Raúl Ilargi Meijer

Apr 252025
 


Salvador Dali Archeological Reminiscence of Millet’s Angelus 1933

 

Trump: Russia’s Concession To Ukraine Is Not Taking The Whole Country (ZH)
Trump Slams Zelensky Again (Margolis)
Peace Will Come When Ukraine Withdraws From 4 Annexed Territories – Peskov (ZH)
Russia Launches ‘Massive’ Missile Strike On Kiev, Leaving 9 Dead (ZH)
Ukraine Preparing To Lose US Support – Bild (RT)
Rubio and Witkoff Slam Politico Over ‘Fake Crap’ And ‘Fiction’ (RT)
European Leaders Rejected US Proposal On Crimea – FT (RT)
Russia Watches Western Europe Closely. It Has Reasons To Worry (Bordachev)
Strategy Does Not Rhyme With Hypocrisy (Pacini)
Russia Can Break Any Naval Blockade (Leiroz)
Rubio and Trump’s Unfinished Business with ‘Bloated’ State Department (Devlin)
‘Coalition of The Willing’ Resolve Eroding – The Times (RT)
Leading Liberals Call Upon Europeans to Resist the United States (Turley)
China Dismisses Reports Of US Trade Progress As “Fake News” (ZH)
The Method Behind the Madness of Trump’s “Tariff Wars” (Victor Davis Hanson)
About the Judge Blocking Trump’s Election Integrity Order (Fred Lucas)
UK To Greenlight Experiments To “Dim The Sun” In Bid To Stop Global Warming (ZH)
EPA Head Demands Answers From Company Putting Sulfur Dioxide Into The Air (JTN)
‘Rewrite The Rules’ – Trump Store Teases Potential 2028 Reelection Bid (JTN)

 

 

 

 

Bessent

Tucker Massie
https://twitter.com/BryceMLipscomb/status/1915089434405491163

Hegseth

Racist

 

 

 

 

He’s completely right, but the story has been so distorted over the past three years that few people in the West will recognize that. Ukrainians claim that their army saved the country. But three years ago, in the initial invasion, Russia had Kiev largely surrounded. They retreated because they were tricked by Merkel et al into a “peace deal”.

Point of contention: “..the US will push Russia to acknowledge Ukraine’s right to maintain its military..” Seems doubtful. Russia already beat that military.

Trump: Russia’s Concession To Ukraine Is Not Taking The Whole Country (ZH)

Reporters in the White House press pool challenged President Trump over some of his latest remarks regarding Ukraine and the possibility of peace. While in the Oval Office sitting across from Norway’s prime minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Trump was asked what concessions Russia has “offered up thus far to get to the point where you’re closer to peace.” He quipped somewhat sarcastically, “Stopping the war, stopping from taking the whole country” — which he called a “pretty big concession.” Zelensky has made clear over the last few days that he’s not on board with Trump’s strategy, which has featured offering recognition of Russian ownership of Crimea as a key concession. These latest words from the US President yet again illustrate that he believes Ukraine has no chance of winning the war, and that he’s being a pragmatist and realist in seeking substantial concessions by Kiev.

When asked about whether the US might (again) cut weapons to Kiev and intelligence-sharing, Trump responded, “Let’s see what happens; I think we’re going to make a deal; ask that question in two weeks.” But Trump apparently plans to keep up the pressure on Moscow. A Thursday Bloomberg report says the US will push Russia to acknowledge Ukraine’s right to maintain its military and defense sector as part of any future peace deal. Steve Witkoff is expected to present the demand to Putin in the next upcoming round of negotiations. Among Putin’s key objectives in the war remains the ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine.

Read more …

Crimea is -again- Russian, since 2014. But Zelensky says there isn’t even anything to talk about. Of course Putin gets tired of that. It’s not a serious conversation.

Trump Slams Zelensky Again (Margolis)

President Donald Trump sharply criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Wednesday after Zelensky rejected a U.S.-backed proposal that would have acknowledged Russian control over Crimea as part of a potential peace agreement. Amid ongoing efforts to broker a peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia, Zelensky reaffirmed that Ukraine would not recognize Russia’s control over Crimea. It’s a firm stance, to be sure, but hardly unexpected given the circumstances. “Ukraine will not legally recognize the occupation of Crimea,” Zelensky said in a press conference. “There’s nothing to talk about here. This is against our constitution.”

Trump, however, saw things differently, and in a post on Truth Social called his statement “very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia in that Crimea was lost years ago under the auspices of President Barack Hussein Obama, and is not even a point of discussion.” Trump continued, “Nobody is asking Zelenskyy to recognize Crimea as Russian Territory but, if he wants Crimea, why didn’t they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired?”

“The area also houses, for many years before “the Obama handover,” major Russian submarine bases. It’s inflammatory statements like Zelenskyy’s that makes it so difficult to settle this War. He has nothing to boast about! The situation for Ukraine is dire — He can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country. I have nothing to do with Russia, but have much to do with wanting to save, on average, five thousand Russian and Ukrainian soldiers a week, who are dying for no reason whatsoever. The statement made by Zelenskyy today will do nothing but prolong the “killing field,” and nobody wants that! We are very close to a Deal, but the man with “no cards to play” should now, finally, GET IT DONE. I look forward to being able to help Ukraine, and Russia, get out of this Complete and Total MESS, that would have never started if I were President!”

The President’s remarks underscore the delicate balance required in international diplomacy. While Zelensky may be acting in what he believes is his nation’s best interest, Trump views his stance as a significant impediment to achieving a swift resolution. The Wall Street Journal has more: “Zelensky’s dismissal upends Trump’s latest gambit to halt the war in Ukraine—now in its fourth year—and casts new uncertainty on the future of the relationship between Kyiv and Washington, which Trump has made conditional on a quick deal. American officials had presented a series of ideas for ending the war, including the Crimea proposal, to Ukrainian officials last week and expected an answer on Wednesday at a summit in London, where Ukrainian, U.S. and European officials will gather. Zelensky said Russia should agree to a cease-fire before further talks to demonstrate “serious steps, and not childishness.” He said that Ukrainian officials meeting with U.S. and European officials in London would have a mandate to discuss a partial or full cease-fire, which Ukraine agreed to last month but Moscow rejected.”

A recent poll shows that while more Ukrainians are open to territorial concessions to end the war, rising from 8% in 2022 to 39% now, half the country still firmly opposes giving up any land. Even among those open to compromise, the idea of formally ceding Crimea remains politically untouchable in Ukraine. Officials have denounced the idea as a breach of international law and a dangerous precedent. Crimean Tatar lawmaker Tamila Tasheva warned that such a move would legitimize aggression and encourage future conflicts. Meanwhile, skepticism persists over whether Vladimir Putin is genuinely interested in peace, despite reports of productive talks with intermediaries like special envoy Steve Witkoff.

Read more …

Plus: No Nukes, No NATO, No Nazis. Nothing changed.

Peace Will Come When Ukraine Withdraws From 4 Annexed Territories – Peskov (ZH)

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has filled in a little bit more of the details in the wake of a Financial Times report issued Tuesday which said President Putin is offering to freeze the current battle lines for the sake of a peace deal. The significant concession came as a surprise to many, who asked what’s the catch. Peskov in Wednesday comments filled in the missing information, stressing that peace can be achieved if Ukrainian forces fully withdraw from territory in the four oblasts Moscow annexed in 2022. Financial Times wrote that “The proposal is the first formal indication Putin has given since the war’s early months three years ago that Russia could step back from its maximalist demands to end the invasion.”

Peskov in the fresh statement emphasized that Russia’s claim to the territories of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia remain enshrined in its constitution. He was asked directly whether a Ukrainian withdrawal would end the war, to which he responded, “If Ukraine withdraws its troops from these four regions, then yes.” “According to the results of the referendums, these territories have entered the administrative borders of Russia. From our point of view, this is a de jure and de facto situation,” Peskov said. But so far Zelensky hasn’t even been willing to cede Crimea, despite the Russian-speaking population of the strategic peninsula long being firmly in Russian hands, also with its naval Black Sea fleet being stationed there since Soviet Times and throughout recent history.

President Trump said Wednesday that Ukraine “lost” Crimea years ago, and so it is “not even a point of discussion”. But Washington’s demands that Ukraine finally compromise on the issue has been rejected by Zelensky. Peskov commented on this too, expressing total agreement with Trump. “This completely corresponds with our understanding, which we have been saying for a long time,” he said. If the Ukrainian government did finally accede to Russia’s demands, it would lose 20% of its total territory, given this is about how much Russian forces currently occupy. The US is also said to currently be offering Ukrainian neutrality vis-a-vis NATO, alongside international recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. But talks have still not gotten off the ground, and the Trump admin is ramping up the pressure on Zelensky especially.

Read more …

Deaths updated to 12. If there really was such a massive strike, “center of Kiev, large-scale death”, there would be 12,000 deaths, not 12. Russia aims at infrastructure, not people.

Russia Launches ‘Massive’ Missile Strike On Kiev, Leaving 9 Dead (ZH)

Amid stalled US-led peace talks, Russia launched a massive overnight attack on Ukraine, including raining down ballistic missiles on the center of Kiev, unleashing large-scale death and destruction. At least nine people have been reported killed and over 70 injured in the capital city, in what was one of the largest and deadliest missile strikes on Ukraine in months. Some other cities, including Kharkiv, were also hit. Anti-aircraft systems began engaging inbound missiles and drones at about 1am local time. But after drones and missiles were able to make it through, several buildings – including a factory – and a house, as well as cars, were set on fire. BBC writes, “An apartment block was completely flattened during the attack and the windows of surrounding buildings were blown out and balconies ripped down.” “Russia has launched a massive combined strike on Kyiv,” Ukraine’s state emergency service announced on Telegram. “According to preliminary data, nine people were killed, 63 injured.”

President Trump early Thursday condemned the attack, saying he’s “not happy” with the Russian move. “Vladimir, STOP!” he wrote on Truth Social. “5000 soldiers a week are dying. Let’s get the Peace Deal DONE!” A large rescue effort has been underway given a missile head a densely populated area, with Ukraine’s interior minister, Ihor Klymenko, saying of Svyatoshinsky district of Kiev, “Mobile phones can be heard ringing under the ruins. The search will continue until everybody is got out. We have information about two children who cannot be found at the scene of the incident.” Ukrainian officials have cited that some 70 missiles and up to 150 drones were used against several cities in the devastating overnight attack. This new Thursday attack on the capital was the deadliest since last year’s July 8 attack on Kiev, which left 34 people dead and 121 injured.

It comes after the Zelensky government has expressed frustration that the White House should be more concerned and standing by Ukraine’s side, instead of holding bilateral talks toward diplomatic normalization with Russia. The latest Trump and Zelensky back-and-forth has focused on Crimea. Trump on Wednesday slammed the Ukrainian leader for rejecting a US proposal that would see Kiev give up all claims on Crimea. Trump pointed out that Crimea “was lost years ago” and that Zelensky has “no cards to play”. Zelensky then cited the 2018 “Crimea declaration” by Trump’s then secretary of state Mike Pompeo, which laid out that the United States “rejects Russia’s attempted annexation”. “There is nothing to talk about. This violates our Constitution. This is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine,” Zelensky had initially told reporters of the question of giving up Crimea permanently.

But Vice President JD Vance had also articulated while traveling in India, “We’ve issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and it’s time for them to either say yes or for the United States to walk away from this process.” He emphasized “The only way to really stop the killing is for the armies to both put down their weapons, to freeze this thing and to get on with the business of actually building a better Russia and a better Ukraine.” Freezing the war now would certainly give Russian forces a huge advantage, given the immense territory in the East they now hold, and this is in large part why Zelensky is refusing such a deal.

Read more …

“..Kiev is now trying to renegotiate with Washington while simultaneously seeking support from its European sponsors..”

Ukraine Preparing To Lose US Support – Bild (RT)

The leadership in Kiev is bracing for a “worst-case scenario” in which US President Donald Trump cuts off all American support, the German tabloid Bild has reported, citing anonymous sources within the Ukrainian government. Trump has reportedly increased the pressure on Ukraine to quickly accept Washington’s “final offer” to resolve the conflict. He has also warned that if negotiations between Moscow and Kiev stall, the US may “take a pass” and withdraw from its role as a mediator. “What is on paper and what is being signaled to us in the negotiations is unacceptable,” Bild wrote on Thursday, quoting a Ukrainian diplomat. “We are preparing for the worst-case scenario… and that means an end to US support,” another unnamed government insider told the paper.

The US president has been pushing for a resolution to the conflict, while also seeking a minerals extraction agreement with Ukraine to help offset the billions of dollars Washington has spent on military and financial aid. Trump temporarily halted military supplies and intelligence sharing with Kiev following a public dispute with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky at the White House in February. On Wednesday, Trump reiterated that Zelensky – who he once described as a “dictator without elections” – has been “more difficult to deal with” than Russian President Vladimir Putin. The remark came after Zelensky publicly rejected a reported provision of the US peace framework, insisting earlier this week that Kiev will not even discuss formally recognizing Crimea as Russian territory.

According to Bild, some officials in Kiev hope that Trump’s personal jabs at Zelensky were merely his way to apply pressure. “Our hope was that it was Trump’s negotiating tactic,” the outlet cited a Ukrainian government insider as saying. The report added that Kiev is now trying to renegotiate with Washington while simultaneously seeking support from its European sponsors. Kiev is still receiving weapons pledged by the previous US administration, but no new aid packages have been authorized since Trump took office, Zelensky said on Monday. His recent pleas for additional Patriot batteries and missiles have also gone unanswered.

Moscow has maintained that it is open to peace talks, provided its core security demands are addressed. It opposes any NATO presence on Ukrainian soil and has demanded that Kiev recognize Russia’s new borders and abandon its plans to join the US-led military bloc. Moscow has condemned the continued flow of Western weapons as detrimental to any lasting peace. The Russian government has also said it will not accept a temporary freeze of the conflict, which would only lead to renewed hostilities later on, citing Ukraine’s multiple violations of an Easter ceasefire and an earlier US-mediated moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure as proof of Kiev’s untrustworthiness.

Read more …

“Politico said Witkoff was the “main proponent” of the plan, allegedly due to a developing “friendship” with Russian President Vladimir Putin in his role as Trump’s envoy..”

Rubio and Witkoff Slam Politico Over ‘Fake Crap’ And ‘Fiction’ (RT)

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, have accused Politico of publishing “fiction” and “fake crap,” over a report by the media outlet on a potential Ukraine peace deal. In an article on Wednesday, Politico claimed that Washington is considering lifting sanctions on Russia’s Nord Stream pipeline and “other Russian assets in Europe” as part of its peace efforts. Citing “five people familiar with the discussions,” Politico said Witkoff was the “main proponent” of the plan, allegedly due to a developing “friendship” with Russian President Vladimir Putin in his role as Trump’s envoy. The piece also claimed Rubio opposed the idea and quoted analysts warning it could hurt US LNG exports by reopening the EU market to Russian gas. Rubio was quick to respond, writing on X that the “piece of fiction” was “unequivocally false.” Witkoff responded with sharper language, calling the article “fake crap.”

Rubio and Witkoff are among the key figures in US-Russia discussions aimed at ending the Ukraine conflict. While the US-proposed peace framework has not been made public, reports suggest it could involve recognizing Crimea as Russian territory. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky recently dismissed any such proposals as “unconstitutional,” prompting Trump to accuse him of jeopardizing the peace process with “inflammatory statements” and warning that he could “lose the whole country” if he does not compromise.

US Vice President J.D. Vance echoed the sentiment, warning on Wednesday that Washington might “walk away” from talks unless Kiev and Moscow reach a deal soon, and stating that “both will have to give up some of the territory they currently own.” Russia has repeatedly said that the status of Crimea and the four other former Ukrainian regions that joined Russia after referendums is not up for negotiation. Moscow insists recognition of the “reality on the ground” is vital for lasting peace. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov cautioned this week against relying on media reports regarding US-Russia talks, warning that “a lot of fakes are being published now, including by respected publications.” He advised the public to trust official sources instead.

Read more …

If a tree falls in a forest…

European Leaders Rejected US Proposal On Crimea – FT (RT)

European leaders have rejected a US proposal to recognize Russia’s sovereignty over Crimea as part of a draft peace deal on the Ukraine conflict, the Financial Times reported on Thursday. European officials told the outlet that such a move could cause a rift within NATO and force Kiev’s backers to choose between sticking with Ukraine or siding with Washington. According to the report, US President Donald Trump’s team has presented Ukraine with a take-it-or-leave-it deal that includes Washington formally recognizing Crimea as Russian territory. US Vice President J.D. Vance has also suggested freezing the conflict along the current lines of control. A senior European diplomat told the FT that it would be “impossible” to accept the US proposal, while one EU official claimed that “Crimea and future NATO membership aspirations are red lines for us.”

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has also refused to even consider conceding Crimea, stating that the country’s constitution prohibits such a move. Trump has criticized Zelensky’s stance, calling it “very harmful” to peace negotiations and stating that “Crimea was lost years ago.” “He can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country,” the US president wrote on social media this week. Officials cited by the FT said that if Trump unilaterally recognizes Crimea or lifts sanctions on Russia, it could trigger a severe split within NATO as well as the EU.

The Trump administration recently warned that the US could end its involvement in Ukraine peace talks if there is no progress soon, but also noted he has found it easier to negotiate with Russia than with Zelensky. Moscow has expressed appreciation for the Trump administration’s efforts to negotiate a settlement of the conflict, and has indicated that it will maintain contact with Washington on the issue. At the same time, Russian officials have said that Kiev and its European backers don’t appear to want the conflict to end and are consistently undermining peace efforts.

Read more …

“The EU’s turn toward Russophobia is not strategic—it is compensatory. Western Europe’s global credibility continues to erode. The reason is simple: a lack of empathy and introspection. The continent views the world through a mirror, seeing only itself.”

Russia Watches Western Europe Closely. It Has Reasons To Worry (Bordachev)

Western Europe is once again returning to a familiar role: a primary source of global instability. For Russia, this presents a critical question—should we simply turn our backs on the West and focus entirely on our eastern partners? Judging by the current trend in Russian foreign trade of Asian countries steadily taking a larger share, this conclusion may appear reasonable. Yet such a strategy, while tempting, is short-sighted. From antiquity to the present, Europe has often served as a destabilizing force. From the Greek island raiders who disrupted the Nile Valley civilizations, to modern Western European meddling in Africa and aggression in Ukraine, the continent has rarely chosen diplomacy over division. The dismantling of colonial empires and Western Europe’s post-war subordination to the United States softened this tendency. But today, old habits are re-emerging.

European political rhetoric may sound hollow, even absurd, given the continent’s dwindling economic and demographic weight. However, that does not make it less dangerous. Europe is no longer the heart of global politics, yet paradoxically remains its most likely flashpoint. Here, the possibility of a direct military clash between great powers remains disturbingly real. For Russia, Western Europe is a historical adversary, one that has long sought to dictate terms or impose its will. From Napoleon to Hitler, and now to Brussels’ bureaucrats, attempts to subdue or marginalize Russia have been met with fierce resistance. This enduring conflict defines much of our shared history. Today, facing its own developmental dead ends, Western Europe once again turns outward in search of a scapegoat. This time, the preferred solution is militarization, supposedly to counter a “Russian threat.”

The irony is obvious. The EU’s grand vision of integration is in disarray. Its socio-economic models are faltering. Britain, now outside the bloc, is no better off. Aging populations, failing welfare systems, and uncontrolled migration are stoking nationalist sentiments and pushing elites toward more radical postures. Finland, once neutral and pragmatic, now also leans into anti-Russian rhetoric to mask its growing internal malaise. Meanwhile, the institutions that once underpinned European unity are crumbling. The EU’s central structures in Brussels are widely viewed with disdain. National governments resist ceding further power, and the criteria for leadership within the bloc seem to have become cynicism and incompetence. For over a decade, the top posts have gone not to visionary leaders, but to pliable figures chosen for their loyalty and lack of ambition.

Gone are the days of Jacques Delors or even Romano Prodi, who at least understood the value of dialogue with Russia. In their place, we have figures like Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, whose inability to achieve anything meaningful within the bloc leads them to seek relevance by provoking confrontation with Moscow. The EU’s turn toward Russophobia is not strategic—it is compensatory. Western Europe’s global credibility continues to erode. The reason is simple: a lack of empathy and introspection. The continent views the world through a mirror, seeing only itself. This solipsism, coupled with economic stagnation, makes it harder for its leaders to convert its shrinking economic advantages into geopolitical influence. Africa offers a telling case. France’s influence, once substantial in its former colonies, is rapidly vanishing. Local governments, tired of paternalistic lectures and ineffective policies, are turning instead to Russia, the United States, or even China to build new partnerships.

Even Western Europe’s relationship with the United States is entering a phase of uncertainty. As internal divisions grow in America, European elites accustomed to strategic dependence now find themselves increasingly anxious. They are unsure whether Washington will continue to shield them, or whether they will be left to face the consequences of their own miscalculations. This insecurity partly explains the EU’s heightened hostility toward Russia: it is a desperate bid for attention and relevance. Representatives of the new US administration have already hinted at the lack of real strategic contradictions with Russia. Such statements provoke panic in Brussels. Western European elites fear a US-Russia thaw that could leave them sidelined. They know Washington will not grant them independence in foreign policy, but they also fear that its patronage will no longer come with privileges.

Read more …

“Not even at Easter was it possible to have a little respite, because, ultimately, no one in the West really wants peace.”

Strategy Does Not Rhyme With Hypocrisy (Pacini)

The President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, had called for an “Easter truce” on the occasion of the liturgical solemnity, celebrated this year throughout the Christian world. This was a sign of strong attention to the human dimension of war, too often forgotten in favor of journalistic narratives and the utility of politicians who profit from the blood of young people dying at the front, but also further proof of Russia’s willingness to find sensible and rational solutions to the conflict. Solutions that, once again, have been manipulated and exploited by the enemy. There is no peace even at Easter. In fact, Ukraine took advantage of the truce to turn the media narrative in its favor. The attack was twofold:

– In the media, Ukraine first accused Moscow of spreading falsehoods and, once the truce actually began (only on the Russian side), repeatedly accused Russia of continuing its attacks, repeatedly violating the truce. – The affair served to cover up and make people forget as much as possible about the events in Sumy, or Bucha 2025. – Strategically, Ukrainian soldiers tried to resupply some frontline positions and break through at some sensitive points, failing to do so but effectively firing on the enemy even though they knew it was a pause in the conflict. In Jus in bello, the law of war, a truce is a temporary suspension of hostilities agreed upon by the parties. When declared unilaterally by one party, it is not usually considered legally binding, but may nevertheless have practical and legal implications.

The Hague Convention of 1907, in Article 36, defines a truce as “the suspension of hostilities between the belligerents for a period fixed by them, either directly or through mediators.” Therefore, when only one party calls for a truce, there is no international legal obligation, but there is nevertheless a strong moral and political value, which generally demonstrates a clear willingness to respect and protect the needs and safety of civilians, as well as to attempt negotiation. There is always an open military risk. It is precisely the political nature of the affair that is strategically interesting. Kiev deliberately sabotaged the Easter truce because it is interested in continuing the military conflict. The Russian Ministry of Defense reported more than 50 attacks within the border areas with civilian casualties, including a 2-year-old girl in the Belgorod region. In addition to the bombing of Russian army positions, civilian areas in Kherson, Zaporizhzhya, Donetsk, and Lugansk were also attacked. On the global political scene, the unelected permanent president Zelensky has shown great hypocrisy, trying to manipulate Putin’s goodwill, but without success. The result is a demonstration of war mongering and a lack of humanity.

After the expiry of the “Easter truce,” Russian troops attacked the industrial zone of the “Storm” research institute in Odessa. The Russian Ministry of Defense also reported the detonation of an ammunition depot in the Kirzhach area due to a violation of safety regulations. Towards Sumy, Russian troops continued their offensive and liberated the Gornalsky monastery, also advancing into the fields towards Oleshnya. Towards Dzerzhinsky, Russian troops moved to fight on the outskirts of Dachnoye, partially surrounding Ukrainian Armed Forces units in the village. Fighters from the Russian Armed Forces’ 68th Tank Regiment are advancing north of Valentinovka and driving the enemy out of most of Sukha Balka. In terms of international politics, however, it is interesting to draw attention to what was announced by Donald Trump, who had planned to stop the war by Easter, or to obtain a truce of at least 30 days. None of this worked. The U.S. has once again confirmed that it is far from having any real capacity to intervene and influence the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.

[..] On the EU/NATO side, Kaja Kallas chastised the U.S. for not using effective tools to put pressure on Russia, stating that “They have tools in their hands to actually put pressure on Russia. They have not used those tools,” and acknowledging that Russia is winning the game. She said that the EU, for its part, will never recognize the peninsula as Russian: ”Crimea is Ukraine. It means a lot to those who are occupied that others do not recognize this as Russian.” The EU therefore wants endless war with Russia under Washington’s umbrella, because it knows that Europe alone would not be able to survive a single day. Not even at Easter was it possible to have a little respite, because, ultimately, no one in the West really wants peace.

Read more …

“In the end, any blockade attempt will only amount to another strategic failure by the West — which continues to underestimate an adversary historically accustomed to resisting — and winning — when encircled.”

Russia Can Break Any Naval Blockade (Leiroz)

The West’s hostile rhetoric against Russia has taken on increasingly aggressive tones, revealing a coordinated effort to isolate Moscow across all spheres — including the maritime domain. Russian presidential aide Nikolay Patrushev recently stated that the European Union and the United Kingdom are currently preparing a naval blockade against Russia, a measure that constitutes a clear violation of international law and signals an unprecedented escalation in geopolitical tensions. More than a symbolic or diplomatic gesture, such a naval siege amounts to a declaration of economic and strategic warfare. Patrushev warned that Russia has more than enough means to respond to any provocation of this kind. He made it clear that, in the event of diplomatic failure, the Russian Navy would be authorized to take whatever measures are necessary to protect the country’s shipping.

First, it is necessary to understand what kind of “blockade” the West is planning to impose. In recent times, Western countries have threatened Russian vessels in various areas of the Atlantic Ocean, particularly in the Baltic Sea, which NATO increasingly treats as its own “lake” — while ignoring the military stronghold of Kaliningrad. Russian ships have also faced patrols and threats near ports and territorial waters of European nations, a situation that is becoming increasingly troubling. However, while there is still insufficient information to determine the West’s real intentions, it is essential to consider the possibility of a full-scale physical encirclement strategy. Although clearly impossible in a direct and frontal manner, such an idea could be pursued progressively through small-scale naval provocations along multiple routes close to Russian shores.

In this context, two key pillars would define Russia’s defensive strategy: the Arctic — where Moscow has built one of the world’s largest military infrastructures — and Russia’s colossal nuclear capability. Over the past decades, Russia has turned the Arctic into a strategic bastion. It now hosts not only highly equipped naval and air bases, but also alternative trade routes and power projection corridors — such as the Northern Sea Route, which is becoming increasingly viable with the melting of polar ice caps. Russia’s Northern Fleet, equipped with next-generation nuclear submarines and cruisers armed with long-range missiles, is strategically positioned to ensure the country’s maritime sovereignty and to prevent any logistical strangulation attempts. More than a defensive zone, the Arctic now functions as an offensive platform allowing Russia to project power not only across the North Atlantic and the Barents Sea, but also along European coastlines, if necessary.

The Western attempt to encircle Russia fails to consider this critical factor: Moscow is not bound by traditional routes, nor does it rely on the goodwill of European ports — its ability to break blockades is real and already operational. In parallel, Moscow is advancing an ambitious naval modernization program, incorporating autonomous systems, new operational doctrines, and a strategic posture that avoids the trap of an arms race but ensures regional superiority. Russia is not seeking direct confrontation, but it is prepared for it — across multiple domains, including the strategic one. And this is where nuclear deterrence comes into play — an element the West insists on ignoring or downplaying in its propaganda, but which remains the primary guarantor of Russian security. The nuclear doctrine of the Russian Federation is clear: in the face of an existential threat — even if not in the form of a direct nuclear attack —, the response may escalate to the use of nuclear weapons. This is not an empty threat, but a pillar of global stability — the same one that prevented direct conflict throughout the Cold War.

Russia’s strategic patrol submarines, many of them operating from Arctic bases, maintain a constant second-strike capability. Their warheads, dispersed and well-protected, ensure that any Western aggression can be met with devastating force. Thus, a naval blockade becomes not just a provocation, but a global risk — one that could trigger a conflict of unpredictable scale. Given this, it is up to the West to reflect on the consequences of its actions. London and Brussels may believe they can suffocate Russia with unilateral measures, but they deliberately ignore the military and geostrategic realities of the 21st century. The Russian Federation is not a vulnerable state; it is a fully capable power, ready to defend its vital interests — whatever the cost. The illusion of a successful naval siege says more about Western arrogance than about any Russian weakness. In the end, any blockade attempt will only amount to another strategic failure by the West — which continues to underestimate an adversary historically accustomed to resisting — and winning — when encircled.

Read more …

“Prior to Rubio’s arrival in Foggy Bottom, the State Department had 734 different offices, many with redundant tasks and responsibilities. Now, Rubio aims to decrease that number to 604 with the closure of 132 offices..”

Rubio and Trump’s Unfinished Business with ‘Bloated’ State Department (Devlin)

If it hasn’t been made clear enough by now, President Donald Trump and his administration have unfinished business from his first term.That feeling is especially acute at the State Department. The first Trump administration’s plans to revive the American system were undermined by leakers and turncoats who sought to preserve the status quo. Such was the case at the State Department: When Trump proposed transformative cuts in 2017, the president faced resistance not just from deep state actors but from his own political appointees and Republicans in Congress. The four-year interregnum of President Joe Biden culminated in Trump’s return to Washington more powerful and more popular than ever. The mandate victory exposed just how wrong the establishment was in thinking the American people wanted Trump-lite—the American people wanted full-bodied Trump.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has brought that message to Foggy Bottom. On Monday, Rubio announced the most aggressive reorganization of the State Department in modern American history. This “comprehensive reorganization plan,” Rubio said in a statement, “will bring the department into the 21st Century.” Prior to Rubio’s arrival in Foggy Bottom, the State Department had 734 different offices, many with redundant tasks and responsibilities. Now, Rubio aims to decrease that number to 604 with the closure of 132 offices, according to a report from The Free Press. The nearly 20% reduction in State Department offices will come with the elimination of 700 civil service and foreign service employees. Beyond the closure of 132 offices, 137 offices will be consolidated into other divisions of the agency. Furthermore, the elimination of 700 foreign and civil service roles is just the tip of the iceberg, as Rubio has instructed his undersecretaries to produce plans within 30 days to slash their staff by 15%.

Some of the offices Rubio is looking to downsize employ thousands of people, thanks to the rapid growth of state department staffing over the last few decades. Prior to World War II, the State Department employed about 1,000. By 1946, the State Department had grown to 17,000 employees, somewhat understandable to meet the needs of the war and its aftermath. Today, the State Department employs around 80,000 people between foreign service, civil service, and locally employed staff. Cold War hires? No. In the year 2000, State Department employees numbered just over 30,000. In 25 years, the agency has nearly tripled in size. All the while, the Department of Defense has played an increasingly important role in international diplomacy at the expense of the State Department. Core State Department functions and efficacy have been undermined, due in no small part to over bureaucratization and left-wing capture that has diverted oodles of taxpayer dollars to liberal pet projects.

Rubio himself described the department as “bloated, bureaucratic, and unable to perform its essential diplomatic mission in this new era of great power competition”: In the early days of Trump 1.0, the administration proposed a 28% cut to the State Department budget, with a $25.6 billion budget between the State Department and USAID. The proposal, Tillerson told State Department employees in an email at the time, “acknowledges that U.S. engagement must be more efficient, that our aid be more effective, and that advocating the national interests of our country always be our primary mission.” Those deep cuts failed to materialize, and Democrats were not solely to blame. Republicans in Congress opposed the plan, as well. Then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he was “not in favor” of the cuts.

The late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., also said he was “very much opposed.” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., went further, claiming Trump’s State Department cuts were “dead on arrival” and that “it would be a disaster.” Even Rubio expressed concerns at the time. Graham’s prediction turned out to be true: Republicans in Congress failed to deliver on the cuts that would have assisted Trump’s reform efforts. By 2021, the State Department saw a 2,000-person drop in foreign service staffers and still fewer reductions in civil service staff, but this was mostly credited to attrition and retirements. Now, Rubio is prepared to go farther than anyone in the first Trump administration—much less Rubio himself—imagined in 2017.

Read more …

“According to The Times, the UK-French plan was rolled back during talks in the UK capital on Wednesday.”

‘Coalition of The Willing’ Resolve Eroding – The Times (RT)

France and the UK displayed a weakening resolve to put boots on the ground in Ukraine, during recent talks in London, The Times has reported, citing anonymous sources.Defense chiefs from a number of European NATO states have been debating deploying forces to Ukraine as part of a self-titled “coalition of the willing.” The idea, led by France and the UK, was proposed as a means of providing Kiev with security guarantees in the event of a ceasefire with Russia. Moscow has rejected outright the idea of troops from the US-led military bloc being deployed to Ukraine under any pretext. According to The Times, the UK-French plan was rolled back during talks in the UK capital on Wednesday.

“Sir Keir Starmer and President Macron of France have offered to deploy troops to Ukraine to keep the peace as part of a ‘coalition of the willing,’ but during talks in London sources told The Times there appeared to be a softening of the commitment,” the newspaper wrote on Wednesday. However, a defense source told the outlet that the UK is not prepared to abandon the plans entirely. Some European officials realise that Moscow would never tolerate the deployment of a force of NATO members’ troops to Ukraine, The Times reported. Russia has warned that it will consider such a troop presence as a NATO deployment, under the guise of peacekeepers or otherwise, and will treat it as a valid military target. Moscow has repeatedly stated that NATO’s eastward expansion and Kiev’s aspirations to join the military bloc are among the root causes of the Ukraine conflict.

The deployment of NATO troops in Ukraine could lead to a direct clash between the US-led bloc and Russia, setting off World War III, Russia’s National Security Council Secretary and former Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu has said. The troop deployment plan comes as EU states have floated a $840 [billion] militarization plan for the bloc, citing a perceived threat from Russia. Moscow has repeatedly criticized the EU’s continued flow of armaments to Ukraine, arguing that Western European nations appear more interested in prolonging the fighting rather than resolving the conflict diplomatically.

Read more …

“..the conference that declared “A New World Order with European Values.” Various Americans were present to reaffirm the worst about the United States..”

Leading Liberals Call Upon Europeans to Resist the United States (Turley)

In his historic speech in Munich this year, Vice President J.D. Vance confronted the Europeans over their attacks on free speech, declaring “If you are running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you.” That is manifestly true, but it appears that there is something that certain Americans can still do for Europe. As the European Union ramps up its long-standing campaign against free speech, it is increasingly calling upon Americans to make the case against both free speech and the United States. The Europeans and globalists see the Trump Administration as a threat in the effort to create transnational governance systems. German diplomat Christoph Heusgen became emotional in responding to Vance, declaring “It is clear that our rules-based international order is under pressure. It is my strong belief that this more multipolar world needs to be based on a single set of norms and principles.”

