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Friday, commenting on the EU decision.

Read more …

Guess they don’t mind looking stupid.

• EU Reveals 18th Sanctions Package Against Moscow (RT)

The EU has managed to approve its 18th sanctions package against Russia over the Ukraine conflict, targeting Moscow’s energy and banking sectors, the bloc’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has said. The Kremlin has decried the unilateral restrictions by Brussels as “illegal.” A previous attempt to greenlight the package, which requires the approval of all 27 member states, failed earlier this week due to opposition from Slovakia. However, Bratislava said on Thursday that it would be “counterproductive” to block the sanctions further, after it received guarantees from the European Commission regarding the availability of gas and oil. Following the meeting of EU ambassadors in Brussels on Friday, Kallas wrote in a post on X that the bloc “just approved one of its strongest sanctions packages against Russia to date.”

According to Kallas, the bloc will maintain economic pressure on Moscow until the Ukraine conflict is settled. Russia has on numerous occasions expressed its readiness to explore a diplomatic solution with Kiev, but insists that it should be legally binding and address the root causes of the crisis. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted later on Friday that Moscow “repeatedly said that we consider such unilateral restrictions to be illegal. We oppose them.” Russia has already obtained “a certain immunity” and adapted to functioning under the sanctions, he stressed. Peskov also pointed out that the economic curbs are a “double-edged sword,” which creates “a negative effect” not only for Moscow, but also for the state which impose them.

The new sanctions ban transactions with 22 Russian banks and the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), and forbids the use of the Nord Stream gas pipelines, which were crippled by underwater blasts in 2022 and remain inoperable, diplomatic sources have told Euronews. The measures also upgrade the EU price cap on Russian crude oil, fixed at $60 per barrel, replacing it with a dynamic mechanism that remains 15% lower than the average market price, according to the sources. In addition, the curbs add another 105 vessels to a blacklist of what Brussels calls the “shadow fleet” involved in transporting Russian oil, bypassing the bloc’s restrictions, they said. This puts the overall number of tanker ships denied access to EU ports and service at over 400.

Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, Russia has redirected its energy sales to Asia, with China and India being the main buyers. Some member countries, including Hungary and Slovakia, have been critical of the EU sanctions against Russia, saying that they harm the bloc’s economy, while being unable to stop the fighting between Moscow and Kiev.

Read more …

“Last year, despite all the sanctions pressure, Russia’s GDP grew by 4.3%, versus a 0.7% growth rate in the Eurozone..”

• Putin Aide Gives Verdict On New EU Sanctions (RT)

EU sanctions on Russia are far more damaging to the bloc’s member states than they are to Moscow, presidential investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev said on Telegram on Friday. Brussels announced the adoption of its 18th package of sanctions against Russia earlier in the day, targeting the country’s hydrocarbon exports and banking sector. One of the financial institutions sanctioned was the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), of which Dmitriev is the CEO. According to the presidential envoy, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen pushed for sanctions on the fund because the RDIF “facilitates the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, promotes dialogue between Russia and the United States, and invests in the growth of the Russian economy.”

The EU elite is afraid of peace and continues to remain captive to hostile narratives, destroying the economy of the entire EU with its own hands.The economic restrictions are destructive to bloc member states, depriving them of stable energy supplies and access to the Russian market, Dmitriev argued. “Last year, despite all the sanctions pressure, Russia’s GDP grew by 4.3%, versus a 0.7% growth rate in the Eurozone,” he said. The RDIF calls for “unwinding the sanctions spiral,” Dmitriev said. He argued that, despite the imposition of more than 30,000 sanctions against Russia, the measures have failed to force Moscow into acting “in opposition to Russian national interests.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that Moscow has developed “a certain immunity” to the Western sanctions. According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, such unilateral economic restrictions harm the economies of the very states that turn to them. “The more sanctions are imposed, the greater the damage to the imposers,” at the Eurasian Economic Union summit in Minsk last month.

Read more …

“This budget would destroy the European Union. I don’t think this budget will even survive next year..”

• Brussels Budget Plan Could Destroy EU – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has sharply criticized the European Union’s proposed seven-year budget, claiming its primary objective is to facilitate Ukraine’s accession and warning that it could spell disaster for the bloc. Orban, a frequent critic of the EU leadership, blasted the draft Multiannual Financial Framework for 2028-2034, which was unveiled earlier this week by the European Commission, during an interview with Kossuth Radio on Friday. “This budget would destroy the European Union. I don’t think this budget will even survive next year,” Orban said. He predicted that the EU’s executive would either have to withdraw the proposal or make significant revisions before national governments would consider approving it.

The Hungarian leader accused the commission of proposing reckless cuts, particularly in agricultural subsidies, likening the approach to an unskilled surgeon who fatally injures a patient during a botched procedure. Orban reiterated his long-standing claim that Brussels is advancing foreign policy goals – namely, integration of Ukraine – at the expense of EU citizens. “This budget has only one obvious purpose, and that is to admit Ukraine to the European Union,” he said, citing financial analysts who estimate that as much as 25% of the funds could be directed toward benefiting Kiev in various forms.

The Hungarian leader said he did not expect Ukraine to qualify for EU membership anytime soon, adding that officials in Brussels are presenting Kiev as “already overripe” for entry. He cautioned that once Ukraine were admitted, the decision would be virtually irreversible regardless of future consequences. The European Commission has defended the proposed €2 trillion ($2.33 trillion) budget, saying it would increase flexibility, reduce bureaucracy, and boost economic competitiveness. Orban, however, dismissed it as a “budget of hopelessness,” better suited for a bloc “preparing for stagnation and merely trying to avoid disintegration.”

Read more …

Talking about the EU…

• France a ‘Fiscal Time Bomb’ For EU – Bloomberg (RT)

France’s efforts to tackle its growing deficit have reignited concerns about EU stability, with financial markets bracing for the fallout, Bloomberg has reported, citing ING Groep NV strategists. The euro dropped to a one-month low this week, driven by tensions over French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou’s massive deficit-cutting plan. His proposals, including slashing public sector jobs and curbing welfare spending, could fuel debate in France’s minority government and undermine investor confidence, the strategists warned. In a note seen by Bloomberg, currency strategist Francesco Pesole warned on Wednesday that while the euro’s decline was largely dollar-driven, it was also due to political and fiscal challenges in France.

“The French deficit story has been very much in the background as of late, but [Tuesday] probably served as a reminder that it is a ticking bomb for EU sentiment,” Pesole wrote, adding “We could start seeing some FX spillovers in the coming months.” Bayrou’s €43.8 billion ($50.9 billion) plan targets a deficit that reached 5.8% of GDP last year – double the EU’s 3% limit. He warned on Tuesday that excessive debt posed a “mortal danger” and proposed scrapping public holidays to boost productivity and freezing pensions. The proposals have faced backlash, with left-wing parties accusing the government of prioritizing military spending over social welfare. Jean-Luc Melenchon, leader of La France Insoumise, called for Bayrou’s resignation, saying “these injustices cannot be tolerated any longer.”

France’s military budget is slated to rise to €64 billion in 2027, double what the country spent in 2017. President Emmanuel Macron has announced an additional €6.5 billion in funding over the next two years, citing heightened threats to European security. A new defense review released this month warned of a potential “major war” in Europe by 2030, listing Moscow among the top threats. The Kremlin has dismissed claims it is planning to attack the West, accusing NATO of using Russia as a pretext for military expansion. Bayrou, who has survived eight no-confidence motions, must secure parliamentary backing for his proposals before presenting the full budget in October. The right-wing National Rally party has opposed the cuts and called for another vote on his government.

Read more …

Quite a few have woken up.

• Freedom Caucus Attempts to Block Central Bank Digital Currency (Caldwell)

After slowing down the Republican leadership’s attempt to advance a bundle of cryptocurrency market reform bills, the conservative House Freedom Caucus and its allies appear to have secured a promise to prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing a digital U.S. dollar. Caucus members contend that’s a victory for Americans’ freedoms. The deal allowed for House Republicans to advance three important pieces of cryptocurrency legislation and stick to a sufficient timeline for passing a rescissions bill defunding public broadcasting and foreign aid facing a Friday deadline. “This is a significant win for the American people as a government-controlled digital currency poses a direct threat to financial privacy and economic freedom,” House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., wrote on the social media platform X on Wednesday night after securing an agreement with House leadership to put anti-central bank digital currency provisions in the annual defense authorization bill.

“By securing these protections, we will be taking a critical step to stop government overreach and to preserve individual liberty,” he added. But the agreement came only after a multiday slog of negotiations on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday, House GOP leadership brought a rule to the House floor to advance three cryptocurrency bills: the GENIUS, CLARITY, and Anti-CBDC Surveillance acts. The rule ultimately failed. The GENIUS and CLARITY acts resolve questions about the regulatory framework surrounding cryptocurrency, which has long been messy and decentralized, with a number of regulators navigating vague boundaries. But Freedom Caucus members and their allies expressed concerns that Congress might pass these first two acts, but neglect to advance safeguards against central bank digital currency.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, explained Wednesday that he and his conservative cohort view a government digital currency as a threat to liberty and privacy. “We believe a line in the sand is that we’ve got to have an emphatic statement from the government of the United States that the government is not going to be tracking your money to prevent you from being able to buy guns … to buy gasoline, if they want to go to all [electric vehicles],” he said. “To prevent you from being able to live your life freely and be able to monitor your transactions like the Chinese Communist Party. We don’t do that here. This is a country that’s supposed to embrace freedom,” Roy said. The vote on the rule to advance the three crypto bills failed 196-223 on Tuesday when 13 Republicans joined Democrats in opposition, demanding that leadership embed anti-CBDC provisions into one of the other pieces of cryptocurrency legislation.

President Donald Trump met with the GOP holdouts at the White House on Tuesday night and shortly afterward announced he had come to a deal with the members, who “all agreed to vote tomorrow morning in favor of the rule.” The next day, Harris said, they had found a deal with the White House to insert anti-CBDC provisions into the CLARITY Act. “Under this agreement, the Rules Committee will reconvene later [Wednesday] to add clear, strong anti–central bank digital currency (CBDC) provisions to the CLARITY legislation,” he wrote. But the agreement ran into some headwinds quickly when the House Rules Committee canceled its planned 4 p.m. meeting. “There was some sort of an agreement that doesn’t appear to exist anymore, and that’s all I got to say,” said Roy.

Punchbowl News reported that much of this gridlock was due to worries from Chairman French Hill, R-Ark., of the Financial Services Committee and Chairman Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., of the Agriculture Committee, since adding anti-CBDC provisions might make passing the CLARITY Act more difficult. “I think those discussions actually continue,” Hill said Wednesday of Trump’s negotiations with holdouts. The Wednesday vote ended up being the longest recorded vote in the history of the House of Representatives, breaking a record that was set earlier this month when leadership advanced the budget reconciliation measure known as the “Big, Beautiful Bill.” The gridlock was ultimately resolved late in the night when leadership came up with a final compromise—inserting anti-CBDC provisions into the annual National Defense Authorization Act.

This compromise yielded the votes to advance the three cryptocurrency bills. The rule passed 217-212 after being held open for more than nine hours. “House Freedom Caucus Members reached an agreement tonight to advance the president’s cryptocurrency agenda and, as part of this agreement, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) will include strong anti–Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) protections in this must-pass legislation,” Harris wrote Wednesday night. He added, “This is exactly why the House Freedom Caucus fights—‘Freedom‘ is our middle name—and we will continue to fight to protect the rights of Americans every day.” House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., who created the anti-CBDC bill, also applauded integrating the CBDC legislation into the defense authorization bill.

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1945941691313144182

“Even Republicans years ago were saying ‘Oh, we’re falling behind the Chinese; they have the digital yuan.’ You know what they use that for? That is a surveillance tool,” he said Thursday. “That is completely against any American value that we know of, and we’ve got to prevent our central government from ever creating this surveillance tool here in the United States of America.” Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., who was a holdout throughout the process, spoke proudly of the deal. “We did what we set out to do. We went a little slower, and guess what—we got there a little faster,” he said shortly after the vote. “Big Brother loses once again.” Now, it will be up to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., to hold the Senate’s feet to the fire to keep the anti-CBDC provisions in the NDAA. The GENIUS Act ultimately passed on a 308-122 vote Thursday. The CLARITY Act also passed, 294-134. The Anti-CBDC Surveillance Act passed by a much narrower 219-210 margin. GENIUS will now go to the president’s desk for final signature.

Read more …

“..Ghislaine’s attorneys, unless they are bought off or threatened, should have her out of prison tomorrow..”

• Release Ghislaine Maxwell (Paul Craig Roberts)

Ghislaine has been convicted for being an accessory to Epstein’s sex-trafficking of underaged kids. But we now have it from President Trump and the Attorney General of the United States that there is no Epstein client list that provides proof that Epstein was engaged in sex-trafficking for “at least a decade” as the BBC claims. Did Epstein keep all his clients, dates, times, and partners in his head? If there is no client list and nothing in the Epstein file, how were Epstein and Ghislaine convicted? Where is the evidence? As officially there is no evidence, Ghislaine’s attorneys, unless they are bought off or threatened, should have her out of prison tomorrow. Trump and Bondi obviously did not realize the consequences of denying the undeniable. Their denial has not disposed of the problem but has elevated it.

But what if there was no sex-trafficking? What if Epstein’s operation was a honey pot entrapment of American elites? Epstein did not need to make money sex-trafficking underage kids. He was well endowed by Mossad. Epstein’s job was to provide blackmail information that Israel could use to force the foreign policy of the United States to conform with the foreign policy of Israel. He succeeded. The American Establishment, those on the client list, called on Trump as did Netanyahu. Unless you are insouciant, you have noticed that Netanyahu rushed to the White House for the third time in six months, allegedly to discuss the Iranian threat. But there was no news conference. There has been no reporting of what was discussed. Such an important meeting, and no reportable results.

My take is that Netanyahu appeared in order to add Israel’s heavy weight to that of the ruling American Establishment that release of Epstein information is a no-no. If the Epstein files are released, then all the years of work, expense, and effort put into collecting blackmail capability over the American ruling class is wasted. Once the files are released and the information is pubic, Israel’s blackmail information is useless. Moreover, it becomes public knowledge that Israel was blackmailing the American elite to serve Israel’s, not America’s interest. The American Establishment cannot afford to have itself discredited, and Mossad cannot afford to have its blackmail information over the ruling American Establishment made worthless by its public exposure. That, dear reader, is the story of the Epstein Saga.

Read more …

“Today, every AI developer is one bad headline away from a class action lawsuit..”

• American AI Could Die in Court Before It Ever Takes Off (Rotella)

“Uh oh—have you guys completed your income tax? Things kind of happened real fast down there, and I need an extension.”—Apollo 13 astronaut Jack Swigert. Even in space, Americans worry about taxes. That’s not a screenwriter’s joke. Hours before Apollo 13 almost ended in disaster, astronaut Jack Swigert, called in as a last-minute replacement, wasn’t worried about launch. He was worried about filing his taxes. Only in America could bureaucracy follow you into orbit. That story says everything about our national identity. We cherish the rule of law. We believe in due process. But in the race to lead in artificial intelligence, it’s becoming clear: The very systems we treasure may be the ones slowing us down.

The 2 Biggest Threats to US Artificial Intelligence Leadership. Right now, America is out front in both generative AI (which predicts content) and agentic AI (which makes autonomous decisions). But two very American forces are putting that lead at risk:

(1) A regulatory Rubik’s Cube. Congress recently passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to jumpstart AI innovation. But it stripped out a crucial provision: a 10-year moratorium on conflicting state-level AI laws. Now, companies face 50 different interpretations of what AI is allowed to do. Some states require bias audits. Others impose disclosure mandates. A tool that’s legal in Florida could get fined in California. Even top-tier compliance lawyers can’t map it all out fast enough. Because AI models cross state lines the moment they’re deployed, this isn’t just inefficient, it’s paralyzing.

(2) A litigation gold rush. Trial lawyers have found their next deep-pocketed target: AI. I say this as someone who used to be one of them and now defends companies against the legal risks of AI deployment. Lawsuits are already moving. The most prominent? A federal case against UnitedHealthcare, accusing the company of using AI to deny long-term care without sufficient human oversight. And that’s only the beginning. The playbook is already forming.

Here are the claims AI developers are now defending against:
• Product liability for algorithmic defects.
• Failure to warn about tool misuse.
• Discrimination based on automated decisions.
• Negligence for not keeping a “human in the loop.”

In America, you don’t have to prove intent. Just tie the harm to an AI tool and let a jury decide. Today, every AI developer is one bad headline away from a class action lawsuit. Let’s be clear: Our legal system is the envy of the world. But when lawsuits are filed before laws are even written, we aren’t protecting consumers, we’re punishing innovators for playing on a field without any lines drawn. Let me be crystal clear: We do not want China’s system. We don’t want central planning. We don’t want censorship. And we don’t want a government-controlled tech industry. But it would be naive to pretend China faces the same friction.

Yes, they have courts. But they don’t have:
• Billboards from class action lawyers.
• Contingency-fee lawsuits built around algorithmic outcomes.
• Juries “sending a message” to tech companies with punitive damages.
• Their developers don’t plan around litigation. Ours have to.

While companies like Nvidia plead to sell advanced chips to China after the H20 export ban was lifted, Beijing isn’t waiting around. It’s racing ahead, deploying AI in defense, logistics, and manufacturing without lawsuits, regulators, or legal second-guessing. We don’t envy China. But we must acknowledge that its AI teams aren’t operating with a target on their back. We’ve been here before. In 1996, Congress passed Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, shielding internet platforms from liability for user-generated content. That one provision allowed Amazon, YouTube, and countless others to thrive. We need an AI-specific shield now, a legal safe harbor that ensures developers aren’t liable for what users do with their tools, unless there’s fraud or criminal intent. Without it, legal departments will keep killing products before they launch.

Congress must also revisit a national moratorium on conflicting state AI laws. National consistency doesn’t mean more bureaucracy. It means sane, scalable innovation. This is our Apollo 13 moment. We have the best technology. We have the best talent. We have an entrepreneurial fire. But we’re losing altitude because the systems designed to protect us are choking progress. Let’s not become the bureaucracy we escaped to get to the moon. Let’s be the country that answered Apollo 13’s “Houston, we have a problem” and brought our tax-conscious astronauts safely back home. Let’s fix this the American way with clear rules, real urgency, and freedom that actually works.

Read more …

If you let a machine do all your thinking, you will lose the ability.

• Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity (RCW)

I began studying AI in the mid-1980s. Unusually for a computer scientist of that era, my interest was entirely in information, not in machines. I became obsessed with understanding what it meant to live during the transition from the late Industrial Age to the early Information Age. What I learned is that computers fundamentally alter the economics of information. We now have inexpensive access to more information, and to higher quality information, than ever before. In theory, that should help individuals reach better decisions, organizations devise improved strategies, and governments craft superior policies. But that’s just a theory. Does it? The answer is “sometimes.” Unfortunately, the “sometimes not” part of the equation is now poised to unleash devastating consequences.

Consider the altered economics of information: Scarcity creates value. That’s been true in all times, in all cultures, and for all resources. If there’s not enough of a resource to meet demand, its value increases. If demand is met and a surplus remains, value plummets. Historically, information was scarce. Spies, lawyers, doctors, priests, scientists, scholars, accountants, teachers, and others spent years acquiring knowledge, then commanded a premium for their services. Today, information is overabundant. No one need know anything because the trusty phones that never leave our sides can answer any question that might come our way. Why waste your time learning, studying, or internalizing information when you can just look it up on demand?

Having spent the past couple of years working in higher education reform and in conversation with college students, I’ve come to appreciate the power—and the danger—of this question. Today’s students have weaker general backgrounds than we’ve seen for many generations because when information ceased being scarce, it lost all value. It’s important to recall how recently this phenomenon began. In 2011, an estimated one-third of Americans, and one-quarter of American teenagers, had smartphones. From there, adoption among the young grew faster than among the general population. Current estimates are that over 90 percent of Americans, and over 95 percent of teenagers, have smartphone access. Even rules limiting classroom use cannot overcome the cultural shift.

Few of today’s college students or recent grads have ever operated without the ability to scout ahead or query a device for information on an as-needed basis. There’s thus no reason for them to have ever developed the discipline or the practices that form the basis for learning. The deeper problem, however, is that while instant lookup may work well for facts, it’s deadly for comprehension and worse for moral thinking. A quick lookup can list every battle of WWII, along with casualty statistics and outcome. It cannot reveal the strategic or ethical deliberations driving the belligerents as they entered that battle. Nor can it explain why Churchill fought for the side of good while Hitler fought for the side of evil—a question that our most popular interviewers and podcasters have recently brought to prominence.

At least, lookup couldn’t provide such answers until recently. New AI systems—still less than three years old—are rushing to fill that gap. They already offer explanations and projections, at times including the motives underlying given decisions. They are beginning to push into moral judgments. Of course, like all search and pattern-matching tools, these systems can only extrapolate from what they find. They thus tend to magnify whatever is popular. They’re also easy prey for some of the most basic cognitive biases. They tend to overweight the recent, the easily available, the widely repeated, and anything that confirms pre-conceived models. The recent reports of Grok regurgitating crude antisemitic stereotypes and slogans illustrate the technological half of the problem.