American politicians and journalists quickly added their voices of condemnation. CBS anchor Margaret Brennan confronted Secretary of State Marco Rubio to suggest that Vance’s support for free speech was outrageous because he was “standing in a country where free speech was weaponized to conduct a genocide.” Brennan’s bizarre suggestion that free speech contributed to the death camps was amplified by Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) who accused Vance of using “some of the same language that Hitler used to justify the Holocaust.” After the Munich speech, some of the leading anti-free speech figures in the world gathered at the World Forum in Berlin. I was one of the few speakers from the free speech community at the conference that declared “A New World Order with European Values.” Various Americans were present to reaffirm the worst about the United States as a nation descending into tyranny.

The two most celebrated figures were Bill and Hillary Clinton, who also criticized the current Administration. The appearance of Hillary Clinton was particularly chilling for the free speech community at the Forum. Clinton has been unrelenting in her attacks on free speech and is a favorite of globalists who want to create this new world order. After Musk bought Twitter with the intention of restoring free speech protections, Clinton called upon the European Union to use its infamous Digital Services Act to make Musk censor her fellow Americans. She has also suggested arresting those spreading disinformation. The EU did precisely that and is now threatening Musk with confiscatory fines unless he resumes the censorship of Americans and others. After returning from Berlin, I testified in the Senate Judiciary Committee and warned about the building threat to free speech from the use of the DSA.

Read more …

China sends out all sorts of people commenting. But Trump wants to talk to XI one-on-one. No “point person for the dialogue..” or anything like that.

Xi bets on Americans turning on Trump, if things get more expensive. But China, too, has domestic breaking points.

China Dismisses Reports Of US Trade Progress As “Fake News” (ZH)

Wednesday’s equity market rollercoaster—sharp pops and drops—was driven by conflicting reports on headlines surrounding potential U.S.-China trade talks. Markets surged after a Wall Street Journal report suggested President Trump considered cutting steep tariffs on Chinese imports. But sentiment quickly reversed when Reuters poured cold water on the claim. Further declines followed after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent clarified there had been “no unilateral offer from Trump” to reduce Chinese tariffs and that a trade deal could take two to three years to finalize. In the overnight hours, China demanded Washington remove unilateral tariffs before engaging in trade talks and rejected the claim that any negotiations had progressed.

“The US should respond to rational voices in the international community and within its own borders and thoroughly remove all unilateral tariffs imposed on China, if it really wants to solve the problem,” Ministry of Commerce’s spokesman He Yadong told reporters at a regular briefing on Thursday in Beijing. Yadong rejected any signs of progress in bilateral communications, indicating that “reports on development in talks are groundless.” He said Washington needs to “show sincerity” if both sides want to make a deal. Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Guo Jiakun also called any rhetoric coming from the Trump administration about deal progress “fake news” in a press conference.

The Trump administration’s softening stance—reported by the WSJ, which sent US equity markets higher early Wednesday—may signal a willingness by the US to de-escalate the trade war with Beijing in order to shift to the negotiating phase. Trump told reporters on Wednesday: “Maybe we’ll make a special deal, and we’ll see what it will be. Right now, [the tariffs are] 145%, that’s very high.” One day earlier, Treasury Secretary Bessent told investors at a closed-door meeting: “No one thinks the current status quo is sustainable, at 145% and 125%, so I would posit that over the very near future, there will be a de-escalation. We have an embargo now on both sides.” Alfredo Montufar-Helu, senior adviser at The Conference Board’s China Center, told the Shanghai Morning Post that “news today confirms China has no intention to reach out first with a proposal of its own.”

“The impasse in negotiations is driven by a very simple dynamic; no side wants to bear with the political costs of being seen as capitulating to the other side,” Montufar-Helu explained. According to Zhang Zhiwei, chief economist at Pinpoint Asset Management, even if the negotiations between China and the US start immediately, reaching an agreement could take time, and mounting risks exist. The tariff war on both sides could soon unleash pain across global trade. “It takes time for trade negotiations to proceed between the US and other countries. This means the tariffs will hit global trade and economies for at least several months. It is not clear to what extent inventory build-up and pre-loading of trade in the past few months will help to soften the immediate damage. The question now is how bad trade and other macro data will be in China, the US and other countries,” Zhiwei said.

[..] Bloomberg reported last week that Beijing wants to see several things from Trump’s administration before trade talks begin, such as more respect and naming a point person for the dialogue. Neither side has announced any upcoming bilateral trade meetings despite Trump’s announcement this week to ease tariffs potentially.

Read more …

“..the EU people want to help the American Left, and one of the ways they think they can is to stonewall and watch the bond and stock market go down.”

The Method Behind the Madness of Trump’s “Tariff Wars” (Victor Davis Hanson)

Where are we in the trade wars, the tariff wars? The stock market recently has recovered somewhat. We’re about where it was in August. I didn’t think it was too bad in August of 2024. It’s recovering 1% to 2%, on occasion. And why is that? Because Donald Trump has announced that JD Vance and his wife, who is of Indian legacy—her family was born in India—met with the Indian government officials, and there may be a trade deal. Japan has been talking with us. They both want—us and Japan—want a deal. Japan says we moved the goalpost. We say, “They’re not serious.” But there’s going to be a deal there. And more importantly, Donald Trump said he was willing to lower tariffs on China. Now the Left says, “Oh, he’s caving, he’s caving. This was all unnecessary.” You could interpret it that way. But it’s more likely “Art of the Deal.”

In other words, “We’re going to invade Panama,” but we’re not going to invade Panama. We just want Panama to let American companies run the exit and the entry to the canal—and that’s probably going to happen. “Canada’s going to be the 51st state.” No. It’s not going to be the 51st state. But Canada should defend themselves and pay 2% of their GDP, and they need to address a $65-$100 billion deficit. But, “We want to absorb Greenland.” No. We don’t. We want Denmark—a colonial power with this huge North American colony—we want them to help them a little bit. And indeed, they’re starting to put Greenland on their imperial flags, and they gave them a billion dollars, and the base is secure. And the Greenland people, 50,000 or so, will want U.S. security. So, that is the “Art of the Deal.”

And to get China to come and reduce its $300 billion trade surplus with the United States, Donald Trump talked about these huge tariffs. Now, he will talk down and we’ll probably get a deal in an “Art of the Deal” fashion. We saw that with NATO. He harangued them in 2018. They were furious. Said he might not come to their aid. They haven’t met their 2%, 2014 promises. And guess what? They started to spend more in defense. Timely so, because when the Ukraine war broke out, Europe had spent a billion dollars more on defense expenditure. And more importantly, they had Finland and Sweden, two of the most muscular of all the European nations in terms of munitions and defense readiness, now both part of NATO. That worked.

And I think the same thing is happening with trade. Here’s the dynamic: the Europeans detest Donald Trump more than they see their self-interest. In other words, they would rather be on the outside of these trade negotiations and punish Donald Trump than they would be with the Asian powers and make a deal and profit, mutually with the United States. And partly that’s because they’re akin to the American Left. And, as we saw with Jamie Raskin, a representative in the Congress, he said to each country, “If you cut a deal with this administration [the Trump administration] we’re going to remember that.” So, the EU people want to help the American Left, and one of the ways they think they can is to stonewall and watch the bond and stock market go down. And then they could come in later with more favorable concessions from the United States.

The problem with that thinking is that if India cuts a deal and South Korea cuts a deal—and now they’re talking about Japan, Taiwan, Australia—the Trump administration has already established, openly, transparently, that those countries that are first to cut a deal will get the most favorable terms. And so, the more people that come in and have a reciprocal agreement with the United States—I’m not saying it’s going to be parity. I’m not saying we’re going to get down to zero deficits—but if we cut this trillion-dollar deficit by half, that will be a considerable achievement. The Europeans, then, will see that they’re left out. And especially if we come to an accord in the next month or so with China—not that we’re going to be able to force China to have no tariffs on their part. But we might be able to lower them and then make them buy American products to reduce that $300 billion—If that were to be true, then Europe has missed the boat.

Read more …

Lawfare doesn’t rhyme with election integrity. The President can’t order fair elections, only Congress can.

“The Democratic National Committee and left-leaning nonprofit groups sued to block the order from being implemented, claiming it would cause voter suppression..”

About the Judge Blocking Trump’s Election Integrity Order (Fred Lucas)

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly blocked part of President Donald Trump’s executive order on election integrity. Kollar-Kotelly, who was appointed to the District Court for the District of Columbia by President Bill Clinton in 1997, has a history of left-leaning decisions on free speech, transgender policy, terrorist detention, and more recently, the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. The Democratic National Committee and left-leaning nonprofit groups sued to block the implementation of the order. Kollar-Kotelly granted the plaintiffs’ request for a temporary injunction and noted they are likely to prevail. “Our Constitution entrusts Congress and the states —not the president–with the authority to regulate federal elections,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote in the opinion.

“Consistent with that allocation of power, Congress is currently debating legislation that would effect many of the changes the president purports to order. And no statutory delegation of authority to the executive ranch permits the president to short-circuit Congress’s deliberative process by executive order.” The judge blocked provisions in the executive order to add documentary proof of citizenship to the standardized national voter registration form. She also blocked the portion of the order that requires federal agencies to assess citizenship before providing a federal voter registration form to people receiving public assistance. Trump’s order adds citizenship scrutiny to the national mail voter registration form, withholds federal grants from states that count mail ballots arriving after Election Day, gives states more access to a federal database to better verify voter registration lists, and directs the Justice Department to prioritize enforcing voting laws.

Trump’s order addressing voter registration lists is significant. As noted in my book, “The Myth of Voter Suppression,” states and localities across the United States have failed to update their voter registration lists to eliminate dead people, people who have moved, or people who are not citizens. Failing to update the voter rolls is a violation of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act. The Democratic National Committee and left-leaning nonprofit groups sued to block the order from being implemented, claiming it would cause voter suppression. Here are six things to know about Kollar-Kotelly.

Read more …

Mass hysteria manifested in the flesh.

UK To Greenlight Experiments To “Dim The Sun” In Bid To Stop Global Warming (ZH)

It’s a project reminiscent of the movie Snowpiercer, in which governments institute a global experiment to spray chemicals into the atmosphere to stop global warming and end up creating a new ice age instead. Once again reality is downstream from fiction as the UK is set to bankroll an experiment to “dim the sun”. This goal will be pursued in field trials which could include injecting aerosols into the atmosphere, or brightening clouds to reflect sunshine. The project is being considered by scientists as a way to prevent “runaway climate change”, despite the fact that there is zero evidence to support the claim of runaway climate change. Aria, the Government’s advanced research and invention funding agency, has set aside £50 million for projects, which will be announced in the coming weeks.

Prof Mark Symes, the program director for Aria (Advanced Research and Invention Agency), said there would be “small controlled outdoor experiments on particular approaches”. “We will be announcing who we have given funding to in a few weeks and when we do so we will be making clear when any outdoor experiments might be taking place,” he said. “One of the missing pieces in this debate was physical data from the real world. Models can only tell us so much. Everything we do is going to be safe by design. We’re absolutely committed to responsible research, including responsible outdoor research. We have strong requirements around the length of time experiments can run for and their reversibility and we won’t be funding the release of any toxic substances to the environment.” One major area of research is Sunlight Reflection Methods (SRM), which includes Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) whereby tiny particles are released into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight.

Another potential project is Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB) in which ships would spray sea-salt particles into the sky to enhance the reflectivity of low-lying clouds. Climate scientists say efforts to reduce carbon emissions are not working fast enough and that levels are “too high”, leading to irregular weather patterns and eventually the temperature “tipping point” in which an exponential crisis is created by heat creating carbon and then carbon creating more heat. The problem is that nothing in this theory is backed by causational evidence or the climate history of the Earth. In other words, climate scientists are siphoning up government grant money to create solutions to a problem that doesn’t exist. The vast majority of climate change theories are based on data collected since the 1880s – 140 years of data is a insignificant window of time in the long lifespan of the Earth’s climate.

When we look at the temperature data over millions of years, we find that today’s temps are near the lowest in our planet’s history (we just exited an Ice Age not long ago and climate scientists want us to believe it’s too hot).

When comparing millions of years of carbon data to parallel temperature data, it becomes clear that there is no correlation between carbon levels and global warming. This graph also proves that carbon and temperature levels can rise and fall independently of human industry and human industry’s effects on these patterns is negligible or non-existent.

There is also no data to prove correlation or causation between carbon emissions and extreme weather patterns. The entirety of the climate change theory is based on lab models with no corresponding examples in nature. It is pure hysteria. This makes the use of atmospheric manipulation by governments all the more disturbing. If they truly are trying to “dim the sun” for the sake of preventing global warming, then they are doing so based on a delusion. There is also the possibility that they know man-made climate change is nonsense and these experiments serve another purpose. In either case, they should be stopped. No one voted for politicians to blot out the sun (or to find a way to blot out the sun). No one gave them permission to pump particulates or chemicals into the sky. Their actions constitute a radical violation of the public trust.

Read more …

50 years ago, sulfur dioxide meant acid rain. Today it must save the world. This is far worse than mass hysteria. Stop these fools. Lock them up with Al Gore.

EPA Head Demands Answers From Company Putting Sulfur Dioxide Into The Air (JTN)

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin is demanding a company that deliberately sends sulfur dioxide into the air to combat global warming provide detailed information on its practices. Critics of the practice, which is called geoengineering, say it puts potentially harmful pollutants into the air and needs more oversight. The company Zeldin is scrutinizing, Make Sunsets, sells “cooling credits.” The credits pay to launch weather balloons made of biodegradable latex containing hydrogen and sulfur dioxide. According to the company, each $5 credit it sells offsets the warming impact of one ton of carbon dioxide for one year. Last year, the company posted on its X account videos of balloon launches. According to the Make Sunsets website, the company has sold 125,717 “cooling credits” since February 2023, delivered by 147 balloons.

As the balloon rises, the decreasing air pressure causes it to burst. They try to make the balloon burst above 66,000 feet, upon which they issue the “cooling credits.” Make Sunsets was founded by entrepreneur Luke Iseman and former account executive Andrew Song. The company is backed by venture capitalists Boost VC, Draper Associates, Pioneer Fund and unnamed “angel investors.” The company isn’t the only company looking at various approaches to geoengineering, nor is it a new concept. More than a decade ago, billionaire Microsoft founder Bill Gates was lobbying governments and international organizations to back research into how sulfur dioxide could be used to counteract global warming.

Last year, The New York Times reported on an experiment by University of Washington researchers on the deck of a decommissioned aircraft carrier in Alameda, California. The researchers sprayed an aerosol of sea salt to brighten clouds and make them reflect more sunlight. This May, experts and advocates of geoengineering – also called solar radiation modification (SRM) – are gathering for a conference on the topic. The “Degrees 2025 Global Forum” features an agenda full of speakers from around the world. The interest in geoengineering is driven by claims that climate change is producing dangerous outcomes, which many experts dispute. With global emissions continuing to rise despite trillions spent pursuing “net zero” – which is balancing the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere with the amount removed – geoengineering proponents say it’s a “Plan B” to stop global warming.

Critics of geoengineering say it’s potentially dangerous and possibly unnecessary. Steve Milloy, senior legal fellow with the Energy and Environmental Legal Institute and publisher of “JunkScience.com,” told Just the News that the balloons Make Sunsets is sending up are likely harmless because the scale of the operation is so small. To have any significant impact on global temperatures, Milloy said, the operation would have to put tons of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, which would cause harm. “All this stuff is just kind of crazy because – well, it’s not kind of crazy, it’s just crazy. In the first place, it’s really not going to work. For it to work, you’d have to do it on such a scale that we would have acid rain again,” Milloy said.

During the 1970s and 1980s, acid rain became a widespread environmental concern, explored in situation comedies and news reports. Acid rain falls when sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are emitted into the atmosphere and transported by wind and air currents. The two gases react with water, oxygen and other chemicals to form sulfuric and nitric acids. They mix with water condensing in the atmosphere and fall to the ground. Dr. Matthew Wielicki, a geologist and author of the “Irrational Fear” Substack, explains in an article on geoengineering that beginning in the 1990s, the U.S. began implementing regulations aimed at sulfur emissions from diesel engines. Ultra-low-sulfur diesel was expensive and drove up the cost of shipping, which drove up the cost of everything, Wielicki explains.

Unlike carbon dioxide, which stimulates plant growth, sulfur dioxide, Wielicki wrote, causes genuine environmental harm, including soil acidification, forest degradation, infrastructure corrosion and severe aquatic ecosystem damage. “This tangible harm justified sulfur regulations,” Wielicki warns. “Yet now, geoengineering advocates want to intentionally pump sulfur into our atmosphere, ignoring decades of clear scientific evidence regarding sulfur’s proven environmental and health damage.” Just the News reached out to Make Sunsets to ask about the safety of their operation and Zeldin’s request for details about its operation, but didn’t receive a response. Make Sunsets co-founder Iseman told the MIT Technology Review the company is part entrepreneurial and partly an act of geoengineering activism meant to get attention. “We joke slash not joke that this is partly a company and partly a cult,” he told the Review. With the threat of climate change, he said, “It’s morally wrong, in my opinion, for us not to be doing this.”

In a press release, Zeldin said Make Sunsets is banned in Mexico, and it’s not clear the company has been in contact with state, local or federal agencies. Noting the potential environmental and respiratory health impacts of sulfur dioxide, the EPA states that the gas has been regulated since 1971. The EPA told Just the News that Make Sunsets is the only entity in the U.S. currently launching sulfur dioxide balloons with the intention of geoengineering. The agency gave the company a deadline of May 14 to answer its questions. In a letter to the company, the EPA warns that a failure to comply in a timely manner could result in monetary penalties. The EPA is asking Make Sunsets to provide information on the physical location of the company, the number of employees, its annual revenues and its expenditures for carbon credits. It’s also asking for detailed information on its balloon launches and their contents, including what gases they contain and how they’re sourced.

The agency is also asking about any communications the company has had with federal, state and local authorities, and any enforcement actions, such as consent decrees, related to air emissions that apply to Make Sunset’s operations. Milloy said that the science behind the cooling effect of sulfur dioxide is solid. Research has shown, for example, the 2001 Mount Pinatubo eruption lowered global temperatures for about 15 months after the eruption due to the cooling effect of the particles it put into the atmosphere. The problem with geoengineering, he said, is that lowering temperatures by increasing sunlight reflection will impact agriculture, in addition to acid rain. On a global scale, it could create all kinds of problems. “Do we really want the Chinese getting involved in this and trying to control our weather?” Milloy asked.

Read more …

“The future looks bright! Rewrite the rules with the Trump 2028 high crown hat..”

‘Rewrite The Rules’ – Trump Store Teases Potential 2028 Reelection Bid (JTN)

First son Eric Trump on Thursday shared a link to the Trump store that appeared to tease a third term for President Donald Trump, with hats and shirts that read “Trump 2028 (rewrite the rules).” The president has floated that there are ways for him to run for a nearly unprecedented third term, which has only been achieved by the late President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and which is now prohibited under the 22nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. President Trump has not specified how he would be able to skirt the 22nd Amendment, except to acknowledge that Vice President JD Vance running, winning and then allowing Trump to be president is a possibility.

The Trump store website charges $50 for the Trump 2028 hat, and $36 for the shirts. “The future looks bright! Rewrite the rules with the Trump 2028 high crown hat,” a description of the item reads. “Fully embroidered with a snap closure in the back, this will become your new go-to hat.” One lawmaker, Tennessee GOP Rep. Andy Ogles, has suggested making it possible for presidents to serve three terms if they do not serve more than two terms back to back. This would allow Trump to seek a third term, because of the gap in his presidencies.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Autism

 

 

 

 

Growth

 

 

Lions

 

 

Eco

 

 

Dressed

 

 

Today I swung my front door wide open and placed my Remington 30.06 on the deck rail. I left six cartridges beside it, then left it alone and went about my business. While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, my neighbor across the street mowed his lawn, a girl walked her dog down the street, and quite a few cars stopped at the stop sign near the front of my house. After about an hour, I checked on the gun. It was still sitting there, right where I had left it. It hadn’t moved itself off the deck rail. It hadn’t killed anyone, even with the numerous opportunities it had presented to do so.

In fact, it hadn’t even loaded itself. You can imagine my surprise, with all the hype by the Left and the Media about how dangerous guns are and how they kill people. Either the media is wrong or I’m in possession of the laziest gun in the world. The United States is third in murders throughout the World. But if you take out just four cities: Chicago , Detroit , Washington DC and New Orleans , the United States is fourth from the bottom, in the entire world, for murders.

These four Cities also have the toughest Gun Control Laws in the U.S. All four of these cities are CONTROLLED BY DEMOCRATS. It would be absurd to draw any conclusions from this data – correct? Well, I’m off to check on my spoons. I hear they’re making people fat .

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 242025
 


Jean-François Millet The Angelus 1857

 

Trump Excoriates Zelensky For Rejecting Crimea Proposal For Peace (ZH)
US Gained ‘Better Understanding’ Of Russia’s Stance On Ukraine – Rubio (RT)
Vance Ramps Up Pressure On Ukraine With Peace Plan That ‘Sharply Favors Russia’ (ZH)
EU Refusing To Lift Russia Sanctions For Peace – Reuters (RT)
Where Have Europe’s Pacifists Gone – Who Once Opposed NATO? (van den Ende)
There Will Be No Ukrainian Peace Deal (Paul Craig Roberts)
Bessent Calls For ‘Reforms’ Among ‘Bretton Woods Institutions’ (ZH)
Musk and Bessent Had ‘WWE Fight’ In White House – Axios (RT)
Judge Orders Correction Notices For Fired Probationary Workers (ET)
Harvard: Take the Trump Deal, Before It’s Too Late (Victor Davis Hanson)
World Economic Forum Opens Probe Into Founder as Klaus Schwab Resigns (DS)
The Left’s Mount Rushmore (Al Perrotta)
New Poll Data Confirms the Democrats’ Worst Fears (Margolis)
HHS, FDA Announce Phase-Out Of All Artificial Food Dyes (ZH)
Depression Cycle Arrives in 2025 & 2026 – Charles Nenner (USAW)
Why U.S. Must Win AI Race Against China – Khosla (ZH)
Ukraine Complicit in 2014 Massacre: European Court of Human Rights (Kuzmarov)

 

 

 

 

Amish
https://twitter.com/Nichole05507742/status/1914675572762140682
https://twitter.com/matt_vanswol/status/1914679392632033447

 

 

https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/1915003832062431232

Collum

Moon

66

 

 

40% of covid deaths are diabetics
https://twitter.com/toobaffled/status/1914932641180090504

 

 

 

 

The key to peace now is getting Europe out of the way. Trump can do that, but does he want that fight? Then again, does he have a choice?

Trump Excoriates Zelensky For Rejecting Crimea Proposal For Peace (ZH)

Trump vs. Zelensky Round Two? Tensions initially looked to have cooled after the Zelensky-Vance-Trump February 28 verbal blow-up and showdown at the Oval Office (see clip below), but the spat is heating up once again, and is fast getting personal. President Trump has slammed President Zelensky in a Wednesday post on Truth Social, saying of the Ukrainian leader, “if he wants Crimea, why didn’t they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired”… and “He can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country.” The fiery denunciation appears in direct response to Zelensky the day prior rejecting Washington demands that Ukraine be ready to formally recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea. Trump continued, “It’s inflammatory statements like Zelenskyy’s that makes it so difficult to settle this War. He has nothing to boast about!”

The White House has this week been making it clear that the United States is ready to walk away from the peace process if it doesn’t have willing partners. All of this pressure seems aimed squarely at Kiev, given also Vice President Vance’s Wednesday remarks while in India. “We’ve issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and it’s time for them to either say yes or for the United States to walk away from this process,” Vance told the press pool while on the trip. “The only way to really stop the killing is for the armies to both put down their weapons, to freeze this thing and to get on with the business of actually building a better Russia and a better Ukraine.” Freezing the war now would certainly give Russian forces a huge advantage, given the immense territory in the East they now hold.

Trump in the fresh social media post further demanded that now is the time to “GET IT DONE” – referring to achieving a lasting settlement. And he coupled this with another swipe at Zelensky, saying the man has “no cards to play” – which has been a US admin theme going back to February. “I look forward to being able to help Ukraine, and Russia, get out of this Complete and Total MESS, that would have never started if I were President!” – Trump concluded in the post. Trump is clearly not happy in the wake of Zelensky’s Tuesday remarks wherein he asserted that Ukraine will not legally recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea under any circumstances,

“There is nothing to talk about. This violates our Constitution. This is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine,” Zelensky told reporters. But Trump is now calling this out as essentially BS – saying that no, this is the very thing in question that must be talked about if the war is to end. On a practical level, Russia is never going to give up Crimea regardless, given it has long been the historic home of the Russian Navy’s Black Sea fleet, and has an overwhelming Russian-speaking population. Will Zelensky respond to this latest dressing down by Trump? His PR handlers are likely urging him not to. The last time this happened in the wake of Zelensky’s visit to the White House, the US cut off weapons supplies and intelligence-sharing to Kiev for several days. But this spat and sparring could blow up further yet. Zelensky expressed hope that he could meet with Trump while in Rome for the Pope’s funeral on Saturday, but this is now looking less likely.

Read more …

“We have a better understanding of that now because we’ve actually spoken to them after three years of not speaking to them..”

US Gained ‘Better Understanding’ Of Russia’s Stance On Ukraine – Rubio (RT)

Washington has gained a much better understanding of Russia’s position on the Ukraine conflict following the recent series of bilateral talks, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. Rubio made the remarks on Wednesday in an interview with The Free Press, saying the US has been seeking to grasp what the Russian position is. “We have a better understanding of that now because we’ve actually spoken to them after three years of not speaking to them,” he stated. Ties between Moscow and Washington all but collapsed following the 2022 escalation of the Ukraine conflict under then-President Joe Biden. Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald Trump has distanced himself from Biden-era policies, pushing for a rapid resolution to the conflict and a reset in bilateral relations. The two sides have held several rounds of high-level talks in recent months.

Voicing hope for a peace deal, Rubio emphasized there’s “no military end” to the ongoing hostilities. “We have to be frank. Russia’s not just going to roll over Ukraine and take the whole country. And Ukraine’s not going to push them all the way back to where they were before 2014,” he stated. “We’ve done our best,” Rubio told the outlet. “This is not our war. We didn’t start this war. We’re trying to help everybody end it,” he said, expressing hope to “bring the two sides closer.” Rubio was expected at a high-level Ukraine meeting in London on Wednesday with UK, US, French, German and Ukrainian diplomats. However, later Rubio and Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff decided to skip the event. The UK Foreign Office later confirmed to AFP that the foreign ministers meeting had been indefinitely postponed, adding that “official level talks” will continue but behind closed doors. As part of a reported “final offer” to end the Ukraine conflict, Washington had planned to present a proposal in London recognizing Crimea as Russian “de jure” and acknowledging Moscow’s control over the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions.

The plan was also said to include the lifting of some sanctions against Russia and opposing NATO membership for Ukraine. On Tuesday, Vladimir Zelensky rejected any discussion of recognizing Crimea as Russian. Trump warned on Wednesday that Zelensky risked losing the entire country if he continued to stall talks. Moscow has maintained that the status of Crimea – which joined Russia in 2014 following a referendum held after the Western-backed coup in Kiev – and the four other former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia in 2022, is not up for negotiation. Russian officials also insist that any peace agreement must address the “root causes” of the conflict. President Vladimir Putin has also said that a viable ceasefire would require Western nations to stop arms deliveries to Ukraine.

Read more …

Ukraine -and Europe- chooses to forget they just lost a war.

Vance Ramps Up Pressure On Ukraine With Peace Plan That ‘Sharply Favors Russia’ (ZH)

Vice President JD Vance while traveling in India on Wednesday issued some new and provocative remarks on the prospect of Ukraine peace, and Washington’s demands related to ending the war. The NY Times headlined is coverage of Vance’s new remarks by somewhat disparagingly calling it a “Plan for Ukraine That Sharply Favors Russia” — given that it calls for ‘freezing’ the front lines, which would leave Russian forces in control of the majority of the Donbass region in Eastern Ukraine. The Vice President reiterated to reporters that the United States would “walk away” from engaging in a peace process if both Ukraine and Russia refused to accept the American terms. The NY Times concludes, “But President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine was clearly the target.”

“We’ve issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and it’s time for them to either say yes or for the United States to walk away from this process,” Vance told the press pool. “The only way to really stop the killing is for the armies to both put down their weapons, to freeze this thing and to get on with the business of actually building a better Russia and a better Ukraine.” Here is the brief list of basics that Washington is demanding for its outline of peace: —a “freeze” of territorial lines in the three-plus year war —no path to NATO membership for Ukraine —formal recognition of Russia holding Crimea But it was only yesterday that Ukraine’s President Zelensky said he has rejected the possibility of ceding over Crimea, after the Trump administration reportedly offered this ‘gift’ to Putin of US recognition of Russian sovereignty over the strategic peninsula which has long been home to the Russian navy’s Black Sea fleet.

According to Ukrainian media: Ukraine will not legally recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea under any circumstances, President Volodymyr Zelensky said during a briefing in Kyiv on April 22. “There is nothing to talk about. This violates our Constitution. This is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine,” Zelensky told reporters. Zelensky added, “As soon as talks about Crimea and our sovereign territories begin, the talks enter the format that Russia wants – prolonging the war – because it will not be possible to agree on everything quickly.” Kiev has also recently accused Moscow of using negotiations as a smokescreen, also coming off the 30-hour Easter truce, which saw both sides accuse the other of many violations.

Commenting further of Vance’s fresh remarks, the NY Times writes, “It was the first time a U.S. official had publicly laid out a cease-fire deal in such stark terms and the comments appeared designed to increase pressure on Ukraine, which has long refused to accept Russia’s claims on its lands, particularly in Crimea.” Ukraine is meanwhile telling its Western backers that it is “ready to negotiate, but not to surrender.” According to fresh words of Ukraine’s vice PM Yulia Svyrydenko, “There will be no agreement that hands Russia the stronger foundations it needs to regroup and return with greater violence. A full ceasefire—on land, in the air, and at sea—is the necessary first step. If Russia opts for a limited pause, Ukraine will respond in kind.”

Read more …

The EU’s story is Russia will invade all of Europe if Ukraine does not get unlimited support. They will cruelly impoverish their own people for it. Unless these people call a halt to that.

EU Refusing To Lift Russia Sanctions For Peace – Reuters (RT)

The EU has firmly rejected the idea of easing Ukraine-related sanctions against Russia before peace negotiations are concluded, Reuters reported on Wednesday, citing sources. Last week, the US shared with EU officials proposals aimed at facilitating a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. The initiative reportedly outlined potential terms to end the conflict, including the easing of sanctions on Moscow in the event of a lasting ceasefire. Brussels, however, “staunchly opposes” Russia’s request to lift EU sanctions before peace talks are concluded, Reuters wrote, citing European diplomats. Another sticking point is the US proposal to recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea – a suggestion the outlet described as a “non-starter” for both the EU and Kiev.

The EU’s stance is reportedly seen as diminishing the chances of any breakthrough in the peace negotiations, prompting senior US officials to skip a high-level meeting in London on Wednesday held for discussing the Ukraine conflict. The gathering was due to include top diplomats from the UK, US, France, Germany, and Ukraine but ended up being downgraded to involve lower-level officials. Both special envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are skipping the event. The US delegation is instead being led instead by General Keith Kellogg, another envoy of US President Donald Trump focused on Ukraine. Last month, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen declared the EU would not lift its sanctions against Russia for as long as the Ukraine conflict continues.

Also in March, the EU rejected a Russian demand to lift sanctions on Russian Agricultural Bank as part of the Black Sea ceasefire initiative discussed between Moscow and Washington. During the talks in Saudi Arabia, Russia and the US agreed to work toward reviving the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which, according to the Kremlin, would include the removal of Western restrictions against the agricultural bank and other financial institutions. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded that the EU’s refusal to lift sanctions on Russia demonstrates the bloc’s reluctance to end the Ukraine conflict. “If European countries don’t want to go down this path, it means they don’t want to go down the path of peace in unison with the efforts shown in Moscow and Washington,” he said at the time.

Read more …

The war industry has conquered Europe in record time.

Where Have Europe’s Pacifists Gone – Who Once Opposed NATO? (van den Ende)

Where are they now—Europe’s pacifists? Why do they no longer gather in Belgium, in Brussels, NATO’s headquarters, where large demonstrations against the alliance once took place? These protests, led by pacifists, denounced NATO, war, militarization, and nuclear arms. The Belgian newspaper Le Soir recently posed an intriguing question: Why have the pacifists vanished? “The arms race has begun,” the article argues. “Like its European neighbors, Belgium is preparing to significantly increase military spending this year—without facing any opposition.” “We keep our word,” declares Francken, Belgium’s former Defense Minister. “Belgium will become a solidary ally with extra defense budgets for personnel, equipment, and infrastructure.” He claims the spending will also boost jobs and innovation. Belgium, after all, is a NATO founding member, alongside the Netherlands.

Some Belgian (former) pacifists have reacted sharply to the government’s plans: “Retirees must accept lower pensions, unemployment benefits are being slashed, the sick languish in poverty, nurses earn less and work longer for diminished pensions, hospitals lose subsidies—all to enrich that corrupt Zelensky gang in Kiev.” The same measures, they note, are being imposed in the Netherlands. But as the article points out, criticizing NATO now invites ridicule. Or does it go further than mockery? Across Western Europe—Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany—and in the Baltic states and Poland, dissent is met with more than scorn. People are arrested, elections are overturned, and societies drift toward totalitarianism—or worse, a resurgence of militarism and fascism unseen since 1945.

Europeans once insisted America should not meddle in their affairs. But it’s too late for that. EU governments, radicalized by waning U.S. interest in Europe, have already been co-opted. They should have spoken up years ago, when it became clear Europe was being used to wage wars in distant lands its citizens barely knew. Instead, they absorbed refugees (often unwillingly) and fell under what some call American colonization. Yet America wasn’t entirely wrong. In Munich last February, Vice President J.D. Vance called Europe a “totalitarian society,” singling out Germany. I can confirm his assessment was accurate—but it barely scratched the surface. The reality is far worse and deteriorating daily. Consider these examples: • A 16-year-old German girl was expelled from school by police for posting a pro-AfD TikTok video featuring the Smurfs (the right-wing party’s color is blue). • An AfD politician was fined for stating that migrants commit more gang rapes than German citizens. (The court didn’t dispute her facts but ruled they incited hatred.)

Germany once had a robust pacifist movement. In the 1970s and 80s, activists—many from what is now the Green Party (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)—protested NATO and nuclear weapons. Today, those same Greens, led by Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck, champion war and arms shipments. Their party program declares Germany must lead Europe, offering a “global counterweight” to China and Russia. The anti-war, anti-NATO movement has been absorbed into a party now pushing for war—especially against Russia, as Baerbock’s rhetoric makes clear. Or take a 2023 case where the EU’s High Representative expressed concern over “extrajudicial sentences against Serbs” who protested NATO in Kosovska Mitrovica. Kosovo’s Foreign Minister defended the arrests, claiming police had “clear evidence” the demonstrators participated in an “attack on NATO.”