The shocking wave of terror-supporting actions wracking college campuses and drawing recent grads in many of our cities illustrate the human half. The abundance of information has destroyed its value. Because information—facts and data—are the building blocks upon which all understanding must rest, we’ve raised a generation incapable of deep understanding. Because complex moral judgments build upon comprehension, young Americans are also shorn of basic morality We are rapidly entering a world in which widespread access to voluminous information is producing worse—not better—decisions and actions at all levels. We have outsourced knowledge, comprehension, and judgment to sterile devices easily biased to magnify popular opinion. We have bred a generation of exquisitely credentialed, deeply immoral, anti-intellectuals on the brink of entering leadership.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Kimberl59898021/status/1946007846857871636

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1945944408462893332
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1946104683568705589

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 18 2025

Jul 182025
 
 July 18, 2025  Posted by at 9:38 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  80 Responses »


Paul Gauguin Tahitians at rest (unfinished) 1891

 

• Trump’s Ultimatum Isn’t An Ultimatum – and Moscow Knows It (Ryumshin)
• Trump Has Backed Himself Into A Corner On Ukraine (Proud)
• It’s Time, Ukraine: Kiev Braces For A Final Reckoning (Poletaev)
• The Emotional Alliance Between Ukrainians and the Russian Federation (Dionísio)
• US Hubris-Driven Blunders Transform The Wider War (Alastair Crooke)
• Three Rational Calculations By Trump’s Men (Helmer)
• ‘Obvious Similarity’ Between Ukraine and Nazi Germany – Medvedev (RT)
• Kiev Setting Stage For Chemical Disaster – Moscow (RT)
• Trump Orders Release Of Epstein ‘Transcripts’ (RT)
• Trump Threatens To Sue WSJ Over ‘Bawdy Letter To Epstein’ (RT)
• Trump Convinces Coca-Cola To Return To Cane Sugar In The US (JTN)
• James Comey’s Daughter Fired From Top US Attorney’s Office Job (NYP)
• I Can’t Believe The NYTimes Thought It Would Get Away With This (Margolis)
• Von der Leyen’s Final Plan: A False Democracy For A False Europe (Pacini)

 

 

Bernal

Lutnick

What do we make of these Yellowstone videos?

Rhys

 

 

 

 

“Trump’s famed “art of the deal” may amount to little more than selling junk with a smile. But if so, he’s done it masterfully.”

• Trump’s Ultimatum Isn’t An Ultimatum – and Moscow Knows It (Ryumshin)

US President Donald Trump has finally issued his much-anticipated “important statement” on Russia. For days, speculation swirled, particularly among pro-Ukrainian circles, that the long-awaited U-turn was coming. Trump, they hoped, would finally get tough – perhaps inspired by the increasingly hawkish rhetoric of Senator Lindsey Graham (who, incidentally, is designated a terrorist and extremist in Russia). Even skeptics began to believe that Trump was gearing up to show Moscow “Kuzka’s mother,” a famous idiomatic expression of aggression used by Nikita Khrushchev during the Cold War. But in classic Trump fashion, expectations were dashed. The supposedly “extremely tough ultimatum” turned out to be something else entirely. Trump threatened tariff sanctions against Russia and its trading partners – but scrapped Graham’s extreme proposal of 500% duties.

Instead, he floated the idea of 100% tariffs that would only take effect after 50 days, if he chooses to enforce them, and if Russia fails to strike a deal. Trump also announced new arms deliveries to Ukraine. But these aren’t gifts – they’ll be sold, not given, and passed through European intermediaries. Supposedly, Ukraine will receive 17 Patriot systems. Yet we soon learned the first of these deliveries won’t arrive for at least two months – again, 50 days. And even now, basic questions remain unanswered. What exactly did Trump mean by “17 Patriots”? Seventeen batteries? Launchers? Missiles? If he meant 17 batteries, that’s simply not plausible. The US itself only operates around 30 active batteries. Germany and Israel combined don’t have anywhere near that many available systems. Such a figure would significantly boost Ukraine’s air defenses – but it’s almost certainly exaggerated.

Seventeen missiles? That would be laughable – but not unthinkable. Washington recently sent just 10 Patriot missiles in a “military aid” package so modest it wouldn’t suffice for a single battle. Seventeen launchers? That seems more realistic. A typical battery consists of six to eight launchers, so this would amount to two or three batteries – more than what Germany and Norway have promised to purchase for Ukraine. Yet even the Pentagon can’t confirm the details. And one suspects Trump himself may be fuzzy on the specifics. His role, after all, is to make the pronouncements; others are left to clean up the mess. The so-called “14 July ultimatum” has already become a textbook example of Trump’s diplomatic approach. In fact, a new phrase has emerged in American political slang: “Trump Always Chickens Out” or TACO.

The acronym speaks for itself. It refers to the president’s habit in trade and security talks of making grandiose threats, only to backtrack or delay implementation.This appears to be another case in point. The negotiations are at an impasse. Trump still craves a Nobel Peace Prize. And he’s reluctant to become too entangled in the Ukrainian conflict. So he’s reached for the oldest trick in his playbook: the non-ultimatum ultimatum. This allows him to sound tough while giving Moscow space – and perhaps even time – to act. It also offers cover with his MAGA base, many of whom are frustrated by distractions like Iran or the Epstein scandal and aren’t eager to see America dragged further into Ukraine. The genius of it, from Trump’s perspective, is that it promises everything and nothing at once.

No clear strategy. No detailed demands. Just an open-ended threat backed by ambiguous timelines. It’s pressure without posture. Leverage without leadership. What’s striking is that the White House didn’t even ask Russia to de-escalate. There were no appeals to halt the almost daily strikes on Ukraine or curb battlefield activity. In effect, Russia has been handed a 50-day window – intentionally or not – to do as it sees fit. A quiet concession to the Kremlin? Perhaps. A careless side effect? Possibly. Either way, Moscow gains. America, too, comes out ahead – at least financially. Under the new arrangement, Western Europe picks up the tab for Ukraine’s defense, while US companies get paid to offload ageing equipment.

Trump’s famed “art of the deal” may amount to little more than selling junk with a smile. But if so, he’s done it masterfully. Still, as a political maneuver, the outcome is more uncertain. Trump may believe he’s found the sweet spot between hawks and doves, between NATO allies and nationalist critics. But trying to be all things to all people rarely ends well. Appeasement disguised as firmness satisfies no one for long. And while Trump plays for time, Russia holds the initiative. That’s the real story here.

Read more …

Trump is trying to resist the fast growing pressure, in the US and Europe, to declare outright war on Russia.

• Trump Has Backed Himself Into A Corner On Ukraine (Proud)

One year after he undertook to end the Ukraine war in one day, and just past six months into his Presidency, Donald Trump has kicked the peace can down the road by fifty days. The ultimatum to President Putin to make peace or face sanctions has practically no chance to changing Russian aims in Ukraine. Backed into a corner, Trump may finally be forced to address Russia’s underlying concerns. In televised remarks on 14 July during his meeting with NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, President Trump said, ‘if we don’t have a [peace] deal in fifty days, we’re going to be doing very severe tariffs, tariffs at about a hundred percent, you’d call them secondary tariffs.’ As he was in 2017, Trump also now finds himself hemmed in by beltway politics and unable to deliver a reset in U.S.-Russia relations that he instinctively seems to want.

The Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 would put in place so-called secondary sanctions on Russia by imposing stiff tariffs of up to 500% against countries such as China and India that inter alia import Russian energy. U.S. lawmakers want to strong arm Trump into forcing President Putin to back down in Ukraine via the back door. But there is a yawn-inducing sense of déjà vu here. The 2017 Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, signed into law on 2 August 2017, had no impact on Russian policy towards Ukraine, but led to a huge collapse in U.S.-Russia relations. This was illustrated most clearly by the decision to cut U.S. diplomatic staffing in Russia by 755 personnel, meaning among other things, that today it is practically impossible for a Russian citizen to apply for a U.S. visa inside of Russia itself; the U.S. Embassy simply doesn’t have enough staff.

To avoid a repeat of 2017, Trump now appears to be buying himself fifty days in DC to reach peace in Ukraine before he is forced by the Senate to impose secondary sanctions on Russia. The 14 July announcement was therefore about domestic U.S. politics more than about foreign policy. But what Trump has in fact done is to set a clear ultimatum on Russia to reach a peace deal with Ukraine, with no clear commitment to meeting Russia’s specific demands, the key demand being Ukraine’s neutrality and revocation of its NATO aspiration. As an ultimatum, this won’t work, because the additional military support that the U.S. is now offering to Ukraine, paid for by European NATO allies, won’t be sufficient to tip the military balance in Ukraine’s favour.

Additional Patriot missiles and interceptors may well reduce the overall impact of Russian drone and missile strikes on Ukrainian cities. But the military facts on the ground are that Russia continues to gain ground. At several points along the front line, around Pokrovsk, and Kupiansk, towards Konstiantynivka and Siversk, there have been significant recent Russian gains, by the slow attritional standards of this war. As reported by the Guardian in the UK, even some Ukrainian politicians and bloggers have come out to say that fifty days will simply allow Russia to occupy further Ukrainian land. The most interesting point about that report is the revelation that a British mainstream media outlet is reporting oppositionist views from Ukraine, rather than the narrative from Zelensky’s propaganda machine. So, fifty days favours Russia more than Ukraine, militarily.

Read more …

“In just the first half of this year, Ukraine recorded over 107,000 criminal cases for desertion – 20% more than in all of 2024, and nearly half of the total since the war began.”

• It’s Time, Ukraine: Kiev Braces For A Final Reckoning (Poletaev)

In our previous pieces, we examined Donald Trump’s half-hearted attempts to cast himself as a deus ex machina, descending to end the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Peace did not follow. Trump, boxed in by political inertia, continued Biden’s policy of disengagement while trying to dump the Ukrainian problem on Western Europe – just as we predicted back in January. Its leaders weren’t prepared. While Macron and Starmer formed coalitions of the willing and delivered lofty speeches, Germany quietly picked up the tab. Berlin, under its new chancellor, has shown more flexibility, but the broader Western European strategy remains unchanged: keep Washington bankrolling Ukraine at all costs. That plan is now crumbling. Trump is slipping away, and without a dramatic turn of events, no new major aid packages should be expected from the US.

This is not hard to understand. Other global crises are emerging, and the depleted American arsenal cannot serve everyone at once. In both Ukraine and across Western Europe, people are adjusting to what once seemed unthinkable: a slow but steady US withdrawal. These European leaders must now decide whether to carry the burden alone or accept a settlement on Moscow’s terms – conceding Ukraine from their sphere of influence. But neither Kiev nor its immediate sponsors is ready for serious negotiations. Why would they be? Ukraine believes it can hold without American backing. Russian oil revenues have dipped, the ruble is under pressure, and Moscow has taken hits in the Middle East and Caucasus. Perhaps, they reason, Putin will come begging in another year or two. Let’s fight, then.

Amid this political theater, the war itself has faded into the background. For many observers, the front lines seem frozen in time – village names flicker in and out of headlines, lines shift, but the broader picture holds. It’s a difficult situation for military analysts. They are forced to generate drama from attritional warfare. One day, headlines declare the Lugansk Peoples Republic fully liberated (a few villages remain contested). The next, we hear of Russian forces entering the Dnepropetrovsk region (true in a narrow sense – they crossed a small corner in a broader encirclement maneuver around Pokrovsk). None of this, however, alters the core dynamic. Both sides are largely following the same strategies as a year ago. For Russia, the aim remains clear: exhaust Ukrainian forces until they can no longer defend. The goal isn’t to seize a specific line, but to break the enemy’s army.

Russia has pursued this with steady, grinding pressure. Last winter, Moscow shifted from large mechanized thrusts to small, flexible assault groups. Instead of smashing through defenses, these units infiltrate after prolonged bombardment from artillery, drones, and air power. The results aren’t flashy, but the goal is cumulative. The summer campaign began in May; we’ll see its full effect by late summer or even winter. This mirrors the pattern of 2024, when Russian forces made their biggest gains in October and November, capturing several cities in Donetsk with minimal resistance – Novogrodovka, Ugledar, Selidovo, Kurakhovo. The key question now is scale: can Russia turn these tactical wins into a full collapse of Ukrainian lines?

The answer depends in part on the weakened state of Ukraine’s forces. By spring, Kiev had fewer armored vehicles, fewer Western shipments, and fewer elite units. The best troops were spent in the failed Kursk push and are now stuck holding Sumy. But the gravest issue is manpower. The supply of volunteers has dried up. Ukraine’s army now relies on forced conscription – the so-called “busified.” And the results are telling. In just the first half of this year, Ukraine recorded over 107,000 criminal cases for desertion – 20% more than in all of 2024, and nearly half of the total since the war began. That’s only the official count; the real number is undoubtedly higher. Desertion is now the Ukrainian army’s leading cause of losses. Draft officers are hated, and civilians fear being dragged into vans and thrown to the front. Power outages have lessened, and life behind the lines is almost normal. But the threat of forced mobilization looms. In a telling detail, real soldiers now mark their cars with “not TCR” to avoid attacks from angry civilians.

Read more …

“..the abundance of cases–desperate mothers, women committing suicide, daughters protesting–began to suggest that, deep down, the Ukrainian soul may still belong to a peaceful people who never wanted any of this..”

• The Emotional Alliance Between Ukrainians and the Russian Federation (Dionísio)

For a regime that presents itself to Western nations as “the shield of democracies,” it is ironic, if not tragic, that its own people do not feel aligned with such a “noble” mission. Indeed, there are signs that Ukrainians neither consider it noble nor desire such a mission, despite the enthusiasm of Western journalists and politicians. When we watch news about the war in Ukraine and encounter journalists who, forgetting their role as informants, immediately shift to “counterarguments“–which is not their function–to challenge any more independent commentator, we are far from understanding the levels of suffering, despair, and immorality to which the Ukrainian people have been subjected over these hellish three years. During this time, the US, EU, NATO, and G7 decided to assign them an impossible mission: “to defend Western democracies against Putin’s autocracy.”

One might expect Ukrainians to feel flattered, even praised, for being chosen for such a lofty mission, especially when the assigners were none other than the self-proclaimed champions of transparency, civility, democracy, and respect for human rights. Over the three years of war, there was no shortage of street interviews in which carefully selected passersby declared their readiness for anything; nor was there a shortage of so-called journalists who praised the courage, fervor, and antagonism toward Russia, and especially toward Putin. Everything was shown to make it seem as though everyone was happy and committed. Europeans and Americans funded the war, other people’s children fought it, and the children of those aspiring to join the Western garden were sent to the front under the auspices of von der Leyen’s victory, the infantile Trumpist Mark Rutte, Baerbock, now Kallas, and formerly Borrell.

Until the news of forced conscription could no longer be contained, even outlets like The New York Times or The Guardian could not suppress it. After all, some were not so enchanted with the mission of defending others’ freedom at the cost of their own tyranny. Images began to emerge of fathers, sons, brothers, young men, and adults resisting–heroically, madly, desperately–being sent to their deaths. The images could no longer lie: men running over recruitment officers–at the risk of arrest and worse–others screaming while clinging to trees, traffic signs, or anything they could hold onto, desperate workers running through the streets shouting… In the end, one of two things must be true: either the promise of eternal freedom is not so thrilling, or the promise of eternal tyranny in case of military defeat is not so credible.

The truth is that the abundance of cases–desperate mothers, women committing suicide, daughters protesting–began to suggest that, deep down, the Ukrainian soul may still belong to a peaceful people who never wanted any of this. For Western media, nothing had changed, except that they stopped contradicting those who openly declared that Ukrainian men were no longer masters of their own lives. Not a single word, report, or statement. After all, what is happening to the Ukrainian people is not so different from what is happening elsewhere in the world.

If in Gaza and the West Bank a people is martyred, eliminated, in the name of defending Israel at the hands of a Zionist minority; in Ukraine, a people is martyred, forced to fight those they considered their brothers, with whom they lived and prospered (Soviet Ukraine was once the 10th-largest economy in the world), tyrannized by a Nazi-fascist minority, used and nurtured to defend “the democratic West.” It all comes down to pure optics, to those who consider themselves superior and, by that superiority, believe they can instrumentalize the worst evils to achieve a supreme good that only a select few enjoy. Just as Zionists consider themselves superior to all other peoples, so too do Western globalists, imperialists, Atlanticists, and liberal-fascists consider themselves superior to the peoples of the Global South, Russians included.

The one who did not fail to identify this profound contradiction was the Russian Federation and its highest military ranks. And then the unexpected happened. After all that was said about the Russian Federation, after the charges brought against Vladimir Putin for genocide and crimes against humanity, after accusations of “imperialist” ambitions, the Ukrainian people began to look at the Russian Federation not as an invader, not as a destroyer, but as an ally–if not a savior, as in the case of Russian-speaking Ukrainians. The decision to bomb “recruitment” centers–read “detention” centers–thus became a form of soft power in itself. With each destroyed center, Ukrainian voices rose in jubilation, as if turning despair into courage to say to their ally, “Yes, it is in you that I must place my hope.” Social media was flooded with messages of gratitude to Russian forces, of sympathy for this unexpected “solidarity.” It was as if, with each destroyed center, Ukrainians gained days of life, extending the hope that the war would truly end, and with it would come peace and the condemnation of the real culprits.

Read more …

“The entire complexion of this war to retain America’s dollar primacy has been irreversibly altered.”

• US Hubris-Driven Blunders Transform The Wider War (Alastair Crooke)

The big issue emerging from the U.S.’ 22 June strike on Iran – second only to ‘wither Iran?’ – is whether in Trump’s calculus he can ‘rhetorically impose’ the having “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear programme claim long enough to both restrain Israel from hitting Iran again, yet still allow Trump to pursue his show-stopper headline, ‘WE WON: I’m in charge now and everybody is going to do what I tell them’. These were the key conflicting issues that were to be hammered out with Netanyahu during his White House visit this week. Netanyahu’s interests essentially are for ‘more hot war’, and thus differ from the Trump ceasefire general stratagem.

Implicit in his ‘In-Boom-Out & Ceasefire’ Iran approach is that Trump may imagine he has created the space to resume his primary objective – that of instituting a broader Israeli-centric order across the Middle East, devolving upon trade deals, economic ties, investment and connectivity, to create a business-led West Asia, centred on Tel Aviv (with Trump as its de facto ‘President’). And, via this ‘Business Super Highway’, to strike further beyond – with the Gulf States penetrating into BRICS’ south Asian heartland to disrupt BRICS connectivity and corridors. The sine qua non for any jumpstart to a putative ‘Abraham Accords 2.0 of course – as Trump clearly understands – is an end to the Gaza War; the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza; and the Strip’s re-construction (none of which seems to be in realistic reach).

What emerges rather, is that Trump continues to be seized by the delusional view that his Israeli-centred vision could all be accomplished merely by ending the genocide in Gaza, but with the world watching aghast as Israel continues on a hegemonic military rampage across the region. The most obvious flaw to the Trump premise is that a chastened Iran somehow has been achieved by Israeli and American strikes. It is the opposite. Iran has arisen more unified, resolute and defiant. Far from being relegated to watching passively from the sidelines, Iran now – in the wake of recent events – resumes its place as a leading regional power. One that is readying a possibly game-changing military riposte to any further strikes by either Israel or the U.S.

What is ignored in all these western claims of Israeli success, is that Israel chose to bet all on a surprise ‘shock and awe’ strike. One that would overturn the Islamic Republic at a stroke. It didn’t work: the strategic objective failed, and it produced the opposite outcome. But the more fundamental point is that the techniques used by Israel – that required months, if not years of preparation – cannot just be repeated again now that their stratagems have been fully exposed. This White House misreading of the Iran reality signals that the Trump Team allowed themselves to be deceived by Israeli hubris in insisting that Iran was a house-of-cards, primed to collapse completely into paralysis upon the first taste of the Israeli sneak decapitation ‘muscle’ on 13 June.

This was a fundamental error – in a pattern of similar errors: That China would capitulate to the threat of imposed tariffs; that Russia could be coerced into a ceasefire against its interests; and that Iran would be ready to sign an unconditional surrender document in the face of Trump’s threats post-22 June. What these U.S. blunders speak to – apart from a consistent divorce from geo-political realities – is western weakness masked behind hubris and bluster. The U.S. Establishment clings to its fading primacy; but in doing it so ineffectually, it has instead accelerated the formation of a potent geo-strategic alliance intent on defying the U.S.

The consequence has been the wake up call to other States occasioned by the western slide towards stratagems of outright lies and deceit: The ‘Spider Web’ operation against the Russian strategic bomber fleet on the eve of the Istanbul talks and the U.S.-Israeli sneak attack on Iran two days before the expected next round of U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks, have increased the will-to-resist by China, Russian and Iran particularly, but more generally it is felt across the Global South. The entire complexion of this war to retain America’s dollar primacy has been irreversibly altered.

Read more …

I -used to- like John Helmer. But he’s lost me now. If you want to claim that Trump is too demented to tie his shoe laces, you need more than a few quotes from a niece who hates his guts.

• Three Rational Calculations By Trump’s Men (Helmer)

About President Donald Trump, certifiable maniac isn’t an expletive – it’s a clinical diagnosis. In the neurological and psychiatric evidence that has been accumulating about Trump over many years, there is the medical history of Alzheimer’s Disease which runs in his family: his father was first diagnosed at age 86 and died at 93; his older sister died of it, aged 86; and at least one cousin died of the same, aged 84. Since the President has just turned 79, there is reason to anticipate similar onset of symptoms and cause of death for him. Trump thinks this himself, according to Mary Trump, a clinical psychologist and the President’s niece. She has published a case history of the President in 2020 which Trump’s lawyers failed to suppress in court.

Last week, she published a new symptom of what she calls the acceleration in Trump’s cognitive decline: he cannot tie his own shoe laces. This claim has already been pursued by online investigators who have been reporting Trump’s lace-ups which appear from the photographs to be tied permanently and a mysterious right shoe several sizes too large. The evidence of Trump’s incapacity to understand the Russian end-of-war terms, as he expressed himself in the July 14 press session with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, was reported here. [..] When Trump and Rutte accuse President Vladimir Putin of failing to negotiate seriously, the record reveals the opposite. Negotiating on the Ukraine war with Trump is proving to be impossible because Trump isn’t serious. That’s not his political decision; it’s his neuro-psychiatric handicap.

“You really gave him [Putin] a chance to be serious to get to the table to start negotiations,” Rutte said to Trump on Monday. “Steve Witkoff, Marco Rubio, we all try to help you. But you’ve now come to a point where you say, well, hey, you know, you have to — you have to get serious.” Trump agreed, replying: “We actually thought we had probably four times [agreed] the deal.” Five times over, Rutte repeated that the Russians aren’t serious. Trump repeated himself: “We’re going to go for a period of time. Maybe he’ll start negotiating. I think we felt, I felt, I don’t know about you Mark, but I felt that we had a deal about four times and here we are still talking about making a deal.”

Trump’s recall was that the terms of his deal had been accepted by Putin; he didn’t recall what Putin’s terms were. He is revealing he cannot comprehend the difference between the US and Russian negotiating positions; he hasn’t so much rejected the “new idea, new concept” from the Kremlin as not to have understood it. This isn’t Trump’s negotiating tactic – it’s cognitive incapacity camouflaged by the threat of force to compel Putin’s capitulation. The first test of Trump’s rationality is the Mary Trump test – an Oval Office press conference in which Trump demonstrates how he ties his shoe laces. The second test requires Russian counter force. This is the Oreshnik decision-making point for Putin, when there is no longer any point to negotiating because the US side aims at escalating its arms supplies to the Ukraine battlefield and encouraging the Germans to join in long-range missile attacks on the Russian hinterland, including Moscow and St. Petersburg.

In the Russian decision-making now under way, there is an attempt to find the rational calculations in what Trump is meaning; that is to say, what Trump’s advisors, constituents, and officials are calculating when he himself is incapacitated. The first of these, Russian sources believe, is that the Trump escalation is a pitch to prevent Trump’s domestic voter base, the MAGA enthusiasts in the battleground states which won the presidency for Trump last November, from deserting him.

The second calculation is that Russia is militarily and economically vulnerable to a combination of escalation of attacks inside Russia and sanctions on the oil trade outside. This is the strategy of the “bigger bear”, announced on CNN this week by former Trump and Biden Administration warfighter, Brett McGurk: “the Russians approach diplomacy as a bear approaches a dance. The bear knows it will determine when and how the dance ends, unless the other dance partner proves itself to be a bigger bear. Sometimes, it helps to be the bigger bear. In the context of Ukraine, like Syria, while the United States is a far more powerful country than Russia, Putin believes that he has the upper hand in such localized conflicts due to Moscow’s determination and consistency contrasted with Washington’s perceived lack of focus, stamina and shifting politics through election cycles. Correcting that perception is a first principle for effective diplomacy with Moscow, and the approach outlined by Trump yesterday offers the chance to do exactly that.”

The third rational calculation, Russian sources believe — as do some US analysts — is that by supplying the Ukraine battlefield through Germany, the UK and Norway with a combination of Patriot anti-aircraft defence batteries and long-range offence missile systems like the Typhon, the Trump Administration will escape having to face a US taxpayer revolt in Congress over the multi-billion dollar cost of direct US arms supplies to Kiev regime. According to this scheme too, Trump would have an alibi if the Oreshnik decision is taken by Putin, and if the US weapons are defeated in the collapse of the Zelensky regime. Trump would blame the Germans, repeating his line: “don’t forget, I’ve just really been involved in this for not very long and it wasn’t initial focus. Again, this is a Biden war. This is a Democrat war, not a Republican or Trump war. This is a war that would have never happened.”

Read more …

“..the 80th anniversary of the Potsdam Conference, which began on July 17, 1945. The conference was the last wartime meeting between leaders of the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom. It laid the groundwork for postwar Europe..”

• ‘Obvious Similarity’ Between Ukraine and Nazi Germany – Medvedev (RT)

Ukraine bears similarities to the Nazi state at the end of World War II and should undergo “demilitarization,” “denazification,” and “democratization” in a manner similar to postwar Germany, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has told TASS. He spoke to the Russian news agency on Thursday, the 80th anniversary of the Potsdam Conference, which began on July 17, 1945. The conference was the last wartime meeting between leaders of the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom. It laid the groundwork for postwar Europe, including plans for Germany’s demilitarization and denazification. Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, explained that the concept of the “three D’s” had originally been formulated for Nazi Germany, which he described as an aggressor state that had disrupted the international order, according to TASS.

“The 1945 Reich and modern Ukraine are, of course, very different – in scale, global role, and even (formally) in state ideology. But there is also obvious similarity.” Medvedev said Ukraine shares its “crisis of identity” with Hitler’s Germany and engages in the “open use of Nazi symbols,” while showing signs of dictatorship and economic degradation. “All this makes the idea of applying the three D’s relevant,” he stated. He added that demilitarization for Ukraine should not be seen as punishment, but rather as “a chance to stop being a pawn in someone else’s bloody geopolitical games.”

He described denazification or “debanderization” as a long-term effort involving public consciousness and historical memory. Democratization, he said, involved not only elections but also the restoration of legal institutions, free media, political competition, and the separation of powers. Many historic ultranationalist leaders, including Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) Stepan Bandera, a notorious Nazi collaborator, are widely revered by Ukrainians today. Russia has repeatedly condemned Kiev’s elevation of these collaborators to national hero status and has demanded the “denazification” of the country as part of a negotiated peace agreement. Russia has accused Western governments of deliberately ignoring continued neo-Nazi activity in Ukrainian ranks.

Read more …

“..placing toxic chemicals in the areas where Russian troops operate and their subsequent detonation.”

• Kiev Setting Stage For Chemical Disaster – Moscow (RT)

The Ukrainian military is trying to provoke a major ecological disaster close to the front line and blame it on Russia, the Defense Ministry in Moscow warned on Thursday. The accusation came from Maj. Gen. Aleksey Rtishchev, the commander of Russia’s Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Protection Troops, who briefed the public about alleged Ukrainian violations of an international treaty prohibiting the use of chemical weapons. Rtishchev disclosed a document obtained by the Russian military, in which the deputy director of Ukrainian state-owned company Ukrkhimtransammiak informed a regional official appointed by Kiev that in late June Ukrainian troops had illegally accessed a site operated by the firm.

The Ukrkhimtransammiak executive stressed his concern that the location could be damaged due to the military’s involvement, potentially causing the release of up to 566 tons of highly toxic liquified ammonia. The site, an above-ground element of a Soviet-built underground ammonia pipeline operated by Ukrkhimtransammiak, is located roughly 2.5 km north of the village of Novotroitskoye, in the Kiev-controlled portion of Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic. Rtishchev claimed the Ukrainian military had placed communication equipment at the location as part of “barbaric tactics used by the Kiev regime” which involves “placing toxic chemicals in the areas where Russian troops operate and their subsequent detonation.”

“The intention is to accuse our nation of intentionally causing a technological disaster and damage its reputation,” the general stated. “The use of hazardous objects for military purposes violates the international humanitarian law.” Rtishchev also reiterated Russian accusations against the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Moscow says the international watchdog ignores Russian reports about Ukrainian violations of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) while taking Kiev’s allegations against Russia at face value.

Read more …

It won’t go away by itself. Might as well feed the frenzy.

• Trump Orders Release Of Epstein ‘Transcripts’ (RT)

US President Donald Trump has promised to release more information after criticism of his administration’s handling of the sex trafficking case involving the late financier Jeffrey Epstein reached a tipping point. After months of pledges to disclose the full case files, the Department of Justice said in a memo last week that no further documents would be made public – triggering a backlash even among some of Trump’s closest supporters. “Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent grand jury testimony, subject to court approval,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday.

Bondi confirmed that her office is “ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts,” though it remains unclear which documents would be released or when. Epstein was arrested in 2019 and charged with trafficking minors for sex. He allegedly hanged himself in his New York jail cell before he could stand trial. His longtime associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, was later convicted of conspiring to sexually abuse underage girls and is now serving a 20-year sentence. Although Epstein’s death was officially ruled a suicide, it has long fueled public skepticism. The DOJ’s controversial review concluded that no “client list” of Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring ever existed and found no evidence of blackmail. There were no grounds to investigate uncharged third parties, the memo stated.

These findings appeared to contradict Bondi’s earlier comments that the client list was “sitting on [her] desk,” and that the FBI had turned over a “truckload” of materials that would “make you sick.” Bondi appeared to walk back those remarks, clarifying on Tuesday that she was referring to case files on her desk in general. She also dismissed concerns about a one-minute gap in the 11-hour surveillance video recorded near Epstein’s jail cell. Earlier this week, Trump claimed only “stupid people” believe the sex offender’s alleged “client list” wasn’t yet another Democrat hoax. Trump ordered the release of additional documents after the Wall Street Journal accused him of sending a lewd birthday greeting to Epstein in 2003. The president has threatened to sue Rupert Murdoch and his “third-rate newspaper” for defamation.

Read more …

“The Wall Street Journal, and Rupert Murdoch, personally, were warned directly by President Donald J. Trump that the supposed letter… was a FAKE and, if they print it, they will be sued,..

• Trump Threatens To Sue WSJ Over ‘Bawdy Letter To Epstein’ (RT)

President Donald Trump has threatened legal action against the Wall Street Journal, its parent company News Corp., and media mogul Rupert Murdoch after the newspaper claimed that he authored a lewd letter to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th birthday. The alleged letter was reportedly part of a leather-bound album compiled by Ghislaine Maxwell in 2003 and included a crude drawing of a nude woman, according to the Journal’s exclusive report on Thursday. “A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly Donald below her waist, mimicking pubic hair,” the report described, without explaining how the outlet obtained what it claimed was a previously unreleased Department of Justice file.

The paper acknowledged that Trump strongly denied the allegation, but went ahead with publication. “I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women… It’s not my language. It’s not my words,” the Journal quoted Trump as saying. Several hours after the story broke, Trump accused Murdoch and WSJ Editor Emma Tucker of deliberately spreading “defamatory lies.” “The Wall Street Journal, and Rupert Murdoch, personally, were warned directly by President Donald J. Trump that the supposed letter… was a FAKE and, if they print it, they will be sued,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform. He described the “once great” paper as a “disgusting and filthy rag” that was desperately trying to “stay relevant.” Trump vowed to sue the WSJ, News Corp., and Murdoch “shortly,” citing his history of successful lawsuits against major media outlets.

Epstein was arrested in 2019 and charged with trafficking minors for sex. He allegedly hanged himself in his New York jail cell before standing trial. His longtime associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, was later convicted of conspiring to sexually abuse underage girls and is now serving a 20-year sentence. Although Epstein’s death was officially ruled a suicide, it has long been the subject of public skepticism. Earlier this week, Trump responded to growing criticism over his administration’s handling of the Epstein case, claiming that only “stupid people” still demand access to the sex offender’s alleged “client list.”

Read more …

“Mexican coke” uses natural cane sugar as a sweetener while American coke has relied on high-fructose corn syrup since the 1980s.”

• Trump Convinces Coca-Cola To Return To Cane Sugar In The US (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced that he had convinced Coca-Cola to use authentic cane sugar in their American products, marking a subtle cultural victory over Mexico. “I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so. I’d like to thank all of those in authority at Coca-Cola. This will be a very good move by them — You’ll see. It’s just better!” Trump announced on Truth Social.

“Mexican coke” uses natural cane sugar as a sweetener while American coke has relied on high-fructose corn syrup since the 1980s. The cane sugar coke often appears in stores contained within glass bottles. Trump did not speak to any planned changes in the American containers. The announcement came somewhat out of left field as Trump has spent much of the week fending off criticisms over his handling of the Epstein case and there was little coverage of any talks with the iconic soda company.

Read more …

Well, she does seem to have let the Diddy case slip through her fingers. And she and her hubby are Trump haters. Why keep them on?

• James Comey’s Daughter Fired From Top US Attorney’s Office Job (NYP)

Maurene Comey, the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, was fired Wednesday from the powerful Manhattan US Attorney’s Office — where she prosecuted Jeffrey Epstein, his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell and, most recently, Sean “Diddy” Combs, sources told The Post. The reason for Comey’s firing, which law enforcement and Department of Justice sources confirmed, was not immediately clear. She was informed that she was being axed under Article II of the Constitution, which describes the powers of the president, the sources added. President Trump has a long history of conflicts with the elder Comey and fired him as FBI director in 2017 during Trump’s first term.

Maurene Comey, who served as an assistant US attorney in the Southern District of New York since 2015, worked on the prosecutions of disgraced financier pedophile Epstein and Maxwell, who was found guilty of multiple sex crimes at trial and sentenced to 20 years in prison. Comey most recently worked on the high-profile sex-trafficking case against Combs. The nearly month-long trial ended with the jury acquitting the disgraced hip-hop mogul of the most serious charges against him — racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking — that could have landed him life in prison. He was only found guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.

[..] “This firing is an effort by the DOJ to distract from its failures on Epstein, the J6 pipe bomb, Butler assassination plot and ongoing whistleblower retaliation,” former FBI agent-turned-whistleblower Steve Friend said. “Removing Maureen Comey six months into the administration is like a fire department hiring an arsonist and expecting applause when they fire him after he’s already burned down a city block. Too little, too late. “They are desperate for a win and distraction. The Comey-Brennan case is a distraction. They’ll never get charged. It’s a way for congressmen to have hearings,” Friend added, referring to the FBI investigation of former CIA Director John Brennan and James Comey for potential criminal conduct related to the 2016 Trump-Russia collusion probe.

The Epstein firestorm was revived last week after the Justice Department and FBI concluded in a memo that the convicted pedophile, 66, killed himself in his Manhattan jail cell in August 2019 — and did not keep a list of wealthy and powerful “clients” to whom he trafficked underage teens. That conclusion sparked a storm of backlash from top MAGA personalities, who suspected that the Trump administration wasn’t being fully upfront about Epstein, despite the 47th president’s promise on the campaign trail to release the files on the convicted pedophile. Comey’s ouster also follows renewed attacks from Trump’s base, including conservative firebrand Laura Loomer, who publicly urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to fire Comey and her husband, SDNY Assistant US Attorney Lucas Issacharoff, back in May.

“Today, the DOJ fired Maurene Comey from the United States Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York,” Loomer posted on X after the news broke. “This comes 2 months after my pressure campaign on Pam Bondi to fire Comey’s daughter and Comey’s son in law from the DOJ.” Loomer has claimed that Issacharoff, who has worked in the SDNY’s Civil Division since 2019, has “a long history of being a Trump hater.” “No word yet on whether or not he was also fired today, but he should be. +1 for Blondi today!” Loomer cheered. Trump has since spent days dismissing Epstein’s case as a “big hoax” concocted by the Democrats for political gain — and blasting suspicious GOP members for being “duped” by their colleagues on the other side of the political aisle. The prez has also lashed out, pressing the country and news reporters to stop focusing on the notorious predator.

“They haven’t learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years,” Trump railed on Truth Social Wednesday. “I have had more success in 6 months than perhaps any President in our Country’s history, and all these people want to talk about, with strong prodding by the Fake News and the success starved Dems, is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax.” The Trump administration is investigating James Comey for potential criminal conduct during the FBI’s Trump-Russia collusion probe in 2016. The Secret Service also interviewed the ex-bureau director in May for a cryptic “86 47” Instagram post that led to accusations from Trump that Comey was calling for another assassination attempt against him.

Read more …

Focus on Trump’s words, memory-hole Biden’s.

That video is priceless. The first minute is Oscar material. Which director lets the head of the president disappear on his way to the podium?

• I Can’t Believe The NYTimes Thought It Would Get Away With This (Margolis)

The irony is thick enough to choke on. The New York Times, that bastion of so-called journalistic integrity, churned out yet another hit piece on President Donald Trump, painting him as some vengeful tyrant hell-bent on crushing his political foes. According to the paper, Trump supposedly views his opponents as downright evil, promising a campaign of retribution that sends shivers down the spines of the elite media class. Last week, he denounced a reporter as a “very evil person” for asking a question he did not like. This week, he declared that Democrats are “an evil group of people.”“Evil” is a word getting a lot of airtime in the second Trump term. It is not enough anymore to dislike a journalistic inquiry or disagree with an opposing philosophy.

Anyone viewed as critical of the president or insufficiently deferential is wicked. The Trump administration’s efforts to achieve its policy goals are not just an exercise in governance but a holy mission against forces of darkness. The characterization seeds the ground to justify all sorts of actions that would normally be considered extreme or out of bounds. If Mr. Trump’s adversaries are not just rivals but villains, then he can rationalize going further than any president has in modern times. This isn’t journalism; it’s selective outrage at its finest. The Times acts like Trump’s tough talk is some unprecedented assault on democracy, conveniently forgetting or willfully ignoring the years of venomous rhetoric that the left spewed against Trump and conservatives everywhere.

It has the gall to portray Trump as the villain while pretending that its side hasn’t been fanning the flames of division for nearly a decade. If the Times is so concerned about demonizing political enemies, maybe it should look in the mirror, or better yet, revisit one of the most egregious examples from its own camp: from Barack Obama’s spying on Trump to frame him for colluding with Russia to Joe Biden’s lawfare campaign that literally tried to put Trump in prison. Actions may speak louder than words, but Joe Biden spoke rather loudly during his infamous speech at Independence Hall back in 2022, where he didn’t even hide the fact that he saw his political allies as evil. Remember that spectacle? There was Biden, standing in front of the birthplace of American liberty, bathed in dramatic red lighting that appropriately gave off a fascistic vibe. He wasn’t there to unite the nation; he was there to declare war on half of it.

“Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic,” he thundered, as if conservatives were some invading horde rather than fellow Americans exercising their right to disagree. He didn’t stop there. He literally called Trump and his supporters a “clear and present danger” to the country. Biden’s words weren’t just heated; they were incendiary. It was pure demagoguery, designed to otherize and vilify millions of Americans who simply wanted secure borders, economic strength, and a government that puts America first. And where was The New York Times during all this? Cheering it on, of course. The paper didn’t call out Biden for his divisive rant; it amplified it, framing it as a noble defense of democracy against the supposed fascist threat of Trump.

“Biden Warns That American Values Are Under Assault by Trump-Led Extremism,” read the headline of one article reacting to the speech. Another article detailing four takeaways from the speech lacked any outrage at all at Biden’s rhetoric. Fast-forward to today, and leftists are clutching their pearls over Trump’s promises to hold corrupt officials accountable, like the ones who weaponized the DOJ against him. Trump’s talk of retribution isn’t about personal vendettas; it’s about restoring justice after years of witch hunts, from the Mueller probe to the sham impeachments. Yet the Times ignores how the left’s rhetoric has real-world consequences. We’ve seen assassination attempts on Trump, violent protests egged on by Democrat leaders, and a media ecosystem that normalizes calling conservatives Nazis or threats to humanity.

And the Times is crying over Trump for saying mean things about his political adversaries? This double standard is the real threat to our republic. The Times’ piece reeks of desperation, a last gasp from a dying media empire that’s lost all credibility. Leftists whine about sources going silent, as if that’s proof of some authoritarian chill, but maybe those experts are just tired of being props in the left’s endless anti-Trump crusade. If the paper truly cared about toning down the rhetoric, it should start by acknowledging its own role in escalating it. Biden’s speech wasn’t a one-off; it was the blueprint for the left’s strategy — demonize, divide, and conquer.

Read more …

“..an estimated 215 million doses, worth close to €4 billion, subsequently being discarded..”

“Many of the key decisions are no longer taken by elected governments or national parliaments, but by EU bodies often guided by a technocratic logic and by interests dominant within the EU system.”

• Von der Leyen’s Final Plan: A False Democracy For A False Europe (Pacini)

The perception of the European Union is changing in some sections of public opinion: from a project of cooperation between sovereign states, the EU is increasingly seen as a centralized bureaucratic machine, which is what it really represents, and this view is fueled by the growing control exercised over information spaces, political dynamics, and the very interpretation of democratic principles. If the failure of the euro as a common currency was already telling, even more so were the isolationist policies of sanctions against the Russian Federation, followed by those against China and, in general, against any political entity that was not in the good graces of the UK-US axis. In this context, the role of the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, is worrying.

While proclaiming herself a champion of democratic values, she is contributing to the construction of a system in which truth, dissent, and public debate are suppressed or marginalized. There is no doubt that no one has ever pursued policies as totally anti-democratic, liberticidal, and homicidal as hers (as in the cases of Ukraine and Palestine).These concerns have been fueled by discussions on a motion of no confidence against von der Leyen. In June 2025, Romanian MEP George Piperea proposed a vote to question her leadership. The necessary signatures were collected from various MEPs to put the issue to a vote in the plenary. The main reason given is the alleged violation of transparency rules during the management of contracts for COVID-19 vaccines in 2020-2021.

Following those agreements, the EU purchased huge quantities of doses, many of which proved to be surplus to requirements, with an estimated 215 million doses, worth close to €4 billion, subsequently being discarded. When citizens and the media asked for clarity on those contracts, the European Commission refused to make the communications public, a decision that the Court of Justice of the European Union later ruled contrary to the rules. According to the Court, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Commission is obliged to prove that such communications do not exist or are not in its possession. Despite this, the Commission has never provided a clear explanation as to why the messages between von der Leyen and Pfizer’s CEO were not disclosed.

It has not been clarified whether the messages were deleted voluntarily or whether they were lost, for example, due to a change of device by the president. Finally, on July 10, during a plenary session in Strasbourg, the European Parliament rejected the motion of no confidence against Ursula von der Leyen. To pass, it would have required a qualified majority of two-thirds, supported by an absolute majority of MEPs. The result was 360 votes against, 175 in favor, and 18 abstentions. The motion was supported by right-wing groups such as Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations, numerous members of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group, and some members of the radical left. Von der Leyen was not present at the time of the vote.

Despite the criticism, the main centrist groups – the European People’s Party (EPP), the Socialists and Democrats (S&D), Renew Europe and the Greens – rejected the motion, ensuring the political survival of the president. However, if the no-confidence motion had passed, the entire European Commission would have fallen, opening a complicated process for the appointment of 27 new commissioners. This decision is perhaps more strategic than tactical: keeping a president who has already lost confidence and is therefore politically manageable and has limited room for maneuver is more convenient than having a new president who may be worse than the previous one and has the full confidence of the European Parliament.

Elections in the European Union, as in many other democratic contexts, should express the will of the people. They should, I emphasize. In practice, however, they are increasingly seen as an institutional ritual with no real impact on fundamental political choices and, above all, they are not an expression of the real will of the people, as they lack representation. Many of the key decisions are no longer taken by elected governments or national parliaments, but by EU bodies often guided by a technocratic logic and by interests dominant within the EU system. The 2024 European elections represented a turning point: conservative, sovereignist, and nationalist parties significantly expanded their representation, establishing themselves in countries such as Italy, Austria, Germany, France, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia.