So where have Europe’s pacifists gone—the ones who marched against war, militarization, and nuclear arms for decades? The Friedrich Naumann Foundation (banned in Russia) claims to have the answer. In an article, they declare: “The end of pacifism (as heard in a Bundestag debate) was historic. Hopefully, it marks the end of a moral and political error.” Has pacifism become a “political mistake”? Millions who oppose war have been misled for years by their own politicians—like the Greens, who traded peace for militarism. The world is upside down, yet Europe’s docile masses seem content as their pensions fund weapons. New Eastern Europe takes it further, arguing “Pacifism kills.” The outlet claims: “The problem isn’t pacifism itself, but its manipulation for purposes contrary to its ideals. While pacifist appeals to Russia (the aggressor) are justified, targeting Ukraine or both sides aids Moscow.”

In short: Pacifism helps Russia. The “hippies” of the 1960s live in a fantasy where peace is impossible, Russia is the villain, and Europe must defeat it. The campaign against pacifism mirrors the EU’s push for militarization. Europe is silencing pacifists—and dissidents—just as pre-WWII Germany did under fascism. New laws are emerging. In Germany, the proposed CDU/CSU-SPD coalition plans to “fight lies,” per their “Culture and Media“ working group. If you “lie” by government standards—say, by advocating peace with Russia or denying its “aggression”—you risk jail, fines, or online erasure. “The deliberate spread of false claims isn’t covered by free speech,” they assert.

Le Soir asked: Where are the pacifists? They’re still here—for now. But once Germany’s new government takes power, once the digital ID and CBDC (mandatory across Europe) launch this October, protests—online or in streets—will be surveilled. Small demonstrations in Germany and Amsterdam show resistance lingers. But soon, fear will silence them: fear for jobs, pensions, benefits, even children.

Read more …

PCR keeps wanting Putin to erase Ukraine. He’ll do it only if forced to. He may well be.

There Will Be No Ukrainian Peace Deal (Paul Craig Roberts)

There cannot be a peace deal when President Trump only proposes that Russia keep Crimea, which Russia did not take in war but in an unanimous vote of the population in Crimea to be reunited with Russia from which Crimea had been torn. Trump has not included in the deal Russian Donbas, which also voted to be returned to Russia or the other Russian areas that Russian forces have liberated and have been reincorporated into Russia. In other words, so far, other than Crimea, President Trump has offered President Putin none of the former Russian territory that is now again part of Russia herself. Is the implication that Putin must hand back to Ukraine the territory from which Russian soldiers have driven out Ukrainian soldiers? So Putin’s 3+ years of war was all for nothing?

Zelensky himself, treated by Trump as Ukraine’s leader despite the fact that Zelensky’s term has expired and he is no longer legally or constitutionally the president of Ukraine, states that he will not even discuss recognizing Crimea as Russian territory: Crimea “is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine. We have nothing to talk about on this topic.” To understand how absurd Zelensky is, consider that Crimea is the home since the 1700s of the base of Russia’s Black Sea Navy, Russia’s access to the Mediterranean. As Zelensky appears to have a veto, even Trump’s partial concession to Russia has no chance. Trump threatens that he will walk away from the negotiations. That w0uld be a good thing if he takes American weapons and money when he goes.

Zelensky would be left to deal with Putin, perhaps an easy task as Putin and Lavrov continue to bleat for negotiations, neglecting their responsibility to win a war that has gone on for far too long drawing in the US and Europe. It seems Zelensky is relying on Britain and France to send their troops to continue the fight against Russia. The French president is talking about extending France’s nuclear umbrella to include Ukraine. Putin and Lavrov seem to prefer a negotiated deal to a military victory. Would the Kremlin accept a deal that requires Russia to give up battlefield successes won at a large cost in Russian life, the life of young men lost and gone and unavailable to create needed Russian population? Is it Putin’s hope for a Great Power Agreement that has prolonged the conflict?

A great power agreement happens only among great powers, but President Putin has convinced the West that Russia is irresolute, averse to using force, and only wants a negotiated settlement to the conflict with Ukraine, for which Putin will pay almost any price, no matter the humiliation. Russia’s inability to bring a war with Ukraine to a victorious conclusion after more than three years of fighting negates any recognition of Russia as a great power as far as the West is concerned. Even Britain and France feel confident to fight Russia. Several of the NATO countries are saying that they are preparing for war with Russia. The Baltic states are even interdicting Russian shipping. Putin’s conduct of the war has convinced the West that he is irresolute and averse to fighting. The choice facing Putin is: Surrender or win a victory and impose the peace.

Read more …

“Recent data shows the Chinese economy tilting even further away from consumption toward manufacturing. China’s economic system, with growth driven by manufacturing exports, will continue to create even more serious imbalances with its trading partners..”

Bessent Calls For ‘Reforms’ Among ‘Bretton Woods Institutions’ (ZH)

Days after Scott Bessent dazzled JP Morgan with closed-door comments (aka not Main Street) that the tariff standoff with China is unsustainable, the US Treasury Secretary is set to deliver comments on Wednesday at the IIF Global Outlook Forum regarding the state of the global financial system as the Trump administration seeks to tamp down rhetoric over China. According to a copy of Bessent’s prepared remarks, he is set to tell the IIF that “America First does not mean America Alone,” and that the IMF must prioritize economic and financial sustainability. He is calling for IMF and World Bank reforms after “mission creep,” i.e. non-economic goals such as climate change and social justice, but that the Trump administration wants to work with them.

“Going forward, the Trump Administration will leverage U.S. leadership and influence at these institutions and push them to accomplish their important mandates,” Bessent said, adding “The United States will also demand that the management and staff of these institutions be accountable for demonstrating real progress.” Bessent – who blamed persistent U.S. trade deficits on foreign policy decisions that promote excess saving and low wages abroad, added that “The architects of Bretton Woods recognized that a global economy required global coordination,” and called for “key reforms to ensure the Bretton Woods institutions are serving their stakeholders—not the other way around.” He also encouraged “security-aligned trade,” suggesting that U.S. security partnerships should influence economic alignment – a strategic counter to China’s Belt and Road.

China Rebalancing Bessent also said that China “is in need of rebalancing.” “Recent data shows the Chinese economy tilting even further away from consumption toward manufacturing. China’s economic system, with growth driven by manufacturing exports, will continue to create even more serious imbalances with its trading partners if the status quo is allowed to continue. China’s current economic model is built on exporting its way out of its economic troubles. It’s an unsustainable model that is not only harming China but the entire world. China needs to change. The country knows it needs to change. Everyone knows it needs to change. And we want to help it change—because we need rebalancing too.” According to an anonymously sourced (of course) report by the WSJ minutes before Bessent’s speech (and which was immediately denied), the Trump administration “is considering slashing its steep tariffs on Chinese imports—in some cases by more than half—in a bid to de-escalate tensions with Beijing.”

President Trump hasn’t made a final determination, the people said, adding that the discussions remain fluid and several options are on the table. One senior White House official said the China tariffs were likely to come down to between roughly 50% and 65%. The administration is also considering a tiered approach similar to the one proposed by the House committee on China late last year: 35% levies for items the U.S. deems not a threat to national security, and at least 100% for items deemed as strategic to America’s interest, some of the people said. The bill proposed phasing in those levies over five years. -WSJ. Bessent’s comments also come after President Donald Trump softened his tone on the unfolding trade war between the world’s two largest economies – to which China’s foreign ministry spokesman, Guo Jiakun replied “our doors are wide open.”

According to Tuesday comments by Trump, “very high” tariffs on Chinese imports will “come down substantially, but it won’t be zero.” “I think we’re going to live together very happily and ideally work together, so I think it’s going to work out very well,” Trump told reporters at the White House. Trump notably excluded China from a pause on “reciprocal” tariffs that were extended to other trading partners in order to allow them time to negotiate – blaming China’s retaliatory actions for its exclusion. The China tariffs include a 125% reciprocal tariff on top of Trump’s original 20% tariff related to the fentanyl trade. Combined with pre-existing Section 301 tariffs, some Chinese goods face levies as high as 245%.

Read more …

“..Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutting initiative, which Bessent claimed has failed to deliver on its promises.”

Musk and Bessent Had ‘WWE Fight’ In White House – Axios (RT)

Tech billionaire Elon Musk and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent were involved in a heated shouting match inside the White House last week, reportedly trading expletives and personal insults during a confrontation over leadership of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), according to Axios. The incident reportedly unfolded in the West Wing on Thursday within earshot of President Donald Trump and visiting Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. The two men argued over Trump’s recent decision to name Gary Shapley, Musk’s preferred candidate, as acting IRS commissioner – a move that blindsided Bessent, who had lobbied for his deputy, Michael Faulkender. “It was two billionaire, middle-aged men thinking it was WWE in the hall of the West Wing,” one witness told Axios on Wednesday.

Musk reportedly accused Bessent – a former partner at Soros Fund Management and the founder of Key Square Group – of being a “Soros agent.” Bessent “roared” back, at one point allegedly shouting “F**k you,” to which Musk replied, “Say it louder.” The clash did not escalate into physical violence, but was loud enough to be heard in nearby offices, according to multiple sources. Witnesses said an aide had to physically step in between the two men to prevent the situation from intensifying. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt downplayed the incident, telling the New York Times that “disagreements are a normal part of any healthy policy process,” and that “ultimately, everyone knows they serve at the pleasure of President Trump.” Bessent ultimately came out on top, with Shapley replaced by Faulkender just days after the appointment. “Trust must be brought back to the IRS, and I am fully confident that [Deputy Secretary] Michael Faulkender is the right man for the moment,” Bessent said on X Friday afternoon.

“Gary Shapley’s passion and thoughtfulness for approaching ways to create durable and lasting reforms at the IRS is essential to our work, and he remains among my most important senior advisors at the [US Treasury] as we work together to rethink and reform the IRS.” The altercation highlights long-standing tensions between Musk and Bessent dating back to the presidential transition, when Musk unsuccessfully pushed for Howard Lutnick to lead the Treasury Department. Trump instead appointed Bessent and nominated Lutnick to head the Commerce Department. Since then, Musk and Bessent have clashed repeatedly over personnel and policy, including Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutting initiative, which Bessent claimed has failed to deliver on its promises.

Read more …

Bookkeeping.

Judge Orders Correction Notices For Fired Probationary Workers (ET)

A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to provide laid-off federal probationary employees with a written notice stating that they were not terminated for performance reasons but that it was part of a government-wide termination effort. U.S. District Judge William Alsup also ordered Acting Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Charles Ezell not to tell agencies to terminate “any federal employee or group of federal employees.” The judge wrote on April 18 that the firings of probationary workers followed an OPM template that states they were fired for job performance reasons. “Termination under the false pretense of performance is an injury that will persist for the working life of each civil servant,” wrote Alsup, who is based in San Francisco. “The stain created by OPM’s pretense will follow each employee through their careers and will limit their professional opportunities.”

The latest directive from the judge is part of a lawsuit that was filed by labor unions and nonprofits contesting the mass firings of thousands of probationary workers in February under President Donald Trump. Probationary workers are typically new hires or employees who were recently promoted and who must serve a trial period of one to two years before they receive full-term, or permanent, employment. “If a particular termination was in fact carried out after an individualized evaluation of that employee’s performance or fitness, the Chief Human Capital Officer (or equivalent) of that agency may instead submit … a declaration, under oath and seal, stating so and providing the individual reasoning underpinning that termination,” Alsup also wrote, setting a May 8 deadline to do so.

On April 8, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked an earlier order from Alsup that required the administration to return to work some of the terminated probationary federal employees who were terminated. The justices were responding to the Trump administration’s emergency appeal of Alsup’s ruling.

Read more …

“Does the university really want to get in a fight with the Trump administration and then bring all of this information about their endowments; their lack of intellectual diversity; their segregation; their lack of due process for people who undergo inquiries or accusations; their separate racial graduations, safe spaces, theme houses; the use of student loans? ”

Harvard: Take the Trump Deal, Before It’s Too Late (Victor Davis Hanson)

We’ve talked about higher education before, but now it’s come into sharper focus with the Trump administration’s deadlock with Harvard University over its unwillingness or inability—whatever term we like to use—to meet the administration’s demands that it ensures an antisemitic-free campus that does not allow people to disrupt classes. It doesn’t use race, after the Supreme Court decision that went against Harvard and said that affirmative action was no longer legal. Columbia had the same type of disagreement, other campuses are. I don’t think it’s a wise thing for them to get into a fight with the federal government. If they are dependent on federal funding, these big private marquee universities—Columbia, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, Duke—and they want federal money, then the federal government is going to ask for some transparency. And we, the public, really don’t know much about it.

It’s like a rock, a traditional rock on moist ground. You don’t wanna turn it over because there’s going to be things underneath there that you would better not—it would be better not to be seen. And that’s what the public is going to learn about higher education. Now, what do I mean? I mean loans. These universities are raising tuition higher than the rate of inflation. And that started when the federal government said, “We will ensure these loans for students.” Once that happened, the moral hazard shifted away from the university. So, they have been gouging students for room and board. I’ll give you an example. Hillsdale College, its room, board, and tuition is about $45,000 a year. It takes no money. Harvard gets about $9 billion in total. Its room, board, and tuition is about $95,000. Same with Stanford.

They’re about double what Hillsdale charges. And one of the reasons is that they’re so dependent on federal money and therefore they can spend like drunken sailors. Remember, of that 1.7, about 10%, 8% are nonperforming and about maybe 14% are late. The public doesn’t know all that. But they’re paying for it—especially kids, the half of the cohort 18 to 30 that’s not going to college, they’re subsidizing this university boondoggle. The second thing is the university doesn’t really obey the first 10 amendments of the Constitution. If you get accused of particular crimes as a student, faculty member, let’s say, sexual harassment or untoward speech, hate speech—whatever the term they use—it’s very unlikely you’re going to get Fourth and Fifth, maybe Sixth Amendment protection.

That is, you’re not going to have an open hearing. You’re not going to be tried by a jury of your peers. You’re not going to necessarily have legal counsel. You’re not necessarily going to know who your accusers are. The affirmative action ruling by the Supreme Court outlawed the use of race in admissions. And we have civil rights statutes that also do that. But the universities do something funny. They have safe spaces. They have theme houses. And they have auxiliary graduations. But the common denominator, they’re predicated on race. So, a black theme house, a Latino theme house has almost very few people. Nobody would want a European, so-called white theme house or an alternate white graduation. And you would say, “Why not, Victor?” Because it would be considered racist, I suppose. But at Stanford, only 22% of the student body is white. Are they going to say, “Well, we’re one of the minorities now. Why don’t we do this?” That’s where it will lead if you enhance tribalism.

There’s no intellectual diversity. The National Association of Scholars did a study not long ago. They found not one of the 133 faculty members at Bryn Mawr was a Republican. At Williams, I think they found one or two. They found a lot of elite universities where there was nobody who openly acknowledged that they were a Republican. There are a couple of other things that are disturbing too. And that is the universities get individual faculty grants—Department of Energy, National Institutes of Health. And usually, in most private foundations, the university is not following their model. What I mean is, a private scholar at a think tank, they might deduct 15% for the use of the phone or office that they would get out of that federal grant. But universities like Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, they can go from 40% to 50% to 60% and they’re relying on that multimillion-dollar—I guess we’d call it—price gouging from the federal government.

And finally, these universities don’t have multimillion-dollar endowments anymore. They have multibillion-dollar—$30 billion, Stanford $53 billion. And they’re predicated—the income—on that. And sometimes they get almost 10%. They’re very good in investing. This $5 or $6 or $7 or $4 billion a year in income is tax-free, for the most part. Tax-free. And that’s predicated that they’re nonpolitical, they’re nonpartisan. But when you look at the makeup of the faculty and the use of race and gender, contrary to federal law, you can see they’re very partisan.

So, let me just sum up. Does the university really want to get in a fight with the Trump administration and then bring all of this information about their endowments; their lack of intellectual diversity; their segregation; their lack of due process for people who undergo inquiries or accusations; their separate racial graduations, safe spaces, theme houses; the use of student loans? I don’t think they want to do that. The public would be shocked. And it’s a losing proposition. If I were the presidents of these major universities, I would do this: I would make a deal with the Trump administration. And I would welcome it because then I would tell my radical students, “You can’t wear a mask. I’d like you to, but the federal government won’t let me.” Or, “We can’t have racially segregated dorms anymore, theme houses. I’d like to, but it’s against the law.” And that would be their way out. Is that going to happen? I don’t think so. And I think we’re going to see some accountability. And the universities are not going to like the consequences.

Read more …

For misusing funds, after having done just that, what, 50 years? Makes little sense. But they sure got rid of him in record time. The Great Reset.

World Economic Forum Opens Probe Into Founder as Klaus Schwab Resigns (DS)

Klaus Schwab, the founder and chairman of the World Economic Forum, resigned on Easter Sunday amid a whistleblower report about alleged misuse of Forum funds, and the globalist organization’s board voted to launch an independent probe into allegations against him. “Following my recent announcement, and as I enter my 88th year, I have decided to step down from the position of Chair and as a member of the Board of Trustees, with immediate effect,” Schwab said in a statement Sunday. Schwab, 87, had previously announced that he would step down as the Forum’s chairman, and the Forum would launch a succession process to be completed by January 2027. The whistleblower report sped up that timeline. A Schwab family spokesperson denied the allegations in the whistleblower report, which claimed Schwab asked subordinates to withdraw thousands of dollars from ATMs on his behalf and used Forum funds to pay for private, in-room massages at hotels.

The report also alleged that Schwab’s wife, Hilde, a former employee of the organization, scheduled “token” meetings in order to justify luxury holiday travel, billing the Forum. The report also repeated concerns about how Schwab treated female employees, warning that his leadership allegedly allowed instances of sexual harassment and discriminatory behavior to go unchecked in the workplace. The Forum had previously investigated these concerns and disputed them. The World Economic Forum Board of Trustees met Sunday to accept Schwab’s resignation. Sources close to the matter told The Wall Street Journal that Schwab asked the board not to investigate the whistleblower report, but the board opened the probe, anyway. The Forum had been shaking up its leadership in recent weeks in response to a previous board probe into its workplace culture. Forum CEO Børge Brende said that investigation did not substantiate the allegations against Schwab.

This turmoil comes amid a growing global backlash to the World Economic Forum’s globalist vision. Newly-inaugurated President Donald Trump addressed the Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 23. In his speech, the president condemned the previous administration’s policies, which echoed the Forum’s advocacy. “What the world has witnessed in the past 72 hours is nothing less than a revolution of common sense,” Trump said. “My administration is acting with unprecedented speed to fix the disasters we’ve inherited from a totally inept group of people and to solve every single crisis facing our country.” Among other things, he touted his withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord—which the World Economic Forum supports—and his moves to “abolish all discriminatory diversity, equity, and inclusion nonsense”—another ideological initiative the Forum wholeheartedly backs.

Outgoing President Joe Biden awarded George Soros, the Hungarian American globalist billionaire, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. As I wrote in my book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government,” Soros-funded groups infiltrated and advised the Biden administration, pushing it in a globalist direction. In addition to the Paris agreement and DEI programs, the World Economic Forum has advocated a host of social and political changes that critics say would empower elites at the expense of personal freedom and economic progress. Schwab co-wrote the book, “COVID-19: The Great Reset,” published in July 2020, which outlines how the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted social and economic systems and calls for sweeping changes “to create a more inclusive, resilient, and sustainable world going forward.”

Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts traveled to Davos, Switzerland, for the Forum’s annual meeting in 2024, and condemned its globalist advocacy. He faulted the World Economic Forum for claiming that climate change poses an existential threat to humanity, that illegal immigration is positive, and that there is no public safety threat in large American cities. “I will be candid and say the agenda that every single member of the administration needs to have is to compile a list of everything that has ever been proposed at the World Economic Forum and object to all of them wholesale,” Roberts said, speaking as a leader of America’s conservative movement. “Anyone not prepared to do that and take away this power of the unelected bureaucrats and give it back to the American people is unprepared to be part of the next conservative administration.”

Read more …

“The phrase “Maryland Dad” is said with the same reverence by the media as “Honest Abe.”

The Left’s Mount Rushmore (Al Perrotta)

Carved into the stone of the Black Hills of South Dakota, four faces look down upon this great nation: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and Theodore Roosevelt. Four American heroes, revered, respected, and representing the noblest aspirations of the American people. The gentleman farmer-turned-general who took down the most powerful army in the world, then shepherded the newborn nation through its infancy. The folksy woodsman who freed a race of people and ensured the United States would move forward as one. The inventor, political philosopher, genius whose poetry turned a statement of independence into a declaration more powerful than any weapon against tyranny the world has ever known. The brash adventurer whose swagger and smarts best captures the can-do American spirit. This is America’s Mount Rushmore.

Sadly, today’s Left and it appears the entire Democratic Party have carved in recent days their own Mount Rushmore: Luigi Mangione, Karmelo Anthony, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and Mahmoud Khalil. A cold-blooded killer who shot a father of two in the back because he didn’t like the American health care system. A cold-blooded killer who allegedly stabbed a fellow teenager in the chest because he felt challenged and disrespected. An illegal immigrant, MS-13 gang-member, alleged human trafficker, who happened to be put back on the wrong plane back to his home country. And did we mention he’s an accused wife beater? An operative of a terrorist organization that promotes the genocide of Jews, who led violent protests against Jewish students … a guest in our country, who allegedly lied on his visa application. These are the Left’s new heroes. This is the Left’s new Mount Rushmore. (Sorry, George Floyd. You’re yesterday’s news.)

Approximately 3 million people a year visit Mount Rushmore. Visitor numbers for the Left’s Mount Rushmore aren’t quite that. Yet. But you did have a U.S. senator travel 2,000 miles to visit Abrego Garcia, with a gaggle of House Democrats soon following. You did have thousands visiting the courthouse holding pro-Hamas Columbia University student Khalil, and tens of thousands gathering around the country to protest his arrest. You did have over 13,400 people visiting the GiveSendGo site of Anthony, dropping enough coin to afford Anthony to not only pay his bail, but rent a $900,000 crib for his family and a hot new ride for himself. Over $455,000 raised because he stabbed a white kid in the chest. And you have countless women gathering at the courthouse to support and swoon over Mangione, the accused killer of UnitedHealth CEO Brian Thompson, like he is the freshly single member of a boy band.

Like the original Mount Rushmore, you can buy souvenirs for the Left’s Mount Rushmore. Don’t want a T-shirt of Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, or Roosevelt? You can get a St. Luigi T-shirt, mugs, and hats. Etsy’s full of “Free Mahmoud Khalil” T-shirts. A website was set up to sell Anthony swag. The phrase “Maryland Dad” is said with the same reverence by the media as “Honest Abe.” Mangione’s motto “Deny, Defend, Depose” is the Left’s new “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” This isn’t even about Mangione, Abrego Garcia, Anthony, or Khalil. Killers are going to kill, terrorists are going to terrorize, and gangbangers are going to gangbang. They no more earned the adoration than Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, and Roosevelt carved their own faces on Mount Rushmore. This isn’t even about the small fringe drawn to the worst among us. Even serial killers get love letters.

This is about the mindset of the Left that tears down statues of our Founders but lifts up lowlifes. Who throw their lot in with Maryland Dad to spite the Orange Man. Who declare that because America’s a racist nation it’s OK for a black kid to plunge a knife into a white kid. How is it that despite the carnage MS-13 has done in the state of Maryland, one of its senators, Chris Van Hollen, went to El Salvador on our dime in a failed bid to win Abrego Garcia’s release? And even after the Department of Justice dropped a load of documents from the Prince George’s County Police Department’s gang unit further proving Abrego Garcia’s MS-13 ties, after the Tennessee Star reported how he was pulled over in 2022, suspected of human trafficking, after documents were released where his wife swore he repeatedly beat her, Van Hollen vowed to continue to fight for his release. And indeed, met with him Thursday for a tropical sit-down as cozy as anything you’d see on “The Bachelor.”

Read more …

“I can’t remember the last time that people who voted on Election Day — the majority, uh, plurality of them — were Democrats.”

New Poll Data Confirms the Democrats’ Worst Fears (Margolis)

Can you believe it? The Democrats, once the supposed champions of the working class, have exposed themselves as nothing more than elitist snobs who couldn’t care less about real Americans. Recent polling has confirmed what conservatives have known all along: the Democratic Party is now the domain of overeducated, snobby, wealthy liberals who look down on anyone who doesn’t share their “enlightened” worldview. Remember when Democrats at least pretended to care about the working class? Those days are long gone, replaced by a woke agenda that caters to the most unhinged elements of society. Now, they’re more interested in slobbering over MS-13 gangbangers than addressing the real concerns of everyday Americans.

Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik didn’t sugarcoat the situation during a conversation with Mark Halperin on 2WAY. The latest poll numbers, he explained, confirm what many on the Left have feared for months: the Democratic Party is in serious trouble. In a blunt, unflinching analysis, Sosnik laid out a series of hard truths that paint a grim picture of the party’s standing with American voters and underscore just how deep the erosion has become. First, Sosnik pointed to the seismic shift in party affiliation. “The electorate in 2024 was 6% less Democratic than compared to four years ago,” Halperin noted, asking if that level of movement was historically significant. Sosnik didn’t mince words: “The shift is significant, but more importantly… I can’t remember the last time that people who voted on Election Day — the majority, uh, plurality of them — were Democrats.”

He continued, “It shows a real erosion for the Democratic Party,” noting that many of the Democrats who backed Biden in 2020 simply didn’t show up this time around. That drop-off was made even more glaring when coupled with the latest favorability ratings. “Lowest net favorable rating since the ’90s,” Halperin remarked, prompting Sosnik to outline a trifecta of disasters driving the collapse in support: inflation, immigration, and cultural arrogance. On the economic front, Sosnik admitted, “We had the worst inflation in America since the early 1980s.” He added that by the time Election Day arrived, “everything… was on average 20% higher than when Biden took office.” That kind of economic pain, Sosnik argued, doesn’t just dent a party; it shatters its credibility.

But the damage didn’t stop there. Immigration, Sosnik said, became both a practical problem and a symbol. “There’s a concern that people, uh, for their own personal… safety and security… the immigration issue was sort of both a real problem for Democrats, but also… a proxy for just a general sense that there was a lawlessness with a Democratic administration.” That perception of disorder extended into the cities, where “these big cities around America that were largely… governed by Democrats” seemed unable — or unwilling — to maintain control.” Then came the cultural disconnect, the sense that Democrats had abandoned everyday Americans in favor of elite ideologies.

“A lot of people in America in the middle of the country thought Democrats were looking down on them,” Sosnik said bluntly. He attributed part of that disconnect to “how they talked, issues they cared about, all the DEI programs.” The result? A broadening sense among voters that Democrats “weren’t competent to govern.” Taken together, the conversation was less a diagnosis than an autopsy. The Democrats aren’t just facing a messaging problem; they’re grappling with a wholesale rejection from swaths of the electorate they once considered safe. The warnings have been mounting for years. Now, with favorability cratering and voters fleeing, the party is watching those warnings come to life.

Read more …

Biggest success story of the Trump team so far is probably Bobby Kennedy. And he’s got much more. He‘s also got a formidable team with guys like Bhattacharya and Makary. Who somewhat ironically became visible because of the Covid disaster.

HHS, FDA Announce Phase-Out Of All Artificial Food Dyes (ZH)

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s quest to “Make America Healthy Again” grew far more substantial on Tuesday, with the announcement that the federal government will eliminate all petroleum-based synthetic food dyes by the end of 2026. The announcement came at a Washington DC news conference, with RFK Jr joined by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Marty Makary and National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya. The podium was flanked by “MAHA Moms” and their children; the moms are a coalition of outspoken advocates of the Trump administration’s health agenda.

Kennedy framed the move against artificial, petroleum-based dyes using forceful language: “For too long, some food producers have been feeding Americans petroleum-based chemicals without their knowledge or consent. These poisonous compounds offer no nutritional benefit and pose real, measurable dangers to our children’s health and development. That era is coming to an end. We’re restoring gold-standard science, applying common sense, and beginning to earn back the public’s trust. And we’re doing it by working with industry to get these toxic dyes out of the foods our families eat every day.”

The first two dyes in the crosshairs are Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B. The FDA is initiating a process to revoke their authorizations “within the coming months.” The FDA will also pressure food producers to eradicate Red No. 3 earlier than Jan 15, 2027. The Biden administration had already set that deadline for its removal from foods and beverages, after long-running concerns about its potential to cause cancer and interfere with hormonal functions. The FDA will also pursue the removal of the remaining six previously-approved petroleum-based dyes by the end of 2026.

Here’s a small sampling of foods these artificial dyes are used in today:
Blue No. 1: M&Ms, blue sports drinks
Blue No. 2: Cereals, candy
Citrus Red No 2: Enhancing the color of real orange rinds
Green No. 3: Mint candy, Sour Patch Kids
Orange B: Hot dog and sausage casings
Red Dye 40: Flamin’ Hot Cheetos, M&Ms, sports drinks, cereals
Yellow No. 5: Mountain Dew, Froot Loops, Doritos
Yellow No. 6: Reese’s Pieces, Cheetos,
Red Dye No. 3: Drinks, cakes, cookies, frozen desserts, frosting, icing

“For the last 50 years, American children have increasingly been living in a toxic soup of synthetic chemicals,” said Makary. Justifying the sweeping change, the former Johns Hopkins surgeon pointed to a Lancet study that found artificial colors cause “increased hyperactivity” in a study of 3-year-olds and 8- and a 9-year-old children. He also cautioned that there’s more to America’s health problems than petroleum-based food dyes: “There’s no one ingredient that accounts for the child chronic disease epidemic. And let’s be honest, taking petroleum-based food dyes out of the food supply is not a silver bullet that will instantly make America’s children healthy, but it is one important step.”

Read more …

” Nenner also thinks the US dollar is going to be okay and will not fall much more—for now. By the way, Nenner says he is up 40% so far in 2025.”

Depression Cycle Arrives in 2025 & 2026 – Charles Nenner (USAW)

Renowned geopolitical and financial cycle expert Charles Nenner is not only predicting a big war cycle but a depression coming by the end of 2025 and into 2026. It’s not caused by the Trump tariffs; it’s just part of the cycle that Nenner follows. When does this big downturn start? Nenner explains, “In the next few months . . . and the end of this year will be a down year. 2026 will also be a down year. It’s going to be very serious. I wrote last year I expect the S&P to go down to 4,000. So, from 6,200 to 4,000 if you are in bad stocks, you could lose 50% of your money, and to get that back, you have to make 100% on what is left of your money. Then we can have a bounce and go lower again. If you look at the list of brokers, 99% are positive. They were talking about the S&P going to 6,800, and then they changed their minds when it came down.”

Nenner is predicting a down year for the stock market this year, but look out in 2026. Nenner says, “It will be much worse in 2026 because the cycles in 1928 and 1929 are in the same position as 2025 and 2026.” Can it shoot through 4,000 on the S&P? Nenner says, “Most definitely, I think so, yeah . . . we expect a bounce from there before it goes down again.” Beyond that, Nenner has long called for a DOW at 5,000. It’s nearly 39,000 today. Nenner says, “I calculated it at 5,000, yes, and I have not calculated it for the S&P.” That is pretty bearish, and before people pooh-pooh what Nenner is saying, listen to his logic on this subject.

Nenner explains, “Let’s take one simple assumption. If there is a big war between China and Tiawan, do you think the market goes up? Do you think there is a chance of it – 50/50? So, there is a 50/50 chance only based on this idea the markets are not going to do well. . . . Of course, China wants to take over Tiawan. . . . There is no history that it does not belong to China. . . . If US gets in a war with China, it will lose. . . US lost 15 out of 15 war games in simulated war with China.” Nenner still likes gold for the long term and has been predicting it’s rise. On silver, Nenner says, “Silver is behind, but starting in May, we expect silver to start catching up—finally.” Nenner thinks interest rates are still in a long-term trend up, but there can be pullbacks. Nenner also thinks the US dollar is going to be okay and will not fall much more—for now. By the way, Nenner says he is up 40% so far in 2025.

Read more …

“.. imagine China providing free doctors to the whole planet, free tutors to every child on the planet, and using, essentially, free goods and services to spread their political philosophy.”

Why U.S. Must Win AI Race Against China – Khosla (ZH)

Venture capitalist Vinod Khosla has issued a grave warning, declaring that the United States is in a do-or-die AI race against China, with the specter of worldwide communist ideology looming if America falters. Khosla cautioned that failing to lead in AI could allow China’s authoritarian regime to impose its oppressive vision globally. “There’s another kind of risk I worry about even more” Khosla told X interviewer Mario Nawfal. “China can use AI in cyber warfare or physical warfare on the battlefield, but the one I worry about even more is the economic power that AI will give a nation that moves fast and wins the race.”

“Once you have economic power, I think it’s trivially easy by 2030 to imagine China providing free doctors to the whole planet, free tutors to every child on the planet, and using, essentially, free goods and services to spread their political philosophy.” Khosla, who co-founded Sun Microsystems and later became one of OpenAI’s earliest backers through his venture capital firm Khosla Ventures, went a step further by [calling] China’s possession of powerful AI a potentially deadly threat to the world. “The biggest risk is AI in Chinese hands—or any bad hands. The more powerful the entity, the bigger the risk,” the Indian-American technologist said. “If somebody used a nuclear weapon, it’s verifiable. AI, when used, may not be verifiable.”

President Donald Trump has made it a key priority for the U.S. to dominate AI. In January, Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence,” aimed at solidifying U.S. dominance in AI by revoking what his administration deemed restrictive policies from President Joe Biden’s 2023 AI Executive Order. Trump’s order rescinded Biden’s framework, which emphasized oversight, risk mitigation, and equity, including requirements for companies to share safety test results with the government and address AI’s potential for discrimination. Instead, Trump’s directive prioritizes deregulation, calling for AI systems free from “ideological bias or engineered social agendas” to boost innovation, economic competitiveness, and national security.

It mandates a 180-day AI Action Plan, led by key advisors like AI and Crypto Czar David Sacks, to streamline policies and eliminate bureaucratic hurdles. Trump has promoted a $500 billion joint venture between OpenAI, Oracle, and SoftBank, which he described as “the largest AI infrastructure project in history.” The initiative aims to construct a nationwide network of data centers across the United States. “China is a competitor and others are competitors. We want it to be in this country,” Trump said at the White House announcement, joined by OpenAI’s Sam Altman, SoftBank’s Masayoshi Son, and Oracle’s Larry Ellison. “We have to get this stuff built,” the president added. “They have to produce a lot of electricity and we’ll make it possible for them to get that production done very easily at their own plants.”

Read more …

Fully unprovoked.

Ukraine Complicit in 2014 Massacre: European Court of Human Rights (Kuzmarov)

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ordered the Ukrainian government to compensate the victims of a May 2014 arson attack on the Trade Unions Building in Odessa. The attack was carried out by fascist thugs who were empowered in the U.S.-NATO-backed Maidan coup in Ukraine. Some 42 people were killed during the burning of the Trade Unions Building and 170 more were injured. The victims were mainly anti-Maidan activists who supported the legitimate Ukrainian government led by Viktor Yanukovych that was overthrown in a February 2014 coup. A lawsuit was filed with the ECHR in Strasbourg by relatives of 25 of the arson victims, along with three survivors of the massacre, who were awarded a total of 114,700 Euros in compensation. One would have a hard time finding anything about the ECHR ruling in the U.S. and Western media.