These parties have strongly opposed the EU’s migration policies, environmental measures deemed excessive, and its confrontational foreign policy towards Russia. However, instead of encouraging constructive debate and giving space to critical voices – as the European Parliament claims to want to do – these forces have been systematically branded as “anti-democratic” and publicly discredited. A central role in this strategy has been played by Ursula von der Leyen, in office since 2019, who has repeatedly portrayed right-wing parties as a “threat to European unity,” without ever providing concrete evidence to support this claim, but often referring to alleged Russian interference or generic “threats to sovereignty.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

1M+

Erodium

Uber

Mamba

Orca

Sears

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 17 2025

Jul 172025
 
 July 17, 2025  Posted by at 8:51 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Portrait of Dora Maar 1943

 

• Trump Arms Ukraine. Russia Doesn’t Care (Kornev)
• Trump’s Tariff Revenues Reach Record Highs (Salgado)
• Federal Judge Takes Control of US Government (Spivak)
• Zelensky Not A Dependable Partner For US – Former Trump Adviser (RT)
• EU Is Funding The ‘Death’ Of Ukraine – Zakharova (RT)
• The Conflict in Ukraine Is Widening out of Control (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Kremlin Urges Trump To Pressure Kiev (RT)
• Zelensky Urges Trump To Revisit Ukrainian Missile Proposal (RT)
• Trump Sprang Ukraine Surprise On NATO States – Reuters (RT)
• The Battle For The Middle East Is Going Global (Sadygzade)
• MTG Tries to Stop US Funding of Israeli Aggression (Paul Craig Roberts)
• India, China, Brazil Facing ‘Consequences’ For Russia Trade Ties – Rutte (RT)
• EU Plan To Move Frozen Russian Money Would Be ‘Expropriation’ – Euroclear (RT)
• Adam Schiff Faces Federal Criminal Referral Over ‘Mortgage Fraud’ (Margolis)
• EU General Court Orders Le Pen Family To Give EU €300k (RT)

 

 

euro

GMO

Beck

 

 

 

 

“Russia’s layered air defense network, including the S-300, S-400, and S-500 systems, was designed with threats like ATACMS in mind. While a 100% interception rate is unrealistic, operational experience shows a high level of effectiveness..”

• Trump Arms Ukraine. Russia Doesn’t Care (Kornev)

On Monday, July 14, US President Donald Trump announced that he had decided to supply Patriot missile systems to Kiev, with the first deliveries expected in the coming days. The key element of this move lies not just in the type of weapons, but in the logistics behind them. While the deliveries will be formally carried out by Washington, the funding will come from NATO allies. The first batteries will be transferred from Germany, which will later be compensated by new shipments from the United States. In essence, a new mechanism is taking shape: American weapons, paid for with European money. But what does this actually mean in practical terms? Is this a major escalation, a political gesture, or simply a reshuffling of existing commitments? And more importantly, how will this affect the battlefield itself?

According to Trump, Ukraine will receive 17 Patriot systems – a statement that immediately raises questions. Most importantly, it’s unclear exactly what the administration considers a “system.” If he meant 17 launchers, that would translate into just three or four full batteries, since each battery includes a radar, command post, and between four and eight launchers. This would not represent a dramatic escalation, but rather allow the Ukrainian Armed Forces to replenish and rotate previously supplied batteries.A more ambitious interpretation would assume that Trump meant 17 full batteries. That would be the single largest delivery of air defense systems to Ukraine to date – several times more than what the country currently fields. While the US has the industrial capacity and inventory to provide this quantity, such a generous transfer would be uncharacteristic of Trump’s approach.

His goal is to make a visible impact, not to set records. The more plausible scenario is that this is a European-funded replacement for earlier systems that have been damaged or expended. In parallel with the Patriot announcement, details began to emerge about long-range missiles. According to The Washington Post, the Trump administration is considering removing all restrictions on Ukraine’s use of ATACMS missiles to strike targets deep inside Russian territory. It’s worth clarifying that Ukraine already possesses such missiles. Since 2023, its forces have deployed ATACMS variants with a range of up to 190 km, and since spring of 2024, longer-range versions capable of reaching 300 km. The change lies not in the hardware itself, but in the potential shift in how it can be used.

Up until now, Washington has forbidden Kiev from using these weapons to strike internationally recognized Russian territory. According to American press reports, those limits may now be dropped. While this move would entail risks, it doesn’t represent a strategic game-changer. Russia’s layered air defense network, including the S-300, S-400, and S-500 systems, was designed with threats like ATACMS in mind. While a 100% interception rate is unrealistic, operational experience shows a high level of effectiveness. The threat is real, but hardly decisive.

Read more …

“Tariff revenues reached a record level of $113 billion, representing a significant financial boost and hitting a new high for this year..”

“Compared to last June, this year’s figures are up 301%..”

• Trump’s Tariff Revenues Reach Record Highs (Salgado)

Revenues from Donald Trump’s tariffs have hit record highs as of the start of this month, as the president announced more tariffs, especially on hostile countries. Tariff revenues reached a record level of $113 billion, representing a significant financial boost and hitting a new high for this year, Fox Business reported. Democrats, who prefer taxing Americans to tariffing foreigners, have bewailed the tariffs nonstop, but Trump’s optimism about the revenues seems to be justified so far. We need fewer taxes on Americans and more tariffs on belligerent nations that hate the USA. And companies that dislike the tariffs should bring operations back to America.

A June 30 press release from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) previously boasted that the majority of the tariff revenues collected this year are due to Trump‘s tariffs, with which he is leveling the international trade playing field and penalizing hostile countries. Fox News added more details on the newest numbers: The U.S. received more than $27 billion in customs duties in June, the highest figure so far this year, according to the Treasury Department’s “Customs and Certain Excise Taxes” data. Compared to last June, this year’s figures are up 301%. In January, tariff revenues hovered around $7.9 billion and more than doubled in April to $16.3 billion. Meanwhile, July is on track to continue as a revenue contributor for the federal government.

Even before the newest revenue numbers were announced, DHS was celebrating the tariffs’ success. “We are proud to help President Trump make America richer and reverse a broken trade system that resulted in millions of jobs shipped overseas and made us dependent on foreign adversaries for essential goods,” said an unnamed senior official. “This administration will always put the American first.” The U.S. slapped all the European Union countries and Mexico with 27% tariffs this month, Fox stated, and Trump imposed a particularly hefty 50% tariff on Brazil for attacking freedom of speech and undermining free elections. “Goods transshipped to evade this 50% Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff,” Trump wrote the Brazilian president Lula before warning, “If for any reason you decide to raise your Tariffs, then, whatever number you choose to raise them by, will be added onto the 50% that we charge.”

Many countries around the world have long imposed significant tariffs on American goods while demanding no reciprocal tariffs on their goods. Trump was determined to change that rigged and unjust system. That naturally infuriated the countries that had become accustomed to taking advantage of us, and Democrats always take part in those criticizing in America, but the change was actually long overdue. Trump also aims to bring manufacturing back to America and encourage both companies and customers to prefer goods made in America. As Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick reminded anti-tariff gripers, “Remember, there’s a ZERO percent tariff on all goods made in the USA!”

Read more …

Lawfare squared and cubed. Congress may not approve, nor may the Supreme court, but this judge is determined to find a way.

• Federal Judge Takes Control of US Government (Spivak)

Just days after the Supreme Court again made it clear that the separation of powers is sacrosanct, Indira Talwani, an Obama appointed federal judge in Massachusetts, has taken the unprecedented step of ordering the government to fund Planned Parenthood, purporting to enjoin implementation of a portion of the Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) passed by Congress. The BBB imposed a one-year ban on state Medicaid payments to health care nonprofits that offer abortions and also received more than $800,000 in federal funding in 2023. Three days after the president signed the BBB into law, Planned Parenthood sought a temporary restraining order (TRO). Without hearing from the government, complying with federal rules, or even providing an explanation, within hours after the filing, Talwani issued a TRO for at least 14 days that requires the government to spend money Congress declined to appropriate.

Four days later, the administration asked Talwani to dissolve the TRO because of its obvious infirmities. Instead, she doubled down, issuing an amended TRO that satisfied the technical requirements she had previously ignored. I work with Planned Parenthood’s very capable lead lawyers. Without the facts or the law on their side, they did the right thing. They found a far-left federal judge who has repeatedly ruled against the Trump administration and is willing to create a constitutional crisis to advance a political cause. Numerous Supreme Court decisions explain that merely because something is legal does not mean that Congress must fund it, or continue to do so. Just a few weeks ago, in Medina v. Planned Parenthood, the Supreme Court rejected Planned Parenthood’s challenge to South Carolina’s right to exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program.

For more than 40 years, the Hyde Amendment has generally prohibited federal funding for abortion, and the court has repeatedly held that the government is under no contrary obligations (e.g., Maher v. Roe and Harris v. McRae). Talwani’s order violates Article I of the Constitution, which could not be more clear: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” Article I vests the power to authorize spending exclusively in Congress. In OPM v. Richmond (1989), the Supreme Court confirmed that the Appropriations Clause conveys a “straightforward and explicit command” that no money “can be paid out of the Treasury unless it has been appropriated by an act of Congress.”

There is no basis in the Constitution or any Supreme Court decision to support the right of a court – any court – to interfere in congressional decisions to fund, or cease funding, a private organization. To the contrary, in Rust v. Sullivan (1991), the Supreme Court held that “the Government has no constitutional duty to subsidize an activity merely because the activity is constitutionally protected.”Planned Parenthood’s main argument is the equivalent of jury nullification. Because it is the dominant provider of abortion services in the United States, limiting its ability to carry out its mission would deprive women of access to such services. Even if true, that is a political argument unsuccessfully made during the last election and during the debate over the BBB.

Planned Parenthood asserts that the BBB is an unconstitutional bill of attainder because the criteria for defunding effectively single it out. That absurd argument flies in the face of an unbroken line of cases that apply the Article I prohibition on bills of attainder only to criminal or quasi-criminal punishment. Congress often funds, or defunds, individuals and organizations. In Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (1971), the Supreme Court rejected the proposition that an individual or defined group is subject to a bill of attainder merely because Congress singles them out. Talwani did not mention bills of attainder in her amended TRO. Planned Parenthood also claims that defunding its efforts constitutes viewpoint retaliation under the First Amendment, and a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment.

In Rust, the Supreme Court rejected similar claims. In its papers, Planned Parenthood cites no Supreme Court case compelling Congress to appropriate spending on these grounds. Nonetheless, in her amended TRO, Talwani relied on the First and Fifth Amendments to justify issuance of the TRO. She also rejected the government’s concern that it would be harmed if it paid money to Planned Parenthood, because, she averred, the government likely would instead use the funds to pay another provider. By that logic, a mugger is only taking money that his victim would probably spend on something else. The first hearing is on Friday. If Talwani does not relent, she can expect an unpleasant rebuke from appellate courts.

Read more …

“..in order for the US-Ukraine partnership to work, Kiev “must become transparent and corruption-free.”

• Zelensky Not A Dependable Partner For US – Former Trump Adviser (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and his chief of staff Andrey Yermak are not “dependable” partners for the US, former Trump adviser Steve Cortes has said, pointing to transparency and corruption issues in Kiev. Cortes made the statement in a reply on X to Ukrainian journalist Diana Panchenko, who had stressed the importance of knowing “the difference between helping Ukraine and helping Zelensky.” She claimed that “Ukrainians want peace” while “Zelensky wants money and to stay in power.” “Exactly,” Cortes responded, stating that in order for the US-Ukraine partnership to work, Kiev “must become transparent and corruption-free.” “Yermak and Zelensky are not dependable, believable partners for the United States,” he said.

Cortes, who previously served as a senior adviser to President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, has long been critical of the Ukrainian government’s internal practices. Earlier this month, he published a commentary warning of waning trust in Kiev’s leadership, singling out Yermak as a central figure in what he described as systemic corruption, calling him Ukraine’s “co-president” and accusing him of shielding officials under criminal investigation. Cortes argued that Yermak has become a nuisance in UK-Ukraine relations, noting bipartisan frustration with the aide. He specifically cited Yermak’s role in the dismissal of General Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, a popular and respected military leader, while officials like Deputy Prime Minister Aleksey Chernyshov—who has faced corruption allegations—remained in office. Chernyshov, however, was ultimately sacked earlier this week amid an ongoing cabinet reshuffle.

The former adviser’s remarks echo longstanding concerns expressed by Donald Trump, who has also described Zelensky as the “primary obstacle” to peace and has repeatedly criticized the scale of US support for Ukraine and the lack of accountability for the billions of dollars sent to Kiev. In March, Trump adviser David Sacks also called for a full audit of US aid to Ukraine, claiming there had been “tons of stories” about corruption and the misuse of American weapons. He said the only remaining question was “how much” had been stolen, calling Kiev’s leadership massively corrupt.

Read more …

“.. it’s a bit like being told to foot the bill for a meal someone else enjoys, only for them to end up dead afterward. Am I correct?”

• EU Is Funding The ‘Death’ Of Ukraine – Zakharova (RT)

The European Union is funding the “death” of Ukraine by paying for weapons sent to Kiev, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. On Monday, US President Donald Trump unveiled a proposal to continue delivering American weapons to Ukraine at the expense of EU taxpayers. Kaja Kallas, the EU’s top diplomat, said that the proposal was welcome, but that Trump should not take credit for aid unless the US is willing to “share the burden.” “Was Kaja starting to figure things out?” Zakharova wrote on social media on Wednesday. “Let’s help her: it’s a bit like being told to foot the bill for a meal someone else enjoys, only for them to end up dead afterward. Am I correct?”

Moscow has consistently argued that no amount of Western military aid will make it change its core goals in the conflict. The Kremlin has described the EU’s approach as an attempt to prolong the war “to the last Ukrainian” and harm Russia, using Ukraine as a proxy. Trump has emphasized that arms sales to Ukraine are a business opportunity for the US. His administration maintains the proposal is naturally shifting responsibility for Ukraine’s future to the EU, which it says has the most to gain or lose.

”Europe wants to take the traditional defense of Europe. They should,” US Ambassador to NATO Matt Whitaker told Fox News. “The reality right now in Europe is they cannot manufacture the armaments required on the battlefield of Ukraine, or on the battlefield if there is a potential war in Europe.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday that the EU was placing “improper pressure” on Trump to adopt a more pro-Ukrainian stance. He warned that escalating sanctions on Moscow – something Trump also threatened – would ultimately harm EU member states more than Russia.

Read more …

“The dilemma is that the US weapons industry is too powerful for peace.”

• The Conflict in Ukraine Is Widening out of Control (Paul Craig Roberts)

Since early 2022, more than three years ago, my theme has been that Russian President Putin’s unwillingness or inability to bring the conflict with Ukraine to a quick end will result in an ever-widening war culminating in a major conflagration far beyond Donbas and Ukraine. It was obvious to me, but not to Putin and to my critics, that by refusing to use sufficient force to end the conflict Putin was guaranteeing the increased participation of Washington and NATO in the conflict. Over the years of the conflict I have provided numerous updates on “The Ever-widening War.”

The war has widened into an attack on Russian strategic forces and recent talk of providing Ukraine with missiles to attack Moscow. According to news reports, Europe is preparing for war with Russia. The conflict has already gone far beyond Donbas. The point of a major conflagration cannot be far off. One Russian commentator says “World War III has already begun.” Putin, and as far as I can tell, few in Russia understand the Zionist neoconservatives doctrine of American hegemony. It seems that Putin has never heard of the three decades old Wolfowitz doctrine. Putin himself admits that he has only now understood the situation that confronts Russia. As John Helmer reports:

“Putin has just admitted this in a television interview on July 14. “I thought that the contradictions with the West were primarily ideological,” he said. “It seemed logical at the time – Cold War inertia, different views of the world, values, the organization of society. But even when the ideology disappeared, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, the same, almost routine deviation from Russia’s interests continued. And it was not because of ideas [ideology], but because of the pursuit of advantages – geopolitical, economic, strategic. The world respects only those who can protect themselves. Until we show that we are an independent and sovereign power that stands behind our interests, there will be no room for anyone to treat us as equals.”

President Trump, stopped by the Ruling Establishment from his domestic agenda, has turned to foreign affairs where he can remain in the limelight by bullying other countries to conform to his edicts. He has now given Putin 50 days to comply. To comply with what? With Zelensky’s demands? What is the agreement for which Trump demands Putin’s consent? As the conflict is between Washington and Russia, the agreement has to be made by Trump and Putin. Putin has made it clear that the agreement must deal with “the root cause” of the conflict, which is the absence of a mutual security agreement. But if Washington is set on hegemony, there can be no mutual security agreement.

Here is the real situation: Two heavily nuclear armed governments are both in denial of reality. Putin and Lavrov are governed by their illusion that the difference between Russia and the West can be resolved through words. Washington is dangerous because the Zionist neoconservative doctrine of American hegemony is institutionalized. To avoid the brewing conflagration, all Washington and the EU need to do is to agree with Russia to a mutual security treaty. Russia only wants threats off its borders. Russia has no territorial ambitions unless Russia is driven to them by security threats. Trump wants America to make money. How does America make money when US aggression cuts the West off from the majority of the world? The only reason for BRICS is Washington’s hostility to Russia, China, and Iran. The dilemma is that the US weapons industry is too powerful for peace.

Read more …

“..sanctions would be imposed on Russia and its trade partners unless hostilities are halted within 50 days. No similar deadline was issued for Ukraine.”

• Kremlin Urges Trump To Pressure Kiev (RT)

The Kremlin urges all nations to push Kiev to reach a negotiated settlement in the Ukraine conflict and hopes US President Donald Trump is privately doing so, spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Monday.Earlier in the week, Trump unveiled a proposal under which NATO member states supporting Kiev would purchase American-made weapons for Ukraine’s fight against Russia. He also warned that sanctions would be imposed on Russia and its trade partners unless hostilities are halted within 50 days. No similar deadline was issued for Ukraine. ”There were a lot of remarks about [Trump’s] disappointment [with Russian President Vladimir Putin], but we want to hope that in parallel to that, pressure is being applied to the Ukrainian side,” Peskov told journalists. “It appears that the Ukrainian side takes all statements of support as signals to continue war, not as signals for peace.”

In public comments, Trump has alternated between assigning blame to Moscow and Kiev for the lack of progress toward his desired outcome in the conflict. His latest statements have focused on criticizing Russia. In May, Ukraine agreed to resume direct negotiations with Russia after the Trump administration indicated it expected such a step. However, talks stalled after the early June meeting, with Kiev declaring the process “exhausted” and indicating it had only participated to avoid appearing dismissive of Trump’s diplomatic agenda. Moscow has said it remains committed to achieving its core objectives in Ukraine but prefers a diplomatic solution if possible.

Trump’s threats were welcomed by hardliners in the US and Europe. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina issued a veiled threat of military action, writing on X that “if Putin and others are wondering what happens on day 51, I would suggest they call the Ayatollah.” Graham referenced Iran’s supreme leader, whose country was targeted last month by US and Israeli airstrikes. Officials claimed the attacks were necessary to dismantle Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure and prevent the development of a nuclear weapon, a goal that Iran denies pursuing.

Read more …

“..Kiev asked the US to station nuclear-capable Tomahawk cruise missiles in Ukraine..”

Great idea. Nazis with nukes.

• Zelensky Urges Trump To Revisit Ukrainian Missile Proposal (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky has called on US President Donald Trump to reconsider Ukraine’s proposal to host long-range American missiles. The appeal comes in the wake of Trump’s pledge this week to provide advanced weapons systems to Kiev, with the caveat that the costs will be covered by other nations. In an interview with Newsmax on Tuesday, Zelensky appealed for even more military aid, referencing part of his “victory plan,” which he had previously presented to both President Joe Biden and Trump in the lead-up to the 2024 US presidential election. ”I remember that we had a powerful deterrence package before President Trump became president. I wanted America to sell us such a package. But it was not done,” Zelensky said.

Previous media reports have suggested that Trump may deliver additional long-range weaponry to Ukraine as part of his new initiatives. Some outlets claimed he had encouraged Zelensky to target Moscow and St. Petersburg, though the White House has refuted them. Publicly, the US president has advised against attacks on the Russian capital. Zelensky first presented his “victory plan” to the US in September 2024. According to leaked classified details of the proposal’s “deterrence package,” Kiev asked the US to station nuclear-capable Tomahawk cruise missiles in Ukraine. The Biden administration reportedly rejected the request outright. Ukrainian lobbying efforts during the 2024 US election cycle drew scrutiny, particularly following Zelensky’s visit to an arms manufacturing facility in the swing state of Pennsylvania.

He was accompanied by prominent Democrats during the trip, including Governor Josh Shapiro and Senator Bob Casey, prompting Republican officials to take aim, accusing him of implicitly supporting the rival party. Zelensky’s subsequent interactions with Trump were also marked by tensions. The planned signing of a minerals deal during his February visit to the White House – an offer of broad US access to Ukrainian natural resources that originally was part of the “victory plan” – erupted into a public dispute in the Oval Office. The agreement was ultimately signed in late April. Moscow has accused Zelensky of prolonging hostilities with Russia despite mounting Ukrainian casualties in a bid to preserve his power through martial law despite his presidential term officially ending last year.

Read more …

“And I also suspect that internally in the administration they are only now beginning to sort out what it means in practice.”

• Trump Sprang Ukraine Surprise On NATO States – Reuters (RT)

Several NATO member states were not notified in advance that they would be asked to fund new arms deliveries to Ukraine under US President Donald Trump’s latest proposal, Reuters has reported, citing European officials. On Monday, Trump pledged to provide more US-made weapons to Kiev through a new scheme funded by European NATO members. “We’re not buying it,” Trump said during an Oval Office meeting with the bloc’s secretary-general, Mark Rutte. “We will manufacture it, and they’re going to be paying for it.” Trump noted that the plan is seen by Washington as a business opportunity. Rutte said six countries – Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, and Canada – were willing to take part in the arms procurement scheme.

However, high-ranking sources at the embassies of two of those countries told Reuters they only learned of their supposed participation when the announcement was made. “It is my clear sense that nobody has been briefed about the exact details in advance,” one European ambassador told Reuters. “And I also suspect that internally in the administration they are only now beginning to sort out what it means in practice.” Several countries have already distanced themselves from Trump’s plan. According to Politico and La Stampa, France and Italy will not be financially supporting the effort. Hungary and the Czech Republic have also declined to participate, with Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala saying Prague is focusing on other projects.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, on the other hand, has welcomed the proposal but emphasized that Washington should “share the burden,” stating that if European countries pay for the weapons, it should be considered as “European support.” Since taking office in January, Trump has renewed pressure on NATO members to increase defense spending and warned that the US may not defend allies who do not meet their obligations. Russia has repeatedly condemned Western arms supplies to Ukraine, arguing that it only prolongs the bloodshed and does not change the course of the conflict. The Kremlin maintains that foreign military aid is being used to escalate the hostilities rather than seek a diplomatic resolution.