Even supposedly left-wing and alternative outlets like Democracy Now and The Intercept have ignored the story along with more mainstream outlets. The only reports I could find were written by Jason Melanovski in the World Socialist Website (WSWS) and Kit Klarenberg in The Grayzone. The ECHR’s findings were especially significant because of its heavy anti-Russia bias. The court found that Ukrainian government officials were aware of the violence that far-right storm-troopers were preparing, and that, in addition to doing nothing, purposely withheld fire and emergency services as the Trade Unions Building was burning. (1) Later, they actively engaged in a cover-up. The cruelty of the perpetrators was apparent as they were captured on video physically attacking people who had jumped out of the Trade Unions Building to escape the flames and were badly injured.

A pregnant woman in the building was strangled with an electric cord and left with a swastika drawn from her blood on the wall. (2) Right-wing thugs surround leftist who escaped the Odessa Trade Unions Building during the fire. Afterwards, the man was savagely beaten, but he survived. [Source: 2mayodessa.org] The video and photos showed Ukrainian riot police standing by, doing nothing to stop or prevent the savage violence being carried out by the right-sector Banderites. The inadequacy of the Ukrainian government investigation was apparent in the fact that on-site inspection of the burned out Trade Unions Building only began two weeks after the massacre. The Trade Unions House remained freely accessible for 17 days afterwards, giving malicious actors plenty of time to manipulate, remove or plant incriminating evidence.

Serious omissions were noted in the securing and processing of forensic evidence. Some essential evidence had never been examined, and some examination reports had only recently been issued or remained pending eight years after the events (3). According to the Russian newspaper Pravda, the Odessa massacre was set in motion when right-sector radicals who valorized Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera attacked a tent camp in Kulikovo Pole in Odessa. These radicals were under the command of Andriy Parubiy, the pro-Nazi head of Kyiv’s national defense and security bureau at the time, who had been dispatched with 500 armed members of the Maidan Self-Defense militia to Odessa on the eve of the massacre (4). Odessa was one of the centers of resistance to the Maidan coup. Located near Transnistria, home to a Russian military base, it is the last major seaport of Ukraine, along with Nikolaev and Mariupol, and hosted Ukraine’s Black Sea Fleet.

The geopolitical website Katehon noted that the loss of Odessa would have cut off Ukraine from the sea, and that geostrategic considerations explain why Ukrainian neo-Nazis were given a carte blanche to intimidate the population of Odessa and carry out the Trade Unions Building massacre with impunity. The Katehon analyst wrote that “the agonizing death of more than 100 people, for which none of the perpetrators have been punished, was primarily a tool of intimidation. Following the massacre on May 2nd in Odessa, the pro-Russian movement was virtually destroyed.” (5) Prior to the massacre, Odessa residents had been collecting signatures for holding a referendum on the federalization of Ukraine and giving the Russian language state status after Ukraine tried to impose the Ukrainian language on the entire region.

[..] Intelligence specialist Gordon Duff wrote in The Intel Drop that the Odessa massacre was not an isolated event but a blueprint for a litany of atrocities that followed. These included:
• The firing by Ukrainian security forces on May 9, 2014, on peaceful protesters in Mariupol who were against the Maidan coup;
• The Ukrainian army’s shelling of homes, schools and hospitals in Sloviansk in June 2014 and carrying out summary executions and torture;
• The ambushing of a convoy of civilians trying to flee Luhansk in August 2014; and
• Ukraine’s firing of rockets at a city bus in Donetsk, resulting in the death of 13 civilians in January 2015.[8]

According to Duff, NATO personnel were on the ground during many of the above operations, advising and directing Ukrainian forces. Additionally, Duff wrote that:
• CIA cash from Afghan heroin trafficking was funneled into Ukraine and paid for weapons, training and Banderist paramilitaries.
• The staging for the Odessa and other massacres was done at the CIA rendition site in Poland, a massive 11,000-hectare facility where Ukrainian radicals were trained in torture, psychological operations and guerrilla warfare.
• Indoctrination of Banderist units took place in Gladiator Schools, financed through GOP campaign funds laundered via a major casino-owning family deeply involved in human trafficking through Macau.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

DMSO
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1914905633360318560

 

 

RFK
https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/1915054512252866990

 

 

2008
https://twitter.com/DiedSuddenly_/status/1914862355256693061

 

 

Fico
https://twitter.com/SaiKate108/status/1914951702404587544

 

 

Twins

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 232025
 


Edward Hopper Sailing 1911

 

Trump Makes ‘Final Offer’ To End Ukraine Conflict – Axios (RT)
Trump Signals Step Back On China Tariffs (DC)
‘Only Trust Primary Sources’ On US-Russia Talks – Kremlin (RT)
Ukraine Not Ready to Discuss US Peace Plan Proposal – Reports (RT)
Ukraine Will Not Recognize Russia’s Crimea – Zelensky (RT)
Rubio and Witkoff To Skip London Ukraine Talks (RT)
EU and UK Preparing Naval Blockade of Russia – Patrushev (RT)
Zelensky Could Easily Rig Wartime Election – Ex-Campaign Chief (RT)
US To Propose Crimea Recognition As Part of Ukraine Peace Deal – WaPo (RT)
Putin Offers To Halt Fighting Along Current Front Lines In Ukraine: FT (ZH)
Tesla Shares Pop 5% After Musk Says He’ll Limit Time With DOGE In May (ZH)
Rubio Announces MAJOR State Department Overhaul (PJM)
Trump’s Courage to Fight the Good Fight (DS)
How Trump ‘Restored Law and Order’ to US Borders (Allen)
Woke Blackout in Tinseltown (Ryumshin)
The Big Short and The Bigger Long (Egon von Greyerz)

 

 


Nikas Safronov (gifted to Trump by Putin)

 

 


https://twitter.com/iam_smx/status/1914636471778111601

JFK

Nap/Sachs

Rice

Zeldin

BlackRock
https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/1914581682675449912

 

 

 

 

“..the US is said to be prepared to grant “de jure” recognition of Crimea as part of Russia, and unofficially acknowledge Moscow’s “de facto” control over the[four regions]..”

Zelensky simply says no, not acceptable. For Kiev, It’s just a game.

Trump Makes ‘Final Offer’ To End Ukraine Conflict – Axios (RT)

Washington has presented Kiev with what US President Donald Trump is calling a “final offer” to end the conflict in Ukraine, according to a report by Axios. The Kremlin, however, has urged the public to rely on official sources for developments in US–Russian talks. The one-page document was reportedly drafted following Trump envoy Steve Witkoff’s four-hour meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this month, and was presented to Ukrainian officials in Paris last week, Axios reported on Tuesday, citing unnamed sources with direct knowledge of the discussions. Under the proposed deal, the US is said to be prepared to grant “de jure” recognition of Crimea as part of Russia, and unofficially acknowledge Moscow’s “de facto” control over the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics, as well as the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions.

The plan also includes provisions for lifting post-2014 sanctions on Moscow and enhancing bilateral economic cooperation. In addition, Washington would formally oppose Ukraine’s bid to join NATO. In return, Ukraine would reportedly receive a “robust security guarantee” from a coalition of EU and other like-minded countries, though the proposal lacks details on how this “peacekeeping” operation would function. Russia has consistently rejected the deployment of NATO forces to Ukraine under any pretext. The framework also promises Kiev unimpeded access to the Dnepr River and potential compensation for reconstruction efforts, although it does not specify where the funding would originate. The plan references a minerals deal between the US and Ukraine, which Trump expects to be signed on Thursday.

Another component of the proposal, according to Axios, involves designating the area around the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant (NPP) as neutral territory under US administration. Washington reportedly expects Kiev to respond to the proposal during a multinational meeting in London on Wednesday. Both Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio will skip the event, with General Keith Kellogg, another Trump envoy focused on Ukraine, leading the US delegation instead. Witkoff is expected to travel to Moscow for a follow-up meeting with Putin. Rubio warned last week that the US could abandon the peace initiative and “move on” to other issues if negotiations fail. Trump said on Monday there is “a good chance of solving the problem” this week.

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly ruled out ceding any territory to Russia and continues to urge the US and other allies to provide sustained military support. Moscow has consistently stated that the status of Crimea – which joined Russia in 2014 following a referendum held after a Western-backed coup in Kiev – and the four other former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia in 2022 is not open to negotiation. Russian officials insist that any peace agreement must address the “root causes” of the conflict. Putin has added that a viable ceasefire would require Western nations to halt arms deliveries to Ukraine.

Read more …

“..I think they’re going to be happy, and I think we’re going to live together very happily and ideally work together.”

Trump Signals Step Back On China Tariffs (DC)

President Donald Trump signaled Tuesday evening from the Oval Office that the U.S. will ease tariffs on China, saying they’ll “come down substantially” but won’t be eliminated entirely. On April 2, Trump announced reciprocal tariffs on several countries, with higher rates for nations like China due to their own trade barriers against the U.S. When asked Tuesday about the tariffs against the foreign country, Trump said that the 145% hit would not last forever. “I’m sure 145% is very high, and it won’t be that high, not going to be that high,” Trump said. “It got up to there. We were talking about fentanyl where, you know, various elements built it up to 145. No, it won’t be anywhere near that high.” Following Trump’s initial tariff announcement, the U.S. and China entered a tariff war, with China responding by imposing steep tariffs of its own.

By April 9, Trump said the U.S. would raise tariffs on China from 104% to 125% — after the country refused to lift its retaliatory measures — while implementing a 90-day pause on tariffs for other countries. “It’ll come down substantially, but it won’t be zero. It used to be zero,” Trump said. “We were just destroyed. China was taking us for a ride and just not going to — it’s not going to happen. We’re going to be very good to China. I have a great relationship with President Xi, but they would make billions and billions and billions of dollars a year, and they were building a military out of the United States on what they made.” By April 10, the White House said that Trump’s announced 125% tariff would actually total 145% on all Chinese imports, according to The New York Times.

The administration said the 125% would be added on top of a previously announced 20% tariff already in place on goods from China, the outlet reported. “So that won’t happen. But they’re going to do very well, and I think they’re going to be happy, and I think we’re going to live together very happily and ideally work together. So I think it’s going to work out very well, but, no, it’s at 145%. It will not be anywhere near that number,” Trump said. During a speech Tuesday, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he expects a “de-escalation” in the tariff war between the U.S. and China, adding that the ongoing conflict would be unsustainable in the long run, according to the Associated Press.

Read more …

Maybe the no.1 item for the day. If the Kremlin feels they must warn about what everybody already knows, it’s serious. The other day I mentioned NPR, NYT, Politico as suspicious sources on the topic. Today the FT very much joins those ranks.

“A lot of fakes are being published now, including by respected publications..”

‘Only Trust Primary Sources’ On US-Russia Talks – Kremlin (RT)

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has urged people to go to the primary sources regarding developments in talks with the US on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, warning of fake news. In an interview with RIA Novosti on Tuesday, Peskov was asked to comment on a recent report from the Financial Times claiming that Moscow is ready to freeze the conflict along the current front lines. “A lot of fakes are being published now, including by respected publications, so you should only listen to the primary sources,” he said. According to the FT article from Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to freeze the conflict during his meeting with US special envoy Steve Witkoff earlier this month in St. Petersburg.

Russian presidential foreign policy aide Yury Ushakov confirmed on Tuesday that Moscow is expecting another visit from Witkoff later this week. This will be the diplomat’s fourth visit to Russia since the start of the US diplomatic push regarding the Ukraine conflict. US President Donald Trump has touted a big reveal of his plan to wrap up the hostilities in Ukraine. “I will be giving you a full detail over the next three days,” he told journalists on Monday, adding that the US has “had very good meetings on Ukraine, Russia.” The Kremlin stated that while work is underway, the peace process is unlikely to conclude soon.

“This topic is so complex that it probably shouldn’t be constrained by strict timeframes,” Peskov told the press on Tuesday. Trump and his administration have signaled growing dissatisfaction with the pace of the peace talks. “If it is not possible to end the war in Ukraine, we need to move on,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters last Friday. Throughout the conflict, Moscow has said it is open to talks with Kiev. Negotiations must be based on the realities on the ground and address the root causes, such as Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The Kremlin previously stated that it would not accept a temporary halt in the hostilities, saying this would simply allow Ukraine’s Western backers to rearm its military.

Read more …

“Not ready yet.” Trump is being played.

Ukraine Not Ready to Discuss US Peace Plan Proposal – Reports (RT)

Ukraine appears to be reluctant to discuss the peace plan framework, prepared by the United States, during the upcoming talks in London, Axios reports, citing a US official. In the past 24 hours, there had been “indications from the Ukrainians” that they only planned to discuss a 30-day ceasefire on Wednesday, instead of US President Donald Trump’s complex peace plan proposal, Axios said on Tuesday night. The Washington Post reported earlier on Tuesday, citing people familiar with the matter, that the Trump administration was going to propose during the upcoming talks with Ukrainian and European representatives in London that Crimea gets recognized as part of Russia and that the front lines get freezed as part of a peace agreement.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday, citing a person with knowledge of the negotiations, that British and French officials were “open to a scenario” where Ukraine would “accept the loss of control of some of the territories taken by Russia,” in exchange for economic support and security guarantees. The newspaper specified that France and the United Kingdom would prefer a Ukraine peace deal that acknowledged control of territories “only in a de facto way.” The New York Post reported, citing a senior US administration official, that Kiev was seemingly “willing to give up 20% of its land,” but only if it was considered a “de facto” recognition of the territory and not “de jure.”

Last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff, the US special presidential envoy for the Middle East, held talks on the conflict resolution with representatives from Germany, the United Kingdom and Ukraine, as well as with French President Emmanuel Macron, in Paris. On April 18, Rubio said he hoped the next meeting between Ukrainian and European representatives would lead to progress in the Ukrainian settlement. On Tuesday, US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said that Rubio was not going to attend the upcoming talks in London. The US will be represented by special envoy Keith Kellogg. Axios suggested on Tuesday that the decision to send Kellogg was made because of Kiev’s reluctance to discuss Trump’s peace plan framework.

Read more …

Zelensky claims Russia wants to prolong the war…

Ukraine Will Not Recognize Russia’s Crimea – Zelensky (RT)

Kiev refuses to discuss recognizing Crimea as a Russian territory, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky told journalists on Tuesday, according to Ukrainian outlet Suspilne. “[Crimea] is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine. We have nothing to talk about on this topic – it is outside our Constitution,” Zelensky said. The Ukrainian leader claimed that discussing the issue of Crimean ownership will only lead to prolonging the war. “As soon as we start talking about Crimea, about our sovereign territories, we enter the format of prolonging the war,” he said, adding that this is “what Russia wants.”

Read more …

The US will now send Kellogg, who was recently demoted to make place for Witkoff.

“Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov reportedly told the US envoys that Kiev is “90%” aligned with Washington’s proposed peace framework..”

Rubio and Witkoff To Skip London Ukraine Talks (RT)

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio will not attend the upcoming Ukraine talks in London, despite earlier plans to take part, the State Department has confirmed. President Donald Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, has also withdrawn from the meeting, according to the Financial Times, and is expected to visit Moscow instead. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce cited scheduling conflicts as the reason for Rubio’s withdrawal from Wednesday’s talks, insisting this does not signal a change in the US commitment to the peace process. “Secretary Rubio is a busy man… And so when there’s certain plans, they’re conditional. And in this particular instance, while the meetings in London are still occurring, he will not be attending. But that is not a statement regarding the meetings; it’s a statement about logistical issues in his schedule,” Bruce told journalists on Tuesday.

General Keith Kellogg, another Trump envoy tasked with negotiating with Kiev directly, will represent Washington at the London discussions. The talks will include officials from the UK, France, and Germany – countries that advocate continued military support for Ukraine – as well as representatives from Kiev. The London talks follow a series of high-level meetings in Paris last week, where Rubio and Witkoff held discussions with European and Ukrainian officials. According to the New York Post, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov reportedly told the US envoys that Kiev is “90%” aligned with Washington’s proposed peace framework, which has not yet been made public. Sources cited by the Washington Post on Tuesday claimed that the US proposals include formally recognizing Crimea as Russian territory and potentially lifting sanctions on Moscow as part of a future agreement.

Meanwhile, the Financial Times claimed that Russia is prepared to halt the hostilities along the current front line. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov urged the media and public to rely on official sources regarding developments in US–Russian talks on the Ukraine conflict, warning that “a lot of fakes are being published now, including by respected publications.” Both Washington and Moscow have officially confirmed that Witkoff will travel to Russia for talks “later this week.” Moscow has stated that the status of Crimea – which joined Russia in 2014 following a referendum held after a Western-backed coup in Kiev – and the four other former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia in 2022, is not subject to negotiation. Russian officials maintain that recognizing the “reality on the ground” is essential to achieving a lasting peace.

Read more …

Russia would have to react. EU and UK hope that starts a war with NATO.

EU and UK Preparing Naval Blockade of Russia – Patrushev (RT)

The EU and the UK are gearing up to impose a naval blockade on Russia, Nikolay Patrushev, a senior aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, has said. He warned that Moscow has a fleet powerful enough to respond to any such move. In an interview published on Monday by Kommersant, Patrushev, who chairs Russia’s Maritime Board, a body which oversees national policy in this domain, stated that Moscow is facing escalating threats and challenges at sea amid growing geopolitical tensions. “The collective West no longer hides its intentions to expel our shipping from the seas, while sanctions plans mulled, for example, by the British and some EU members increasingly resemble a maritime blockade,” he said. Patrushev warned that these steps would “meet an adequate and proportionate response” from Moscow.

“If diplomatic or legal instruments do not take effect, the security of Russian shipping will be ensured by our navy. The hotheads in London or Brussels need to clearly understand this,” he said. Patrushev emphasized that Russia is pursuing a large-scale naval modernization program, including the development and deployment of unmanned systems while refining navy tactics. However, Moscow does not intend to get involved in a “naval arms race,” he added. Western countries introduced maritime restrictions on Russia in 2022 over the Ukraine conflict, and have sanctioned dozens of Russian ships for allegedly circumventing an oil price cap. Russian ships have also faced major obstacles in accessing EU ports, insurers, and financial institutions.

The British Navy has been shadowing Russian ships passing near its waters for months, citing concerns about a perceived threat to national security and maritime infrastructure. Maritime tensions have also been heightened in recent months following several ruptures in underwater infrastructure in the Baltic Sea. While there has been speculation about alleged Russian involvement, Western officials have offered no evidence. The Kremlin has dismissed the speculation as “absurd.” NATO has increased its military presence in the Baltic Sea following the sabotage allegations, prompting Russia to warn that it would respond appropriately to any “violations” by the bloc’s vessels.

Read more …

You can’t have a fair election with him as a candidate, or an organizer.

Zelensky Could Easily Rig Wartime Election – Ex-Campaign Chief (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has the ability to manipulate the outcome of a presidential election under the current martial law, according to his former campaign chief, Dmitry Razumkov. Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, but he asserts that no leadership change can occur while the conflict with Russia persists. In an interview with journalist Anna Maksimchuk on Monday, Razumkov, a seasoned political strategist who propelled Zelensky to power, expressed concern over his former client’s ability to maintain control. ”If someone devises a system for elections under martial law, Zelensky will end up with 102% of the vote,” he quipped. “They’ll station conscription officers at every polling station and draft on the spot anyone who dares not support the current government.”

Razumkov further criticized the notion of conducting a remote election via Ukraine’s e-government service, asserting that “whoever controls Dia will then secure that same 102%.” He quipped that Russia could engineer Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko’s election in Ukraine through such a faulty system. “Dia,” which translates to “the state and I,” is an app closely associated with Digitalization Minister Mikhail Fedorov. Razumkov managed the successful 2019 campaign that turned Zelensky from a comedian into a head of state. Subsequently, he served as the speaker of parliament until 2021, when he was ousted by fellow lawmakers from the president’s party in what many observers said was a consolidation of power.

Zelensky has continuously extended martial law in Ukraine roughly every three months, with the latest prolongation last week pushing the expiration date to early August. His emergency rule has even been condemned by US President Donald Trump, who called Zelensky a “dictator without elections” in February. Moscow contends that, according to the Ukrainian constitution, Zelensky should transfer presidential authority to the current parliamentary speaker, Ruslan Stefanchuk. Zelensky’s refusal to do so casts doubt on the legal validity of any documents he signs, including potentially a peace treaty with Russia, President Vladimir Putin has observed.

Read more …

“.. it was “Witkoff’s idea” for the US to designate Crimea as Russian “without forcing Ukraine to recognize it.”

US To Propose Crimea Recognition As Part of Ukraine Peace Deal – WaPo (RT)

Washington will propose a peace deal recognizing Russian sovereignty over Crimea and freezing the front lines in the Ukraine conflict at a meeting with Ukrainian and European officials this week, the Washington Post has reported, citing sources. The US is expected to hold talks in London on Wednesday with Ukrainian and European officials as US President Donald Trump continues his push for a deal. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Trump’s envoys Steve Witkoff and Keith Kellogg are reportedly set to meet foreign ministers and security advisers from France, Germany, the UK, and Ukraine. People familiar with the matter told the outlet on Tuesday that US proposals, presented to Ukraine in Paris last week, include Washington formally recognizing Crimea as Russian territory and eventually lifting sanctions against Moscow under a future accord.

One Western official described the pressure on Ukraine as “astounding.” European officials are expected to push for security guarantees for Ukraine and postwar reconstruction efforts, possibly funded in part by frozen Russian assets, the report said.Trump has threatened to walk away if progress is not made soon, and told reporters on Monday that he would be releasing details of the US proposals “over the next three days.” US special envoy Steve Witkoff, who has had multiple rounds of talks with senior Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, will visit Russia later this week, Moscow has confirmed. According to one of the Post’s sources, it was “Witkoff’s idea” for the US to designate Crimea as Russian “without forcing Ukraine to recognize it.”

Crimea held a referendum to join Russia in 2014 following a Western-backed armed coup in Kiev. The new Ukrainian government, along with its Western supporters, has refused to recognize the vote’s legitimacy.Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has ruled out relinquishing any territorial claims against Russia and has urged the US and other nations to continue providing military aid – a policy the Trump administration has said it will end. Moscow insists that the status of Crimea, the city of Sevastopol, and the four former Ukrainian regions which voted to join Russia in 2022, is not up for negotiation. Russian officials have emphasized that recognizing the “reality on the ground” is key to achieving lasting peace.

Read more …

This is the report the Kremlin warns about.

Putin Offers To Halt Fighting Along Current Front Lines In Ukraine: FT (ZH)

In a huge development, President Vladimir Putin has offered to halt his invasion of Ukraine across the current front line as part of ongoing efforts to work with US President Donald Trump toward reaching a permanent peace deal. This reportedly happened during ongoing dialogue with Trump’s top envoys. This is according to several sources which spoke to Financial Times, which wrote further in a Tuesday report, “The proposal is the first formal indication Putin has given since the war’s early months three years ago that Russia could step back from its maximalist demands to end the invasion.” “The Russian president told Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, during a meeting in St Petersburg earlier this month that Moscow could relinquish its claims to areas of four partly occupied Ukrainian regions that remain under Kyiv’s control, three of the people said,” FT continues.

The Kremlin side has not publicly acknowledged this, and so the breaking report should be taken with a grain of salt, given this contradicts Putin’s public stance that Russia will never relinquish the four territories which were declared part of the Russian Federation after the Moscow-backed referendums of Sept. 2022. However, if Russian forces did simply halt their advance based on an agreed-upon freeze in fighting, there would be portions of these territories still not under Russian military control. The FT report goes on, “The US has since floated ideas for a possible settlement that includes Washington recognizing Russian ownership of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, the people added, as well as at least acknowledging the Kremlin’s de facto control over the parts of the four regions it currently holds.”

All of this is being reported hours after Ukraine’s President Zelensky said he has rejected the possibility of ceding over Crimea, after the Trump administration reportedly offered the ‘gift’ to Putin of US recognition of Russian sovereignty over the strategic peninsula and home to the Russian navy’s Black Sea fleet. According to Ukrainian media: “Ukraine will not legally recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea under any circumstances, President Volodymyr Zelensky said during a briefing in Kyiv on April 22. “There is nothing to talk about. This violates our Constitution. This is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine,” Zelensky told reporters. Zelensky added, “As soon as talks about Crimea and our sovereign territories begin, the talks enter the format that Russia wants — prolonging the war – because it will not be possible to agree on everything quickly.”

Kiev has also recently accused Moscow of using negotiations as a smokescreen while in actuality prolonging the war, also coming off the 30-hour Eastern truce, which saw both sides accuse the other of many violations. The Financial Times acknowledged this possibility, and the fact that Moscow is in the driver’s seat related to any potential settlement that would end the conflict, in the following: But European officials briefed on US efforts to end the war cautioned that Putin would probably use the apparent concession as bait to lure Trump into accepting Russia’s other demands and forcing them on Ukraine as a fait accompli. “There is a lot of pressure on Kyiv right now to give up on things so Trump can claim victory,” one of them said.

The reality remains that if Zelensky can’t so much as admit that Crimea will be permanently in Russia’s hands, with no hope of Kiev ever getting it back, the prospect of a peace settlement happening anytime soon seems very remote. But clearly Moscow is seeking to show itself willing to compromise by these overtures, but whether there’s much substance or genuineness behind the offer to halt all frontline fighting is another question. At the moment, at least 99.5% of Kursk territory is back in Russia’s control. Russia’s military also still continues to advance in remaining parts of Donetsk still held by Ukraine, but slowly and village by village.

Read more …

Tesla will be alright. So will Musk.

Tesla Shares Pop 5% After Musk Says He’ll Limit Time With DOGE In May (ZH)

In a candid call with analysts on Tuesday, Elon Musk announced that he will begin scaling back his involvement with the federal government starting in May, signaling a shift in priorities back toward Tesla. As a result, Tesla shares were up 5% late in the after hours session.“I think starting probably next month, May, my time allocation to DOGE will drop significantly,” Musk said. Musk has been a central figure in the effort to streamline the federal government under the Trump administration through an initiative he dubbed the “Department of Government Efficiency,” or DOGE. That effort has involved an aggressive reduction of federal workforce levels, targeting DEI programs, and a broad reorganization of agency resources. Despite growing protests against Tesla and Musk’s role in Washington, he remains unapologetic. “The work with DOGE is critical,” he stated, while dismissing the backlash as “organized and paid for.”

Although the billionaire entrepreneur holds the title of “special government employee”—a designation that legally limits him to 130 days of federal work per year—his presence in the capital has been nothing short of influential. Musk indicated that the heavy lifting to establish DOGE is “mostly done,” allowing him to reallocate his schedule. “I will spend ‘a day or two’ per week on government matters if President Trump wants me to,” he said, but emphasized that more of his attention will now return to Tesla. Despite his pullback from the capital, Musk said he will “continue to advocate for lower tariffs, rather than higher tariffs,” noting that this is the extent of his ongoing engagement on trade policy. Tesla remains the only publicly traded firm among Musk’s sprawling portfolio, which includes SpaceX, Neuralink, XAI, and The Boring Company. As such, it has absorbed much of the public response—both praise and criticism—related to Musk’s deepening political ties.

Yet, the CEO expressed confidence in Tesla’s direction. “I remain extremely optimistic about Tesla’s future,” he said, pointing to the company’s ambitions in autonomous vehicles and humanoid robots. He reiterated his forecast that Tesla will become the most valuable company in the world, noting that robotaxis are expected to deliver a meaningful financial impact by mid-2026. He also revealed that Tesla aims to have thousands of its Optimus humanoid robots operational in factories by the end of the year, with plans to scale to one million units annually within five years—a pace he described as faster than any product in the company’s history. Closing the call with idealism, Musk said, “I like this phrase sustainable abundance for all,” and affirmed his commitment to continue leading Tesla through its next phase of innovation and expansion. Tesla reported earnings after the market closed that were worse than analyst expectations. The stock, with most of the bad news seemingly already priced in, held its ground in after hours trading. The results were:

• Revenues $19.34BN, big miss to estimates of $21.37BN
• EPS 27c, missing estimates of 43c
• Gross margin 16.3% (down from 17.4% y/y), and beating estimates of 16.1%
• Automotive gross margin ex reg credits 12.5%, beating estimates of 11.9%
• Operating income $399 million, -66% y/y, missing estimates of $1.13 billion
• Free cash flow $664 million (vs. negative $2.53 billion y/y) missing estimate $1.08 billion
• Capital expenditure $1.49 billion (down -46% vs $2.77Bn y/y and down 47% vs $2.78BN Q/Q), missing estimates of $2.49 billion
Of note, Tesla eked out positive free cash flow number by slashing capex almost in half compared with the prior quarter and a year ago. Absent that, it would have burned cash.

Tesla offered a measured outlook during its earnings report, signaling that it will revisit its 2025 guidance in the Q2 update, while notably omitting any concrete forecast for a return to growth. The company emphasized that its rate of growth will hinge on a range of variables, including global trade policy, which it admitted is difficult to quantify in terms of impact. Tariffs, in particular, are expected to weigh more heavily on the company’s energy unit than its automotive business, with Tesla cautioning that the broader tariff landscape could have a larger effect on demand and operational strategy. Nevertheless, the company maintained that actions are being taken to stabilize performance over the medium to long term, and it expressed confidence in having sufficient liquidity to fund its product roadmap. Tesla confirmed that plans for new, more affordable vehicle models remain on track for production in the first half of 2025, though it acknowledged that these models may lead to less dramatic cost reductions than previously expected. Even with trade headwinds, the company reiterated a growing need for energy storage solutions across markets.

Read more …

“In its current form, the Department is bloated, bureaucratic, and unable to perform its essential diplomatic mission..”

Rubio Announces MAJOR State Department Overhaul (PJM)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio made a huge announcement on Tuesday regarding the State Department and the Donald Trump administration’s “America First” agenda. It’s being called the biggest shakeup at State in decades. “Today is the day,” Rubio began in a post on X, adding, “Under @POTUS’ leadership and at my direction, we are reversing decades of bloat and bureaucracy at the State Department. These sweeping changes will empower our talented diplomats to put America and Americans first.” The post included an official statement from the State Department, which reads (emphasis mine): We are facing tremendous challenges across the globe. To deliver on President Trump’s America First foreign policy, we must make the State Department Great Again. In its current form, the Department is bloated, bureaucratic, and unable to perform its essential diplomatic mission in this new era of great power competition.

Over the past 15 years, the Department’s footprint has had unprecedented growth and costs have soared. But far from seeing a return on investment, taxpayers have seen less effective and efficient diplomacy. The sprawling bureaucracy created a system more beholden to radical political ideology than advancing America’s core national interests. That is why today I am announcing a comprehensive reorganization plan that will bring the Department into the 21st Century. This approach will empower the Department from the ground up, from the bureaus to the embassies. Region-specific functions will be consolidated to increase functionality, redundant offices will be removed, and non-statutory programs that are misaligned with America’s core national interests will cease to exist. Under President Trump’s leadership, we have a commander in chief committed to putting America and Americans first. As his Secretary of State, I am confident a reformed State Department will meet the moment and help make our country great once again.

So what exactly does a “comprehensive reorganization” of the State Department look like? According to The Free Press, which Rubio says has the “real exclusive,” — by the way, how do we get one of those exclusives here at PJ Media? — internal documents show that the Department “will close 132 agency offices, including those launched to further human rights, advance democracy overseas, counter extremism, and prevent war crimes.” That’s a 17% reduction to start. Additionally, “under secretaries at the State Department are also being instructed within 30 days to present plans to reduce their U.S. personnel in individual departments by 15 percent,” including “six top offices employing thousands of people.”

Rubio also wrote about the shakeup in what appears to be a new Substack for the State Department, stating that “The Department has long struggled to perform basic diplomatic functions, even as both its size and cost to the American taxpayer has [sic] ballooned over the past fifteen years. The problem is not a lack of money, or even dedicated talent, but rather a system where everything takes too much time, costs too much money, involves too many individuals, and all too often ends up failing the American people.” He also expanded on a topic I covered last week, the shuttering of the Global Engagement Center — an office that censored U.S. citizens — citing it as just one of many reasons why this overhaul is necessary.

“An example of an out-of-control Department is the Global Engagement Center (GEC) that I shuttered last week. The office engaged with media outlets and platforms to censor speech it disagreed with, including that of the President o the United States, who its director in 2019 accused of employing ‘the same techniques of disinformation as the Russians.’ Despite Congress voting to shutter it, the GEC simply renamed itself and continued operating as if nothing had changed. Unless we confront the underlying bureaucratic culture that prevents the State Department from carrying out an effective foreign policy, while allowing offices like GEC to flourish in the shadows, nothing will change. That is why I am initiating a broad reorganization of the Department to address the steady growth of bureaucracy, duplication of functions, and capture by special interests that have crippled American Foreign Policy.

Read more …

“Courage means feeling fear but behaving in a way that is noble and good..”

Trump’s Courage to Fight the Good Fight (DS)

When the White House invoked the “Immortal Chaplains” to illustrate the history between the United States and Greenland, it touched on a theme emerging in the second Trump administration: the importance of courage. On Feb. 3, 1943, the American steamship SS Dorchester embarked with 902 souls—soldiers, merchant seamen, and civilians—bound for a U.S. Army base in southern Greenland to support the buildup of military personnel during World War II. The ship’s captain ordered those on board to sleep in their uniforms and life jackets in case of an attack by German submarines, but many disregarded the order because of heat from the ship’s engine. Just after midnight, a U-boat’s torpedo slammed into the Dorchester’s starboard side below the water line. Four Navy chaplains—a rabbi, a Methodist minister, a Catholic priest, and a Protestant reverend—gave up their own life vests and guided panicked crew members to the lifeboats.

The Dorchester sank in 20 minutes. One of the 230 survivors later recalled what he saw as he swam away from the ship: “The bow came up high and she slid under. The last thing I saw, the four chaplains were up there praying for the safety of the men. They had done everything they could.” Courage means feeling fear but behaving in a way that is noble and good, as the chaplains did when they acted on their deepest convictions aboard the Dorchester. Donald Trump once wrote that courage is not the absence of fear but “the ability to act effectively, in spite of fear.” In 2016, Trump showed moral courage when he spoke the truth to American voters: A parasitic “establishment” of political and corporate interests had been exploiting our workers, farmers, and soldiers. When Trump challenged 16 opponents in the Republican primary, he exposed untruths in a conservative orthodoxy passed down from Ronald Reagan through George W. Bush.

Establishment foes hounded him with investigations and impeachment proceedings throughout the four years of his presidency, but Trump refused to compromise his principles or check his ambition to “make America great again.” Emboldened by Joe Biden’s inauguration in 2021, the establishment connived to use the 14th Amendment to prevent Trump from running for president a third time. They leveled charges against him in two federal district courts, tried him in a New York state court, and indicted him in Georgia for alleged RICO Act violations. Though Trump was unbowed, his campaign manager, Susie Wiles, was concerned: “I just worry that if they can’t get him this way, they’ll try to kill him.” And that almost happened on July 13 at the fairgrounds in Butler, Pennsylvania, when an assassin’s bullet grazed Trump’s ear.