Read more …

“..the Middle East, where the actions of the US and Israel are seen as manifestations of Western hegemony, while BRICS nations and their partners are increasingly positioning themselves as defenders of multipolarity, sovereignty, and a just international order.”

• The Battle For The Middle East Is Going Global (Sadygzade)

Global events increasingly reflect the growing confrontation between the Western bloc, led by the United States and its allies, and the countries of the so-called “World Majority,” coalescing around BRICS. This geopolitical tension is particularly evident against the backdrop of escalating conflicts in the Middle East, where the actions of the US and Israel are seen as manifestations of Western hegemony, while BRICS nations and their partners are increasingly positioning themselves as defenders of multipolarity, sovereignty, and a just international order.

On July 7, US President Donald Trump hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. The two leaders discussed two major issues: the upcoming negotiations with Iran and the controversial initiative to relocate Palestinians from Gaza. These topics underscored Washington and West Jerusalem’s efforts to reshape the Middle East’s security architecture – framed under the banner of offering a “better future,” yet unfolding amid growing accusations of violations of international law.= During a working dinner, Netanyahu stated that Israel and the US had been consulting with several countries allegedly willing to accept Palestinians wishing to leave Gaza. He emphasized that the proposed relocation would be “voluntary,” offering a better future to those who seek it. According to him, agreements with a number of countries were already nearing completion.

Initially, Trump refrained from making a clear statement on the matter, but later remarked that “neighboring countries have been extremely cooperative,” expressing confidence that “something good will happen.” This ambiguity may reflect either an attempt to soften the political sensitivity of the issue or a reluctance to prematurely reveal the details of a plan that has drawn considerable criticism. Previously, Trump had proposed transforming Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East” and relocating its population – an idea harshly rejected both by the residents of the enclave and by international human rights organizations, which characterized it as a form of ethnic cleansing. Behind the scenes of the dinner, indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas were ongoing, focused on securing a ceasefire and a hostage exchange.

The meeting marked the third in-person encounter between Trump and Netanyahu since the Republican leader’s return to the White House in January. Just two weeks earlier, the US had carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in support of Israeli military action. Days later, Trump helped broker a short-term ceasefire in the 12-day war between Israel and Iran – an achievement likely intended to bolster his own diplomatic credentials. During the meeting, Trump announced that his administration had scheduled formal talks with Iran. He said that Tehran had shown a willingness to negotiate following substantial military and economic pressure. US Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff confirmed that the meeting was expected to take place “within the next week.”

Trump also indicated he was open to lifting sanctions on Iran under the right circumstances. Meanwhile, Iran’s newly elected president, Masoud Pezeshkian, expressed hope that tensions with the United States could be resolved through diplomacy. These statements suggested a potential, albeit limited, window for resetting US-Iranian relations, though both sides appeared driven primarily by tactical considerations. The political significance of the Trump-Netanyahu meeting was further underscored by protests outside the White House. Hundreds of demonstrators, waving Palestinian flags, demanded an end to US military support for Israel and called for Netanyahu’s arrest in light of the International Criminal Court’s warrant against him for alleged war crimes in Gaza.

Read more …

“..it is impossible not to be thankful for Trump. But Trump’s subservience to Israel is dispiriting and shameful..”

• MTG Tries to Stop US Funding of Israeli Aggression (Paul Craig Roberts)

US Rep. Greene has introduced legislation to remove military aid for Israel from the US budget. Marjorie Greene has done several things that members of the US House and Senate are trained not to do. She acknowledged Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons. Members of the US government are not supposed to acknowledge Israel’s nuclear weapons, because the Symington Amendment forbids aid to governments that enrich weapons grade uranium and produce nuclear weapons outside of International Atomic Energy Agency controls. The Israeli controlled US government avoids the Symington law by refusing to acknowledge the fact that Israel has acquired, with Washington’s assistance, nuclear weapons totally outside the IAEA controls

US Rep. Greene also points out the incongruity of Israel armed with nuclear weapons needing American military aid. This is especially the case when American men and women were killed and wounded fighting Israel’s wars against Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Hezbollah the protector of Lebanon, and then were abandoned by Washington and are living on the streets. The US military is now being urged to die for Israel in Iran. Americans have been so successfully brainwashed by the Israel Lobby that they see no difference between the interest of America and Israel. This is Netanyahu’s constant message. Israel and America are the same country.

President Trump has done a good thing for Americans by closing the border to immigrant-invaders. The Biden regime used American tax dollars to pay for the inflow of millions of non-ethnic Americans across an undefended border to transform the country into a Tower of Babel. President Trump did another good thing in eliminating the intentional discrimination against white ethnic Americans by the Biden regime’s DEI policy which refused to promote white heterosexuals until there was a specified percentage of homosexuals, lesbians, pedophiles, transgendered, and peoples of color. This Democrat liberal/leftwing policy was called “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion,” but white people were not included. So, it is impossible not to be thankful for Trump. But Trump’s subservience to Israel is dispiriting and shameful.

Read more …

Yeah, threatening China is a real slick move if you’re located in the North Atlantic.

• India, China, Brazil Facing ‘Consequences’ For Russia Trade Ties – Rutte (RT)

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has warned India, China and Brazil of “consequences” if they continue to do business with Russia. Rutte’s comment came after a meeting with US Senators on Tuesday, following President Donald Trump’s announcement on providing new military aid for Ukraine and a threat to impose 100% secondary tariffs on purchasers of Russian exports, unless a peace agreement is reached within 50 days. “My encouragement to these three countries, particularly is, if you live now in Beijing, or in Delhi, or you are the President of Brazil, you might want to take a look into this, because this might hit you very hard,” Rutte told reporters.

“So I urge you to make a phone call to Vladimir Putin and convey to him that he needs to get serious about peace talks, because if not, the consequences will have a massive impact on Brazil, India, and China,” he added. Since 2022, India and China have significantly increased their oil purchases from Russia. In May, New Delhi emerged as the second-largest buyer of Russian fossil fuels, with estimated purchases totaling $4.9 billion, of which crude constituted about 72% of the total value, according to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air. The US and India are engaged in negotiations for a trade agreement and are racing to meet an August 1 deadline set by Trump, in order to avoid reciprocal tariffs.

Rutte’s warning echoes US Senator Lindsey Graham, who in June said that he was working on a sanctions bill that he called an “economic bunker buster,” aimed at the three countries. Indian diplomats and officials have spoken with the Republican senator who sponsored the bill, which has Trump’s backing. Since he began his second term in January, Trump has issued direct threats to BRICS and imposed new duties on countries perceived to be aligned with the bloc.

Read more …

Euroclear issues warnings, but at the same time it transfers money to Ukraine.

• EU Plan To Move Frozen Russian Money Would Be ‘Expropriation’ – Euroclear (RT)

European Union plans to move frozen Russian sovereign assets into riskier investments would amount to expropriation, the Belgium-based settlement house Euroclear has warned.In an interview with the Financial Times published Wednesday, Euroclear Chief Executive Valerie Urbain said such a move could expose the EU’s financial system to both legal and systemic risks. Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, the US and EU have frozen more than $300 billion in Russian state assets. In May, the EU approved a plan to channel profits from those assets to support Ukraine, while some member states have pushed for outright confiscation.

Some $213 billion of the assets are held by Euroclear. The securities depository is currently reinvesting proceeds from Russia’s maturing assets – such as coupon payments and redemptions – primarily through central banks. The G7 is using those returns to support a $50 billion loan to Ukraine. However, as profits have declined following interest rate cuts by the European Central Bank, the European Commission is reportedly considering moving the funds into higher-yield investments to boost Kiev’s funding. Urbain has warned that seeking higher returns could lead to retaliation from Moscow and compromise Euroclear’s central role in the global financial system. “If you increase the revenues, you increase the risks.” Last year, Euroclear transferred €4 billion ($4.3 billion) to Ukraine, and so far this year it has paid €1.8 billion ($1.9 billion), according to Urbain.

She said the EU may try to raise those amounts by creating a “special purpose vehicle” to channel Russian assets into higher-risk investments that could bring “more revenues.” She cautioned that such a structure would involve “a lot of risks for Euroclear and for the European markets globally.” Legally, she said, the move would constitute “expropriation of the cash from Euroclear” without relieving the institution of its liability to the Russian central bank, “a position that we cannot bear.” Moscow has repeatedly warned that seizing its funds would violate international law. Legal and political concerns – particularly over sovereign immunity and property rights – have so far prevented the EU from endorsing full confiscation.

Read more …

The facts do seem obvious.

• Adam Schiff Faces Federal Criminal Referral Over ‘Mortgage Fraud’ (Margolis)

President Donald Trump demanded on Tuesday that California Democrat Sen. Adam Schiff be “brought to justice” following allegations of mortgage fraud tied to his Maryland property. The statement came after a federal housing agency reportedly referred the matter to the Justice Department for a criminal investigation into Schiff’s real estate dealings. “I have always suspected Shifty Adam Schiff was a scam artist,” he wrote. “And now I learn that Fannie Mae’s Financial Crimes Division have concluded that Adam Schiff has engaged in a sustained pattern of possible Mortgage Fraud.” “I always knew Adam Schiff was a Crook,” Trump continued. “Mortgage Fraud is very serious, and CROOKED Adam Schiff (now a Senator) needs to be brought to justice.” Schiff, of course, denies the allegations.

These aren’t wild allegations plucked from thin air; the evidence is pretty clear. According to records, Schiff claimed his main residence was a spacious 3,420 square foot home in Maryland, a move that conveniently secured him better mortgage rates — rates designed for people who actually reside in those homes as their principal dwelling. Simultaneously, he grabbed a homeowner’s exemption on a much smaller 650 square foot condo in Burbank, Calif., handing himself a tidy cut of about $7,000 off his tax bill by also insisting that the property was his “primary residence.” Two homes, both allegedly his principal residence, in two different states, reaping benefits from both ends. Is that some kind of bureaucratic miracle? Or a calculated abuse of the system he’s sworn to oversee?

Schiff’s own paperwork — mortgage forms, exemption claims, and that curious personal check he used to pay California property taxes (listing his Maryland address, no less) — tells a story of someone playing the system with both hands. Adding insult to injury, Schiff only made that personal check payment once, in 2017. The evidence is serious enough that a senior administration official confirmed to The New York Post that the Federal Housing Finance Agency, responsible for overseeing Fannie Mae, has submitted a criminal referral to the Justice Department, calling for a full investigation.

“It is extremely serious and [Schiff] is not taking it seriously,” the official told the Post. The source added that Schiff had a criminal count for each time he paid his monthly mortgage. The Federal Housing Finance Agency, under the leadership of Bill Pulte, has remained tight-lipped, declining to comment on the referral involving Schiff. But it was Pulte who, just a few months ago, referred another high-profile Trump adversary, New York Attorney General Letitia James, to the Justice Department over alleged mortgage fraud tied to properties in Brooklyn and Virginia.

Read more …

Whatever Macron says. What kind of court is that?

• EU General Court Orders Le Pen Family To Give EU €300k (RT)

The EU General Court in Luxembourg has ordered Marine Le Pen and her two sisters to repay more than €300,000 (over $350,000) to the EU. The funds were “considered to have been wrongly received” by their father, the late opposition leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, during his time as a member of the European Parliament, the court said in a statement on Wednesday. The legislative body claimed in 2024 that Le Pen “had improperly invoiced personal expenses” and demanded repayment. The latter, however, sought to appeal. Following Le Pen’s death in January, his daughters pursued the proceedings as his legal heirs.

Jean-Marie Le Pen was founder of the right-wing National Front and a longtime critic of EU integration. He served as an MEP from 1984 to 2019. His outspoken positions on national sovereignty and immigration challenged the French political establishment for decades. What were once dismissed as fringe positions have since become major issues in European politics. The ruling comes just months after his daughter, Marine Le Pen, former leader of the right-wing National Rally (RN) and three-time presidential candidate, was convicted of embezzling EU funds. Although she denied any wrongdoing, she received a prison sentence, was fined €100,000 ($116,000), and barred from holding public office for five years, a decision widely seen as eliminating a leading contender from the 2027 presidential race.

Le Pen has appealed the conviction. A verdict is expected in the summer of 2026 and will prove decisive in her bid for the presidency. The previous election in 2022 resulted in a run-off between Le Pen, who won over 42% of votes, and Emmanuel Macron, who secured 58%. Le Pen’s conviction triggered a wave of protests, with her supporters condemning the ruling as politically motivated and aimed at silencing dissent. US President Donald Trump accused the French political establishment of employing lawfare against the right-wing figure, urging Paris to “free” her.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/mickitiki/status/1945216878474912079

Oil

Damascus

No idea

Honda Rube

Don’t miss

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 16 2025

Jul 162025
 
 July 16, 2025  Posted by at 9:34 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  73 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Portrait de femme (Dora Maar) 1943

 

• Trump’s Ukraine Reversal Represents ‘Complete Betrayal Of America First’ (Sp.)
• Trump Believes Russia Will Win – Politico (RT)
• Trump Under ‘Improper Pressure’ From EU and NATO – Lavrov
• Ghislaine Maxwell Is ‘Ready’ to Testify (Margolis)
• Trump Asked Zelensky About Striking Moscow, Making Putin ‘Feel The Pain’ (NYP)
• Trump Tells Zelensky Not To Attack Moscow (RT)
• EU Welcomes Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia (RT)
• EU Tells US To ‘Share The Burden’ For Ukraine Weapons (RT)
• Slovak PM Fico Denounces Brussels’ ‘Imbecilic’ Russia Plan (RT)
• Tick Tock Co-Pilot John Solomon Says FBI Currently Investigating “Conspiracy” (CTH)
• The European Surprise—Why We Misread the Continent’s Shifts (ET)
• Bessent Says “Formal Process” To Find Successor To Jerome Powell Has Begun (ZH)
• Marc Andreessen: ‘Universities Declared War On 70% Of The Country’ (ZH)
• Trump Says He Spoke to Bongino Amid Reports of Infighting (ET)
• Media Runs Interference as Biden Autopen Scandal Explodes (Margolis)

 

 

 

 

Walsh

KIRK

vote

 

 

 

 

Ex-US Army staff officer David Pyne gets it.

• Trump’s Ukraine Reversal Represents ‘Complete Betrayal Of America First’ (Sp.)

Donald Trump is on the brink of tearing up his ‘no foreign wars, pro-peace’ pre-election pledge on Ukraine, with plans to deliver more weapons, and threats against Russia edging him closer toward inheriting “Biden’s war.” Sputnik asked a renowned US geopolitics and military affairs expert to break it down. The president claims that his plans to ramp up arms deliveries to Ukraine and threaten Russia with secondary tariffs are designed to help end the conflict, “when in fact these steps are serving to prolong and escalate the war unnecessarily with no end in sight,” ex-US Army staff officer David Pyne says. “Trump fails to understand that it is US military assistance to Ukrainian dictator Volodymyr Zelensky that is the chief obstacle to achieving a realistic and durable peace settlement, not an unwillingness on the part of Putin to compromise,” Pyne, deputy head of the EMP Task Force, told Sputnik.

Since the policy reversal “represents a complete betrayal of Trump’s America First conservative voting base,” who elected him in part based on his pledge to end the crisis, it threatens to derail his presidency, according to Pyne. “If Trump continues in this foolish course of pursuing war instead of peace, not only will it increase the risk of a future direct military confrontation with Russia, but it will likely serve to further fracture his America First conservative base, enabling the Democrats to seize control of Congress in the November 2026 midterm elections,” the observer predicts. Pyne’s recommendation? End all US weapons and offensive intelligence support to Ukraine, pressure Zelensky to resign and hold elections, and broadly, accept Russia’s peace terms, so that Trump can get back to his “overriding grand strategic vision” of a “geostrategic partnership with Russia.”

Read more …

“The president’s view is Russia is going to win; it’s a matter of how long it takes,” the White House official told the outlet..”

• Trump Believes Russia Will Win – Politico (RT)

US President Donald Trump believes that Russian victory in the Ukraine conflict is inevitable, Politico reported, citing a senior White House official. On Monday, Trump threatened to impose secondary US tariffs of up to 100% on Russia’s trading partners unless progress toward a peace agreement is made within 50 days. He also authorized new weapons deliveries to Ukraine, which are to be paid for by European NATO members. Moscow has warned that Trump’s declaration could be seen by Kiev as a signal to continue the war. According to Politico, Trump decided to up the pressure on Moscow out of frustration with continued Russian strikes on Ukraine. The source noted that the US president believes that Moscow can secure military victory against Kiev thanks to its “bigger economy” and “bigger military.”

“The president’s view is Russia is going to win; it’s a matter of how long it takes,” the White House official told the outlet, noting Moscow’s progress on the battlefield. In recent months, Russian forces have continued to gain ground, fully liberating the Lugansk People’s Republic, as well as the Kursk Region, which was invaded by Ukrainian forces last year. Russia has rejected Trump’s latest ultimatum, while condemning attempts to pressure it. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov asserted that this approach is “unacceptable” and demanded that Washington and NATO respect Russia’s interests and concerns.

Moscow has repeatedly stressed that it is open to conducting negotiations based on mutual respect with the aim of settling the Ukraine conflict diplomatically. However, Russian officials have also said they see no genuine effort on the part of Kiev or the West to pursue peace and repeatedly slammed calls by Western officials to inflict “strategic defeat” on Russia. Russia has emphasized that it remains determined to achieve the goals of its military operation in Ukraine and, while it would prefer to do so through diplomacy, it is prepared to use military means if necessary.

Read more …

“We are already dealing with an unprecedented number of sanctions, and I am certain we can handle more.” “..they are more likely to impact European economies than Russia’s.”

• Trump Under ‘Improper Pressure’ From EU and NATO – Lavrov

US President Donald Trump is facing “improper pressure” from the European Union and NATO leaders to adopt a hardline stance on the Ukraine conflict, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday. On Monday, Trump announced future deliveries of advanced weapons systems to Ukraine, which the US president said would be funded by European NATO members. Trump also issued an ultimatum threatening Russia and its trading partners with new economic sanctions unless the Ukraine conflict is resolved within 50 days. ”Clearly, [Trump] is under enormous – improper, I would say – pressure by the European Union and current NATO leaders,” Lavrov said during a press conference following a ministerial meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Tianjin, China.

He added that the “regime” of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky continues to request weapons donations “at the mounting expense of Western taxpayers.” Lavrov noted that Russia has previously received multiple ultimatums involving deadlines and demands for concessions on what it considers its core strategic objectives in the Ukraine conflict. He downplayed the effectiveness of new sanctions, arguing they are more likely to impact European economies than Russia’s.

”Trump clearly explained that Europe will be paying for all of that,” Lavrov said. “European economists and political experts who are objective acknowledge that this sanctions war is damaging the nations who initiated it. We are already dealing with an unprecedented number of sanctions, and I am certain we can handle more.” The minister reaffirmed Moscow’s position that NATO instigated the crisis by threatening Russia’s national security through its meddling in Ukraine. The West has pursued a containment strategy against Russia for decades and ignored repeated warnings from Moscow, Lavrov added.

Read more …

If they can bury the files, they can do the same with her.

• Ghislaine Maxwell Is ‘Ready’ to Testify (Margolis)

Well, isn’t this just the plot twist America’s corrupt ruling class was hoping you’d ignore? Ghislaine Maxwell is suddenly ready to spill the beans before Congress about Jeffrey Epstein’s whole operation. But, here’s where the story gets weird. “Despite the rumors, Ghislaine was never offered any kind of plea deal. She would be more than happy to sit before Congress and tell her story,” a source told The Daily Mail. “No-one from the government has ever asked her to share what she knows. She remains the only person to be jailed in connection to Epstein and she would welcome the chance to tell the American public the truth.” So, the only person ever jailed for Epstein’s monstrous crimes, and the government can’t be bothered to ask, “Hey, who else was involved?” Give me a break. If you believe that’s an accident, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Maxwell argues she should have been protected from prosecution as part of a Non Prosecution Agreement made by Epstein – her former lover and boss – in 2007 when he agreed to plead guilty to two minor charges of prostitution in a ‘sweetheart deal’ which saw him spend little time behind bars. And now, controversy continues to rage over the Department of Justice’s statement that there is no Epstein ‘client list’ and the release of videos from inside New York’s Metropolitan Correctional Center which the DOJ says proves he committed suicide in 2019 while being held in jail on sex trafficking charges. Critics have pointed to the fact that there is a crucial minute missing from the jail house video that also does not show the door or, indeed, the inside of Epstein’s jail cell.

The scandal – and alleged ‘cover up’ – has prompted a rebellion amongst President Trump’s loyal MAGA base. Some even believe Attorney General Pam Bondi should be fired after promising to release all files relating to Epstein and his high-profile male friends only to apparently renege on that promise. What’s really at stake here isn’t just the sordid details of Epstein’s operation. It’s the principle that in America, no one is above the law. Or at least, that’s what we’re supposed to believe. But every time Congress shrugs off a chance to get real answers—every time the Deep State buries evidence, every time the media gaslights the public—it becomes clearer that there’s one set of rules for the elites and another for the rest of us.

If Ghislaine Maxwell is willing to testify, how Congress handles it will speak volumes. The Epstein scandal isn’t just another controversy—it’s a litmus test for whether truth still has a place in American politics. If our elected leaders choose to look the other way, they’ve forfeited any moral claim to the power they hold. The Biden administration was happy to bury it, hoping the story would fade. But Trump made it clear on the campaign trail: he wants the truth exposed, and so does the MAGA movement. The American people deserve real answers—no matter how damning they might be for the elites pulling the strings. If we let this story die, we’re telling the swamp that they can get away with anything. And that, more than any memo or media spin, is the real threat to our republic.

Read more …

If you look at the ruble or Moscow’s stock exchange, it doesn’t look like the economy is ‘cracking’.