Where Trump modeled courage, the establishment shows only cowardice—their decade-long effort to destroy Trump has been prosecuted from the shadows, hiding behind the anonymity that bureaucratic power affords. They falsely claimed that Trump “colluded” with Vladimir Putin and Russia. They used a cloak-and-dagger plan to scuttle the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh in 2018. And, in 2022, someone leaked a copy of the Dobbs decision overruling Roe v. Wade. In spite of Chief Justice John Roberts’ promise, the leaker remains unidentified and unaccountable. Some say that Trump’s opponents exemplify courage in their bold attacks on his character and reputation. But talk doesn’t make them courageous, least of all because it costs them nothing. Their admonitions are purely performative means to curry favor with the media and the establishment at large, which are viciously opposed to Trump’s reforms.

There is nothing courageous about yelling “F–k Trump” into a microphone. Whatever force it has in the political sphere depends on showing that the saying is accompanied by a doing. Trump’s been talking tough for years and backs it up by action of some kind. In the moment that he rose to his feet in Butler, with his face bloodied and yelling, “Fight! Fight! Fight!,” he gave the final proof that he’s more than a tough talker. Biden’s presidency is a rich example of cowardice: Insiders worked for years to conceal that the sitting president was incapable of executing the duties of the office. In the book “Fight: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House,” longtime political reporters Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes pull back the curtain on Biden’s presidency, detailing how his staff stage-managed a declining president and hid his impairment from the American people. Biden “lived in bubble wrap inside bunkers,” the authors write.

Though “the signs of decline were clear to anyone who was willing to see them,” Biden’s inner circle believed that “no one walks away from the house, the plane, the helicopter,” so, onward they went. When the scam was exposed at the presidential debate last June, the power players in Washington again retreated to the secrecy of the back room and hatched a scheme to cede the delegates that Biden had secured to nominate a candidate of their choice rather than the people’s choice. For decades, presidents talked about moving the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, but no one did until Trump. For years, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, and Bernie Sanders called for tariffs to restructure world trade. But when Trump did what he said he would do and imposed tariffs? That was all it took for the same people to discover their opposition to tariffs.

The cowardice of Biden and the leading lights in the Democratic Party contrast sharply with the new administration. Trump and many others have gambled their reputations, fortunes, and future interests on a bold but polarizing agenda. They face the American people, every day, openly and fearlessly. For Trump, the most important quality for aides and Cabinet members is not loyalty but courage—and the willingness to pay a price for things that matter.

Read more …

Turns out, the border is a problem only if you invite people over.

How Trump ‘Restored Law and Order’ to US Borders (Allen)

The House Homeland Security Committee released its latest “Border Brief” Tuesday, highlighting significant changes at the border since President Donald Trump took office, and a staggering year-over-year decline in the number of illegal immigrants attempting to enter the United States. “Southwest border crossings have hit another record-low because we now have a president and [a Department of Homeland Security] secretary who enforce the law,” Rep. Mark Green, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, told The Daily Signal. “In less than three months, President Trump has restored law and order to our nation’s borders, removed criminal illegal aliens from our communities, and helped ensure the safety of the American people by empowering Department of Homeland Security law enforcement to do their jobs,” according to a committee press release.

In March, encounters with illegal aliens between ports of entry at the southern border fell by 94% compared to March 2024. Customs and Border Protection encountered 29,065 illegal aliens nationwide last month, down 88% from the 246,505 encountered in March 2024. Border Patrol’s daily apprehensions nationwide were the lowest in recorded history in March, averaging 264, a 94% decline from the previous year. The House Homeland Security Committee credits the decline in illegal crossings to the “Trump administration’s sustained deployment of military and federal law enforcement across the Southwest border, as well as partnerships with countries like El Salvador.” Since Jan. 20, the Trump administration has deployed thousands of troops and additional military resources to the southern border. The U.S. also formed an agreement with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele to house deported illegal aliens in El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center.

The Trump administration has also ended various parole programs set in place or expanded under the Biden administration, such as the CBP One mobile application that allowed illegal aliens to schedule an appointment at a port of entry to claim asylum. The result of ending the Biden administration’s parole programs, according to the House committee, is an 80% decline in migrant encounters at U.S. ports of entry since March 2024. The daily average of known “getaways,” illegal aliens who manage to evade Border Patrol apprehension, has also fallen by more than 90% since Trump took office. Last week, a Maryland jury found Victor Martinez-Hernandez, a reported illegal alien gotaway from El Salvador, guilty of murdering Rachel Morin, a mother of five. The number of unaccompanied alien children arriving at the southern border declined by 92% last month when compared with March 2024.

Border Patrol has also witnessed a 97% year-over-year decline in the number of Chinese nationals crossing the southern border between ports of entry. Rather than “commending this return to law and order,” Green, R-Tenn., said his “colleagues across the aisle are working to defend an illegal alien MS-13 gang member who was rightfully removed from our country.” Democrats are advocating for the return of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, an illegal alien with ties to MS-13 who the Trump administration recently deported to a prison in El Salvador. Some Democrats, such as Mayland Sen. Chris Van Hollen who traveled to El Salvador to meet with Abrego Garcia, claim the man was wrongfully removed from the U.S. “To the American people, the contrast could not be clearer,” Green continued.

“Make no mistake—our communities are safer because the Trump administration has empowered DHS law enforcement to do their jobs, remove violent criminals, and dismantle the cartels’ business model. Now, Congress must codify President Trump’s homeland security agenda and provide the necessary funding to continue successfully securing our borders.” The House Homeland Security Committee’s March “Border Brief” celebrates the 32,809 arrests of illegal aliens at the hands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers during the first 50 days of the Trump administration. The nearly 33,000 arrests included “14,111 convicted criminals, of whom 1,155 were criminal gang members, as well as 39 aliens on the Terrorist Screening Data Set,” according to the committee. ICE has also arrested more than 300 members of the violent prison gang Tren de Aragua since Trump took office.

The committee in April advanced legislation introduced by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., that would require the DHS to publish the known number of special interest aliens, that is illegal aliens who pose a possible national security risk to the U.S., who cross U.S. borders. In its first border-related hearing of the 119th Congress, the committee highlighted the changes at the border during a Border Security and Enforcement Subcommittee hearing on March 28, aimed at showcasing the Biden administration’s “failure” at the border. “President Trump continues to deliver on the promises he made to secure our border,” Rep. Michael Guest, R-Miss., told The Daily Signal. “As the chairman of the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement, I am honored to have the opportunity to work alongside President Trump to continue delivering results for the American people.”

Read more …

Woke has bankrupted Hollywood. Or almost. Bad for business.

Woke Blackout in Tinseltown (Ryumshin)

The conservative winds that have swept across America since January 20, 2025 have reached all the way to California. Hollywood, once the global capital of progressive values, is rapidly turning its back on the previous narrative. Transgender characters are quietly being cut from scripts, LGBT-themed productions shelved, and studios are shifting toward content with Christian and family-oriented values. Entire projects have been dropped. Others are being rewritten on the fly to avoid positive portrayals of LGBT characters. Just a year ago, such a reversal seemed unthinkable. Hollywood, which had long been synonymous with ‘woke’ ideology, appeared firmly entrenched in its liberal agenda. Anti-Trump themes were being churned out with near industrial efficiency, and conservative attempts at counter-programming lacked the budget or reach to compete. In the cultural trenches, liberals were not just winning, they were dominating. But now, studios are backing off.

The liberal press, already ringing alarm bells, has pinned the blame squarely on Donald Trump. In this rare case, they might have a point. Following his re-election, President Trump wasted no time in asserting ideological control. He signed executive orders recognizing only two genders, reinstated the ban on transgender individuals serving in the military, and scrapped federal Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) guidelines. In the cultural sphere, he made a bold appointment: Brendan Carr, a staunch Trump supporter and co-architect of the ‘Project 2025’ conservative reform blueprint, was named chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC might seem bureaucratic, but under Carr, it has become a powerful cultural weapon. Investigations were quickly launched into media outlets seen as hostile to Trump.

Disney, one of the most vocal progressive corporations, was accused of violating equal opportunity laws through its DEI policies. After making some adjustments, Disney still found itself under pressure, with Carr even threatening to revoke ABC’s broadcasting license. The result? Rapid, widespread self-censorship. Studios aren’t backpedaling because they’ve had a change of heart, they simply don’t want to attract the regulatory wrath of Washington. Amazon, led by Jeff Bezos, was ahead of the curve. Bezos cultivated ties with the Trump camp, quietly axed DEI advisors, and began investing only in “safe” content. The reward? Government scrutiny vanished. Still, it would be unfair to credit Trump alone for Hollywood’s pivot.

The shift had begun before the 2024 election, driven by cold economic realities. The traditional business model of cable TV is collapsing. Streaming services, flooded with progressive content, have failed to turn a profit. Worse, many of those “inclusive” productions have sparked controversy, underperformed at the box office, and alienated large swathes of the audience. Family-oriented and religious films, by contrast, often require modest budgets and cater to a mainstream audience. Conservative content, it turns out, is not just safer – it’s more profitable. There’s also the matter of public fatigue. Americans are tired of being lectured. Box office returns, streaming numbers, and network ratings all tell the same story. Once-dominant liberal cable channels are in freefall. As of December 2024, CNN and MSNBC had lost half their prime-time audiences, plunging to 30-year lows.

Fox News, meanwhile, is thriving. So are conservative-leaning podcasters like Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan, now the dominant voices in America’s ‘new media’ landscape. None of this is a coincidence. The broader cultural and economic environment in the United States has shifted. Hollywood’s liberal monopoly was unsustainable, both financially and ideologically. Trump’s return to power merely accelerated a transformation already underway. Will this rightward turn change the face of global culture? Almost certainly. Will it return Hollywood to its former glory? Time will tell. But what is already clear is that the old narrative is dead – and the new one is being written with a red pen.

Read more …

“..the total collapse which is about to happen, is not “Trump’s fault”. He just happened to be the right person to execute the inevitable downfall of a major monetary era. But even if it is not his fault, history will unfairly blame him as the villain who brought the world economy down, and thus see him as probably the worst president in history. So not the best of timing for Mr Trump.”

The Big Short and The Bigger Long (Egon von Greyerz)

For at least 35 years, the monetary system has been telling us that the current era is coming to an end. That means a debt collapse, a currency collapse and a collapse of most bubble assets like stocks and property. THUS THE BIG SHORT! As I am writing this on Easter Monday, the Dow is down 1,100 points (2.9%) and the Nasdaq is down 3.3%. Anyone who buys the dips will be slaughtered. As I have said for a very long time, before this is over, stocks will be down 90-99% in real terms, which is gold. More importantly, this total collapse has very little to do with TRUMP. More later.

And don’t for a moment believe that gold is overvalued. As many have used conventional technical tools to predict a gold correction, I have been saying for a long time that gold is in an acceleration phase and will reach multiples of the current price. (Yes, of course, there will be corrections on the way up, but most probably not yet.) THUS THE BIG LONG! As many have used conventional technical tools to predict a gold correction, I have been saying for a long time that gold is in an acceleration phase and will reach multiples of the current price. (Yes, of course there will be corrections on the way up but most probably not yet). THUS THE BIG LONG!

END OF A MONETARY ERA The end of a monetary era is always the same, with bubble assets going up in smoke. The majority of investors haven’t got a clue what is happening. They are hanging on to their stocks, hoping that Trump will save them by firing Powell and telling the next Chairman of the Fed to lower interest rates. But the time of manipulating rates is over. The market will now determine rates, which it should always do. And with uncontrollable debt escalation in the US and many other countries, the cost of debt can only go one way – UP! Remember, there is only one buyer of US debt, which is the Fed. But the Fed can only buy debt if the US government issues more debt. And therein lies the crux. More debt must be created in a futile attempt to save the ever-growing and out-of-control finances of the US. This is without doubt the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. Madoff would certainly have enjoyed it.

And still, it would have been so easy, as all of this has been totally predictable. To paraphrase Churchill, the more you study history, the more self-evident the future becomes. Still no government, no central banker, no journalist and virtually no market student spends any time on learning from the past. Why, why, why, you ask yourself. Well, it is clearly sheer arrogance in believing that we know better today and that we have better tools. And of course, “The times are different today”. Hmmm! But they are not and have never been. Every monetary system has collapsed in history, and every currency has gone to ZERO, without fail. As I witnessed Greenspan’s expansionary policy after the property market collapse in the 1990s and how debt and derivatives quickly continued to grow, I was certain that we were seeing the end of a major monetary system.

I had, since the late 1980s, been convinced that gold was the best insurance against yet another coming failure of the monetary system. As major central banks like the UK and Switzerland were selling their gold in the mid to late 1990s, it was clear that we were near the bottom. So we waited until the 1999 gold bottom at $250 and confirmation of the gold price recovery in the early 2000s before buying physical gold. BACK TO TRUMP – the culprit. But everything is, of course, Trump’s fault! All the misery hitting the world now is due to Trump’s capricious actions. Here are just a few examples of how TRUMP is now wrecking not just the US but the whole world economy, according to the general public as well as the media and politicians in most countries:

Stocks crashing, bonds crashing, rates up, dollar crashing, trade wars with massive daily tit for tat yo-yo swinging tariffs between 10% and 145%, much higher Inflation, collapse of global trade etc, etc. Yes, all of the above is happening and much more and it is all Trump’s fault.But is it really? No, Trump is not the culprit. Instead, Trump happens to be the catalyst. An absolutely superb analysis of the US-China trade war was given by this very acute Chinese influencer: “Leaders are instruments of their time, and they appear at the time in the cycle to carry out what was going to happen anyway.

Just like Thatcher and Reagan were the right leaders to lead the upturn in the early 1980s, Trump is perfect for creating the havoc and chaos that comes with the end of a major monetary era. What is happening in the US and global economy today, and the total collapse which is about to happen, is not “Trump’s fault”. He just happened to be the right person to execute the inevitable downfall of a major monetary era. But even if it is not his fault, history will unfairly blame him as the villain who brought the world economy down, and thus see him as probably the worst president in history. So not the best of timing for Mr Trump.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

ivm

 

 

Malhotra

 

 

Hotez

 

 

https://twitter.com/DiedSuddenly_/status/1914837101486518732

 

 

 

 

Phone

 

 

Mom

 

 

Goose

 

 

https://twitter.com/Lin11W/status/1914406273602277705

 

 

Feynman

 

 

Goats
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1914628619722281004

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 222025
 


Edward Hopper The Lee Shore 1941

 

Trump Wants Direct Talks With Xi – Politico (RT)
China Is In Economic Dire Straits And They’re No Longer Able To Hide It (ZH)
China’s Gray Trade Strategy Blunts Impact of US Tariffs (Gorrie)
The Shanghai Spirit – China Will Take No Bullying (Pepe Escobar)
Trump Wants Piece Of Russia Claimed By Kiev – WSJ (RT)
Trump Slams Supreme Court Over Blocking Deportations (JTN)
Do You Prefer White Liberal States To Hispanic States? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Trump Wants A Deal. Putin Wants Victory. Ukraine Will Get What It Deserves (RT)
Putin Reacts To EU Threats On Victory Day (RT)
Is a Coup Against Pete Hegseth Brewing at the Pentagon? (Margolis)
Hegseth Slams Media Over Latest Smear Campaign: ‘Full of Hoaxsters’ (Margolis)
US Senator Ron Johnson Says New 9/11 Investigation Could Happen (RT)
Canada’s Conservatives See A Reversal of Fortune (JTN)
Trump Administration Halts New York Offshore Wind Project (Wade)
The UK Is Doubling Down On Wind Energy (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Rickards
https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/1914201957213814828

112
https://twitter.com/defense_civil25/status/1914296461870702669

O’Leary

Thiel

Tucker

 

 

 

 

Trump shuts down all potential communication lines between him and Xi. Except for those he wants. Direct line. Call me.

Trump Wants Direct Talks With Xi – Politico (RT)

US President Donald Trump has stifled almost every channel of diplomatic outreach with China, aiming to deal directly with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, as the trade war between the two superpowers escalates, Politico has reported citing anonymous sources. The increasing tit-for-tat duties between the US and China is part of a broader US tariff campaign against more than 90 countries, said to be aimed at addressing unfair trade imbalances. While Trump has paused the hikes for most countries for 90 days, Beijing was excluded and faces a 145% tariff. China has retaliated with 125% tariffs on US goods and restricted certain key exports. The US president is adamant about direct negotiations with Xi, and has stifled other diplomatic avenues, Politico wrote on Saturday, citing anonymous former US State Department officials and an industry official.

Trump has not authorized White House delegates to engage with Beijing, the outlet cited its sources as saying. In addition, the Senate has not confirmed a US ambassador to China, Trump has not nominated an official to lead a diplomatic effort, and Washington has thus far not reached out to the Chinese embassy, Politico reported. “The backchannels don’t work because President Trump doesn’t want them to,” Ryan Hass, former director for China, Taiwan, and Mongolia at the National Security Council during the Obama administration, told the outlet. “Trump wants to deal directly with President Xi in the same way he has with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin,” he said. Washington is waiting for Beijing to reach out and call first, CNN wrote earlier this month, citing anonymous officials.

“China wants to make a deal. They just don’t know how quite to go about it,” Trump has said. “They’re proud people.” Additionally, Washington intends to use negotiations over potential tariff exemptions to pressure US trading partners to curb their ties with China and ramp up pressure on Beijing, the Wall Street Journal reported last week, citing unnamed sources. In a statement on Monday, the Chinese Commerce Ministry stressed that it would retaliate against any country that takes such a deal “at the expense of China’s interests.”

Read more …

Memories of all the roads to nowhere and the giant empty apartment buidings a few years ago.

China Is In Economic Dire Straits And They’re No Longer Able To Hide It (ZH)

Official economic data from any government is always treated with suspicion by anyone with common sense. The US, for example, witnessed some of the most egregious statistical tinkering imaginable under the Biden Administration, not to mention outright lies and propaganda from the establishment media on the health of the economy. To this day no one has been fired (or tarred and feathered) for hiding the reality of the stagflation crisis. Any government or corporate economist that called the threat “transitory” should be stripped of their financial prestige and banished to a cash register at Arby’s. And let’s not forget Biden’s misrepresentation of the labor market, portraying millions of new jobs for illegal migrants and visa holders as if they were jobs benefiting American citizens. In the US and across the western world, lying about the economy is generally seen by politicians as a temporary solution to secure reelection.

However, in China, lying about the economy is treated as a national security imperative. If there’s anything in the world that gives communists a feeling of existential dread, it’s the fear that their ideological enemies will discover proof that communism doesn’t work. The Trump Administration’s tariffs on China are not the initiator of the nation’s troubles, they are more a bookend to a process of decline that has been ongoing for years. Overall tariffs on Chinese goods currently sit at 124%, but some goods will be taxed as high as 245%. Trump has given a 1 month exemption on electronic parts and devices, perhaps to offer manufacturers like Apple, Nvidia and Microsoft time to arrange sourcing from alternative vendors. The problem for Chinese manufacturers is not just the tariffs but the uncertainty of timing and sudden changes to policy. They say no one is willing to make a big move on production or shipments until the trade landscape becomes more predictable. This means most Chinese factories are frozen in stasis.

Trump’s tariff actions are widely criticized by the media as erratic or poorly planned, but what they don’t understand is that uncertainty is the real leverage, not the tariffs. What seems like a spur of the moment decision or a sudden capitulation on Trump’s part can be highly effective at throwing foreign governments and corporations off balance. Globalism requires a perpetual status quo, change of any kind is like holy water to a vampire. Chinese shipments are on standby and orders are frozen. Nothing is moving. At bottom, China will not be able to survive tariffs on the current scale for long (a single year of 124% tariffs would crush China’s economy beyond repair). The US is 15% of China’s export market, which may not sound substantial but their next largest trading partner (outside of Hong Kong) is Vietnam at 4% of exports.

In terms of domestic buying, China is 11% of the global consumer market which is not too shabby, but compared to the US with its 30%-35% global consumer market share there is no chance that the Chinese will be able to fill the void domestically and stay afloat. But the situation is far worse than most people know… China has been suffering from a deflationary crisis since 2023. An uptick in exports during the pandemic was offset by the CCP’s draconian lockdowns. This was, essentially, fiscal suicide on the part of the government and China has been struggling ever since. Their property market has imploded, partially due to overbuilding through government subsidized infrastructure programs that flooded the market with poorly constructed homes and buildings that were then left to rot. Corporate defaults have run rampant and left investors with nothing.

There was some optimism that the government’s measures to end the crisis had been working to reinvigorate the market, but on Mar 31st, government-linked developer Vanke reported a record 49.5 billion yuan (S$9.1 billion) annual loss for 2024. It’s the company’s first full-year loss since its initial public offering in 1991, reigniting concerns about the sector and showing just how deep the problem runs. When these projects do finally see some progress it is often due to dangerously poor construction standards and subpar workmanship; what many now refer to as “Tofu Dreg” buildings. The deflationary spiral has been eating away at employment and has also resulted in numerous factories refusing to pay their workers on time (or at all). Unpaid wages are leading to frequent protests and a disturbing trend of factory fires. The government is limited in how it can respond to the problem. Stimulus is an option, but China’s overall non-financial debt is well over 300% of GDP already.

China’s attempts to hide the decay from the outside world are becoming less and less effective. With Chinese citizens able to access the internet beyond the “Great Firewall”, more and more videos are being leaked by people within the country who are tired of the misinformation. Again, the CCP views negative economic data as a national security threat and any citizen caught leaking this info could be subject to harsh punishment. Chinese citizens have taken substantial risks to get the truth out there. It cannot be stressed enough that the global economy is largely a farce, but China is closest to the edge of the cliff in terms of consequences and crisis. The interdependency of globalism has left many nations without the ability to weather a trade dispute and China’s survival is almost entirely based on steady exports to the west and the US in particular. Don’t let high paid TikTok and YouTube influencers fool you with videos of Chinese skyscrapers caked with LED lights or lavish parties with dancing robots. This is not the true China. Underneath the facade is a nation on the brink of disaster.

Read more …

China tries to export to US via Vietnam because of tariffs. Easy to shut down.

China’s Gray Trade Strategy Blunts Impact of US Tariffs (Gorrie)

Is a new boom in deceptive trading practices taking shape in many parts of the world? As the U.S.–China trade war intensifies, it certainly looks that way. With U.S. tariffs reaching 145 percent on Chinese imports—at least at the time of this writing—Beijing’s new strategy seems to include the use of so-called gray trade to bypass American trade barriers. Gray trade involves rerouting goods through low-tariff countries, such as Vietnam, Mexico, or Malaysia, to conceal their Chinese origin and thereby reduce U.S. import duties. This sneaky tactic has surged as a response to President Donald Trump’s aggressive tariff policies, making China’s goods less competitive in the U.S. market due to their added cost.

Gray Trade Loophole Strategy The simple idea behind gray trade is to exploit loopholes in U.S. Rules of Origin, the trading guidance for determining a product’s country of origin for tariff purposes. Chinese goods, for example, will remain unassembled or may be about 90 percent manufactured before being shipped to an intermediary country. There, they undergo final production, assembly, processing, repackaging, or relabeling to qualify as originating from that country, rather than from China. For example, Chinese electronic parts may be sent to Vietnam, assembled into a product, and then labeled, “Made in Vietnam.” This enables China to benefit from the 10 percent tariff on Vietnamese imports under Trump’s 2025 reciprocal tariff regime, instead of the 145 percent tariffs on Chinese goods. It’s a perfectly sensible response by Beijing, and there’s no doubt that Chinese firms are rerouting goods through Vietnam, Mexico, and Turkey to exploit lower tariffs on goods sourced from those countries. A related tactic occurring in Mexico involves dividing goods into packages that are below the $800 tariff-free threshold for non-Chinese origins, a tactic called the “Tijuana two-step.”

China Has to Resort to Gray Trade But gray trade isn’t new or even unfamiliar to the second Trump administration. During Trump’s first term, Chinese solar manufacturers bypassed 30 percent tariffs by partnering with their neighbors in Southeast Asia. In 2025, tracing the movement and provenance of vast numbers of products is complex at best and nearly impossible at worst, making it a challenge to disrupt gray trade. It’s no mystery why Beijing is engaging in gray trade. With its exports to the United States accounting for 10 percent of its trade and supporting between 10 million and 20 million jobs, some experts say the world’s largest manufacturer faces an estimated 80 percent decline in its exports over the next two years, if the gray trade were to cease.

As domestic economic conditions decline due to the anticipated extensive trade tensions, China’s 2025 GDP projections have fallen from 5 percent to as low as 4 percent, potentially resulting in a 20 percent drop in GDP growth in just one year. With joblessness among its young people (ages 16 to 24) already approaching 17 percent, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) faces a growing resentment among its people. The Party would like to avoid an uprising by its younger generation. The gray trade has provided a much-needed cushion against the blow of the Trump administration’s high tariffs. For instance, according to official data, China’s exports surged by 12.4 percent in March, with exports to ASEAN increasing by 11.6 percent and exports to Vietnam climbing by nearly 19 percent.

Impact on Low-Tariff Countries But it’s not just China that gains from gray trade. Its low-tariff country partners also gain economically from gray trade but face risks, too. Gray trading partners, such as Vietnam, Malaysia, and Mexico, profit from trade and processing fees, with some estimates on the social media platform X reaching as high as 10 percent. It’s worth noting that between 2017 and 2022, Vietnam replaced almost half of China’s lost market share in U.S. imports. However, gray trading partner countries risk the consequences of U.S. pushback, resulting in a delicate balancing act for these countries caught between gray trade with China and managing important trading relationships with the United States.

Economic and Geopolitical Implications Economically, gray trade preserves China’s U.S. market access for the moment, but it raises costs as intermediaries take their cut, with logistics costs also increasing. For U.S. consumers, it may delay steep price hikes, but won’t eliminate them. Geopolitically, Beijing’s retaliatory 125 percent tariffs on U.S. goods, plus adding barriers to U.S. beef and LNG imports, raise tensions even higher. CCP leader Xi Jinping’s recent visits to Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia could have secured their gray trade hubs going forward.

But the impact of gray trade is perhaps deeper and wider than many may expect. On the one hand, it’s a reasonable response on China’s part to U.S. tariffs. But on the other hand, there are greater risks. The United States could expand tariffs or use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to close loopholes. That, too, may be a rational response by the United States, or it could make things worse. “The global trade system for the past ninety years is collapsing, leaving it difficult for people to forecast the economic impact and tell where the bottom for a market is,” Vincent Chan, a China strategist at Aletheia Capital Ltd., told Bloomberg. As new phases of U.S. trade policy and responses unfold, the biggest risk may be uncontrolled escalation in both tariff retaliation and other forms of retaliation. In short, the impact of the gray trade may be deeper and wider than many expect, and it could even lead to a global trade war, with its own far-reaching implications.

Read more …

Pepe is in China and in love.

The Shanghai Spirit – China Will Take No Bullying (Pepe Escobar)

There could not be a more strategic place to spend these past Trump Tariff Tizzy (TTT) heady days than in Shanghai – China’s trade, commercial and cultural capital. From the top of the Jin Mao tower in the world class Lujiazui financial district in Pudong, an elegantly discreet art deco companion to the World Financial Center super-skyscraper – the trademark symbol of China’s economic power – it’s as if the spokes of a wheel radiated to the Bund and beyond tracking a ceaseless drive to counteract the absurd idiocy of the “Emperor of Tariffs”, relentless mocked across myriad Chinese social media platforms. I have had the privilege to transit from the Bund Financial Center, which hosts among others the Fosun Foundation – a bamboo-inspired architectural masterpiece – to the China Academy at the immaculate campus of Fudan University, where I shared a seminar with star professor Zhang Weiwei and a round table with top PhD students from several disciplines. Professor Zhang Weiwei is the foremost conceptualizer of China as a civilization-state.

The key theme of our seminar was the Russia-China strategic partnership, but inevitably the focus switched back and forth to the rationale behind the Emperor of Tariffs. The questions from the students were as sharp as they come. That was compounded with an in-depth interview for China Academy hosted by their CEO, the formidable Pan Xiaoli. A visit to the HQ of Guancha – the top independent new/analysis site in China, whose several channels in several different platforms reach an astonishing 200 million people – could not have been more timely. Guo Jiezhen, a research fellow from the China Institute, who was part of our round table at Fudan University, came up with one of the more astute analyses of what he describes as Trump’s “deranged money-making technique”.

While meeting with Guancha’s new editor-in-chief He Shenquan and discussing with hyper-competent international relations specialist Kelly Liu and Yang Hanyi – the China Institute’s communication officer – we watched together an exceptional podcast featuring PLA Colonel Wang Lihua, Gao Zhikai – Deputy Director of the Center for China and Globalization (CCG) – and the always essential Li Bo, President of the Shanghai Chunqiu Development Strategy Institute. And that’s when Mao Zedong’s legendary 1960s formulation of the US as a “paper tiger” – quoted in everything from Latin American guerrilla slogans to Godard movies – resurfaced with full force. Wang Lihua picked up on what President Xi had told Putin at their landmark meeting at the Kremlin two years ago: we are right in the middle of changes not seen in 100 years. Wang: “This change cannot be changed all at once, and the trade war between China and the United States will not be resolved once and for all. This kind of friction and struggle, in the words of Chairman Mao, is ‘making trouble, failing, making trouble again, failing again, until destruction.’”

Wang wrapped up with what may encapsulate the general feeling in China, identified in every nook and cranny across Shanghai: “It is difficult for the United States to repair itself from within. Now the United States has to confront China and the whole world, and its strength is obviously not enough, so failure is inevitable. We are not afraid of a protracted war, because time is on our side.” China “not afraid of war”, however it may manifest itself, from hybrid to hot, is the consensus feeling in Shanghai, borrowing from the Maoist concept of “united front”, and espoused from academics and business leaders to residents of “model quarters” of the Maoist era still impeccably preserved – and with an eye for innovation (example: row after row of a.c. outlets to feed the array of electric bikes parked in the internal patios).

Read more …

Hard bargain.

Trump Wants Piece Of Russia Claimed By Kiev – WSJ (RT)

The US intends to assert control over the Russian territory surrounding Europe’s largest nuclear power plant as part of a mediated agreement between Kiev and Moscow, according to the Wall Street Journal. The proposal is part of a reported package of options that the US expects Ukraine to respond to by the end of this week. Last Thursday, senior members of US President Donald Trump’s administration met with Ukrainian and European officials in Paris. One of their ideas aimed at facilitating a peace agreement between Kiev and Moscow involves designating the land around the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant (NPP) as neutral territory under US control, the newspaper reported Sunday, citing anonymous sources. The former Ukrainian region hosting the facility voted to join Russia in 2022, though Kiev has dismissed the referendum as a sham.

In March, Trump claimed that Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky had proposed that the US take ownership of his country’s nuclear power plants. Zelensky, however, refuted this assertion, stating that he and Trump only discussed potential US investments in the Zaporozhye NPP. Additionally, Washington has suggested recognizing Russian sovereignty over Crimea, not opposing Russian control over four other former Ukrainian regions, including Zaporozhye, and rejecting Ukraine’s bid for NATO membership, according to the WSJ. However, the list of proposals does not include any cap on the strength of the Ukrainian army or ban on troop deployments by European NATO members in Ukraine, the newspaper noted. If the US, its European allies, and Ukraine achieve a “convergence” this week, the package will be presented to Moscow, the WSJ reported.

Moscow has firmly rejected any proposed NATO presence in Ukraine and has asserted that the Istanbul agreement — a truce proposal negotiated in 2022 that includes limitations on the Ukrainian military — should serve as the foundation for a future peace accord. This plan was rejected by Kiev following intervention from then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Russia has accused the EU and the UK of attempting to undermine Trump’s mediation efforts in order to prolong the conflict in Ukraine. The US president has cautioned that his administration would “just take a pass” if the diplomatic effort becomes too challenging.

Read more …

“We cannot give everyone a trial, because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years..”

“What a ridiculous situation we are in..”

Trump Slams Supreme Court Over Blocking Deportations (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Monday slammed the United States’ court system, including the Supreme Court, over their response to his efforts to deport illegal migrants, stating it is “not possible” to try every person who is in the U.S. illegally. The Supreme Court over the weekend temporarily blocked Trump’s latest round of deportations under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. Trump’s deportations have come under scrutiny after he removed hundreds of illegal migrants he accused of being gang members without due process. The president defended his actions in a post on Truth Social, claiming it would take “200 years” to try every illegal migrant, and slammed the Supreme Court for allegedly not wanting him to “send violent criminals and terrorists back to Venezuela.”

“I’m doing what I was elected to do, remove criminals from our Country, but the Courts don’t seem to want me to do that,” Trump wrote in the post. “My team is fantastic, doing an incredible job, however, they are being stymied at every turn by even the U.S. Supreme Court, which I have such great respect for, but which seemingly doesn’t want me to send violent criminals and terrorists back to Venezuela, or any other Country.” The president praised Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s dissent, stating the justice was right for wanting to “dissolve the pause on deportations.” “If we don’t get these criminals out of our country, we are not going to have a country any longer,” Trump insisted. “We cannot give everyone a trial, because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years. We would need hundreds of thousands of trials for the hundreds of thousands of Illegals we are sending out of the country. Such a thing is not possible to do.

“What a ridiculous situation we are in,” he concluded.

Read more …

“Millions of immigrant-invaders can enter America illegally, but they cannot be deported until they have had their day in court..”

“The deportation hearings, which will be shopped to Democrat district and appeal courts, will take years and will not be resolved until Trump’s term is over.”

Do You Prefer White Liberal States To Hispanic States? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Like Trump’s on-off-on tariffs, the US Supreme Court’s rulings are off-on-maybe-we will see. Last week the Court overruled Boasberg and said that Trump had the authority to deport illegal aliens. But by the time last Saturday arrived, the Court had changed its mind and “paused” the deportation of illegal entrants. The Court now has decided that those who had entered the US illegally, thus committing a crime, had the right to challenge their deportation in US courts.Here is the Supreme Court’s ruling: “The government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this court.” Note the Court’s use of the word “putative.” The Court is saying that it is uncertain that the illegals are illegals. Once you have walked in, you are an American, right? That seems to be the Democrats’ position. What will the Court’s position be?

Amazing, isn’t it. Millions of immigrant-invaders can enter America illegally, but they cannot be deported until they have had their day in court. To be clear, what the US Supreme Court has ruled is that there will be no further deportations. The 16 or 30 million, or whatever the figure, illegal entrants are here to stay. The deportation hearings, which will be shopped to Democrat district and appeal courts, will take years and will not be resolved until Trump’s term is over. For decades American conservatives have thought that the most important reason to have a Republican president is Supreme Court Appointments, but now we see it matters not to have a Republican majority on the Supreme Court. The Court, whether Republican or Democrat, has no comprehension of American survival. The courts are preoccupied with grabbing power from the executive.

Just as the US took Texas, Colorado, California and the SouthWest from Mexico, the hispanics are taking it back with the aid of the Democrat Party and the US Supreme Court. And, of course, with the acquiesce of Republicans who are incapable of fighting. The question is: how much do we really care? Would you prefer to have white liberal Colorado, California, Arizona or Hispanic Colorado, California, and Arizona. I would prefer the Hispanics. They are more decent people than white liberals, and, unlike white liberals, they do not hate America. Perhaps the ignorant insouciance of the American courts will have the unintended result of replacing anti-American blue states with Hispanic states. It would be a huge improvement in the quality of America.

Read more …

Sergei Poletaev.

Trump Wants A Deal. Putin Wants Victory. Ukraine Will Get What It Deserves (RT)

The Easter ceasefire has come and gone, with Russia and Ukraine trading accusations over thousands of violations as fighting resumes across the front lines – yet another reminder of how difficult it is to bring this war to an end. Amid the renewed hostilities, Donald Trump’s long-promised peace plan is colliding with geopolitical realities. Despite backchannel talks with the Kremlin and growing pressure from both allies and opponents, Trump has yet to produce a deal that doesn’t resemble capitulation – or undermine his own political standing. With a new offensive looming and patience wearing thin, the real question now is whether peace is still on the table – and if so, on whose terms.

The Relentless Push for Peace The fundamental difference between President Donald Trump and his predecessor, Joe Biden, is that Trump is genuinely trying to negotiate a meaningful peace with Russia. He has no interest in prolonging what he sees as a losing war inherited from Biden, and he’s determined to end it. But he also knows he can’t accept just any deal – he needs a version of peace that won’t look like a defeat. After all, his critics are ready to frame any compromise as his own personal Afghanistan.That’s the framework Trump is working within. What motivates Russian President Vladimir Putin isn’t really a top concern for him. So, he sends a trusted confidant – Steve Witkoff – to explore the possibility of striking a deal with the Kremlin. In his meeting with Putin, Witkoff likely hears the same hardline message the Russian leader shares in public – and, reportedly, in private calls with Trump: lasting peace can only be achieved on Moscow’s terms.

At a minimum, that means reviving the Istanbul agreements with additional territorial concessions. At most, it involves Russia’s sweeping 2021 demands to redraw Eastern Europe’s security architecture and, in effect, reverse the legacy of the Cold War. It also seems Putin thinks he can secure at least his minimum objectives through brute force. Whether he’s bluffing or not, he’s clearly using the threat of escalation to pressure Trump. The message is implicit: Worried that Ukraine’s collapse will be blamed on you? There’s one way to prevent that – make a deal with me. In return, Trump could preserve face, gain economic wins like Nord Stream 2, and claim peace during his term. Meanwhile, Putin gets what he really wants: a thaw in US-Russia relations, an end to sanctions, and, crucially, legitimization of Russia’s actions in Ukraine. And if future conflicts arise, he’ll be in a stronger position. Not to mention, it would strike a blow against the globalists – an enemy both men seem to share.

That’s the pitch Putin’s been making, and by all indications, it’s what he and Witkoff discussed in their five-hour meeting. Witkoff, for his part, appears to be on board – he said as much during a Fox News appearance on April 15. But the final call rests with Trump, not Witkoff. And Trump faces a difficult challenge: even if he wants to make a deal, how can he ensure it sticks? It’s not just Ukraine and Europe trying to sabotage the talks – that was to be expected – but opposition is also coming from inside Trump’s own camp. Take Keith Kellogg, for example. He might tell Trump that Ukraine will never accept any such agreement. He could argue that Europe is fully aligned with Kiev and that if Trump really wants peace, he’ll need to get Putin to accept a European military presence in Ukraine. You want peace? Here’s the map – go make it happen.

Then there’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who may quietly but firmly advance the globalist view: any peace must be on Western terms, not Russian ones. He might even bring a fresh round of sanctions and another military aid package for Ukraine to the table. It’s a situation reminiscent of 2016. Back then, Trump had seemingly cordial relations with Putin but ended up expanding anti-Russia measures due to domestic constraints. Today, his political position at home is stronger – but so are the stakes.

Read more …

EU knows no shame.

Putin Reacts To EU Threats On Victory Day (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has commended the courage of European leaders who choose to come to Moscow for events commemorating the 80th anniversary of victory in World War II, despite pressure on them from EU officials.Last week, the bloc’s top diplomat and former Estonian prime minister, Kaja Kallas, warned the leaders of EU member and candidate states against flying to Russia to take part, recommending instead that they visit Kiev to show solidarity with Ukraine. Other EU officials have reportedly threatened to derail membership bids for candidate countries whose leaders defy Brussels on the matter. Journalists asked Putin to comment on the reports after the All-Russian Municipal Service Award ceremony in Moscow on Monday.

“Those who are going to come to Russia have much more courage than those who are hiding behind someone’s back and trying to threaten others,” he replied.“In this case, [threatening] those who are going to celebrate the historical merits of people who gave their lives in the fight against Nazism,” Putin said. According to Kallas, participation in this year’s events in Moscow “will be not taken lightly.” Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, the only EU member state leader who has promised to attend, blasted the statement as outright “disrespectful.” “Is Ms. Kallas’s warning a form of blackmail or a signal that I will be punished?” he wrote on X last week. “The year is 2025, not 1939,” he added.

The president of EU candidate Serbia, Aleksandar Vucic, similarly indicated that he would not change his plans in the face of pressure from Brussels. “I have not changed my decision… Eight months ago, I announced my visit to Moscow, publicly,” he said last week, according to Serbian media.Moscow has extended multiple invitations to this year’s landmark celebrations, including to the heads of China, India, and Brazil, as well as a number of other international leaders. Victory Day is one of the most important national holidays in Russia. The event is celebrated annually on May 9 to mark the 1945 triumph of the USSR over Nazi Germany and its allies, and to honor the estimated 26.6 million deaths the Soviet Union suffered in World War II. Around 18 million were civilian deaths.

Read more …

Recently Hegseth, JD Vance, Tulsi Gabbard and Susie Wiles voted against bombing Iran. Three Pentagon staff departed. This is the result. Usual suspects: NPR, NYT, Politico et al.

Is a Coup Against Pete Hegseth Brewing at the Pentagon? (Margolis)

Something tells me that the liberal media is trying to force Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth from the Pentagon. According to a report from Politico, the Pentagon has become a “chaotic” mess because of Hegseth’s alleged influence, and it’s becoming a problem for the administration. “It’s been a month of total chaos at the Pentagon. From leaks of sensitive operational plans to mass firings, the dysfunction is now a major distraction for the president — who deserves better from his senior leadership,” the article claims. “President Donald Trump has a strong record of holding his top officials to account. Given that, it’s hard to see Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth remaining in his role for much longer.” It’s a claim so ludicrous that you almost have to appreciate the creative writing involved. What’s the evidence? A few anonymous complaints and a spin cycle that would make a laundromat envious.

John Ullyot, the writer of the article, claims that he’s a Hegseth supporter, yet the Pentagon recently asked him to resign. So I’m sure he doesn’t have an axe to grind. But let’s take a look at what he’s claiming anyway. According to Ullyot, the Pentagon “is in disarray under Hegseth’s leadership.” Curiously, to prove his point, he cites the “Signalgate” kerfuffle as evidence of the chaos, not the successful mission against the Houthi rebels in Yemen. Despite his repeated claims of supporting Hegseth, his narrative sounds like it was lifted straight from the Democrat playbook. I suspect he leans on his supposed backing of Hegseth not out of conviction, but as a shield to lend credibility to what amounts to a repackaged left-wing hit job on the Pentagon.

“Yet even strong backers of the secretary like me must admit: The last month has been a full-blown meltdown at the Pentagon — and it’s becoming a real problem for the administration,” Ullyot writes. Let’s not pretend that this isn’t orchestrated. The timing is telling. Hegseth has been critical of the Biden administration’s dismal defense policies, exposing its failure to prioritize American security interests. And now, as if by magic, Politico drops a hit piece linking him to alleged dysfunction at the Pentagon by a “friend.” Give me a break. He sounds like the next Omarosa. We saw this play out during Trump’s first term, and it looks like it’s happening all over again — figures who claim to support the president suddenly breaking ranks “for the greater good.” But scratch the surface, and it’s clear that they’re serving as mouthpieces for the deep state, trying to create the very dysfunction and chaos they claim already exists.

It’s a classic tactic: create the chaos, then point to it as proof they were right all along. Ullyot claims that “There are very likely more shoes to drop in short order, with even bigger bombshell stories coming this week, key Pentagon reporters have been telling sources privately.” Ahhh, sources. If anything, this article proves one thing: the left and their media enablers are running scared. So let’s call the situation what it is. Politico isn’t reporting the news; it’s trying to shape it. Hegseth stands for values that terrify the liberal elite: strength, accountability, and an America-first mindset. And that’s why the left is working so hard to undermine him, even if it means stretching the truth to the breaking point to create chaos.

Read more …

Hegseth survived phase 1. That emboldened him, also because it shows Trump’s trust and loyalty.

Hegseth Slams Media Over Latest Smear Campaign: ‘Full of Hoaxsters’ (Margolis)

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth didn’t hold back when asked about the latest media-driven controversy involving internal Signal messages and supposed leaks from the Pentagon. Speaking during the White House Easter Egg Roll, Hegseth delivered a scathing rebuke of the press, accusing it of orchestrating a smear campaign using anonymous sources and recycled narratives. “What a big surprise,” Hegseth said, when asked about the so-called “Signal chat controversy.” “A few leakers get fired and suddenly a bunch of hit pieces come out from the same media that peddled the Russia hoax. They got Pulitzers for a bunch of lies — Pulitzers for a bunch of lies, and on hoaxes, time and time again.” Hegseth wasn’t finished. As reporters tried to pepper him with more questions, he tore into what he sees as the media’s standard operating procedure: relying on unverifiable leaks and turning them into politically motivated attacks.

“This is what the media does,” he said. “They take anonymous sources from disgruntled former employees and then they try to slash and burn people and ruin their reputations.” “But it’s not gonna work with me,” he added defiantly. “Because we’re changing the Defense Department. We’re putting the Pentagon back in the hands of war fighters, and anonymous smears from disgruntled former employees on old news doesn’t matter.” Former Pentagon official John Ullyot, who was recently asked to resign, just penned a thinly veiled hit piece in Politico claiming that the Pentagon has descended into “chaos” and predicting that Hegseth’s ouster is imminent. The article leans heavily on anonymous sources and paints a conveniently damning picture that plays right into the hands of the deep state.

It’s a familiar playbook: pose as a concerned insider while amplifying the very narrative the left wants to push. The timing is no accident. These attacks are surfacing just as Hegseth is aggressively working to clean house, purge entrenched bureaucrats, and return the Pentagon to the control of actual warfighters. This isn’t genuine concern; it’s a coordinated attempt to take down an outsider who refuses to play by their rules. As the secretary stood alongside his father and his children, he reminded reporters what motivates him. “This is what we’re doing it for. These kids right here. This is why we’re fighting the fake news media. This is why we’re fighting slash-and-burn Democrats. This is why we’re fighting hoaxsters.” When one reporter tried to interject with another question, Hegseth cut through the noise.

“This group right here,” he said, pointing toward the assembled press, “full of hoaxsters that peddle anonymous sources from leakers with axes to grind. And then you put it all together as if it’s some news story.” Despite the media’s coordinated efforts to generate controversy, Hegseth made it clear he isn’t backing down.“I’m really proud of what we’re doing for the president — fighting hard across the board,” he said before heading off to enjoy the Easter event with his family. “I’ve spoken to the president, and we are gonna continue fighting on the same page all the way.” In typical fashion, the media tried to create a scandal. But in Pete Hegseth, they’ve found someone unafraid to punch back.

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1914484235597176850

Read more …

24 years ago.

US Senator Ron Johnson Says New 9/11 Investigation Could Happen (RT)

Republican Senator Ron Johnson has suggested that new congressional hearings into the September 11 attacks may be forthcoming, citing unanswered questions surrounding the official narrative and the handling of evidence. On September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four passenger airliners, crashing two into the World Trade Center towers in Manhattan. A third plane struck the Pentagon, while the fourth crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed due to fires ignited by debris from one of the nearby towers. During an interview with conservative commentator Benny Johnson published Monday, Senator Johnson questioned several aspects of the 9/11 investigation, including the collapse of Building 7.

“I don’t know that you can find structural engineers – other than the ones that have the corrupt investigation inside NIST – that would say that that thing didn’t come down in any other way than a controlled demolition,” he said. Johnson, who chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, also criticized the removal and destruction of physical evidence from the site, calling it “totally contrary to any other firefighting investigation procedures.” “Where’s all the documentation from the NIST investigation? There are a host of questions that I want and I will be asking, quite honestly, now that my eyes have been opened,” he added. When asked whether the public might see hearings on the issue, Johnson replied, “I think so.”

He further suggested that President Donald Trump, “being a New Yorker himself,” might have an interest in reopening the case: “What actually happened in 9/11? What do we know? What is being covered up? My guess is there’s an awful lot being covered up in terms of what the American government knows about 9/11.” Johnson also said he recently spoke with former Congressman Curt Weldon and plans to “work with him to expose what he’s willing to expose.” Earlier this month, Weldon urged Trump to appoint “people of impeccable integrity” to lead a commission to “study the facts” surrounding 9/11.

In an interview with journalist Tucker Carlson, Weldon dismissed the label of conspiracy theorist, suggesting that the CIA and the government have long engaged in disinformation. “You know, what gets me is reporters who call people conspiracy theorists. Well, that’s all the agency does! They’re the ones who create the conspiracies,” he said. “They have whole courses for their agents on how to make people look like they’re conspiracy theorists.” The 9/11 Commission Report, released in 2004, remains the most comprehensive federal review of the attacks. However, critics have pointed to omissions and the continued classification of key government documents. Johnson also referenced a bipartisan effort with Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) in 2023 to obtain unredacted FBI files. “We wanted to get those answers, those documents for the families. Again, we didn’t get squat from the FBI,” he said.

Read more …

January: Conservatives polled 92.5%. April, 3 months later, they poll 38%. ¿Perqué? A very fertile breeding ground for TDS.

Canada’s Conservatives See A Reversal of Fortune (JTN)

Before Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stepped down in favor of Mark Carney, Canada’s Conservative Party was expected to streamroll the national elections and overturn more than a decade of far-left liberal leadership. But under Pierre Poilievre, the Conservatives have seen their electoral prospects fall off a cliff as he has struggled to meet the moment and galvanize his supporters on a promise of tangible change. Betting markets currently hand Carney a 76.6% chance of winning the election, to Poilievre’s 23.3%. The figure represents a stunning reversal from mid-January, when Poilievre was assigned a 92.5% chance of winning. The Canadian Broadcast Corporation’s current polling shows Carney’s Liberal Party with 43.2% support, while Poilievre and the Conservatives trail with 38.0%.

Canada is a multi-party parliamentary democracy that often sees other blocs gain seats in its legislature, though no other party is expected to seriously compete for the premiership. Under CBC estimates, the Liberals have an 83% shot at an outright majority and a 13% shot at winning a plurality, while the Conservatives reportedly have a 2% chance of taking the most seats. “I have never seen a transformation of our voter landscape in Canada of that nature,” pollster Frank Graves told Politico. Adding to Poilievre’s own shortcomings is the ongoing tariff row between Canada and the United States, which has allowed the Liberals to own the nationalist angle while Carney’s status as a fresh face has let him shed much of Trudeau’s baggage. The Conservatives were the favorites to win as recently as mid-March. So why the massive flip? In short, Poilievre, Trump and immigration.

Since returning to the White House, President Donald Trump criticized the trade relationship between Ottawa and Washington, suggesting that the Canadians enjoyed unfair advantages due to dubious practices to undercut American markets. “The dominant issue is, how do we negotiate future trade relationships with the United States and all those sorts of issues around tariffs,” Politico’s Graves said. “And [Carney] has a very large advantage on that.” While Trudeau was still in office, he traveled to Mar-a-Lago on a high-profile visit to address prospective tariffs. Trump later mocked Trudeau as the “governor of Canada,” leaning into his tounge-in-cheek rhetoric of making the country the 51st American state. Trudeau himself was widely lampooned in the Canadian media for seemingly surrendering his dignity to the American president.

After Trudeau resigned, however, Trump went further and announced reciprocal tariffs, which have seen Carney garner support for opposing them and triggered a nationalist Canadian response on the left to Trump himself. Trump’s nominal ideological link to the Conservatives as a fellow politician on the right, moreover, appears to have hurt the party’s image, despite Poilievre’s own criticisms of Trump and the tariffs. “It produced this really dramatic rise in national attachment, which is the main factor that propelled the Liberals to their elevated position,” Graves said of Trump’s goading.

Like many Western countries, Canada is struggling with an identity crisis amid mass immigration, notably from South Asian countries such as India and Bangladesh. Trudeau was comparable to President Joe Biden in allowing large numbers of migrants into the country. The sheer volume of migrants contributed substantially to an ongoing housing shortage in Canada and, like in America, overwhelmed public services. Immigration ranked among the leading contributors to Trudeau’s decline in popularity.

Though the issue may have stoked considerable frustration in the electorate, the Conservatives struggled to harness voter discontent about immigration and were hesitant to lean into deportations in the way that Trump did while campaigning for the White House. Poilievre has called for “moderate, reasonable levels of immigration” though he has made no commitment to specific immigration levels. In recent weeks, however, he has softened somewhat on the issue and issued statements more welcoming to immigrants, though that has come with some backlash. “Bring your culture, bring your traditions, bring your family, but do not bring foreign conflicts onto our streets,” Poilievre said this month. The clip went viral, attracting millions of views and thousands of comments, nearly all of which condemned the soft stance on immigration.

Though the Canadian Conservative Party occupies the right side of the Canadian aisle, as one would expect, they are far from the ideological siblings of the MAGA-dominated Republicans in the United States. Rather, under its current leadership, the Conservatives more closely resemble the GOP of Mitt Romney and so-called “RINOS.” Graves gave Poilievre credit for running a “disciplined campaign” but asserted he had not been able to pivot on his messaging in response to Trump, especially in light of a subset of his supporters liking the American president.

“They’ve tried a lot of things,” he said. “They’ve tried labeling Carney as another Trudeau. That’s not penetrating. They’ve tried going after him on an ethics issue. But in our testing on this stuff, they haven’t figured out a message that’s really resonating.” Poilievre used the approach of likening Carney to Trudeau as recently as Sunday, saying then that the only adjustments he made to the former prime minister’s platform were to “increase inflationary spending even higher.” “Canada can’t afford a 4th Liberal term of the same Liberals pushing higher taxes, higher spending, and higher inflation,” he posted. The election is set for next Monday. Canadian law prohibits publication on Election Day of previously unreleased polls as well as the release of “exit polls” before all polling stations are closed.

Read more …

“This halt is to remain in effect until further review is completed to address these serious deficiencies.”

Trump Administration Halts New York Offshore Wind Project (Wade)

The Donald Trump administration has halted a massive New York offshore wind project as it conducts a financial and regulatory review of plans to erect towering turbines along the nation’s coastlines. The Interior Department issued an order earlier this week calling for the immediate halt of construction on the Empire Wind Project “until further review,” citing new information suggesting that the Joe Biden administration “rushed through its approval without sufficient analysis.” “Approval for the project was rushed through by the prior administration without sufficient analysis or consultation among the relevant agencies as relates to the potential effects from the project,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum wrote in a letter to the Bureau of Ocean Management, which oversees federal offshore lease permits. “This halt is to remain in effect until further review is completed to address these serious deficiencies.”

The project’s developer, Norway-based Equinor, said Thursday that it was complying with the Trump administration’s order to halt the project but is considering a potential legal challenge. “Upon receipt of the order, immediate steps were taken by Empire and its contractors to initiate suspension of relevant marine activities, ensuring the safety of workers and the environment,” the company said in a statement. “Empire is engaging with relevant authorities to clarify this matter and is considering its legal remedies, including appealing the order.” Gov. Kathy Hochul blasted the decision, saying Empire Wind 1 already employs hundreds of New Yorkers, including 1,000 “good-paying union jobs” as part of a growing sector that she claimed has “already spurred significant economic development and private investment.”

“This fully federally permitted project has already put shovels in the ground before the President’s executive orders—it’s exactly the type of bipartisan energy solution we should be working on,” she said in a statement. “As Governor, I will not allow this federal overreach to stand. I will fight this every step of the way to protect union jobs, affordable energy and New York’s economic future.” New York’s Empire Wind is one of several offshore wind projects under development off the Atlantic coastline that could be impacted by the Bureau of Ocean Management’s review of federal leases. President Donald Trump had campaigned on a promise to end the offshore wind industry, arguing it is too expensive and hurts birds and marine animals. He previously issued an order suspending new leasing for wind projects in federal waters. Massachusetts is working with Rhode Island on three projects totaling 2,678 megawatts of offshore wind, which, when completed, will be capable of providing enough electricity to power more than 1.4 million homes.

In August, the U.S. Department of Energy awarded $389 million to Massachusetts and several New England states for improvements to the power grid aimed at significantly increasing the region’s capacity for offshore wind. The Power Up New England plan—a collaboration between Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont and several utilities—calls for expanding and upgrading the shared interconnection points for undersea cables that bring power from offshore wind turbines to the regional grid. But the push to develop wind comes amid increasing turbulence in the nation’s nascent green industry. Even before the Trump administration’s scrutiny of the projects, developers were scaling back—or in some cases backing out of projects—citing supply chain disruptions, higher construction costs and a lack of tax credits from the states and federal government. Some states, like New Jersey, have struggled to go it alone on offshore wind and have ended up scrapping some projects.

Read more …

Must be a different science.

The UK Is Doubling Down On Wind Energy (ZH)

The U.K. is already a world leader in wind energy, having rapidly expanded both its onshore and offshore wind capacity over the last decade. Now, under the new Labour government, the U.K. hopes to expand its wind power sector even further through the massive expansion of the Rampion offshore wind farm. This is expected to help the government progress towards achieving its net-zero carbon ambitions. In 2023, 46.4 percent of the UK’s electricity was generated using renewable energy sources, of which wind energy contributed 61 percent. Around 39.7 percent of the U.K.’s wind energy is generated onshore and the remaining 60.3 offshore. The U.K. constructed its first commercial onshore wind farm in 1991, generating 1 GW of wind capacity. In 2024, the U.K.’s wind energy capacity increased to 30GW, double that of 2017. The U.K. has 11,906 turbines, with 9,141 onshore and 2,765 offshore, consisting of 10 floating and 2,755 fixed turbines.

Approximately 32,000 people are employed in the U.K.’s offshore wind industry, a figure that is expected to increase to over 120,000 by 2030. The government also hopes to achieve 60 GW of wind capacity by the end of the decade, which could add as much as $58.5 billion to the economy. By the beginning of 2025, the U.K. had grown its offshore wind energy capacity to become the largest in Europe and second only to China, at 14 GW. In early April, the government approved plans to develop Rampion 2, an offshore wind farm with enough energy to power around 1 million U.K. homes. The expansion of the Rampion offshore wind farm, off England’s south coast, would include the addition of 90 turbines to add 1.2 GW of capacity. The project is expected to create 4,000 jobs during the construction phase, which is scheduled to commence in 2026. The government decision on the expansion was expected to be delivered in February but it has been delayed while more information is collected from the project’s developer.

The wind farm is being developed by RWE as the majority shareholder (50.1 percent), a Macquarie-led consortium (25 percent), and Enbridge (24.9 percent). The electricity produced at Rampion will be transported to land via subsea cables. An underground cable will then deliver the power inland to a new substation at Oakendene near Cowfold before connecting it to the national grid at Bolney in Sussex. The wind farm is expected to be operational by the late 2020s. Danielle Lane, the director of offshore wind development U.K. and Ireland at RWE, stated, “We are delighted to receive the development consent order for the proposed Rampion 2 offshore wind farm. This is a key milestone in the development of the project, as Rampion 2 can play an important role in helping secure the U.K.’s energy supplies from our abundant wind resource and play a key role in supporting the U.K. government’s clean power ambitions.”

Since coming into power last July, the Labour government has gone full throttle on the deployment of green energy, with plans to double the U.K.’s onshore wind, triple its solar power, and quadruple its offshore wind power capacity by 2030. It has also announced plans to reduce the contribution of natural gas to the country’s electricity generation to just 5 percent by the end of the decade. Thanks to the development of a more friendly investment environment, in an event in October some of the world’s largest green energy companies pledged to invest almost $31.39 billion across the U.K., demonstrating that greater public investment in the sector is attracting higher levels of private financing.

U.K. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said, “The U.K. has a boundless supply of wind that cannot be turned on and off at the whims of dictators and petrostates. It’s time to get off the fossil fuel rollercoaster, roll out clean power, protect our energy security and bring down bills for good.” He added, “This project puts us within reach of our clean power offshore wind target,” Miliband said. “Through our plan for change, we’re getting on with delivering the clean energy and jobs Britain needs.” Last year was a record year for wind energy production, with onshore and offshore projects producing 83 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity across Great Britain, an increase from almost 79 TWh in 2023. In around 10 days in December alone, over 50 percent of Britain’s electricity production came from wind.

However, there are also less windy periods, where energy production is lower. This suggests the need for greater investment in battery storage technology to make the renewable energy source more reliable and help reduce the U.K.’s reliance on fossil fuels during low-production times.The U.K. is already a major onshore and offshore producer of wind energy, having developed several projects over the last three decades. The approval of the new Rampion 2 project is expected to put the country on track to achieve its end-of-decade climate goals, by decarbonising its transmission network. This is one of many clean energy projects the Labour government has announced over the last eight months, with the ambitious green transition agenda expected to attract high levels of private funding in the sector.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Bhattacharya
https://twitter.com/plantparadise7/status/1914251645430489245

 

 

Makary

 

 

 

 

RFK
https://twitter.com/AVPac_US/status/1914432756815421626

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sagan

 

 

 

 

Goats

 

 

Cat

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 212025
 


Edward Hopper The “Martha McKeen” of Wellfleet 1944

 

What It Means To Be White In America (Von Hoffmeister)
Pope Francis Meets JD Vance On Easter, Appeals For Release Of Hostages (JTN)
Trump Hopeful For Russia-Ukraine Peace Deal In Coming Days (RT)
Russia Will Attack In A ‘Couple Of Years’ – Estonian FM (RT)
The Era of Lawless Leftist Judges is Likely Ending Soon (Margolis)
EU Selectively Condemns Political Persecution – Turkish Foreign Minister (RT)
Experts and Western Media Weigh In On Russia-Initiated Easter Truce (RT)
Trump Faces Self-Imposed Deadline To Make Scores Of Trade Deals (JTN)
It’s World War III… and the Democrats Are Siding With China (Pinsker)
SCOTUS Orders Trump to Stop Deporting Illegal Alien Gang Members (CTH)
Alito: SCOTUS Block Of Venezuelan Gang Deportations “Legally Questionable” (ET)
Ukrainian Envoy Asks For 30% Of Germany’s Military Equipment (RT)
Hegseth Shares Data on Yemen Strikes in Yet Another Chat (Sp.)
Van Hollen Tries to Rewrite Script of His El Salvador Stunt (Margolis)
Tom Homan Destroys Van Hollen for Prioritizing MS-13 Member (Margolis)
MSNBC Suggests Trump Plans to Deport African-Americans (Bartee)
Democrats Issue Warning To Biden – The Hill (RT)
US Liberals Changing Their Minds About Free Trade (RT)

 

 

 

 

Sachs
https://twitter.com/upholdreality/status/1913733871155257356

Movie

Chamath


https://twitter.com/theallinpod/status/1913991732863356970

 

 

 

 

An overdue conversation?!

What It Means To Be White In America (Von Hoffmeister)

To be white in America is to inherit a name shaped by migration, faith, and forgotten histories. It is a lineage carried across oceans, passed through lullabies, and rooted in both cathedrals and cornfields. This identity lingers in quiet rural churches, where the voices of ancestors seem to echo in the trees. For many, “white” becomes a stand-in when older names fade — when “American” feels like a hollow label on a billboard. It is not about shame or dominance. It is about memory, continuity, and being quietly aware of where you come from.

Multiculturalism, as it manifests now, behaves like a solvent. It dissolves the distinct, merges the sacred into sameness, smiles as it rubs out the texture of rooted lives. Within this flood, those who carry European memory find themselves drifting, searching for a foothold. The word “White” is that foothold. It holds meaning through resistance, through memory, through the fierce dignity of cultural continuity. Identity, in this sense, becomes a form of love — love for origins, love for inherited stories, love for those yet to come.

Supremacism speaks in the language of domination. Identity speaks in the language of presence. The White American who awakens to his name does not seek a throne. He seeks a hearth. He seeks a way to stay whole in a world that rewards fragmentation. This is a path of loyalty to one’s kind, never hostility towards others. In the garden of peoples, each flower flourishes with its own fragrance. Ethnopluralism offers an architecture of difference, a choreography of coexistence, where each cultural rhythm retains its beat without drowning the others.

The term “White” in the American lexicon carries a unique frequency. It vibrates with Jefferson’s quill and Bach’s organ, with frontier hymns and Viennese waltzes, with cavalry horns and Celtic chants. To call oneself White in this context is to protect this frequency from dissonance disguised as “inclusion.” It is to declare, without aggression, that the old songs deserve to be sung again. Memory deserves air. Tradition deserves breath. Identity deserves more than footnotes in someone else’s anthology.

European nationalists who peer across the Atlantic may see a racial label where a cultural signal flares. In America, this signal reaches through the noise, calling for cohesion in the absence of nationhood. The immigrant once became American through absorption into a defined mythos. That mythos no longer exists. “White” now fills the vacuum with a new mode of belonging — fused from ancestral fragments, reconstructed into a postmodern tribe bound by shared affinities rather than state-sponsored creeds. This tribe seeks kinship, not conquest.

The word itself — “White” — is undergoing alchemy. Once used carelessly, once wielded cruelly, now reclaimed with care. It becomes a sanctuary word, a quiet defiance against vanishing. It shields neither empire nor empire-building. It cradles only memory. Those who say the word do so with reverence, tracing maps invisible to those who only see skin. Within this word lives the village, the chapel bell, the grandmother’s eyes. To be White, then, is to feel time coiling through your veins, to hold the sacred burden of continuity with both hands.

Identity here acts as a compass, never a cage. It points to something essential, never reductive. Within its frame, new expressions rise — art, ritual, story, space. The future emerges from the past, remixed through intention rather than accident. Each person who reclaims identity becomes a steward. Each community that honors its inheritance becomes a lighthouse. In the haze of cultural disintegration, the glow of remembrance shines stronger than shame. Authentic diversity, when anchored in respect, requires difference. And difference requires selfhood.

To be pro-White is to be pro-identity. To affirm one’s people is to affirm all peoples. The line between celebration and supremacism is one of spirit, not volume. This spirit seeks harmony, not hierarchy. A world without distinct identities offers only the cold hum of managed sameness. A world of living cultures brims with meaning. So let this be said clearly: the affirmation of White identity, grounded in respect, carried with humility, lit by ancestral fire, serves not as a threat — but as a promise. A promise to remain, to remember, to reimagine.

Read more …

Last thing he did. The Pope died this morning.

Pope Francis Meets JD Vance On Easter, Appeals For Release Of Hostages (JTN)

An ailing Pope Francis, still recovering from a lung infection, met Sunday with Vice President J.D. Vance at the Vatican and made an Easter appeal for the release of hostages in the Hamas-Israel war. “I appeal to the warring parties: call a ceasefire, release the hostages and come to the aid of a starving people that aspires to a future of peace!” Francis said in a prepared Easter message. Hospitalized for more than a month with pneumonia, the 88-year-old Roman Catholic pontiff made several surprise appearances on Easter, including waving to adoring crowds from the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica.

While he did not preside over the traditional Easter mass, he did deliver the “Urbi et Orbi” blessing to the “City [of Rome] and to the World,” a special declaration of reconciliation that only a pope may deliver. Perhaps his highest profile moment came when he met privately with Vance, a 2019 convert to Catholicism who has tangled with the pope over U.S. enforcement of immigration laws. “The meeting, which lasted a few minutes, provided an opportunity to exchange Easter greetings,” the Vatican said in a statement.

Read more …

Here’s hoping.

Trump Hopeful For Russia-Ukraine Peace Deal In Coming Days (RT)

US President Donald Trump has expressed hope that Russia and Ukraine could reach a peace agreement within days, suggesting that both nations could instead turn their attention to trade with the United States. The statement follows remarks from Trump and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who hinted that Washington may abandon its mediation efforts unless tangible progress is made. “HOPEFULLY RUSSIA [and] UKRAINE WILL MAKE A DEAL THIS WEEK,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account on Sunday. “BOTH WILL THEN START TO DO BIG BUSINESS WITH THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WHICH IS THRIVING, AND MAKE A FORTUNE!” The 30-hour Easter truce declared by Russian President Vladimir Putin expired at midnight on Monday. The Kremlin confirmed there were no plans for an extension, and both sides have accused each other of breaching the agreement.

The Russian Defense Ministry reported around 1,300 violations of the holiday ceasefire, including artillery strikes and drone attacks. Since taking office in January, Trump has repeatedly emphasized his desire to broker an end to the conflict “as soon as possible.” His team has engaged in shuttle diplomacy, including a 30-day moratorium on strikes targeting energy infrastructure last month. However, both Moscow and Kiev later accused each other of violating that deal. According to the New York Post, the United States aims to “make a determination for a full and comprehensive ceasefire” within the coming days. The Friday report cited a senior US official who said the goal was to evaluate where Moscow and Kiev stand on a potential agreement through direct discussions.

Rubio warned that Washington could drop the peace initiative if talks break down. “We need to figure out here, now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable,” he told reporters on Friday. “If it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on.” He described the current proposal as a “broad framework” but declined to provide further details. Trump endorsed Rubio’s remarks, stating that Washington wants to see the conflict resolved and that there is “a good chance of solving the problem.” sMoscow has emphasized that any peace deal must address the “root causes” of the conflict, including NATO’s eastward expansion and Ukraine’s aspirations to join the US-led alliance.

Putin has also demanded that Kiev recognize Russia’s new borders – something Ukrainian leaders have so far rejected. Last month, Putin stated that in order for a viable ceasefire to be achieved, the Western nations must cease arms shipments to Ukraine, and Kiev must withdraw troops from Russian territories. Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Russian UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia called a full ceasefire “simply unrealistic at this stage,” accusing the West of using negotiations as a cover to rearm Ukrainian forces.

Read more …

What Trump’s peace efforts are up against.

Russia Will Attack In A ‘Couple Of Years’ – Estonian FM (RT)

NATO still has several years to prepare for a Russian invasion, Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna has said. President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly dismissed claims that Moscow has any aggressive plans towards NATO as “nonsense” that is meant to scare the European population and justify increases in military spending. In his interview with France 24 on Friday, Tsahkna suggested that “we have a couple of years to prepare for the full-scale [Russian] invasion capabilities to be ready” on the bloc’s borders. NATO has this time window because Russia’s military is currently preoccupied with the Ukraine conflict, he said. Like its fellow Baltic States, Estonia has been one of the most vocal backers of Ukraine during the conflict with Russia, calling for the supply of more weapons to Kiev and increased sanctions pressure on Moscow.

Tallinn has provided military assistance worth nearly €500 million, or more than 1.4% of its GDP, to the government of Vladimir Zelensky since February 2022. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are also reportedly among the six countries that support the push by the UK and France to deploy a Western “reassurance force” to Ukraine once the fighting stops there. “I was defense minister of Estonia in 2016 and 2017, and I saw the other side of our borders, NATO and European Union borders, 120,000 troops ready to go within 48 hours from the Russian side,” he said. However, currently it “is pretty empty [on] the other side of our borders from the Russian side because Russia is in Ukraine,” the foreign minister explained. “But what we see is that Russia is investing heavily to the [military] infrastructure, even [on] a larger scale than they had before,” he said.