• Trump Asked Zelensky About Striking Moscow, Making Putin ‘Feel The Pain’ (NYP)

President Trump privately questioned Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about whether Kyiv could blast Moscow and St Petersburg if needed to make Russians “feel the pain” and come to the negotiating table, according to a report. “Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow? … Can you hit St Petersburg too?” Trump asked on a July 4 call with Zelensky, a day after the president had a disappointing phone call with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, the Financial Times reported, citing multiple sources. Zelensky, who has pressed Western powers for years to provide more long-range missiles, reportedly replied, “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.”

The White House insisted in a statement to The Post that the comments should not be taken out of context, with press secretary Karoline Leavitt pushing back on the Financial Times’ framing of the call, which suggested Trump encouraged Zelensky to step up strikes deep into Russian territory. “The Financial Times is notorious for taking words wildly out of context to get clicks because their paper is dying,” Leavitt told The Post. “President Trump was merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing. He’s working tirelessly to stop the killing and end this war.” Trump’s reported query came after he spoke with Putin and was left convinced that the Kremlin wasn’t going to halt its war machine.

The reported question marks a significant turnaround from Trump’s explosive Feb. 28 Oval Office meeting with Zelensky, in which he raged that the Ukrainian leader was “gambling with World War III” and that “you don’t have the cards right now.” On Monday, Trump announced a deal with NATO for the US to step up its supply of weapons to Ukraine, including Patriot missile systems and what he called a “full complement” of firepower to the war-torn ally. The deal could also include offensive weapons, such as long-range missiles to strike deep into Russia, Axios reported Monday. This would be critical for Ukraine as it will enable Kyiv to attack Russian machinery and weapons that have been used to bombard its cities, rather than relying on defensive measures.

Ukraine had carried out a daring military strike deep in Russian territory last month, known as Operation Spiderweb, in which it snuck a fleet of suicide drones into Russia and destroyed about a dozen bombers. In addition to the plan to send weapons to Ukraine, Trump also gave Putin a 50-day ultimatum to achieve some sort of peace agreement or else face 100% secondary tariffs, meaning countries that do business with Moscow will face the stiff levies. That economic threat comes as Russia’s economy minister warned last month that his country is “on the brink of recession.” Over the past three years, Russia has tapped into its National Wealth Fund, printed money and worked to evade the crippling sanctions imposed against it over its bloody onslaught against neighboring Ukraine.

But there are signs that its economic resilience is beginning to crack as the US and Europe look to further tighten the screws and close off workarounds. Late last month, Putin publicly announced plans to cut Russia’s military budget for next year, but didn’t specify how much. Throughout his second term, Trump had aggressively sought to broker a peace deal between the two warring countries. In recent weeks, however, the US president vented that he felt Putin was tapping him along. “I speak to him [Putin] a lot about getting this thing done. And I always hang up and say, ‘Well, that was a nice phone call,’” Trump said of his calls with the Russian leader over the past six months. “And then missiles are launched into Kyiv or some other city. And I said, ‘Strange.’ And after that happens three or four times, you say the talk doesn’t mean anything.”

Read more …

“Leavitt insisted that Trump was “merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing..”

How does that rhyme with sending more weapons, like long range missiles?

• Trump Tells Zelensky Not To Attack Moscow (RT)

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he told Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky not to target Moscow with military strikes. The statement comes in response to media speculation that he had encouraged Kiev to carry out long-range missile attacks deep into Russia. The Financial Times reported on Tuesday that Trump had privately asked Zelensky whether he could hit Moscow and St. Petersburg if Washington supplied long-range weapons. Zelensky reportedly replied that he could. Asked by reporters whether Zelensky ought to fire missiles at Russia’s capital, Trump replied “No, he shouldn’t target Moscow.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt accused the FT of twisting the president’s words, saying it is “notorious for taking words wildly out of context to get clicks because their paper is dying.”

Leavitt insisted that Trump was “merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing,” stressing that the president was “working tirelessly to stop the killing and end this war.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also weighed in on the report, noting that “as a rule, all of this usually turns out to be fake.” He added, however, that “sometimes there are indeed serious leaks, even in publications we once considered quite respectable.” The FT report followed on Trump’s ultimatum to Moscow, in which he threatened to impose “severe” secondary tariffs on Russia’s trade partners if no progress towards peace is made within 50 days. Trump also announced future deliveries of advanced weapons systems to Ukraine, which are to be funded by European NATO members.

Since taking office in January, Trump has maintained that he wants the neighboring countries to make peace and has had several phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin that were focused on settling the conflict s
Moscow says it remains open to negotiating with Kiev but has yet to receive a response on when new peace talks will take place. The two sides have held two rounds of direct negotiations in Istanbul so far this year, but no breakthroughs were achieved, other than agreements to carry out large-scale prisoner exchanges. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on Tuesday that EU and NATO leaders have put Trump under “improper pressure” to adopt a hardline stance on the conflict.

Read more …

Russia wants peace badly, but not on western terms.

• EU Welcomes Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia (RT)

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has welcomed US President Donald Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on Russia’s trading partners unless a deal with Ukraine is reached within 50 days, calling it a “positive” step. Moscow, however, has warned that Trump’s declaration could be seen by Kiev as a signal to continue the war. Trump said on Monday that he was “very, very unhappy” with the protracted negotiation process, warning Moscow of “severe” secondary tariffs of up to 100% unless the sides move towards a settlement. “It is very positive that President Trump is taking a strong stance on Russia,” Kallas, known for her hawkish stance on Moscow, said at a press briefing. She suggested, however, that Trump’s deadline may not be enough to “pressure” Russia.

”50 days is a very long time… It is clear that we all need to put more pressure on Russia so that they would also want peace,” she stated, calling for Washington to continue supporting Kiev militarily.Russia has repeatedly denounced Western arms supplies to Ukraine, saying they prolong the conflict without changing its course. Moscow has also condemned sanctions as illegal under international law. Russia and Ukraine have held two rounds of direct talks in Istanbul over the past two months. Both sides agreed to major prisoner swaps and exchanged proposals on potential ways towards a settlement. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday that Moscow remains open to negotiations but has not received a response on the timing of the next round from Kiev.Peskov described Trump’s ultimatum as “quite serious,” but noted that Russia needs time to analyze it. He also warned that the shift in Washington’s tone could be seen in Kiev “not as a signal toward peace, but as a signal to continue the war.”

Read more …

That took less than one day. Trump’s entire domestic sales pitch out the window.

• EU Tells US To ‘Share The Burden’ For Ukraine Weapons (RT)

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has welcomed US President Donald Trump’s promise to send more weapons to Kiev, but said he can’t describe it as American aid if European NATO states are fully bankrolling the initiative. Trump announced on Monday that he will allow other NATO members to buy American-made Patriot missile defense systems and other weapons for Ukraine – but indicated that US taxpayers will no longer finance Kiev’s war effort. “The United States will not be having any payment made. We’re not buying it, but we will manufacture it, and they’re going to be paying for it,” the US leader said during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office, adding “this will be a business for us.”

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Kallas welcomed Trump’s announcement but noted that Brussels “would like to see the US share the burden.” “If we pay for these weapons – it’s our support, it’s European support,” Kallas explained when asked to clarify what she meant by sharing the burden. “We are doing as much as we can to help Ukraine, and therefore the call is that everybody would do the same. It’s, you know, if you promise to give the weapons but say that somebody else is going to pay – it’s not really given by you, is it?” Moscow has repeatedly denounced Western arms supplies to Ukraine, saying they only serve to prolong the bloodshed and escalate the conflict without altering its course.

Russia remains open to negotiations but has not received a response from Kiev on the timing of the next round. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on Tuesday that EU and NATO leaders have put Trump under “improper pressure” to adopt a hardline stance. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov stressed that “any attempts to make demands, let alone issue ultimatums, are unacceptable.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also criticized Trump’s threat to impose “severe” secondary tariffs of up to 100% in 50 days, noting that such ultimatums are “perceived by the Ukrainian side not as a signal toward peace, but as a signal to continue the war.”

Read more …

“..Slovakia, but also Hungary, Austria, and reportedly Italy..”

“The [European] Commission’s proposal is, excuse my language, imbecilic. Demagogically, it is the result of a limitless obsession with Russia..”

• Slovak PM Fico Denounces Brussels’ ‘Imbecilic’ Russia Plan (RT)

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has slammed the EU’s plan to phase out Russian energy imports as “imbecilic,” warning that the move would undermine his country’s energy security, as well as the rest of the bloc. The RePowerEU plan envisages cutting all Russian oil and gas imports into the EU by 2027. The scheme has met with opposition not only from Slovakia, but also Hungary, Austria, and reportedly Italy.In a video posted on Facebook on Monday, Fico said the “battle for Slovakia’s energy security is nearing its end,” acknowledging that Bratislava cannot veto Brussels’ plan. He accused the EU leadership of deliberately presenting the proposal as trade legislation to pre-empt opposition. Unlike sanctions, the plan only requires a qualified majority to pass.

“The [European] Commission’s proposal is, excuse my language, imbecilic. Demagogically, it is the result of a limitless obsession with Russia,” the prime minister said. He added that phasing out Russian energy will “damage the Slovak economy and undermine the competitiveness of the entire EU.” Responding to a letter from Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala, who urged Fico to support the EU’s 18th sanctions package against Russia, the Slovak leader stated on Monday that he would not relent until “relevant stakeholders provide [Bratislava] with the necessary guarantees that after January 1, 2028, Slovakia will have sufficient gas supplies at reasonable prices.”

Slovakia blocked the sanctions package for the second time last Friday, demanding that its concerns over the separate RePowerEU plan be addressed first. While Russian gas has not been subject to a direct EU ban, most member states have voluntarily cut imports. However, several landlocked countries – including Slovakia, Hungary, Austria, and the Czech Republic – still rely on limited volumes through exemptions. Bratislava and Budapest also receive much of their oil from Russia. Russia has warned that targeting its energy exports will continue to cause energy prices to surge across the EU, weakening the bloc’s economy. Since 2022, growth across the EU has stagnated.

Read more …

Sundance is not buying.

“Who believes this nonsense? We are years beyond believing the FBI is structurally doing anything to return fire against the Obama administration; yet here is Fox News selling bulk hopium to their viewers. Ridiculous. All of it.”

• Tick Tock Co-Pilot John Solomon Says FBI Currently Investigating “Conspiracy” (CTH)

Sean Hannity and John Solomon have apparently ejected Sara Carter for “Tick Tock Term-2”, seemingly replacing her with James (‘sounds like Gopher from Winnie the Pooh‘) Comer. In the latest iteration of the tick-tock walls closing in, at least according to Solomon, the FBI is currently doing a “grand conspiracy” investigation of Barack Obama, James Comey, John Brennan and James Clapper. Solomon says below, “This is a criminal conspiracy. And by treating it as a conspiracy, you eliminate the five-year statutes on individual crimes. So if something happened in 2016, but it was part of an ongoing conspiracy that continued with Jack Smith raiding Donald Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago, it can be charged in the larger conspiracy. Even though, if you tried to charge it as an individual case, you wouldn’t get it.”

According to Solomon, even Lee Zeldin is a potential candidate to lead a special prosecution team against the former conspirators, and the evidence is so overwhelming … “a special prosecutor would have a jumpstart. This could be wrapped up in a couple of years.”… I can’t even begin to wrap my head around how ridiculous this claim by Hannity, Solomon and Representative ‘Gopher‘ Comer actually is. Who believes this nonsense? We are years beyond believing the FBI is structurally doing anything to return fire against the Obama administration; yet here is Fox News selling bulk hopium to their viewers. Ridiculous. All of it.

Read more …

“English-speaking audiences relying on European media’s English editions get an incomplete picture, skewed toward liberal narratives and missing the conservative currents driving political shifts..”

• The European Surprise—Why We Misread the Continent’s Shifts (ET)

Europe’s political landscape continues to defy expectations, leaving analysts and policymakers scrambling to explain outcomes that, in hindsight, seem foreseeable. From the UK’s Brexit vote to Giorgia Meloni’s rise in Italy, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) surge in Germany, Dutch farmers’ revolts, and Marine Le Pen’s ascent in France, each development triggers a chorus of shocked “No one saw this coming.” Yet millions of Europeans did. The persistent surprise may stem from a flawed lens—dominated by English-language media filters, historical overcorrections, and shrinking on-the-ground reporting—that distorts our understanding. As these shifts ripple globally, misreading Europe poses strategic risks we can no longer afford to ignore.

The pattern is unmistakable. Europe has been portrayed as a stable, liberal bastion—centrist coalitions driving climate action and European Union unity, embodying a progressive ideal. Yet reality diverges: The UK exited the EU in 2016, Meloni became Italy’s prime minister in 2022, Germany’s AfD polled second nationally in 2025, Dutch farmers blocked roads over nitrogen policies, and France’s center collapsed in 2024, elevating Le Pen. Each time, English-language coverage reacts with shock, missing signals visible to local populations. This disconnect begins with a critical media filter. English-language European outlets, such as state-funded France 24, Deutsche Welle, Politico Europe, and center-left publications like Le Monde, cater to an urban, university-educated, globally minded audience. These sources are mostly credible and professional but reflect a narrow slice of society, underrepresenting conservative and rural perspectives.

A key disparity amplifies this bias: While mainstream liberal media regularly publish English editions, conservative and right-wing outlets across Europe—such as Germany’s Junge Freiheit or Italy’s Il Giornale—rarely do. This choice stems from several factors: a lack of perceived demand in English-speaking markets, suspicion of hostile Anglo-American coverage, and a strategic focus on local bases. As a result, English-speaking audiences relying on European media’s English editions get an incomplete picture, skewed toward liberal narratives and missing the conservative currents driving political shifts. Country-specific examples reveal the depth of this gap. In Italy, Meloni’s 2022 victory, often labeled “neo-fascist” because of her party’s post-fascist roots, was misread by English outlets.

Yet her platform—lower taxes, stronger borders, and national pride—reflected frustration with unelected technocrats and Brussels’ fiscal rules. She formed a coalition with Matteo Salvini’s League and Forza Italia, securing a parliamentary majority with 44 percent of the vote, appealing to millions disillusioned by years of instability, not extremism. Her government’s three-year record (2022 to 2025) has focused on economic recovery. In Germany, AfD’s rise to more than 20 percent in state elections and a mayoral win in 2025 reflect discontent with soaring energy prices post-nuclear shutdown and immigration strains. Yet it’s framed as a dangerous anomaly, ignoring its roots in rural and eastern voter bases.

In the Netherlands, the government’s 2019 nitrogen reduction plan, mandating farm buyouts, sparked tractor blockades by farmers facing existential threats to generational livelihoods. The Farmer-Citizen Movement, formed in response, became the largest party in the Dutch Senate by 2023, a democratic revolt misread as a sideshow. In France, President Emmanuel Macron’s 2024 dissolution of the National Assembly followed his party’s European election defeat, paving the way for Le Pen’s National Rally. Her movement, drawing working-class and youth voters from disaffected leftist unions, has softened its rhetoric—shifting from anti-immigrant hardline to economic populism—normalizing her appeal amid the center’s collapse.

This blind spot is structural, rooted in postwar Europe’s “firewall” logic. After World War II, institutions like Germany’s Basic Law and France’s laïcité were designed to prevent fascism and nationalism, embedding a cultural consensus against these ideologies. The EU, as a moral project to dissolve rivalries, reinforced this stance. Over time, this overcorrection stigmatized moderate conservatism—national flags or religious appeals were red flags, dissent from EU norms labeled “anti-democratic.” Repressing these voices buried resentment, fueling unexpected populism. The UK grooming gang scandals illustrate a similar pattern: institutional real fear of fomenting racism delayed action on abuse, worsening the crisis. In Europe, suppressing feedback has similarly driven political surprises.

The Anglosphere’s media compounds this. Decades ago, outlets like The New York Times or CBS maintained lively European bureaus, offering nuance and real understanding of reality on the ground. Budget cuts and shifting priorities have shuttered many, replacing correspondents with wire services and freelancers. Walter Duranty’s downplaying of Joseph Stalin’s Holodomor, despite his Moscow base, shows proximity isn’t a cure-all, but its absence distorts coverage, even by the mere addition of intermediaries. Today’s reports—relying on embassy briefings, nongovernmental organization releases, the European media’s English language editions, or echo-chamber articles—many times lack critical context. For example, there was the framing of Dutch tractor protests as climate backlash rather than a livelihood crisis. For policymakers and investors, this distance misjudges risks, from policy legitimacy to market stability.

The stakes are high. Misreading Europe leads to ill-fated policies, regulatory backlash, and eroding trust in journalism, fueling polarization. Each “shock result” signals analytical failure with global repercussions—markets shift, alliances waver, and migration patterns change. The postwar consensus, while essential, has ossified into dogma, blinding elites to new threats. To see Europe clearly, we ought to think and act like historians. We stop waiting for “The Truth” to arrive in a statement and start building our own mosaic. This means reading across ideological spectra, using artificial intelligence to translate non-English conservative sources like Junge Freiheit (even if one vehemently disagrees with its editorial line), tracking polling trends, and listening beyond capitals.

This is not about endorsing right-wing or conservative parties over liberal and progressive ideologies; rather, it underscores that navigating with a flawed map—lacking the full true picture—hurts everyone’s performance. Understanding Europe’s diverse political currents, progressive gains and conservative surges alike, reduces the risk of costly surprises.

Read more …

He himself is a leading candidate.

• Bessent Says “Formal Process” To Find Successor To Jerome Powell Has Begun (ZH)

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed on Tuesday that a “formal process” is underway to find a potential successor to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. In an interview with Bloomberg Surveillance, Bessent remarked, “There are a lot of great candidates, and we’ll see how rapidly it progresses.” He also noted that it would be confusing for Powell to stay on at the Federal Reserve after his term as chair concludes. Since last month President Donald Trump has intensified his criticism of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, repeatedly accusing him of mismanaging monetary policy and calling for aggressive interest rate cuts. Trump has argued that Powell is acting too slowly to respond to economic conditions and said, “Maybe I should go to the Fed… Am I allowed to appoint myself at the Fed? I’d do a much better job than these people.”

He has labeled Powell with a series of insults, calling him “stupid,” “too late,” “a numbskull,” and demanding the Fed slash rates by a full percentage point to stimulate the economy. Trump’s attacks continued into July, growing even sharper. On July 8, he declared that Powell “should resign immediately.” A few days later, he criticized Powell over cost overruns tied to a $2.5 billion renovation project at the Federal Reserve, referring to him as a “knucklehead” and “stupid guy.” Last week, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought also criticized Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell for a renovation project he called “too lavish,” referring to it as “Versailles on the National Mall.”

On CNBC, Vought cited “fundamental mismanagement” at the Fed. Meanwhile, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, a potential successor to Powell, added, “If there is cause to fire Powell, Trump has the authority to do so.” The criticism appeared coordinated, with other figures like Fed candidate Kevin Warsh and Vice President J.D. Vance joining in. Trump also reiterated his demand for rates to be cut to around 1%. Members of his team suggested they might review the renovation project as a possible justification to remove Powell “for cause.”

Read more …

It’s not just Harvard.

“..Stanford University and MIT are operating as “mainly political lobbying operations fighting American innovation.”

• Marc Andreessen: ‘Universities Declared War On 70% Of The Country’ (ZH)

Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen warned that universities engaging in discriminatory practices against students and faculty will face significant consequences, according to leaked screenshots obtained by the Washington Post. In the private group chat with AI scientists and Trump administration officials, Andreessen stated that universities “declared war on 70% of the country and now they’re going to pay the price.” He criticized DEI and immigration policies, describing them as “two forms of discrimination” that are “politically lethal.”

Andreessen further claimed that Stanford University and MIT are operating as “mainly political lobbying operations fighting American innovation.” The billionaire tech investor also addressed Stanford’s decision to remove his wife, Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen, as chair of its Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society, noting it was done “without a second thought, a decision that will cost them something like $5 billion in future donations.”

This isn’t the first time Andreessen has called out what he perceives as a broken university system. In a recent interview with billionaire venture capitalist and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, Andreessen raised concerns about access to elite education. “If you’re the parents of a smart kid where I grew up [rural Wisconsin] and you think you’re going to get them into a top university in this country, you’re fooling yourself,” Andreessen said. “What level of untapped talent exists in this country that a combination of DEI and immigration have basically cut out of the loop for the last 50 years?”

Andreessen argued that the intersection of DEI policies and high-skilled immigration has “warped” perceptions of who gets access to elite education. “Nobody wants to talk about, but I’ve started to talk about the intersection of DEI and immigration that has really warped our perceptions on high-skilled immigration over the last 50 years,” he said.

Andreessen also pointed to the sharp rise in foreign enrollment at top universities, noting, “You look at the foreign enrollment rates at the top universities, which went from 2 or 3 or 4 percent 50 years ago or whatever to 27% or 30% or 50%.” “There’s been this massive transformation of who gets admitted through affirmative action, as we now know it, DEI,” the tech billionaire continued. “This goes straight to the political divide in the country. If you’re parents of a kid where I grew up [rural Wisconsin] and you’ve got a smart kid and you think you’re going to get them into, you know, a top university in this country, like you’re fooling yourself.”

Andreessen drove the point home, adding, “There is this really fundamental question which is, what level of untapped talent exists in this country that a combination of DEI and immigration have basically cut out of the loop for the last 50 years? And how long can we have this story to everybody in the Midwest and in the South that says, sorry, because of historical oppression, your kids are shit out of luck.” Andreessen made headlines last year when he and his business partner, Ben Horowitz, endorsed President Donald Trump’s third campaign for the White House.

Read more …

“Trump suggested that nothing in the Epstein files “could have hurt the MAGA Movement.”

• Trump Says He Spoke to Bongino Amid Reports of Infighting (ET)

President Donald Trump said he spoke to FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino on July 13, indicating that the two remain close despite reported friction over the release of the Jeffrey Epstein documents. “I spoke to him today. Dan Bongino is a very good guy. I’ve known him a long time,” Trump told reporters outside Air Force 1. “He’s in good shape.” The comments come after Axios reported on July 11 that Bongino—previously a conservative commentator who had long pressed for answers about Epstein’s 2019 death and operation—skipped work on Friday due to disagreements with Attorney General Pam Bondi’s handling of the matter. Laura Loomer, a political commentator close to the president, also reported on Bongino’s absence from work last week, similarly referencing disagreements between Bongino and Bondi.

Trump on July 12 told his supporters not to continue looking into the circumstances surrounding the billionaire’s death. “What’s going on with my ‘boys’ and, in some cases, ‘gals?’” Trump said in a July 12 post on social media platform Truth Social. “They’re all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We’re on one Team, MAGA, and I don’t like what’s happening. “We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and ‘selfish people’ are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein.” He added, “One year ago our Country was DEAD, now it’s the ‘HOTTEST’ Country anywhere in the World. Let’s keep it that way, and not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about.”

Epstein’s case has been intensely scrutinized online for years following his 2019 death in federal custody while awaiting prosecution on charges of engaging in a multiyear conspiracy to sex traffic minors. The billionaire was reported to have hung himself in his cell, but given his connections with many high-ranking officials and celebrities, many have speculated whether Epstein was murdered. The nature of Epstein’s operation, involving sexual exploitation of over one thousand victims, many of whom were minors, has also been scrutinized. At a July 8 Cabinet meeting, a reporter asked Bondi to address a claim that Epstein had been some form of intelligence community asset. “I have no knowledge about that,” she said. “We can get back to you on that.”

During that Cabinet meeting, Bondi also said a missing minute from a jail surveillance tape on the night Epstein died was a normal circumstance due to a routine technical artifact in the camera system, as the video is reset every night at 12 a.m. Trump suggested that nothing in the Epstein files “could have hurt the MAGA Movement.” On July 7, the Department of Justice and FBI released a memo stating that Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide and had no “client list,” and that the agencies would not release any further material related to the Epstein case. “As part of our commitment to transparency, the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have conducted an exhaustive review of investigative holdings relating to Jeffrey Epstein,” the agencies stated in the memo.

The review found that Epstein committed suicide in his cell as he was awaiting trial in August 2019. This concurs with an autopsy conducted at the time. “The conclusion that Epstein died by suicide is further supported by video footage from the common area of the Special Housing Unit (SHU) where Epstein was housed at the time of his death,” the memo reads. The review found that Epstein did not keep a list of clients as part of his sex trafficking activities. Additionally, there is no evidence that Epstein blackmailed individuals, according to the memo. Nonetheless, according to the review, Epstein “harmed over one thousand victims” as “each suffered unique trauma.”

Read more …

This screams Supreme Court. Expedited.

• Media Runs Interference as Biden Autopen Scandal Explodes (Margolis)

The legacy media never misses a beat when it comes to parroting Democratic talking points, screaming “threat to democracy” and “constitutional crisis” anytime Donald Trump sneezes in the wrong direction. But when the left tramples on constitutional norms? Crickets — or worse, full-blown excuses. Case in point: Joe Biden’s autopen scandal. The same press corps that waited until after he left office to admit what we all saw with our own eyes — that Biden was mentally unfit — is now running interference again. This time, they’re pretending the autopen scandal is much ado about nothing. This week, the New York Times published an exposé that revealed that, despite claims to the contrary, Joe Biden didn’t individually approve every pardon or act of clemency done in his name. It was a damning report that raises even major questions about what was signed via autopen without his knowledge.

So what did ABC News do? They tweeted out that Joe Biden personally made every clemency and pardon decision during the last weeks of his failed presidency, including the ones handled by autopen. To call that misleading is an understatement. The New York Times admits, and so do Biden’s own aides, that many of those pardons were processed in “large batches.” The decisions? Not made after careful review of individuals, but based on broad, pre-approved categories. Biden didn’t know the names. He didn’t scrutinize the cases. He rubber-stamped entire classes of people for a free pass, while the staffers and bureaucrats filled in the blanks. Despite pushing the Biden talking point on social media, the actual article ABC linked to directly refutes Biden’s own statement.

“Former President Joe Biden, in an interview with the New York Times published on Sunday, said that he personally made every clemency and pardon decision during the last few weeks of his presidency — including those made with an autopen. However, he and aides told the Times that some decisions for large batches of pardons were based on broad categories that various people fell into, not based on reviewing individuals on a case-by-case basis. Biden said he approved the categories and standards for choosing who to pardon. “I made every single one of those. And — including the categories, when we set this up to begin with,” Biden said of the clemency and pardon decisions.”

This is the same media that now pretends to have had a “come to Jesus” moment over the cover-up of Biden’s cognitive decline — while still actively covering it up. They’re pushing Biden’s denials as truth right in their headlines, hoping the public fixates on the spin instead of the facts. But those facts are damning: Biden and his own aides have admitted he didn’t personally make every decision. The media’s job used to be holding power accountable. Now, they’re still running PR for Joe Biden.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

lungs

https://twitter.com/ChildrensHD/status/1945226072057905629

Xishi

Monarch

Chico

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 15 2025

Jul 152025
 
 July 15, 2025  Posted by at 9:08 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Female bust 1943

 

• World War III Has Already Begun (Dmitry Trenin)
• Trump Issues Threats To Russia Over Ukraine Conflict (RT)
• Trump’s Patriot Pledge is Just Political Theater: Scott Ritter (Sp.)
• If Trump Folds to Neocons on Ukraine, MAGA Base Will Bury Him as Biden 2.0 (Sp.)
• Bannon Warns of Electoral Catastrophe For Republicans (RT)
• Trump Could Send Long-range Missiles To Ukraine – Media (RT)
• Interest Groups Are Stronger Than President Trump (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Trump Was Saved to Save Our Country (Margolis)
• German President Calls For Universal Military Conscription (RT)
• Nvidia CEO Says China’s Army Won’t Rely On US AI Chips (ZH)
• Kristi Noem Turns NBC’s Ambush Into a Masterclass in Command (Margolis)
• FBI Opens ‘Grand Conspiracy’ Probe On Weaponization (JTN)
• X Marks The Spat (Zilber)
• Biden Defends Controversial Autopen Use For Mass Clemency Decisions (NYP)

 

 

Alex

Tariffs

MIlley

 

 

 

 

 

 

As the MAGA base is still talking about Epstein, Trump is picking a fight with Putin, risking WWiiI. They may forgive him for Epstein, but not that.

• World War III Has Already Begun (Dmitry Trenin)

Many now speak of humanity’s drift towards World War III, imagining events similar to those of the 20th century. But war evolves. It will not begin with a June 1941 Barbarossa-style invasion or a Cuban Missile Crisis-style nuclear standoff. In fact, the new world war is already underway – it’s just that not everyone has recognized it yet. For Russia, the pre-war period ended in 2014. For China, it was 2017. For Iran, 2023. Since then, war – in its modern, diffuse form – has intensified. This is not a new Cold War. Since 2022, the West’s campaign against Russia has grown more decisive. The risk of direct nuclear confrontation with NATO over the Ukraine conflict is rising. Donald Trump’s return to the White House created a temporary window in which such a clash could be avoided, but by mid-2025, hawks in the US and Western Europe had pushed us dangerously close again.

This war involves the world’s leading powers: the United States and its allies on one side, China and Russia on the other. It is global, not because of its scale, but because of the stakes: the future balance of power. The West sees the rise of China and the resurgence of Russia as existential threats. Its counteroffensive, economic and ideological, is meant to put a halt to that shift. It is a war of survival for the West, not just geopolitically but ideologically. Western globalism – whether economic, political, or cultural – cannot tolerate alternative civilizational models. Post-national elites in the US and Western Europe are committed to preserving their dominance. A diversity of worldviews, civilizational autonomy, and national sovereignty are seen not as options, but as threats.

This explains the severity of the West’s response. When Joe Biden told Brazil’s President Lula that he wanted to “destroy” Russia, he revealed the truth behind euphemisms like “strategic defeat.” Western-backed Israel has shown how total this doctrine is – first in Gaza, then Lebanon, and finally Iran. In early June, a similar strategy was used in attacks on Russian airfields. Reports suggest US and British involvement in both cases. To Western planners, Russia, Iran, China and North Korea are part of a single axis. That belief shapes military planning. Compromise is no longer part of the game. What we’re seeing are not temporary crises but rolling conflicts. Eastern Europe and the Middle East are the two current flashpoints. A third has long been identified: East Asia, particularly Taiwan. Russia is directly engaged in Ukraine, holds stakes in the Middle East, and may become involved in the Pacific.

The war is no longer about occupation, but destabilization. The new strategy focuses on sowing internal disorder: economic sabotage, social unrest, and psychological attrition. The West’s plan for Russia is not defeat on the battlefield, but gradual internal collapse. Its tactics are all-encompassing. Drone strikes target infrastructure and nuclear facilities. Political assassinations are no longer off-limits. Journalists, negotiators, scientists, and even their families are being hunted. Residential neighborhoods, schools, and hospitals are not collateral damage – they are targets. This is total war.

Read more …

“The Russian stock market soared on Trump’s remarks, with the main index jumping nearly 3%,,,”

• Trump Issues Threats To Russia Over Ukraine Conflict (RT)

US President Donald Trump has threatened to impose “severe” tariffs of up to 100% on Russia’s trading partners unless a deal is reached to end the Ukraine conflict within 50 days. Trump issued the warning on Monday during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office. “We’re very, very unhappy – I am – with [Russia], and we’re going to be doing very severe tariffs if we don’t have a deal in about 50 days,” he stated. Trump blamed his predecessor Joe Biden for dragging Washington into the conflict, saying the US had spent approximately $350 billion on aid for Ukraine. The US president also mentioned a congressional bill that would impose tougher sanctions on Russia, saying, “I’m not sure we need it, but it’s good they’re doing it… could be very useful.” A Senate vote is expected next week.

He noted that, if there was no progress on Ukraine, slapping Russia with secondary US tariffs would not require congressional approval. Secondary tariffs are sometimes introduced on countries that do business with a sanctioned country. Trump also announced that the US will send weapons to Ukraine through NATO, which would handle both payment and distribution. “We’ve made a deal today where we are going to be sending them weapons, and they’re going to be paying for them,” he said. Russia has repeatedly denounced the West for supplying Ukraine with weapons, warning that this only serves to prolong the conflict and makes no impact on its outcome. The Russian stock market soared on Trump’s remarks, with the main index jumping nearly 3%, according to data from the Moscow Exchange.

Read more …

“..while Trump’s tariff and sanctions threat may be “designed to weaken the Russian will…all it’s going to do is collapse the American economy, and it will be the United States that pulls back and withdraws and shows weakness, not Russia and not Russia’s allies,”

• Trump’s Patriot Pledge is Just Political Theater: Scott Ritter (Sp.)

Donald Trump’s pledge to source “up to 17” Patriot batteries for Ukraine leaves an array of questions unanswered, like whether US allies will be willing to pony up, whether Ukraine has the personnel required to operate them, and whether the systems would even survive transit to their destination in conditions of near-total Russian air superiority in the skies over Ukraine, Ritter says. “Russia right now enjoys relative freedom of activity over Ukraine in terms of drone operations, missile operations. They apparently have very good intelligence coverage of Ukraine. So as Patriot batteries are transferred to Ukraine there’s an increased likelihood that they will be detected by the Russians and destroyed by the Russians before they’re ever installed,” Ritter told Sputnik.

Delivering the air defense systems to Ukraine would be “a massive waste of money” that “won’t help Ukraine,” but hurt it, needlessly prolonging the conflict, in which time “thousands” more people will be killed, Ritter said. “This is a political gesture being made by President Trump because he’s embarrassed that he hasn’t been able to pressure Russian President Vladimir Putin into bending the knee to American demands on how to bring this war to an end,” the analyst emphasized. The CIA being tasked with procuring the Patriots opens the door to even more questions, according to Ritter. “This is a non-standard transaction. It’s not the byproduct of extensive diplomacy and the defense departments of both nations getting together and talking about things.

“This is a CIA covert operation that has its roots, the political drive of a president who needs to be seen as doing something. So there’s a lot of intent in here, but it’s not backed up with a guaranteed outcome. We don’t know if all of the systems that the CIA thinks can be made available are in fact available,” the observer explained. “Germany has 12 Patriot systems…Are the Germans going to relinquish all of their Patriot batteries? How many of those is the United States counting on? The United States may say, ‘give us them all, we’ll back you up’. But are the Germans really going to give up all 12 batteries?” Ritter asked. “The same thing with Spain. Spain is said to be a potential source of Patriot batteries, but Spain has very few Patriot batteries that they’ve procured. And is Spain willing to give up all of its Patriot capability, knowing that the American backfill is dependent upon a production bottleneck that isn’t going to change anytime soon?”

“Then we also have to remember, a Patriot battery is not a Patriot battery,” Ritter said. “There’s old Patriot batteries, there’s less old, there’s new Patriot batteries. If you’re giving away old Patriot batteries with old systems, first of all, many of these missiles may have already gone through a life extension program and are not suitable for continuing to be made operational. They may not function. And if they do function, they’re not designed to do the kind of high-speed maneuvering and target acquisition that’s affiliated with the modern Patriot. So even if you get numbers, the capabilities, they might as well not have a Patriot system,” the observer stressed. Beside the Patriot announcement is Trump’s threat of 100% secondary sanctions on countries cooperating with Russia. Making good on these threats would be “foolhardy” to say the least, according to Ritter.

“Trump just recently unraveled the disaster he made by putting sanctions on China back in April. China’s retaliation on rare earth minerals destroyed the American automobile industry. And only recently did Donald Trump get a new arrangement with China where the pipeline for these magnetic materials and rare earth minerals will once again be opened. But production has already been disrupted. And now if you’re talking about putting on another 100%. First of all, even before that 100% goes on, who’s going to sign contracts today, believing that in 50 days, the entire thing will unravel because of sanctions. This is disruptive in the extreme.”

Secondly, “do you think China is just going to sit there and go ‘okay, yeah, give us that 100%. We’ll do nothing’? No, they’ll retaliate again. It’s ridiculous. India isn’t going to put up with this. And Brazil has already indicated that if the United States wants to play tariff games, then Brazil will just cut off all trade with the United States,” the analyst stressed. In other words, while Trump’s tariff and sanctions threat may be “designed to weaken the Russian will…all it’s going to do is collapse the American economy, and it will be the United States that pulls back and withdraws and shows weakness, not Russia and not Russia’s allies,” Ritter summed up.

Read more …

“Putin said the US and its allies have disregarded Russia’s interests since the collapse of the Soviet Union.”

• Trump Could Send Long-range Missiles To Ukraine – Media (RT)

US President Donald Trump is weighing whether to authorize the delivery to Ukraine of long-range missiles capable of striking targets deep within Russia, Axios reported on Sunday. The outlet cited two sources with knowledge of the plans for weapons deliveries. Trump is expected to make an announcement regarding Ukraine on Monday, which “is going to be very aggressive,” according to comments to Axios by Senator Lindsey Graham, who supports ramping up the sanctions on Russia. Trump previously said he could send Patriots to Ukraine – without specifying whether he means the missiles or the complete air defense systems – and expressed frustration over Russia’s unwillingness to agree to an unconditional ceasefire.

Moscow considers the ceasefire proposal to be a stalling tactic to allow Ukraine to regroup. Trump has hinted at new weapons deliveries, saying the US will send “various pieces of very sophisticated military” equipment. He added that other nations “are gonna pay us 100%” for the weapons, describing it as good business. He indicated that the EU would cover the costs. During the latest direct peace talks in Istanbul, Moscow offered a conditional ceasefire, saying it would agree to a truce if Kiev takes meaningful steps to deescalate, including suspending deliveries of Western military aid. This proposal was rejected, and Kiev appears unwilling to resume the negotiations.

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Kislitsa said last week that “this format has practically exhausted itself,” unless Russian President Vladimir Putin grants his delegation the authority to offer terms suitable for Ukraine. Kislitsa said Kiev’s goal in Istanbul is to push for a summit between Putin and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. The Russian president previously said he would meet with Zelensky if Kiev first accepts the terms of a viable peace deal – adding, however, that he does not believe Zelensky has the authority to sign international treaties, as his term as president expired last year and he refused to step down, citing martial law. In a separate interview last week, Putin said the US and its allies have disregarded Russia’s interests since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Read more …

“Trump would effectively become a second Biden, thus committing political suicide.”

• If Trump Folds to Neocons on Ukraine, MAGA Base Will Bury Him as Biden 2.0 (Sp.)

President Trump has pulled a 180 on his Russia/Ukraine peace push, including an “aggressive” new arms aid plan, and 100% “secondary tariff” threats against Moscow. Sputnik asked a leading Russian foreign and defense policy expert to weigh in. The US president’s escalatory rhetoric vis-à-vis Russia is the result of the realization that he cannot “force” Russia to make the concessions he needs to declare a peace in Ukraine which doesn’t address the conflict’s root causes, Russian Council on Foreign & Defense Policy Dmitry Suslov has told Sputnik. Succumbing to the “hypocritical flattery” of the neocon wing of the GOP, plus hawkish European allies, Trump is being lobbied to believe that acting “tough” works. At the same time, his intuition is telling him to try to avoid being dragged into a long confrontation with Russia, and thus “become a second Biden.”

The president’s problem is that he’s trying to “maneuver” between neocons and MAGA Republicans who don’t want any more wars on US taxpayers’ dime. “Trump wants to somehow demonstrate toughness to put pressure on Russia, but doesn’t want to ‘privatize’ the Ukraine war,” Suslov argues. If he uses the leftover $4B from Biden’s budget for Ukraine, he can continue to make the argument that this is ‘not his war’. But “if he asks Congress for a new budget to support Ukraine, it will mean that Biden’s war has turned into Trump’s war,” Suslov stresses.

“This would be a political disaster, a political defeat for Trump, because he would antagonize his MAGA base even further,” the observer noted. “Trump would effectively become a second Biden, thus committing political suicide.” As for arms deliveries vs. dialog, everything comes down to the “risks of escalation,” according to Suslov. If Trump approves the use of ATACMS missiles for deep strikes into Russia, this would increase the risks of a direct Russia-NATO clash. If his efforts are limited to freezing the rapprochement and new sanctions, the impact wouldn’t be nearly as serious, the analyst argues. Whatever comes next, Russia will “continue its special military operation, and continue to intensify offensive operations and strikes against military and MIC targets in Ukraine, regardless of what the US does or does not do,” Suslov summed up.

Read more …

“Trump’s party could lose up to 40 US House seats and the presidency over the backlash to the Epstein files debacle, the former strategist has said..”

• Bannon Warns of Electoral Catastrophe For Republicans (RT)

Republicans could lose 40 US House seats and the presidency if the backlash over the Jeffrey Epstein case continues to divide the MAGA base, President Donald Trump’s former chief strategist, Steve Bannon, has warned. On the campaign trail, Trump repeatedly promised to declassify files related to the case of late financier and registered sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi said that a list of Epstein’s clients was “sitting on my desk.” Last week, however, the Justice Department released a memo claiming that no client list exists, and that no evidence has been found to justify the investigation of uncharged third parties.

The memo has triggered outrage among Trump supporters, with accusations that the administration has failed to deliver transparency. Bannon warned during a podcast last week that the fallout could erode 10% of MAGA’s support. “If we lose 10% of the MAGA movement right now, we’re going to lose 40 seats in ‘26, we’re going to lose the presidency,” he said. Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has also cautioned that the Epstein issue “is not going away” and will hinder Trump’s efforts on other national challenges. According to CNN, FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino has not reported to work since the memo’s release and is considering resigning.

Epstein, a financier with ties to influential figures, was arrested in 2019 for sex trafficking and died in jail before trial. His death was ruled a suicide, but many have demanded the release of alleged client names rumored to include Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, Bill Gates, and others. Some suspect Trump may also be implicated. Trump has dismissed the controversy, saying, “Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?” and claiming on Truth Social that the Democrats fabricated the client list. “We’re on one Team, MAGA,” he wrote, blaming “selfish people” for fueling internal divisions.

Read more …

“It has only taken the Ruling Establishment six months to cancel the domestic agenda of the Trump administration. The Reagan administration lasted longer before it was neutralized..”

• Interest Groups Are Stronger Than President Trump (Paul Craig Roberts)

We are six months into Donald Trump’s presidency, really his first presidency as his previous four years he was staffed by the ruling establishment with his opponents. Washington taught Trump a lesson, and this time he is staffed with people who share the values he expressed in his campaign. Nevertheless, the Trump administration is now at odds within itself and with a significant percentage of its MAGA supporters, if news reports can be believed. The issue splitting the Trump forces is the Epstein dossier. I wrote yesterday about the Epstein Saga. Clearly there are problems. But the nature of the problem is being misrepresented. Attorney General Bondi did not decide on her own that the Epstein file was empty. She was not protecting Trump.

The decision was imposed on the Trump administration by the American Establishment, the Ruling Elite, the Deep State, the Globalists–whatever you want to call those whose money and economic interests rule the governments in the Western World. The issue our rulers put to President Trump was: Are you prepared to discredit in the eyes of the American People the ruling establishment and the government of the United States? If the people lose confidence in their government, how can you accomplish anything? Netanyahu was there with Trump to back them up. If you release the Epstein Files it will be revealed that he was a Mossad agent blackmailing your leaders. We, Israel, will release the names, and your country will be ruined. But it is not only Bondi having difficulties. It is also Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secretary of Health and Human services, and Trump himself.

Robert Kennedy has found that despite being a cabinet secretary in the US government, he cannot decide based on hard evidence that the Covid “vaccine” is harmful to everyone. All RFK could do was to cease the government’s recommendation of the deadly Covid vax for healthy children and pregnant women. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is powerless to stop the vaccination of the vast majority of the American population with a “vaccine” that kills and destroys the immune system. Big Pharma is more powerful than the US Secretary for Health. Kennedy despite his promise was also unable to ban the deadly glyphosate weed killer that has poisoned food, soil, and water. Kennedy announced that this toxic substance was too important to agri-business to be denied them. Agri-business is more powerful than Secretary Kennedy, and its profits are more important than Americans’ health.

President Trump cannot even impose tariffs or deport immigrant-invaders. Globalism makes countries dependent on imports. Manufacturers are harmed by tariffs, and agri-business is harmed by deportations of illegals. These powerful economic interests are opposed to tariffs and deportations. Trump’s tariffs are used to lower foreign tariffs against the US or to force concessions from foreign governments. But as it turned out the tariffs raise the cost of the remaining American manufacturers and hurt their profits.. They confronted Trump and were granted exemptions from tariffs for their input needs. Essentially, the tariff list was naked. Nothing on it that wasn’t exempted. The same for deportations. According to news reports, there are to be no deportations of restaurant workers, farm workers, and workers in the chicken slaughter houses. The deportations seem mainly to be limited to criminal gangs.