According to Tsahkna, Moscow has “a plan to relocate the troops, maybe even [on] the largest scale in the future to the other side of all borders. But we are not talking about [the] Estonian border, we are talking about NATO.” He suggested that “if [Russian President Vladimir] Putin would like to test NATO in our region, I think that the cost for him will be very high” due to the permanent deployment of the bloc’s troops in the Baltic States, increased defense spending by member states in recent years and the inclusion of Finland and Sweden into NATO 2023 and 2024, respectively. US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, who has met with the Russian leader at the Kremlin three times, told American journalist Tucker Carlson in March that Moscow is “100% not” interested in invading NATO countries.

Read more …

“The fact that the justices have called for arguments in May suggests the urgency and significance of the issue. “It never hears cases in May..”

The Era of Lawless Leftist Judges is Likely Ending Soon (Margolis)

The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to weigh in on one of the most significant legal power plays in recent memory: whether individual federal trial judges can continue issuing nationwide injunctions that derail national policy. The high court’s move could mark a turning point in the Trump administration’s effort to rein in what it sees as activist judges stifling the will of the elected government. John Yoo, a law professor at UC Berkeley and former Justice Department official, broke down the issue during an appearance on Fox News, where he explained the gravity of the situation and why the Supreme Court is now stepping in. “This is about who controls all those… and there’s about 675 federal trial judges spread out all over the country,” Yoo said.

“And some of them have been bringing the federal government, bringing President Trump’s agenda to a screeching halt, even though they don’t have anybody, say, who works for the government or any of the illegal aliens or any of the spending in their own courtrooms.” In recent years, liberal activists have filed lawsuits in strategically chosen jurisdictions where they know they’ll find a sympathetic judge. The result? Leftist district judges, with no direct connection to the underlying policy or parties involved, have been able to issue injunctions blocking Trump administration directives nationwide—from immigration enforcement to federal spending priorities. “What’s going on here, I think it’s important to understand, is that the Supreme Court is already signaling that they’re very sympathetic to the Trump administration,” Yoo said. “The Supreme Court scheduled oral argument for May 15th.”

That date raised eyebrows among legal observers, as the Court typically stops hearing arguments by April and shifts to issuing decisions in pending cases. The fact that the justices have called for arguments in May suggests the urgency and significance of the issue. “It never hears cases in May,” Yoo explained. “Usually, they’d be done their business and they’d be sending out opinions by now. They’ve called basically a special session in order to hear President Trump’s claims that there should not be unlimited nationwide injunctions, but that they should be under the control of the Supreme Court.” The specific case revolves around Trump’s executive order targeting birthright citizenship, but Yoo emphasized that the justices may not even reach that policy question. The real issue is the unchecked legal activism that’s allowed district court judges to assume authority over foreign policy, immigration, and federal hiring and spending.

https://twittercom/RichSementa/status/1913695871088161159

“Whether you agree or disagree with President Trump’s order on birthright citizenship,” Yoo said, “they may not even get to the question, because the key thing here is for the Supreme Court to put an end to the 675 trial judges who all think they can run foreign policy, spending and hiring throughout the federal government. ”If the court sides with the Trump administration, it could dramatically reshape how federal power is contested in the courtroom and restore constitutional limits on unelected judges meddling in national affairs.”

Read more …

Being lectured by Turkey on democracy.

EU Selectively Condemns Political Persecution – Turkish Foreign Minister (RT)

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has accused the EU of applying double standards by remaining silent over Moldova’s arrest of Yevgenia Gutsul, the elected governor of the country’s autonomous Gagauzia region, who was arrested on charges related to her 2023 election campaign. Fidan noted that while the bloc has been vocal about the detention of Ekrem Imamoglu, the former mayor of Istanbul and potential rival to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, they have not condemned similar actions in other countries.

“In France, a woman party leader was imprisoned for corruption. Did you criticize it? No. In Romania, a candidate who won the election was tried before the second round and was politically banned. In Moldova, you imprisoned an elected regional head. Did you condemn it? No,” Fidan stated, as reported by Hurriyet on Sunday. Last month, Gagauzia Governor Yevgenia Gutsul was arrested amid an investigation into alleged irregularities during her 2023 election campaign. She condemned the Moldovan government’s actions, asserting that it seeks to undermine the autonomous region’s freedoms in retaliation for its support of opposition figures, including herself.

Gutsul’s arrest has sparked protests in Gagauzia, with supporters claiming political persecution. Moldovan authorities assert that the legal proceedings are part of efforts to uphold the rule of law and combat corruption. The French example Fidan referred to appears to concern Marine Le Pen, a former leader of the right-wing National Rally party (RN) and a three-time presidential candidate. A Paris court sentenced Le Pen to four years in prison for embezzlement last month, with two years suspended, and the other two to be served under a form of house arrest. She also received a five-year ban on holding political office, which effectively disqualifies her from the 2027 presidential race.

Read more …

The westerners all seem to think it’s all about the west. Like Russia has no life and no culture of its own.

Experts and Western Media Weigh In On Russia-Initiated Easter Truce (RT)

Multiple pundits and commentators, Western, Russian and those from further afield, have offered their takes on the Easter truce in the Ukraine conflict, which was unilaterally declared by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday. While many Western experts have been quick to express skepticism over the Kremlin’s true motives, others have described the temporary ceasefire as a pivotal step toward a potential broader peace agreement between Moscow and Kiev.

Western experts heap scorn on Putin’s Easter truce Ivor Bennett of Sky News suggested in his piece that the truce “feels like a diplomatic dance,” in which President Putin seemingly makes a concession, though one falling distinctly short of US President Donald Trump’s expectations. “Putin is giving Trump just enough to keep him on side” and secure the continuation of the apparent thaw in relations with the US, while “trying to cast himself as the peacemaker in the eyes of the US president – as the one who gives solutions, not problems,” Bennett wrote. CNN’s International Security Editor Nick Paton Walsh opined that the “sudden rush of this seems designed entirely to placate White House demands for some sign that Russia is willing to stop fighting,” adding that “it will likely feed Trump’s at-times pro-Moscow framing of the conflict.” Walsh concluded by predicting that the Easter truce “is likely to do more damage to the role of diplomacy in the coming months than it does to support it.”

Western pundits see ploy to lure Trump in Putin’s Easter truce Col. Richard Kemp (ret.) of the British Army and Rafael Bardaji, former national security advisor to the Spanish government, stated in an article for The Telegraph that Putin “needs time to rebuild the Russian economy” and does not want to draw President Trump’s ire by rejecting his peace proposals outright. German military expert Carlo Masala told Bild that “a cold-blooded calculation,” lies behind Putin’s Easter truce, with Moscow’s message being primarily intended for the occupant of the US White House. He further suggested that by throwing “Trump another crumb,” Moscow is trying to isolate Vladimir Zelensky and prompt Washington to abandon Kiev, while continuing to mend relations with Russia.

Others think Moscow is serious about peace Speaking to RIA Novosti, former Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl struck a more positive tone, saying that the “Easter truce is not something that will have decisive importance militarily, but diplomacy and human life often need gestures before it is possible to move on to real measures.” She opined that Putin chose an “opportune” moment to make such a signal, and expressed hope that the temporary ceasefire could pave the way to a comprehensive peace. Argentinian international relations analyst Christian Lamesa told Izvestia that the Kremlin’s initiative “will be received well by Washington, as a genuine and true expression of Vladimir Putin’s will toward creating a lasting peace.”

Russian expert says Easter truce was prepared well in advance In a comment to RIA Novosti, Iranian political scientist and international security expert Professor Ruhollah Modabber hailed the Russian president’s move on two counts: first, the Ester Truce demonstrates that Moscow respects and takes Christian ideals very seriously; second, Putin’s initiative proves that Russia truly wants to achieve peace in the Ukraine conflict. Russian military expert and RT contributor, Col. Mikhail Khodarenok (ret.), told Gazeta.Ru that the “Easter truce was possibly agreed on in advance… with the most direct involvement of the White House.” He claimed that the Russian military had begun making preparations well before it was officially announced. According to Khodarenok, Putin’s initiative is a “goodwill gesture,” illustrating Moscow’s readiness to put an end to the hostilities.

In announcing the truce, which is set to expire at midnight on April 21, Putin said that it would help reveal whether Ukraine is sincerely willing to engage in negotiations to end the conflict. Responding to the temporary ceasefire on social media, Zelensky made a counteroffer, suggesting that the current lull in fighting be extended further. Meanwhile, Russia’s Defense Ministry reported on Sunday that its forces had been targeted by Ukrainian troops with artillery and mortar fire, as well as kamikaze drones more than 1,300 times since the truce took effect.

Read more …

Busy days ahead.

Trump Faces Self-Imposed Deadline To Make Scores Of Trade Deals (JTN)

The White House likes to say that it moves at “Trump speed,” but even the dealmaker in chief could face challenges meeting a self-imposed deadline to work out trade deals with at least 75 nations during a 90-day pause on higher tariffs. Trump plans to sign off on each deal personally. He’s also personally talking to top leaders in other countries. On Tuesday, the White House reported the president’s team was reviewing 15 trade proposals. On Wednesday, Trump reported “big progress” on talks with Japan. The president met with Italy Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Thursday at the White House. The same day, Trump described a call with Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum as “very productive.”

On Friday, Trump talked with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the leader of a nation that maintains a special relationship with the U.S. and a more even trade balance with the U.S. than other countries. Starmer underscored his “commitment to free and open trade and the importance of protecting the national interest” during the call, a Downing Street spokesperson said. In March, Trump announced a 25% tariff on foreign vehicles and auto parts. That also affects the UK. British car makers sell luxury vehicles to the U.S. In 2024, the UK shipped more than 1 million British vehicles worth about $9.79 billion to the U.S. Jaguar Land Rover halted shipments to the U.S. for a month as it studies ways to mitigate the costs of the tariffs.

The White House reported that more than 75 nations reached out to Trump and his trade team after Trump implemented a wave of what he called reciprocal tariffs on April 2 – Trump’s self-proclaimed “Liberation Day” for U.S. trade. On April 9, Trump announced a 90-day pause on those higher tariffs while keeping a baseline 10% tariff and a 145% tariff on imports from China. Trump has made some exemptions to that tariff on imports from China by excluding smartphones, computers and other electronics. A tariff is a tax on imported goods. The importer pays the tax and can either absorb the loss or pass the tax on to consumers in the form of higher prices.

Trump has promised that tariffs will help increase federal revenue, restore manufacturing jobs lost to lower-wage countries in decades past, and shift the tax burden away from U.S. families. Some nations, including China, have responded with retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Others have signaled they are eager to make a deal with the Trump administration. Trump has not yet announced any trade deals. Trump paused the higher tariffs for 90 days, giving his administration limited time to make deals with 75 nations the White House reported reached out seeking trade negotiations. Trump said after the 90-day pause, the higher reciprocal tariffs could come back into play, something most nations and business groups want to avoid.

Read more …

“You’ve got 82% of Republicans with an unfavorable opinion of China — and 77% of Americans overall.”

It’s World War III… and the Democrats Are Siding With China (Pinsker)

“Liberation Day” was on April 2. Hasn’t even been three weeks yet. As far as Trade Wars go, this one is still in diapers. So today, on Easter Sunday, let’s (carefully) vacate our bunkers and survey the dreadful damage: Hmm… Disruption has been minimal. You can still buy all the iPhones you want. Sure, the ambiguity over tariffs sucks for globally-sourced products, but most Americans understand Trump’s thought process. It’s threefold:
• China is a communist dictatorship that’s ruthlessly dishonest, absolutely untrustworthy, and has become our #1 global rival. Seems kind of stupid to perpetually send our money to our #1 global rival.
• One of the lessons of the COVID pandemic was the importance of nationalizing critical supply chains, so we’re no longer dependent on foreign rivals for medicine, food, and technology.
• Cheap (crappy) mass-produced Chinese goods are great, but American jobs are even better. And with millions of young people stuck in stagnant, low-paying jobs — unable to ever afford a house of their own — we needed to flip our priorities.

Which is why Trump is playing brinksmanship and renegotiating trade deals. You can agree or disagree with his methodology, but the problems he’s attempting to fix are painfully authentic. Ignore them at your own peril. (Kamala Harris ignored ‘em, and it cost her the election.) Yet the Democrats are already waiving the white flag, bowing before the country that is, quite literally, a red flag. Again: it’s only been 18 days! Mark Twain popularized the expression in 1907, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” And, to be fair, poll numbers are statistics. So for consistency’s sake, we’ll use the exact same numerical thresholds as our pals in the mainstream media. Two days ago, we noted a new media theme about Trump’s “tanking” numbers on immigration. And there were a lot of stories:

• The Independent: Trump’s approval rating on immigration has tanked in recent weeks as more controversial deportations are revealed
• Newsweek: Donald Trump’s Approval Rating Over Immigration Is Tumbling
• Slate: Trump polling: Perhaps sending people to Salvadoran gulags is not exactly what voters had in mind.
• The Independent (Part II): Amid the Kilmar Abrego Garcia controversy, Trump is losing ground on immigration
• Splinter: Trump’s Immigration Policies Are Not Popular
• The American Prospect: The Anti-Immigration Majority Is a Mirage
• MSN: Trump’s economic and immigration policies face growing dissent

Well, garsh! That all sounds crappy. So we dug deeper and reviewed the poll that the media described as “tanking,” “tumbling,” “losing,” and a “mirage”: “Tanked,” eh? Well, let’s look under the hood, shall we: Last week 57% of Americans supported Trump’s immigration policies. This week it “tanked” to 54%. Three points! The poll’s margin of error is 3.5, by the way. You don’t need to be a math major to recognize a big, fat, juicy Nothing Burger when you see one. According to the standard set by the mainstream media, a three-point drop — in an opinion poll with a 3.5 margin of error! — constitutes “tanking,” “tumbling,” “losing,” and a “mirage.” Fine. Recently, the Pew Research Center released a new poll on Americans perceptions of China. And what did they discover?

For the first time in five years, the share of Americans with an unfavorable opinion of China has fallen from the year before – albeit slightly, from 81% in 2024 to 77% in 2025. Well, that’s a four-point drop. (Even bigger than Trump’s “tanking” three-point drop.) Hmm. Let’s dig a little deeper: Views of China tend to vary by party. While majorities of adults in both parties have an unfavorable opinion of China, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are significantly more likely than Democrats and Democratic leaners to hold this view (82% vs. 72%). So the real story is a 10-point divide between the parties on China. Keep an eye on this gap, because the Democrats’ knee-jerk impulse to oppose everything Trump supports — and support everything Trump opposes — will push them closer to China. They’ll sympathize with the Chi-Coms. They’ll editorialize on behalf of China. They’ll include Xi within the Great Liberal Wall of Resistance.

And they’ll likely pluck away a few libertarian-leaning, Ayn Rand-loving conservatives, too. One of the unexpected results of the poll was a 16-point drop amongst Republicans who had a “very unfavorable” view of China. Still, this issue is a yuuuuge net winner for the GOP. You’ve got 82% of Republicans with an unfavorable opinion of China — and 77% of Americans overall. Even after 18 days of hyperbolic, venomous headlines, more than seven out of 10 DEMOCRATS rightly recognize China as a bad actor! But that 10-point gap is a doozy. So far in this Trade War, there’s been a curious absence of nationalism. That’s a PR mistake. Beginning on Monday, it would be wise for Team MAGA to reframe the issue from fairness to patriotism — because the fairness argument has already been successfully seeded. We’re at 77%! There’s already a consensus. What’s missing is a patriotic call to arms, where the country understands that we’re sacrificing together so we can win together. We need a national buy-in on the mission. That’s what’s missing. And it’s not too late.

Read more …

‘sundance’ on that midnight order.

“Any illegal alien who happens to also be a gang member, or illegal alien who would ‘smartly’ now claim to be a gang member, is ultimately the beneficiary of a Supreme Court order..”

SCOTUS Orders Trump to Stop Deporting Illegal Alien Gang Members (CTH)

At 1:00am on Saturday, the Supreme Court of the USA issued an injunction blocking President Trump from deporting illegal aliens identified under the Alien Enemies Act. It was/is a bizarre order considering the lower court had not even ruled on the matter; worse yet, the Supreme Court created an imaginary “class” of aliens. Any illegal alien who happens to also be a gang member, or illegal alien who would ‘smartly’ now claim to be a gang member, is ultimately the beneficiary of a Supreme Court order blocking their removal or deportation. That’s how judicially insane this injunction is.

As outlined in the original injunction order, Justice Alito issued a blistering dissent, calling out seven of the justices who affirmed the order. An incredulous Alito concludes with the following paragraph:

The Trump administration has already filed a response, hitting on several of the key legal contradictions that are outlined by Alito in his dissent. The bottom line appears to be the ACLU ran to the Supreme Court less than an hour after filing a responsive motion with the court of jurisdiction, solely on the false premise that some illegal alien member within the removal order process of deportation, might be removed. The Supreme Court bought the argument, created an entire class of deportees under the auspices of gang membership, and blocked President Trump from deporting anyone who might be a gang member, while the illegal aliens argue about their non-gang status.

Madness; all of it.

Read more …

“.. literally in the middle of the night, the Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule..”

“..with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order..”

“The justices acted even though “it is not clear the Court had jurisdiction..” or authority to hear the case, he wrote.”

Alito: SCOTUS Block Of Venezuelan Gang Deportations “Legally Questionable” (ET)

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito filed a strongly worded dissent from the court’s order issued early April 19 that temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting alleged members of the Venezuelan criminal gang Tren de Aragua. The dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, was posted on the court’s website early on April 20. “In sum, literally in the middle of the night, the Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule, without hearing from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order,” Alito wrote. “I refused to join the Court’s order because we had no good reason to think that, under the circumstances, issuing an order at midnight was necessary or appropriate.”

“Both the Executive and the Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law. The Executive must proceed under the terms of our order in Trump v. J.G.G., and this Court should follow established procedures,” Alito wrote. The justices acted even though “it is not clear the Court had jurisdiction,” or authority to hear the case, he wrote. “The papers before us, while alleging that the applicants were in imminent danger of removal, provided little concrete support for that allegation,” Alito wrote. In Trump v. J.G.G., the Supreme Court on April 7 granted the president’s request to pause a federal district judge’s orders preventing his administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected members of Tren de Aragua but determined that detainees must be given an opportunity to challenge their removal.

The unsigned one-page administrative stay issued early April 19 to which Alito referred directed the federal government “not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court.” An administrative stay gives the justices more time to consider the emergency request to block the deportations. That order did not provide an explanation of why the court acted. The order was issued after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed an emergency request on behalf of two Venezuelan nationals late on April 18, asking the Supreme Court to immediately block their deportation. The emergency application in A.A.R.P. and W.M.M. v. Trump challenges President Donald Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport illegal immigrants who are alleged or confirmed criminal gang members. A.A.R.P. and W.M.M. are the initials of two of the detained men.

The ACLU also sought a temporary restraining order from the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, as well as a stay of removal order from the Fifth Circuit, according to the application. On March 14, Trump signed Proclamation 10903, in which he officially declared that Tren de Aragua, a designated foreign terrorist organization, “is perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States.” The group is using mass illegal immigration to the United States to harm U.S. citizens, undermine public safety, and support the goal of the Venezuelan socialist regime with which it is associated to destabilize “democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States,” the proclamation said. The president invoked the Alien Enemies Act to authorize the “immediate apprehension, detention, and removal” of members of the group who are Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older and who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United States.

The application said the ACLU’s clients are challenging the Trump administration’s use of the federal statute to deport them. The clients “are in imminent and ongoing jeopardy of being removed from the United States without notice or an opportunity to be heard, in direct contravention of this Court’s order in Trump v. J.G.G.” “Many individuals have already been loaded on to buses, presumably headed to the airport,” and are at risk of being sent to a prison in El Salvador, according to the April 18 application. On March 15, the Trump administration used the Alien Enemies Act to deport at least 137 Venezuelans to El Salvador, where they are now incarcerated “possibly for the rest of their lives” at the Salvadoran Terrorism Confinement Center, which is “one of the most notorious prisons in the world,” the application said. The application alleged that many of those deported since March 15 were not members of Tren de Aragua.

“Such false accusations are particularly devastating given the present Applicants’ strong claims for relief under our immigration laws,” the application said. The application came one day after U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas denied the ACLU clients’ request for a temporary restraining order halting removal efforts.Hendrix rejected the ACLU’s claim that its clients were “at imminent risk of summary removal” because the government denied the allegation. Late on April 19, Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to deny the application. “At a minimum, if the Court keeps its administrative stay in place, the government respectfully requests that the Court clarify that it is administratively staying removals only under the [Alien Enemies Act], and that its order does not preclude removal pursuant to any other immigration authorities,” Sauer wrote.

Read more …

Why not all of it?

Ukrainian Envoy Asks For 30% Of Germany’s Military Equipment (RT)

Germany should donate 30% of its available armored vehicles and military aircraft to Kiev, according to Andrey Melnik, Ukraine’s envoy to the UN. His appeal comes as the EU nations seek ways to boost support amid uncertainty over whether US President Donald Trump will continue to back Ukraine. Melnik, who served as ambassador to Berlin from 2015 to 2022, addressed his plea in an open letter to Chancellor-designate Friedrich Merz, published in Welt am Sonntag on Saturday. “It is in your hands, as peacemakers, to stop this damn war by the end of 2025,” he wrote. The diplomat outlined a series of steps he believes Merz must take to “cut the Gordian knot and force [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to make peace.”

According to Melnik, Germany should donate 30% of its Bundeswehr stock of armored vehicles and aircraft to Kiev, including around 45 Eurofighter Typhoon and 30 Tornado fighter jets, 100 Leopard 2 main battle tanks, and 115 Puma and 130 Marder infantry fighting vehicles. He also called on Berlin to defy “the expected resistance” from the Social Democrats (SPD) and send 150 Taurus cruise missiles. The SPD has opposed the missile deliveries, citing concerns about further escalation with Russia. The Social Democrats and Merz’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) are currently engaged in coalition talks.

Melnik urged Germany to commit 0.5% of its GDP, or €21.5 billion ($24.5 billion) annually, toward military aid to Ukraine through 2029. “These funds should be invested in the production of state-of-the-art weapons in both Germany and Ukraine,” he wrote. He also called for the 0.5% benchmark to be adopted across the EU as a “huge warning signal” to Russia. Merz recently expressed an openness to delivering Taurus missiles, prompting criticism from SPD leader Matthias Miersch and Defense Minister Boris Pistorius. Meanwhile, Russian Ambassador to Germany Sergey Nechayev warned that such shipments would “bring no changes to the battlefield” but would further implicate Germany in the conflict.

Read more …

Ugly.

Hegseth Shares Data on Yemen Strikes in Yet Another Chat (Sp.)

In March, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth sent data on upcoming strikes on Yemen in a closed group chat on the Signal messenger, the participants were not only people from his professional circle, but also his wife, as well as his brother and lawyer, the New York Times reported, citing sources. According to the publication, the Pentagon chief sent the flight schedule of the F/A-18 Hornets that attacked Shia military-political movement Ansar Allah (Houthis) in Yemen from his personal phone to a chat called “Defense | Team Huddle” — he published the same information in another chat with officials of the US administration.

The publication notes that Hegseth’s wife Jennifer, a former Fox News producer, is not an employee of the US Department of Defense. However, she was previously criticized for accompanying her husband to secret meetings with foreign leaders. At the same time, Hegseth’s brother and lawyer work at the Pentagon, but, as the newspaper said, it is unclear why they needed information about the upcoming strikes on Yemen. The newspaper notes that Hegseth was the group chat’s creator. In addition to his wife, it included about a dozen people from his personal and professional circle. Earlier, the Office of the Inspector General of the US Department of Defense launched an investigation into the use of the Signal messenger by the US Secretary of Defense after the scandal surrounding the leak of discussions between officials of the US administration about strikes in Yemen.

On March 24, the editor-in-chief of the Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, said that on March 11, he had received a request in the Signal messenger and had got into a chat where the US authorities were discussing strikes against the Houthis ruling in northern Yemen. According to Goldberg, accounts under the names of Hegseth, US Vice President J.D. Vance, White House National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and other officials were in the chat, what many of them subsequently confirmed, insisting that they did not exchange classified information in the messenger. Goldberg presented screenshots of the correspondence, in which the Pentagon chief, several hours before the start of the operation, reports on the types of aircraft and targets, which, according to the journalist, could threaten servicemen if leaked. Goldberg accused officials of serious violation of security rules. It was also noted that the chat was set to automatically delete messages, which violated the requirements for storing official information.

Read more …

“Americans’ constitutional rights are nowhere near as endangered by enforcing immigration law as they are by the lawlessness that open borders and weak leadership encourage.”

Van Hollen Tries to Rewrite Script of His El Salvador Stunt (Margolis)

Last week, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) scrambled to contain the fallout from his tone-deaf El Salvador stunt that quickly turned into a political fiasco. The Maryland Democrat, who initially grandstanded about his efforts to “rescue” a deported MS-13 gang member, is now in full damage control mode—desperately trying to rewrite the narrative of a trip that backfired spectacularly. Van Hollen even hit the Sunday talk shows to contain the fallout. Curiously insisting to Jonathan Karl of ABC News’s “This Week” that he’s not defending Kilmar Abrego Garcia, but that he’s defending “the rule of law.” Host Jonathan Karl pressed Van Hollen on “some pretty serious allegations of abuse” made by Abrego Garcia’s wife in court—allegations that President Trump has recently brought to national attention.

“Obviously, everybody in this country, even those undocumented immigrants, have rights. But are you concerned about standing so forcefully with somebody that has, you know, at least a questionable record?” Karl asked. Van Hollen insisted his advocacy wasn’t about the man himself, but about legal principle. “I am not defending the man. I’m defending the rights of this man to due process,” he claimed. “And the Trump administration has admitted in court that he was wrongfully detained and wrongfully deported.” Abrego Garcia’s case is anything but an example of a rushed or unjust deportation. In fact, the timeline of events makes clear that Garcia received extensive due process over the course of several years. His encounters with law enforcement began well before his deportation, including multiple arrests tied to suspected gang activity.

His immigration status was reviewed in formal proceedings before multiple judges. Notably, two separate immigration judges independently determined that Garcia was a member of the violent MS-13 gang—a finding that was never overturned or disputed in subsequent legal filings. Garcia was represented by legal counsel throughout, and he took full advantage of the appeals process. Several of his appeals were reviewed by higher courts and ultimately rejected. Adding to the legal weight against him, Garcia’s wife sought a protective order through a U.S. court. The judge in that case found that Garcia had committed acts of domestic abuse, further strengthening the government’s case for removal.

Taken together, these facts dismantle the narrative that Garcia was denied fair treatment. His deportation came only after a lengthy legal process, multiple court rulings, and ample opportunity to challenge the government’s case—proving that due process was not only afforded, but exhausted. Van Hollen’s defense of his misguided field trip to El Salvador boils down to hollow talking points about constitutional rights. He dramatically claims, “If we take [those rights] away from him, we jeopardize them for everybody.” Really, Senator? Because last I checked, Americans’ constitutional rights are nowhere near as endangered by enforcing immigration law as they are by the lawlessness that open borders and weak leadership encourage.

Meanwhile, Democrats such as Van Hollen keep sending a clear message to criminals and illegal immigrants worldwide: America’s laws are optional, especially if you can find a soft-hearted (or soft-headed) liberal to champion your cause. How many innocent Americans have to suffer due to gang violence fueled by people such as Abrego Garcia before someone such as Van Hollen admits this open-borders sympathy act only hurts the country? And let’s talk about priorities. While Van Hollen grandstands about “due process” in a Salvadoran prison, how about the rights of American families devastated by MS-13’s reign of terror? How about standing up for law-abiding citizens who expect safety in their communities? Instead, Van Hollen wants us to sympathize with a gang member who had no business in this country in the first place.

Read more …

“He didn’t care when border patrol agents were being overrun, when families were being destroyed, when fentanyl was pouring into this country. But now he wants to talk about due process for someone with MS-13 ties?”

Tom Homan Destroys Van Hollen for Prioritizing MS-13 Member (Margolis)

During a hard-hitting segment on ABC’s “This Week,” border czar Tom Homan tore into Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) for prioritizing a suspected MS-13 gang member over the countless American victims of illegal immigration. Homan’s comments came in response to Van Hollen’s trip to El Salvador, where the senator met with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an alleged MS-13 member, wife-beater, and human trafficker recently deported by the Trump administration. “What bothers me more than that is a U.S. senator traveled to El Salvador on taxpayer dime to meet with a MS-13 gang member, public safety threat, terrorist,” Homan said. “And in the meantime, the day before he traveled, an illegal alien was arrested for murder, released to the streets rather than honoring an ICE detainer in his very own state.”

Homan didn’t stop there. He slammed Van Hollen for turning a blind eye to the border crisis throughout Joe Biden’s presidency. “What concerns me is Van Hollen never went to the border the last four years under Joe Biden,” he said, “when you had a 600% increase in sex trafficking in women and children. You have a record number of known suspected terrorists crossing that border. You had a quarter million Americans die from fentanyl overdoses because of the open border.” He continued, “You got over 4,000 illegal aliens [who] died making that journey, which is an historic record. What shocks me is he’s remained silent on the travesty that happened on our southern border.” Homan emphasized the staggering human cost of lax immigration enforcement, something Van Hollen appears uninterested in addressing.

“Many people died. Thousands of people died,” he said. “I’ve met with hundreds of angel moms and dads who buried their children that were murdered by an illegal alien—how many angel moms and dads has he met in, in the state of, uh, state of Maryland? That’s what concerns me.” According to Homan, this isn’t just about one deportation—it’s about a complete failure to acknowledge the real-world impact of Democratic immigration policies. “He’s more concerned about getting a photo op with a gang member,” Homan said, “than he is about the thousands of Americans who have been killed, raped, or trafficked because the border was left wide open for four years.”

Homan concluded with a damning indictment of Van Hollen’s priorities: “He didn’t care when border patrol agents were being overrun, when families were being destroyed, when fentanyl was pouring into this country. But now he wants to talk about due process for someone with MS-13 ties?” President Trump is back in the White House and his administration is wasting no time restoring law and order at the border. The days of open-border appeasement, of politicians bending over backwards for criminals while turning their backs on American families, are coming to an end. The public is fed up with leaders such as Van Hollen, who sympathize with gang members while ignoring the blood-stained consequences at home.

Read more …

Oh, of course. Next week: women.

MSNBC Suggests Trump Plans to Deport African-Americans (Bartee)

The latest racial-tinged conspiracy theory that the TDS-addled corporate state media is running with is that the Trump administration is developing plans to deport African-Americans, otherwise known as “people of color.” Let the brutal ogre and former Kamala Harris press ops goon who has rebranded herself as a journalist, Symone Sanders, explain:

“We’ve been talking about this all week, but Janai Nelson of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, she penned an op-ed in The Nation this week. And her op-ed talked about that we think democracies are — the way they die is dramatically, through these wars, and blood is shed, and it’s cinematic in a sense. But really, the realistic way in which democracies die, is it is dismantled brick by brick, piece by piece. And she says that what we are seeing now with the lawlessness from this administration are really the canaries in the coal mine gasping for air. I’m paraphrasing here. But to me, that is why Kilmar Abrego-Garcia’s specific case, the case of the gentleman who’s a make-up artist out of California who was also sent to that prison, that’s what the more — the 75% of the folks who have been sent, the men who have been sent there that don’t have criminal records — that is why this is so important. If they can do it to them, if they can snatch students off the street without any pushback or recourse, they will do it to any of us. To be very clear, it’s going to be the people of color, and vulnerable communities that are next in line.”

Diverse Congressman Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.) goes on to concur with Sanders’ apocalyptic warning, adding that “that’s certainly part of why the African-American community is so behind” trying to bring the “Maryland father”/alleged MS-13 gang member back to the United States, clearly insinuating that the Trump administration is going to specifically target blacks in its next roundup. Absolutely at no point did Trump, obviously, declare his intention to begin deporting minorities on racial grounds. What he did say — and, for the record, I don’t agree with trying to deport American citizens convicted of crimes — is that he would look into deporting “homegrown” criminals here, the meaning of which is not entirely clear. “The homegrowns are next, the homegrowns. You’ve got to build about five more places,” he told El Salvador president Nayib Bukele last week in reference to the prisons that currently house deported illegal aliens.

Later, during the same meeting, Trump clarified that these are not established plans, but that he instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether doing so would be legal: “I’d like to go a step further, I mean, I say, I said it to Pam: “I don’t know what the laws are,” we always have to obey the laws, but we also have homegrown criminals that push people into subways, that hit elderly ladies on the back of the head with a baseball bat when they’re not looking, that are absolute monsters. I’d like to include them in the group of people to get them out of the country, but you’d have to be looking at the laws on that.”

Read more …

Go away!

Democrats Issue Warning To Biden – The Hill (RT)

Democrats are expressing frustration over former US President Joe Biden’s re-emergence in the public spotlight, arguing that his presence is complicating efforts to regroup after the party’s defeat in the 2024 presidential and congressional elections, according to The Hill’s sources. Biden made his first public appearance in months on April 15, delivering a speech sharply criticizing recent White House policy decisions. Biden claimed that US President Donald Trump has inflicted a “breathtaking” amount of damage on federal programs through extensive cuts, and went on to demean the Republican’s supporters and argue that America has “never been this divided.”

Many in the party believe the octogenarian’s return is ill-timed and risks distracting from the Democratic Party’s attempts to rebuild. Former press secretary to First Lady Jill Biden Michael LaRosa argued that Biden’s speech was a “lovely gift for the White House, President Trump and conservative media,” especially in light of the new tariff policies, when the administration is under “heavy scrutiny.” “If they had advisers who had their hand on the pulse of the Democratic Party or national politics, they would have understood the intense level of anger or indifference to them that remains inside our party and isn’t going away anytime soon,” LaRosa added.

Strategists close to the Democratic leadership have expressed concern that it’s an inopportune time for Biden to appear, especially as polling indicates that Americans are increasingly blaming Trump for his handling of the economy.Biden’s recent remarks have also drawn criticism from conservatives, who alleged that the Democratic Party and the former president’s policies were among the main factors contributing to divisions in American society. According to polling cited by The Hill earlier this year, only 39% of Americans approved of Biden’s presidency from 2021 to 2025, while 57% rated his performance negatively. In some surveys, he was described as one of the least popular living US presidents.

Read more …

They support free trade because Trump does not.

“Negative partisanship is a helluva drug..”

US Liberals Changing Their Minds About Free Trade (RT)

Support for free trade among American liberals has more than doubled since Donald Trump won his second term as US president in November, a study has suggested. During the election campaign, Trump accused America’s trade partners of ripping off the country and vowed to impose harsh duties on them. On April 2, he made good on his threat, announcing new “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly 90 countries, saying that it would raise revenues and boost the number of jobs in the US. After global markets reacted by dropping sharply, the president put most of the tariffs on hold for 90 days, reducing them to a baseline rate of 10%. However, the pause does not apply to China, whose exports to the US are now subject to tariffs of up to 145% amid an ongoing tit-for-tat trade war.

A poll by Polarization Research Lab, first published by the Financial Times and actively shared by social media users on Friday, has suggested that “American attitudes towards free trade have rapidly polarized” over the past several months. In early 2024, there was some 20% support for unrestricted exports and imports among both liberals and conservatives, the study said. However, the divide on the issue between the groups, which appeared in the run up to the election, has increased dramatically since Trump’s victory, it said. According to the poll, more than 40% of leftists surveyed now say that they “strongly approve” of free trade. The Democrats, whom liberals tend to support, had earlier blasted Trump’s tariff policies as being “dangerous” and a “corrupt scheme to enrich administration officials and those loyal to them.”

Meanwhile, the number of conservatives who support free trade has decreased, albeit not as sharply, with some 13% of them still favoring it, the study suggested. Some of the commentators online said that the results of the poll suggested that the supporters of both Democrats and Republicans tend to simply back the stance of their party on various issues, without actually looking into them. “Negative partisanship is a helluva drug,” chief data reporter at the Financial Times John Burn-Murdoch wrote on X about the findings of the survey. The director of Polarization Research Lab, Sean Westwood, disagreed with the notion, arguing that “this is not an irrational flip by Liberals in response to Conservatives – Liberals are witnessing a stock market crash and an economic retraction. It could very well be reasoned.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Spike

 

 

Lymphocytes
https://twitter.com/FredsFarm247/status/1914100594366644534

 

 

Birds

 

 

Harbor

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 202025
 


Edward Hopper The long leg 1935

 

Opposition to ‘Eurofascism’ Driving US and Russia Closer – Spy Agency (RT)
Russia Announces Easter Ceasefire (RT)
European Union Bans Commemorating The Defeat of Nazi Germany (SCF)
Trump Administration Plans To Send Envoy Witkoff To Russia Again – CNN (RT)
Scott Ritter: Rubio’s Threats to Quit Ukraine Talks Look Like Sabotage (Sp.)
US Threats To Quit Ukraine Talks Aimed at Kiev Rather Than Moscow (TASS)
US Sets Timeline For Kiev To Agree To Ceasefire (RT)
Germany Wants The UK To Hold Its Hand While It Starts WWIII (Marsden)
Moldova Wages War On Christians To Please Its EU Overlords (Romanenko)
Will Trump’s Tariffs Hurt GOP in Midterms? (Caldwell)
US, Iran Agree To Enter Next Phase Of Nuclear Negotiations (JTN)
Trump On Deported Migrant: ‘He’s Got MS-13 Tattooed’ On His Knuckles (JTN)
SCOTUS Order Pauses Deportations Under Alien Enemies Act (Allen)
SCOTUS Blocks Deportation of Alleged Venezuela Gang Members for Now (ET)
SCOTUS Halts Venezuelan Deportations, 4th Circuit Upholds Garcia Order (Turley)
Judge Blocks Trump’s Order Ending ‘X’ Gender Marker on Passports (ET)
Tesla Continues to Reign Supreme Despite Leftist Violence (Blackmon)

 

 

 

 

90 days

Cernovich
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1913298101915238458

Tish
https://twitter.com/LynneBP_294/status/1913223009462010142

DEI

injunctions

Left

Ireland

Conor

 

 

 

 

“.. work together to prevent “a new global conflict” and confront “possible provocations both from Ukraine and from the ‘maddened Europeans’..”

Opposition to ‘Eurofascism’ Driving US and Russia Closer – Spy Agency (RT)

The US and Russia are natural allies against “Eurofascism” and the tyrannical tendencies prevalent in Western European countries, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has said. The spy agency published a text on its website on Wednesday titled ‘Eurofascism, just as 80 years ago, is the common enemy for Moscow and Washington.’ The SVR argued that Europe has a “historical predisposition” to “various forms of totalitarianism that periodically produce devastating, global-scale conflicts.” It cited the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution and the “bloody actions” of Napoleon as examples. It also referenced the Charlemagne Division of the SS, made up of volunteers from Nazi-occupied France.

The agency credited French author Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, who collaborated with Nazi Germany, with introducing “the concept of Eurofascism… and its ideology.” According to the SVR, la Rochelle believed that “Eurofascism … [is] inherent not only to the Germans but to other European ‘societies’ as well.” The agency cited unnamed experts as saying that the current rift between the US and the EU facilitates a “situational rapprochement of Washington and Moscow.” “The United States is free due to the willingness of the ancestors of modern Americans to confront such dictatorships as the British Monarchy or the Jacobin Revolution,” it said. The SVR claimed that “conservative expert circles in the USA believe that the British elite … is very much inclined to commit the gravest crimes against humanity.”

“America felt the effect of similar inclinations of the British back in August of 1814, when the British troops occupied Washington, burned the Capitol and the White House,” the SVR claimed. The agency said that “foreign expert circles” are hopeful that Russia and the US will work together to prevent “a new global conflict” and confront “possible provocations both from Ukraine and from the ‘maddened Europeans’ traditionally urged on by Great Britain.” The statement was released as the US is attempting to broker a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. Russian officials said that, unlike the Biden administration, President Donald Trump and his team have shown a readiness to listen to Moscow’s positions and understand the root causes of the conflict.

Read more …

It took just seconds for Zelensky to claim Russia was violating its own ceasefire. And that is the only newsbit broadcast all across the west.

Russia Announces Easter Ceasefire (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced a temporary Easter pause in hostilities with Ukraine, which is slated to begin at 18:00 Moscow time on Saturday and last until midnight on April 21. The announcement came during his meeting with Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov in Moscow. Putin expressed hope that Kiev would demonstrate goodwill and adhere to the ceasefire. ”At the same time, our troops must be prepared to respond to any violations or provocations by the adversary, to any aggressive actions,” he said. Putin stated that Ukraine’s reaction to the ceasefire would be a clear indicator of whether Kiev is sincerely willing to engage in negotiations to end the conflict. The president referenced the US-brokered 30-day energy infrastructure truce agreed to on March 18, accusing Ukraine of violating it.

“We know that the Kiev regime has violated the agreement on pausing energy infrastructure strikes more than a hundred times,” Putin explained. “Therefore, I ask you [Gerasimov] to remain extremely vigilant and prepared for an immediate and full-force response.” Shortly after Putin’s statement, the Russian Defense Ministry confirmed the ceasefire, calling on Kiev to reciprocate. ”The ceasefire is being introduced for humanitarian purposes and will be observed by the Russian Joint Group of Troops, provided it is mutually observed by the Kiev regime,” the ministry said. While Kiev did not immediately provide a clear response to Putin’s announcement, it appeared to reject the temporary truce. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky branded it an attempt to “play with human lives,” claiming that swarms of Russian kamikaze drones were detected in the country’s skies at 17:15 Moscow time.

The drones “in our skies show Putin’s true attitude to Easter and human lives,” Zelensky said in a statement. According to RT war correspondent Andrey Filatov, reporting from the Pokrovsk (Krasnoarmeysk) area in Donetsk People’s Republic, multiple violations of the ceasefire were observed within an hour of it taking effect. Ukrainian forces in the area have been actively using drones, mortars and heavy artillery, striking Russian positions with cluster munitions. Earlier this week, Moscow suggested a full long-term ceasefire with Ukraine was highly unlikely, given Kiev’s long history of broken promises and violations of previous deals.

Speaking to reporters at UN headquarters on Thursday, Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” referencing the fate of the long-defunct Minsk agreements, as well as repeated violations of a US-brokered 30-day moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes. In the meantime, Washington has signaled that time is running out for finding a solution to the Ukraine conflict. On Friday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the Trump administration was prepared to throw in the towel soon. “We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio stated.

Read more …

In case you were wondering what the EU stands for. This should be hard to believe. Unfortunately, it is not.

European Union Bans Commemorating The Defeat of Nazi Germany (SCF)

The European Union is warning European leaders not to attend the 80th anniversary of Victory Day in Moscow on May 9. Ostensibly, the rationale for such a ban is that Russia is allegedly waging a war against Ukraine and threatening the rest of Europe, according to the EU. That’s one way of seeing it. Another way of seeing the matter is that the conflict in Ukraine is a proxy war sponsored by the EU and NATO to defeat Russia, eight decades after Nazi Germany failed to do it. The Euro elites who have come to dominate policymaking share the same fascist mentality. No wonder, then, that they are against attending the 80th anniversary event in Moscow next month. They need to sully that event by way of covering up their despicable politics. The event marking the defeat of Nazi Germany and fascism in Europe is a massively important historical date for the entire world.

Eighty years ago, on May 9, 1945, the Soviet Red Army crushed the Nazi regime in Berlin thereby ending the most horrific war in human history. Up to 27 million Soviet citizens – perhaps more – gave their lives in the epic struggle to defeat Nazi Germany and its fascist European allies, including Vichy France, Italy, Hungary, Finland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Russia holds the honor of liberating Europe from the evil of fascism. By comparison, the other anti-fascist allies of the United States and Britain lost less than 5 per cent of the casualties that the Soviet citizens endured. It is fitting that many international leaders are attending the Victory Day parade in Moscow this year. They include China’s Xi Jinping and India’s Narendra Modi. Many others, however, will not be in Moscow, which is lamentable.

The American President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer should be present to pay respects to the soldiers and civilians who sacrificed their lives. Deplorably, the toxic politics that have poisoned relations between Western states and Russia have rendered such participation impossible. What is all the more appalling, however, is the explicit ban on European leaders attending the celebrations in Moscow. This week, Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s Commissioner for Foreign Affairs, issued a warning that any politicians who went to Moscow would face severe consequences. Kallas, who was formerly the prime minister of the tiny Baltic state of Estonia, was appointed last year as the EU’s most senior official on foreign policy. One of those defying orders is Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico. He rebuked Kallas for daring to tell him, as the leader of a sovereign nation, where and where not to go.

He added: “I will go to Moscow to pay respects to thousands of Red Army soldiers who died liberating Slovakia.” Fico was elected on a platform calling for friendly relations with Russia and an end to the NATO proxy war in Ukraine. He has consistently opposed sending more military aid to the Kiev regime. Last year, Fico survived an assassination attempt in which he was shot by a gunman motivated by pro-Ukraine politics. Of particular note, the European Union’s sanctions on politicians attending the Victory Day commemoration in Moscow are targeting candidate states joining the 27-member bloc. Kallas threatened that their candidacy could be cancelled. They include the Balkan nations of Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia, as well as Moldova and Georgia. Nevertheless, Serbian President Aleksander Vucic stated that he would be going to Moscow despite intense pressure from Brussels.

“We are proud of our struggle against fascism, and that was the key reason why I accepted the invitation”, said Vucic. He spoke, however, of the sinister leverage on his government. “It seems to me that the sky is about to fall on my head due to the pressure surrounding the trip to Moscow,” said the Serbian president, who added that his country was being destabilized by outside agitators. The unseemly controversy over the Victory Day parade in Moscow serves to highlight the growing malevolent tendencies of the EU. Increasingly, the bloc’s centralization of political power is becoming more authoritarian and hostile towards Russia. Any dissent among the EU members questioning the bloc’s support for the proxy war in Ukraine is ruthlessly suppressed with threats of political and economic sanctions.

The EU leadership, under Russophobic autocrats like European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, is implicated in suppressing elections in Romania, Moldova and Georgia to prevent parties that are calling for an end to the war in Ukraine and better relations with Russia. The recent dubious prosecution in France of nationalist politician Marine Le Pen, who has been critical of NATO’s proxy war, is another baleful example of the EU moving to crush dissent. It is startling how much the EU has come to operate like a fascist bloc. Policy decisions about funding a NeoNazi regime in Ukraine to fight a proxy war against Russia are being made by Russophobic elites with no democratic accountability.

Read more …

This will be visit no. 4. Putin and Trump now know from each other what they want, not just what they say they want.

This is the first time that I see Witkoff saying a peace deal would include not only the recognition of Crimea as Russian, but also the other 4 regions.

Trump Administration Plans To Send Envoy Witkoff To Russia Again – CNN (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s administration is planning one more meeting between special envoy Steve Witkoff and senior Russian officials to get Moscow on board with its vision for peace in the Ukraine conflict, CNN has claimed, citing an anonymous source. Witkoff has already met with Russian President Vladimir Putin three times this year as the US president tries to broker a ceasefire between Kiev and Moscow. In its article on Saturday, CNN further quoted its source as saying that Washington’s plan, which was reportedly presented to Ukrainian officials and several European leaders during a top-level meeting in Paris on Thursday, envisages a ceasefire along the current front line. The US government also supposedly signaled a willingness to recognize Crimea as Russian territory.

Commenting on his meeting with Putin in Moscow last Friday, Witkoff told Fox News on Monday that the nearly five-hour talks were “compelling” and that the Kremlin is seeking a lasting solution to the Ukraine conflict. Trump’s special envoy claimed that Moscow and Kiev “might be on the verge of something that would be very, very important for the world at large.” According to the US official, any potential peace deal would include the recognition of Crimea, the Donetsk, and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions as part of Russia. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Tuesday that while there were “no clear outlines of any agreement yet,” Moscow values the “constructive and substantive” contact with the US.

Witkoff’s remarks did not sit well with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, who on Thursday accused Trump’s envoy of “wittingly or unwittingly spreading Russian narratives.” He reiterated that Kiev will “never recognize any temporarily occupied Ukrainian territory as Russian.” Russia has maintained that it is open to peace talks with Ukraine in principle, as long as its key security concerns are addressed. Moscow demands among other things that Kiev renounce its NATO aspirations and recognize the territorial “realities on the ground.” The Kremlin has insisted it will not accept a mere freeze of the conflict.

On Saturday, President Putin announced a temporary Easter truce effective from 18:00 Moscow time through midnight on Sunday night. While he expressed hope that Ukraine would reciprocate, he also stated that the “Kiev regime has violated the agreement on pausing energy infrastructure strikes more than a hundred times.” Putin argued that Ukraine’s reaction to the ceasefire would be a clear indicator of whether Kiev is serious about wanting to achieve peace.

Read more …

Trump cannot leave the talks. They’re his, after all. And it would lead to a Moscow-Brussels war, which would involve Paris, London, Berlin and … NATO. They will try to blackmail the US into that fight. Trump should simply say, beforehand, that he wants none of this to happen.

Scott Ritter: Rubio’s Threats to Quit Ukraine Talks Look Like Sabotage (Sp.)

Marco Rubio warned Friday that the US could walk out of the Ukrainian peace process if progress is not made “within days.” A day earlier, Volodymyr Zelensky accused Trump Ukraine envoy Steve Witkoff of “spreading Russian narratives,” and claimed Witkoff has no “mandate…to speak about Ukrainian territories.” The US secretary of state’s remarks on potentially ending the US peace push in Ukraine signal dual frustrations: with Steve Witkoff’s influence over Ukraine policy, and with Russia’s demands for a lasting peace instead of a temporary ceasefire, military analyst and former Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter told Sputnik. “I think this is an effort by Marco Rubio to insert himself into the process, but I want to remind people that he doesn’t make policy, especially policy concerning US-Russian relations,” Ritter emphasized.

Ritter sees Rubio’s comments as an attempt to “create the atmosphere of a failed policy” to try to get the US to abandon its current policy on Ukraine, but doesn’t see President Trump accepting this position. Ritter also recalled that Rubio’s position in the Trump administration has forced him to pull a 180 degree turn on the traditional pro-Ukraine, anti-Russia posture he held throughout his career in the Senate. “Rubio’s statement actually empowers Europe and Ukraine in many ways because now all they have to do is drag this out. The key here is for Europe and Ukraine is to get the United States out of the peacekeeping business and hopefully get the US back into the war-fighting business, that is, to continue their proxy conflict against Russia. That doesn’t seem to be the policy direction that Donald Trump favors,” the observer stressed.

Ultimately, Ritter said, what the Ukraine crisis needs right now is diplomacy. “This requires the United States to put pressure on Europe, to put pressure on Ukraine. The Trump administration doesn’t seem to have the leverage necessary to achieve that. This is where Marco Rubio is supposed to be stepping forward to take the lead diplomatically to see the president’s will translated into actual policy that can be implemented. But Rubio doesn’t seem to be inclined to do this.” “So what I envision happening is, in a week or so, you’ll see Marco Rubio make a play with the Trump administration, with the president himself, to terminate America’s effort to bring this conflict to an end. But I don’t see Donald Trump accepting that. I see Donald Trump rejecting that advice and continuing to press forward and giving Steve Witkoff a chance to work with the Russians. But this is a process that if it continues, is going to take weeks, if not months, before you get the kind of detailed agreement necessary to allow Russia to accept a ceasefire,” Ritter summed up.

Read more …

“..we’re just going to say, ‘You’re foolish, you’re fools, you’re horrible people.’

US Threats To Quit Ukraine Talks Aimed at Kiev Rather Than Moscow (TASS)

Washington’s threats to walk away from the negotiation process on Ukraine are directed against the Kiev regime rather than Moscow, the Axios portal said, citing European officials. “Two European diplomats confirmed Rubio said Trump was losing his patience and might withdraw from the process if a deal wasn’t reached soon,” the portal wrote, adding that “three European diplomats felt Rubio’s comments were mostly aimed at the Ukrainians.” “A source close to the Ukrainian government also said it seemed Rubio’s comments were aimed at pressing Ukraine. The source was also concerned that a Trump withdrawal from the negotiations could lead to suspension of US military aid to Ukraine,” the portal noted.

The European diplomats pointed out that during talks in Paris, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has not mentioned “increasing the pressure on Russia.” “The impression was that Rubio and Witkoff are under a lot of pressure from Trump and they are channeling it to the other players,” a European diplomat said. According to Axios, Rubio said that US President Donald Trump had decided that “he has dedicated a lot of time and energy to this, and there are a lot of things going on in the world right now that we need to be focused on.” “We need to figure out <…> within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. If it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” the top US diplomat added.

Rubio told reporters in Paris that Trump may abandon his efforts to settle the Ukraine crisis if there is no immediate progress. “We’re not going to continue with this endeavor for weeks and months on end,” he explained. Earlier, Trump himself did not rule out the US leaving the negotiations. “Now if, for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say, ‘You’re foolish, you’re fools, you’re horrible people.’ And we’re going to just take a pass, but hopefully we won’t have to do that,” he told reporters at the White House.

Read more …

“..as early as next week..”

I think the talks will take much longer.

US Sets Timeline For Kiev To Agree To Ceasefire (RT)

US President Donald Trump reportedly expects to “make a determination for a full and comprehensive ceasefire” between Ukraine and Russia as early as next week. Both are to be presented with the final offer, the New York Post has claimed, citing an anonymous senior administration official. Trump has stated on multiple occasions that he wants to put an end to the Ukraine conflict as soon as possible. Since he assumed office in January, Washington and Moscow have been engaged in active diplomacy, holding several rounds of high-level talks. The newspaper quoted a source on Friday as saying that “this coming week in London, we want to make a determination for a full and comprehensive cease-fire.” The unnamed US official added that the “intent then is to have [discussions] with the Russians” and determine where Moscow and Kiev stand on this “final offer.”

According to the publication, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov told US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff during their meeting in Paris on Thursday that Kiev is “90%” on board with Washington’s peace framework, which has yet to be made public. Ukraine’s remaining concerns mostly revolve around territories which Kiev claims as its own, but are in fact under Moscow’s control at present, the Post reported.Russia has demanded that Ukraine officially recognize the “reality on the ground,” while Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly ruled out such a scenario.

The media outlet further alleged that the US could offer Russia a “carrot”: the relaxation of sanctions and the potential unfreezing of Moscow’s seized assets, which are currently held by Western institutions. Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump echoed a remark made by Rubio earlier in the day, stating that “if for some reason one of the two parties makes it very difficult… we’re going to just take a pass.” Russian authorities have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of a ceasefire with Ukraine and accused Kiev’s backers in Europe of undermining US efforts. Speaking to journalists on Thursday, Moscow’s UN representative, Vassily Nebenzia, stated that due to the West’s record of using peace deals to help build up the Ukrainian military, expectations of a full ceasefire are “simply unrealistic at this stage.”

Read more …

“..Merz needs a useful idiot to ride shotgun alongside him in the doltmobile to share in any responsibility for the eventual mayhem when things inevitably go pear-shaped. “You rang?” say the Brits.”

Germany Wants The UK To Hold Its Hand While It Starts WWIII (Marsden)

Germany’s chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz doesn’t officially take office until May 6, but that hasn’t stopped him from hitting the press circuit like it’s demolition day. Apparently, he’s got some lost time – and infrastructure – to make up for. In a chat with Germany’s public broadcaster, ARD, he floated the idea that Kiev, which seems to rank higher than Berlin on his priority list, needs to “get ahead of the situation” on the battlefield and “shape events” instead of playing defense. The event he seems most eager to shape? Oh, just the Third World War, apparently. Because he pivoted straight to the Kerch Bridge – mainland Russia’s lifeline to the Crimean peninsula – like it’s been living on borrowed time.

Merz said that “if for example, the most important land connection between Russia and Crimea is destroyed, or if something happens on Crimea itself, where most of the Russian military logistics are located, then that would be an opportunity to bring this country strategically back into the picture finally.” Cool, cool. Which picture would that be, exactly? The one labeled “Catastrophic Misjudgments of the 21st Century”? Probably. Which is why Merz needs a useful idiot to ride shotgun alongside him in the doltmobile to share in any responsibility for the eventual mayhem when things inevitably go pear-shaped. “You rang?” say the Brits. Or at least that’s what Merz is apparently hoping they say. “Our European partners are already supplying cruise missiles,” Merz said in an interview. “The British are doing it, the French are doing it, and the Americans are doing it anyway, this must be jointly agreed. And if it’s agreed, then Germany should take part.”

Merz’s fellow Christian Democratic Party MPs have been floating the idea in the Western press that he’s waiting for an official permission slip from London. It would probably read something like this: “Dear Herr Friedrich, You are hereby authorized to partake in a highly coordinated, militarized pub crawl. First stop: a punch-up with Russia, followed by a wobbly march to a greasy spoon for black coffee, bad lighting, and a collective hangover.” Merz is just days away from grabbing the wheel, and he’s done pretending to be the guy in the backseat yelling directions at Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Scholz, for his part, always said that Germany wouldn’t hand Kiev the Taurus long-range missiles. Not that he had much wiggle room after last year’s leaked audio from Russian intelligence of German Air Force brass workshopping ways to hit the Kerch Bridge without leaving any German fingerprints.

Kind of a bad look for a guy who keeps overtly declaring that he wants peace. So naturally, he was furious. Which is why, if Team Scholz suddenly turned around now and said, “You know what? Let’s try a few long-range missile strikes, just for funsies,” people might reasonably assume that he’d undergone a surprise lobotomy with a NATO letter opener. As the coalition partners for Merz’s incoming government, Scholz’s Social Democrats’ support would be needed on any vote. And so far, they’ve shown no interest in greenlighting his WW3 passion project. You know, democracy and all that. Minor hiccup, I know. If military ambition and musings alone were all it took, Merz would already be well on his way to having a Netflix original named after him and maybe even a seat with his name on it waiting at The Hague.

But hey, hear the guy out. What if it’s, like, a group project? Das ist gut, ja? Nah, dude. Nicht gut. Nicht gut at all. What exactly does Team Merz think this would look like? Would the Brits and Germans sit side by side, fingers hovering over their respective missile buttons, doing a tense little “one, two, three, fire” and just praying that neither one flinches at the last second and leaves the other one with some very awkward phone calls to make? If so, that would certainly explain why they’re talking about specifically needing Britain’s non-negotiable participation and not France – the country that trained a flagship brigade for the Ukrainian army, who apparently learned how to bail out before even seeing action. “Paris hailed it as a ‘unique’ initiative,” reported France24. Training 1,700 Ukrainians in France to fight who then just end up surrendering to the foie gras and rosé at the local café prior to deployment is ‘unique’, alright.

“Ah, wonderbar!”

Read more …

“..Moldova’s airport detentions echo the trajectory taken by the Kiev authorities in Ukraine..”

Moldova Wages War On Christians To Please Its EU Overlords (Romanenko)

On Thursday, Moldovan authorities chose to detain Bishop Marchel of the Moldovan Metropolis, a metropolitanate under the Russian Orthodox Church, at Chiinau International Airport. Bishop Marchel was on his way to Jerusalem to bring back the Holy Fire for Easter, one of the most sacred ceremonies of the year for Orthodox believers. According to reports, he was pulled aside for a thorough inspection of his person and luggage, had his passport confiscated, and was not allowed to board his flight even though nothing suspicious was ever found. His documents were only returned thirty minutes after the plane departed. By contrast, the rival Metropolis of Bessarabia, a different Orthodox Christian church in Moldova, canonically under the Romanian Patriarchate, sent its own delegate, Bishop Filaret, on the same mission unmolested.

This isn’t an isolated outrage but rather the latest episode in a systematic campaign against anyone deemed pro Russian. On March 25, 2025, Eugenia Gutul the democratically elected head of the Gagauz autonomy was detained at the very same airport. Her passport was confiscated and she was held incommunicado for 72 hours on opaque corruption and illegal financing charges, before being put under house arrest to await trial. Two days later, opposition figure Alexei Lungu was stopped from leaving the country on murky grounds, and Viktor Petrov another Gagauz leader was held for hours in February after flying in from Istanbul, an arrest he claims was orchestrated by Prime Minister Recean’s office. These incidents form a clear pattern: every pro Russian politician, cleric or public figure is under suspicion of destabilizing European choice or colluding with foreign powers.

At its core, what is being played out in Moldova in regards to the Moldovan Metropolis is an attempt to hold the spiritual life of the majority hostage to a political agenda. Nearly 70 percent of Moldovans adhere to the Moldovan Metropolis of the Russian Orthodox Church. By making its shepherds and representatives into targets, the government is sending a message: worship with a Romanian or European aligned body and you re free to practice your faith; profess loyalty to a politically inconvenient church and you risk being treated like a criminal. This is not a security measure it is a politicization of religion.

Worryingly, Moldova’s airport detentions echo the trajectory taken by the Kiev authorities in Ukraine. In August 2024, the Ukrainian parliament passed a law effectively banning any religious organization affiliated with a state engaged in armed aggression a barely veiled reference to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC MP). The bill sailed through 265 29 and obliged each parish to sever ties with Moscow or face court ordered closure within nine months. President Zelensky hailed it as a step toward spiritual independence, yet by criminalizing an entire denomination, Kiev set the stage for unprecedented state intrusion into religious life.

Read more …

“if a far-left radical is the one raising the most money, and someone who’s arguing that Democrats should go even further left, that’s good for Republicans.”

Will Trump’s Tariffs Hurt GOP in Midterms? (Caldwell)

As President Donald Trump moves at a feverish pace in imposing tariffs and undoing much of his predecessor’s legacy, a question has emerged: How will voters react to these bold actions when midterm elections arrive in 2026? Trump has said that his tariffs—which have corresponded with a drop in his economic job-approval rating—will end up benefiting him and Republicans in midterms. “And I really think we’re helped a lot by the tariff situation that’s going on, which is a good situation,” he said at a National Republican Congressional Committee fundraising dinner last week. “It’s going to be legendary. You watch.” But Brad Bannon, a veteran pollster and political consultant for Democrat congressional campaigns, told The Daily Signal he thinks lower approval ratings and higher uncertainty on the economy will benefit Democrats significantly.

“I don’t believe that anybody should panic, but the Republicans should be worried, based on the latest polling I’ve seen,” said Bannon. Bannon said he was paying particular attention to a CBS poll that showed 53% of people thought the economy had worsened in the past three months and 54% thought Trump had ownership for the state of the economy, rather than former President Joe Biden. Though he acknowledged that Trump’s economic approval rating has risen since its nosedive amid the market crash, he suggested that the fall in the stock market would trigger backlash from voters with 401(k)s who “got basically killed during the tariff thing.” But Republican consultants painted a different picture.

Jason Roe is a reelection campaign consultant for Rep. Tom Barrett, R-Mich., who flipped Michigan’s 7th Congressional District in 2024, which is one of the most volatile swing districts in the country. Michigan is in a special situation as a state that’s especially reliant on Canadian goods, but also has many voters who suffered from deindustrialization in the wake of prior free-trade agreements. Roe says polling suggests to him that voters are willing to give Trump a chance on his ambitious restructuring of the economy. “Everyone seems to—even people that don’t love Trump—feel like we’ve got to do something,” Roe said. “It’s unsustainable as it is.” “So, I think there’s this willingness to give the benefit of the doubt, and you see that in polling on issues like tariffs that don’t poll well, yet Trump’s numbers are still holding. He’s at 47 in the most recent CBS poll. For him to be doing what he’s doing and being who he is, that’s an extraordinarily strong number… but if we get much past Labor Day and people aren’t seeing results… then we could see political problems.” he added.

Democrats also have much to fear as they look toward the 2026 midterms. The Democratic Party had a 27% approval rating in an NBC poll in March. Additionally, the Democratic Party has begun to gravitate toward polarizing figures, such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Jasmine Crockett of Texas, as leaders. Republican strategists think that will be a great asset when midterm season comes. “The national party heads become great targets,” said Brett O’Donnell, a veteran of many presidential campaigns who is consulting for the reelection campaign of Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark. He contends that figures such as Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would alienate most voters. “They make for great targets because they’re talking about things that, for the most part, aren’t the concerns of the majority of Americans,” O’Donnell said.

Todd, the Republican consultant, who argues that the Democrats suffered in 2024 because “they’ve allowed themselves to get so far out of the mainstream,” thinks that those figures will hurt Democrats in the next election cycle. Asked about Ocasio-Cortez’s massive fundraising efforts, he replied, “if a far-left radical is the one raising the most money, and someone who’s arguing that Democrats should go even further left, that’s good for Republicans.”

Read more …

“..Iran completely free of nuclear weapons and sanctions, and maintaining its ability to develop peaceful nuclear energy..”

US, Iran Agree To Enter Next Phase Of Nuclear Negotiations (JTN)

The U.S. and Iran have agreed to enter the next phase of negotiations over the Iranian regime’s nuclear program. The second round of the talks began in Rome on Saturday between Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and President Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff through the mediation of Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi. The envoys have “agreed to enter into the next phase of their discussions that aim to seal a fair, enduring and binding deal which will ensure Iran completely free of nuclear weapons and sanctions, and maintaining its ability to develop peaceful nuclear energy,” a spokesperson for Oman’s foreign ministry said in a statement posted on Saturday on X. “It is only in dialogue and clear communication that we will be able to achieve a mutually credible agreement and understanding for the benefit of all concerned regionally and internationally. It is also agreed that the next round will take place in Muscat in the next few days,” the statement also read.

Read more …

Is that the hill you want to die on?

“Two other Congressional Democrats have asked the House Oversight Committee to allow them to travel to El Salvador on the taxpayers’ dime to visit the migrant, but Chairman James Comer denied the request on Friday.”

Trump On Deported Migrant: ‘He’s Got MS-13 Tattooed’ On His Knuckles (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Friday night doubled down on his administration’s allegation that a deported migrant now in El Salvador is connected to the violent MS-13 gang. Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, who was originally from El Salvador, has become the focal point of one of the biggest deportation cases in recent history, after he was sent back home with another group of illegal migrants. Democrats have argued that Abrego Garcia was a peaceful, law-abiding man from Maryland prior to his deportation, but the Trump administration argues that he was a member of MS-13, who had beaten his wife. Court documents from 2021 showed Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez, applied for a protective order against her husband, though the case was eventually dismissed. Trump, in a post on Truth Social, shared an image of what he claimed was Abrego Garcia’s hand, which showed tattoos on his knuckles that included a marijuana leaf, a cross, a skull and a smiley face.

“This is the hand of the man that the Democrats feel should be brought back to the United States, because he is such ‘a fine and innocent person,'” the president wrote in the post. “They said he is not a member of MS-13, even though he’s got MS-13 tattooed onto his knuckles, and two Highly Respected Courts found that he was a member of MS-13. “I was elected to take bad people out of the United States, among other things,” he continued. “I must be allowed to do my job. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” The post comes after Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen met with Abrego Garcia in El Salvador this week. Two other Congressional Democrats have asked the House Oversight Committee to allow them to travel to El Salvador on the taxpayers’ dime to visit the migrant, but Chairman James Comer denied the request on Friday.

Read more …

“I am sympathetic to everything you’re saying, I just don’t I think I have the power to do anything,” Boasberg told the attorneys for the illegal aliens.”

SCOTUS Order Pauses Deportations Under Alien Enemies Act (Allen)

The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration early Saturday morning to pause the deportation of some Venezuelan illegal aliens until the court can rule further. The Court did not grant or deny the use of the Alien Enemies Act to remove the illegal aliens, who the Trump administration claims are Tren de Aragua gang members, but instead the justices simply hit pause on the matter. “The Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court,” the order states. After designating Tren de Aragua as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, the White House announced in March that President Donald Trump would use the powers of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to remove members of the gang from America.

The illegal immigrants in question in the ongoing case are currently being held in Texas. The Supreme Court order is in response to an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the Court’s order. Before the Supreme Court issued the order, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg in Washington, D.C. told the lawyers representing the illegal aliens that he did not have the power to stop deportation flights. “I am sympathetic to everything you’re saying, I just don’t I think I have the power to do anything,” Boasberg told the attorneys for the illegal aliens.

Boasberg did, last month, issue a temporary restraining order barring the U.S. from using the Alien Enemies Act to rapidly deport illegal aliens, but shortly thereafter the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration could resume deportations of Venezuelan criminal illegal aliens under the Alien Enemies Act. The previous 5-4 decision from the justices was narrow and did not address the constitutionality of using the Alien Enemies Act to deport members of the Venezuelan prison gang Tren de Aragua. Instead, the court said in its opinion that “judicial review” was requested in the wrong court. The attorneys for the illegal alien should have filed their lawsuit against the deportations in Texas, where the illegal aliens are being held, instead of filing in Washington, D.C., the court found.

Read more …

“..immediate apprehension, detention, and removal” of members of the group who are Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older and who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United States.”

SCOTUS Blocks Deportation of Alleged Venezuela Gang Members for Now (ET)

The Supreme Court on April 19 temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting an unspecified number of Venezuelan men currently in immigration custody who are alleged to be members of a criminal gang. The new, unsigned order granting the Venezuelans’ emergency application was issued on Saturday at about 12:55 a.m. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Alito’s reasoning will be added to the court’s file later, according to the order. “The Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court,” the order states. The order notes that a request to block the deportations is currently pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

After the Fifth Circuit acts, Solicitor General D. John Sauer should file a response to the application with the Supreme Court as soon as possible, the order states. The order was issued after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed an emergency request on behalf of its Venezuelan clients late on April 18 asking the Supreme Court to immediately block the Trump administration from deporting the clients. The emergency application in A.A.R.P. and W.M.M. v. Trump, which challenges President Donald Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport illegal immigrants who are alleged or confirmed criminal gang members, was directed to Justice Samuel Alito. The ACLU is also seeking a temporary restraining order from the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, as well as a stay of removal order from the Fifth Circuit, according to the application.

On March 14, President Donald Trump signed Proclamation 10903, in which he officially declared that Tren de Aragua, a designated foreign terrorist organization, “is perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States.” The group is using mass illegal immigration to the United States to harm U.S. citizens, undermine public safety, and support the goal of the Venezuelan regime with which it is associated to destabilize “democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States,” the proclamation said. The president invoked the Alien Enemies Act to authorize the “immediate apprehension, detention, and removal” of members of the group who are Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older and who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United States.

The application said the ACLU’s clients are challenging the Trump administration’s use of the federal statute to deport them. The clients “are in imminent and ongoing jeopardy of being removed from the United States without notice or an opportunity to be heard, in direct contravention of this Court’s order in Trump v. J.G.G.” “Many individuals have already been loaded