It has only taken the Ruling Establishment six months to cancel the domestic agenda of the Trump administration. The Reagan administration lasted longer before it was neutralized. Trump’s peace agenda has also gone by the wayside. He has bombed Iran for Netanyahu and continues to support Israeli aggression and Israel’s genocide of Palestine. Trump is yet to meet with Putin, instead handing the “peace negotiations” over to Zelensky and Putin. As the war is really between the US and Russia, Zelensky cannot settle it. The military/security complex needs war or the threat of war for its profits and power. Peace does not serve their interests. Americans have a false belief in the power of a president. As long as private money determines politics, money, not the people, rules.

Read more …

“..fighting with a clarity and conviction that only comes from knowing just how far the enemy is willing to go..”

• Trump Was Saved to Save Our Country (Margolis)

One year ago in Butler, Pennsylvania, America came within inches of catastrophe. A bullet meant for Donald Trump whizzed past his head, grazing his ear thanks to a sudden turn of his head, in a near-miss that could have changed history. That bullet didn’t miss by accident. Trump was spared for a reason. The attempt wasn’t just a physical attack—it was a political one. At the time, Joe Biden was collapsing in the polls. Hispanic and black voters were shifting toward Trump. Democrats and their allies in the legacy media were in a frenzy, comparing him to Hitler, accusing him of being a dictator, and trying to put him in prison. The rhetoric was poisonous—and it was only a matter of time before someone acted on it.

But instead of silencing Trump, the assassin did the opposite. He ignited something far more powerful. The shot missed, and in that moment, Donald Trump emerged not just as a survivor—but as a man on a mission. A president with unfinished business and a renewed sense of purpose. That brush with death didn’t shake him—it emboldened him. Everything we’ve seen in Trump’s second term flows from that moment. He came back stronger, more focused, more unapologetically committed to saving the country from the radical left. There’s no more playing nice, no more deference to broken institutions or phony decorum. The Trump we see today is a man who knows exactly how high the stakes are—and he’s governing like it. Whether it’s securing the border, dismantling the administrative state, or taking on the corrupt DOJ, this is a president unchained.

The media refused to acknowledge that this was a politically motivated attempt to erase Trump from the national stage. But the American people saw it for what it was—and they responded. They rallied around him, not out of sympathy, but out of shared conviction. They saw the left for what it had become: a movement willing to destroy anyone who stands in its way. When lawfare failed, violence was the next option. The miracle in Butler lit a fire that hasn’t gone out. It changed the tone of his presidency and the trajectory of the movement behind him. When Americans voted in November, they didn’t just elect a president—they sent a message. That they were done being bullied by a regime that trades in fear. That they chose secure borders over chaos, defending police over defunding them, protecting children instead of butchering them, and truth over the manufactured lies of the press.

Trump’s survival wasn’t the end of a chapter—it was the beginning of something much bigger. A sharpened presidency. A hardened resolve. A movement that refuses to back down. He was saved to finish the job. And one year later, he’s doing exactly that—fighting with a clarity and conviction that only comes from knowing just how far the enemy is willing to go. The bullet missed, but the message hit its mark: Trump is still here, and he’s more dangerous to the left than ever. America was given another chance that day. And with Trump back in charge, this time we’re not wasting it.

Read more …

Russia: “Germany becoming dangerous again..”

• German President Calls For Universal Military Conscription (RT)

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier has urged a nationwide debate about reinstating military conscription, stressing that Berlin needs to strengthen its armed forces amid what he described as escalating security threats in Europe. Compulsory military service was suspended in Germany in 2011. Although inactive, the legal framework for a draft remains intact and can be reactivated by a simple parliamentary majority. A full-scale return, including women, however, would require changes to the constitution. Speaking to ZDF on Sunday, Steinmeier said Germany must prepare for the possibility that voluntary enlistment will fall short of staffing requirements for the army.

“I am an advocate of conscription because I believe that with the changing security situation in Europe, with the fact that a war is taking place, and with the conclusions we have drawn from it to better protect ourselves, the personnel equipment of the Bundeswehr also needs to be adapted,” he said. He expressed support for Defense Minister Boris Pistorius’ proposal to expand troop numbers and create a backup draft system. The plan aims for around 5,000 volunteer recruits annually, rising to 30,000 by 2029. Legislation which is being prepared for cabinet review in August with possible enactment by early 2026 includes provisions to automatically reintroduce conscription if volunteer numbers fall short.

“We need this debate now, preferably with a positive outcome, so that if there are not enough volunteers, we will probably return to a different form of conscription than the one we have already abolished,” Steinmeier said. Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, Germany has been working to strengthen its military, citing what it sees as a security threat from Russia. Moscow has rejected claims that it plans to attack NATO nations, dismissing them as “nonsense” and accusing Western leaders of intentionally alarming their citizens to justify increased defense budgets.

Read more …

“We want the American tech stack to be the global standard … in order for us to do that, we have to be in search of all the AI developers in the world..”

• Nvidia CEO Says China’s Army Won’t Rely On US AI Chips (ZH)

In an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang argued that, just as the internet was designed and built by American technology, so too should artificial intelligence be shaped by it globally. He emphasized the need to reopen markets where Nvidia’s advanced chips are currently banned, such as China. Zakaria asked Huang: “But what if, in doing that, you are also providing the Chinese military and Chinese intelligence with the capacity to supercharge, turbocharge their weapons with the very best American chips?” Huang replied, “We don’t have to worry about that, because the Chinese military, no different than the US military, won’t seek each other’s technology out to build critical systems.”

“It could be limited at any time; not to mention, there’s plenty of computing capacity in China already,” he said, adding, “They don’t need Nvidia’s chips, certainly, or American tech stacks in order to build their military.” Huang’s remarks follow years of bipartisan U.S. policy imposing trade restrictions on Nvidia’s advanced AI chips to China. He argued that these export controls have been counterproductive, accelerating China’s own AI chip ambitions. Huang contended that U.S. tech leadership means ensuring global AI systems are built on the American tech stack, rather than Chinese technology…

“We want the American tech stack to be the global standard … in order for us to do that, we have to be in search of all the AI developers in the world,” Huang said, noting that about half of the world’s AI developers are based in China. Huang’s CNN interview comes just days after he met with President Trump at the White House late last week, and plans a scheduled trip to Beijing to meet with senior Chinese officials and attend the International Supply Chain Expo. Huang has been vocal in recent months about the combined impact of the Biden-Harris regime and the Trump-Vance administration’s export restrictions on advanced AI chips to China. In May, he told investors, “The $50 billion China market is effectively closed to U.S. industry.”

However, the Trump team cancelled a planned rule by former President Joe Biden called the “AI diffusion rule,” promising fewer restrictions later this year on which countries could receive Nvidia’s advanced AI chips. “The world is right now hungry, anxious to engage AI,” Huang previously said, adding, “Let us get the American AI out in front of everybody right now.” Last week, Nvidia became the first company to close a trading day with a market cap over $4 trillion… This was a symbolic milestone for capital markets and the current bull cycle. Huang is walking a very fine line between Washington and Beijing as he seeks to preserve Nvidia’s global market access. The real question is whether China hawks in the White House will ever allow Beijing unrestricted access to Nvidia’s AI chips—something that seems increasingly unlikely.

Read more …

“Within just an hour or two after the flooding, we had resources from Homeland Security on the ground. The Coast Guard was deployed immediately and rescued countless Texans. Border Patrol tactical teams were there. FEMA arrived within hours. Call centers were fully staffed. This was the fastest FEMA deployment in years—maybe decades.”

• Kristi Noem Turns NBC’s Ambush Into a Masterclass in Command (Margolis)

Kristi Noem’s appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” this Sunday was a textbook example of how to dismantle media bias with poise and facts. Faced with a predictably hostile Kristen Welker, Noem didn’t just hold her ground—she flipped the script. In a setting designed to put Trump administration officials on the defensive, Noem calmly exposed the hollowness of NBC’s narrative and reminded viewers what real leadership looks like under pressure. The interview focused on the Trump administration’s rapid response to the devastating Texas floods and recent high-profile immigration enforcement actions. True to form, NBC leaned on anonymous sources to push a tired smear—this time suggesting Noem had personally delayed FEMA aid by requiring her approval for contracts over $100,000. But Noem dismantled that narrative without breaking a sweat.

“Those claims are absolutely false,” she said. “Within just an hour or two after the flooding, we had resources from Homeland Security on the ground. The Coast Guard was deployed immediately and rescued countless Texans. Border Patrol tactical teams were there. FEMA arrived within hours. Call centers were fully staffed. This was the fastest FEMA deployment in years—maybe decades.” That’s the reality: while the left hides behind nameless leaks and secondhand gossip, Americans saw a swift, coordinated federal response. Contrary to the media’s implication that federal agencies run on autopilot, it takes leadership to move that quickly. Noem and her team cut through red tape and got it done.

When Welker pivoted to immigration enforcement—specifically a major bust at a California marijuana grow operation—the media’s playbook was once again on display. She tried to push the false claim that Border Czar Tom Homan was advocating racial profiling during an appearance on CNN, but Noem didn’t take the bait. She laid out the facts: over 300 arrests, 14 unaccompanied minors rescued from likely trafficking or exploitation, and criminals among the detained with records including rape, child pornography, and murder. These weren’t random detentions—they were targeted law enforcement actions aimed at dismantling illegal grow operations that often serve as fronts for organized crime.

Of course, the legacy media doesn’t want to talk about that. They’d rather peddle innuendo than acknowledge that the Trump administration is actually enforcing the law—and doing it effectively.This is what voters signed up for: strong, competent leadership that doesn’t cave to media pressure or waste time chasing elite approval. Noem didn’t just survive the interview—she turned it into a moment of clarity for anyone still wondering whether the Trump administration is serious about restoring law and order. While NBC and its allies keep spinning excuses for the failures of the Biden years, Americans are seeing a stark contrast in real time. The chaos at the border, the paralyzed disaster responses, and the endless bureaucratic dithering that defined the last administration are over. Under Trump, we’re witnessing what happens when leaders actually take the job seriously.

Read more …

Someone suggested Bondi could be the special prosecutor, making way for Matt Gaetz to be AG, as Trump originally intended.

• FBI Opens ‘Grand Conspiracy’ Probe On Weaponization (JTN)

The FBI has quietly launched an investigation into a decade of Democratic party and deep-state antics from Russia collusion to Jack Smith, opening the door for the appointment of a special prosecutor to examine whether the well-documented episodes amount to a criminal conspiracy to meddle in three U.S. elections to the benefit of Democrats and the detriment of President Donald Trump, Just the News has learned. The “grand conspiracy” case was opened several weeks ago after new FBI Director Kash Patel took over, and it could get a significant boost if Trump were to declassify two secret tranches of evidence that identify a potential ignition point to the alleged conspiracy in the summer of 2016, according to several people directly familiar with the inquiry, who spoke to Just the News on a condition of anonymity.

The first piece of evidence is a classified annex to a years-old inspector general probe of Hillary Clinton’s improper email server sought by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley. That annex is believed to show that credible information about possible wrongdoing was intentionally ignored by the FBI. The second tranche of evidence was identified by former Russiagate Special Counsel John Durham in his final report. The evidence was dubbed in the report as the “Clinton plan intelligence,” and it was also placed in a classified annex kept from the American public and even many members of Congress. Excerpts from the publicly-available and unclassified Durham report show that U.S. spy agencies were aware that Clinton’s 2016 campaign was concocting a bogus Russia collusion narrative to harm Trump’s election chances before the FBI opened its now-discredited Crossfire Hurricane probe, in part using evidence created by the Clinton campaign or offered by Clinton associates.

[,,] CIA Director John Ratcliffe earlier this month released a scathing review of the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment of Russian influence in the 2016 election, criticizing then-CIA Director John Brennan for joining the FBI in pushing to include disgraced British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s baseless anti-Trump dossier. In particular, Ratcliffe concluded that then-CIA Director John Brennan “showed a preference for narrative consistency over analytical soundness.” Ratcliffe later posted on social media about his report, calling the smear campaign against Trump an “atypical & corrupt process under the politically charged environments of former Dir. Brennan & former FBI Dir. Comey.”

If Trump declassifies the Grassley and Durham documents, prosecutors could submit them to a grand jury in an effort to try to show a distinct pattern of the FBI and spy agencies willfully ignoring intelligence or evidence damaging to Democrats while relentlessly pursuing Trump with evidence that was often flawed. Trump administration officials have weighed naming a special prosecutor to probe the recent bombshell revelations reported by Just the News that the FBI received human source intelligence – and some corroborating evidence – that China was engaged in a scheme to create fake mail-in ballots in 2020 to help Joe Biden win. The FBI failed to investigate the matter, and even recalled the intelligence and asked fellow spy agencies to destroy it. But the five-year statute of limitations on that inquiry is only weeks away from expiring since the evidence arrived in August 2020, leaving the potential for criminal charges or other accountability on an almost impossibly tight timetable.

The overarching conspiracy case opened by Patel’s FBI offers a more expansive approach that would allow a special prosecutor time to tie alleged criminal events currently covered by statutes of limitations to older events by treating them as part of an ongoing conspiracy or even a racketeering operation. The “grand conspiracy” probe also would open the door to empanel a grand jury outside of Washington D.C. where juries have been reluctant to convict actors who pursued Trump. If voting patterns are any indicator, the Capitol City is the most hostile venue to Trump. The district has never supported a GOP presidential candidate. CNN reported that only one Republican presidential candidate has ever won more than 20% of DC’s vote — Richard Nixon in 1972, with 21.56%, and in the last election, a whopping 92.1% of the vote went against Trump.

Read more …

“She tried to ride the tiger but was thrown off.”

• X Marks The Spat (Zilber)

Linda Yaccarino’s resignation from X as chief executive marked the end of a high-pressure — and at times emotional — two-year stint that insiders described as riddled with stress, conflict and power struggles, according to a report. At times, Yaccarino was reportedly tearful in the office, worn down by the overwhelming demands of working under Elon Musk and the increasing pressure surrounding her role, the Financial Times reported over the weekend. Yaccarino had claimed in an interview just three weeks before stepping down that “I’m the CEO of X and my boss remains the same.” But last Wednesday she announced her departure, citing X’s merger with Musk’s AI venture xAI as a turning point and calling it a “new chapter” for the company.

Their contrasting styles — Yaccarino’s polished advertising world background versus Musk’s unfiltered, hands-on leadership — clashed repeatedly. “Elon calls all the shots,” an advertising executive who knows both Yaccarino and Musk told FT. “She tried to ride the tiger but was thrown off.” A breaking point reportedly came early last year, when Yaccarino helped secure a content deal with former CNN anchor Don Lemon. The arrangement backfired after Lemon conducted a contentious interview with Musk, asking if he used drugs. Musk canceled the deal, and Lemon is now suing for breach of contract. The internal tension and lack of authority reportedly took an emotional toll. Multiple people who worked with Yaccarino said she was “at times being tearful in the office.”

One former colleague told FT: “She lasted two years in a job that would have crushed most people in two weeks.” Though she managed to lure back some major advertisers like Apple, Google and Verizon, many in the industry questioned the sustainability and strategy behind the return.“To her credit, she did get advertisers back to X,” one longtime executive told FT. “She did it with a gun, but they came back.” Another added, “They did not return voluntarily or happily.” Others criticized the platform’s underperformance. “Many clients don’t advertise on X, not because of the content, but because it does not perform very well,” one executive told FT. Sensor Tower reported some renewed ad strength, and Emarketer projected a revenue increase to $2.3 billion in 2025 — still far below the $4.1 billion in global sales before Musk’s takeover.

[..] Yaccarino’s priorities sometimes diverged from Musk’s, particularly around child safety — a concern she reportedly believed Musk was not focused on enough, according to FT. She ultimately informed a small circle ahead of time about her resignation, which happened to coincide with xAI’s chatbot Grok publishing antisemitic content, FT reported. X staff said the two events were unrelated. Yaccarino’s challenges began as soon as she took the job in 2023, leaving NBCUniversal to help repair the damage Musk’s $44 billion takeover of the platform had inflicted on advertiser relations. Brands had fled the platform, citing Musk’s volatile behavior and tolerance of toxic content. She was known as the “Velvet Hammer” in the industry, with a reputation for toughness and a powerful Rolodex of brand contacts.

She scored some victories, securing deals with creators and sports leagues, upgrading X’s video features and laying the groundwork for a digital wallet called X Money. She also aggressively pursued advertisers — at one point suing their trade group and companies like Shell and Pinterest, accusing them of an “illegal boycott.” But despite her efforts, she never gained full control of the company. Musk retained ultimate authority, even in areas core to her role like advertising, the FT reported. He began making unilateral decisions — banning hashtags in ads, charging brands based on vertical ad size — and hired product chief Nikita Bier without her input, according to FT. Musk’s growing relationship with President Donald Trump created further complications. His focus on politics temporarily drew attention away from X, offering Yaccarino some breathing room.

“What saved her was the election and Elon diving deep into the administration,” one person who worked with both told FT. But once Musk returned to business and pushed the $45 billion acquisition of X by xAI, her position became increasingly tenuous, it was reported. Financial control was another battleground. Musk brought in Mahmoud Reza Banki as CFO, who reported directly to Musk and bypassed Yaccarino. Their relationship grew strained, especially when Banki redirected funds away from creator and ad-tech investments — areas Yaccarino viewed as crucial, according to FT. Publicly, Yaccarino remained loyal to Musk, but insiders suggested her style never resonated with him. Her deep ties to Trump, however, remain intact, according to the FT.

She is reportedly close to Ivanka Trump, HUD Secretary Scott Turner and Director of Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. One confidante said she still supports Trump despite his falling-out with Musk. Her next move remains unclear. Some speculate she may join the Trump administration or assume a public-facing role around free speech.

Read more …

“Zients wrote in an email at 10:31 p.m.: “I approve the use of the autopen for the execution of all of the following pardons.”

• Biden Defends Controversial Autopen Use For Mass Clemency Decisions (NYP)

Former President Joe Biden has acknowledged in a stunning new interview that he didn’t agree to the name of every person who received one of the 46th president’s sweeping pardons — with emails indicating that then-White House chief of staff Jeff Zients approved the use of the notorious White House autopen. The 46th president insisted in a phone interview with the New York Times last week that “I made every decision” about clemencies issued during his term before admitting that he had his staff replicate his signature because “we’re talking about a lot of people.” Biden’s team used an autopen on 25 warrants for pardons and commutations in December and January of last year, but two of those warrants granted clemency to thousands of people.

On Dec. 12, Biden commuted roughly 1,500 sentences and outright pardoned 39 more. Three days before he left office, the then-president commuted the sentence of nearly 2,500 federal inmates convicted of crack cocaine offenses. According to the Times, Biden approved what standards would be used to determine which convicts would qualify for a pardon or commutation, while his underlings sorted out the specifics. In cases where changes were made to the list of inmates, staffers waited until a final version of the clemency roster was produced, then ran it through the autopen rather than ask Biden to keep signing successive versions. President Trump has cast doubt on the legitimacy of the documents Biden signed via autopen—— which has been used since at least the Trump administration to reproduce the president’s signature.

“I understand why Trump would think that,” the former president told the Times,” because obviously, I guess, he doesn’t focus much. Anyway, so — yes, I made every decision.” Emails from a meeting held on the final night of Biden’s presidency, Jan. 19, indicate that the then-president decided to issue pre-emptive pardons to members of his family — including controversial first brother James Biden — with mere hours to go in his term. After messages summarizing the meeting circulated among top Biden advisers, Zients wrote in an email at 10:31 p.m.: “I approve the use of the autopen for the execution of all of the following pardons.” The autopen was managed by former staff secretary Stefanie Feldman, who put documents through the device. Feldman would receive “blurbs” or written accounts confirming that Biden supposedly gave the order to use the autopen, per the outlet.

But most of the time, the assistants who drafted those “blurbs” weren’t actually in the room to hear Biden give the orders, according to the New York Times. Still, Biden was adamant that he approved every high-profile pardon with aides, specifically noting Gen. Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “We know how vindictive Trump is, and I’ve no doubt they would have gone after Mark for no good reason,” Biden said. “The general, you know. So they may read off his name — what’d I want? I told them I wanted to make sure he had a pardon because I knew exactly what Trump would do — without any merit, I might add.” Biden, too, accused Republicans of lying about speculation that his subordinates abused the technology to try and hide his mental states.

“They’re liars. They know it. They know, for certain. I mean, this is — look, what they, they’ve had a pretty good thing going here. They’ve done so badly. They’ve lied so consistently about almost everything they’re doing,” he griped. “The best thing they can do is try to change the focus and focus on something else. And this is a — I think that’s what this is about.” Trump, for his part, recently claimed that Biden’s aides had committed “crimes” by using the autopen to “do anything they wanted.” “That’s a crime to do that to the country,” Trump said on The Post’s “Pod Force One” podcast hosted by Miranda Devine. “Well, number one, I really believe it was a crime because I don’t think he knew he was doing it. I think that people took over the autopen. They got things signed that shouldn’t have been signed.”

“It was people that surrounded that desk that operated the autopen. They surrounded the beautiful Resolute Desk,” Trump continued. “They are criminals, and what they did to our country should never be forgotten. And hopefully, as criminals, they’ll pay a price for what they do.” The Justice Department launched an investigation into the autopen controversy last month to probe whether any White House aides “abused the power of Presidential signatures.” The White House has also confirmed that Ed Martin, the head of an anti-weaponization working group, is probing whether Biden “was competent and whether others were taking advantage of him through use of AutoPen or other means.”

Meanwhile, House Republicans — led by Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) — have started a separate inquiry into allegations of a White House cover-up involving aides who hid the president’s diminishing mental acuity from the public. Trump’s White House only allows two top aides — staff secretary Will Scharf and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles — to use the autopen “for all matters,” according to an internal memo previously reported by The Post.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1944605889962332374

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Toxic

IVM

Dragonfly

Cats

Emanuel

Rube

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries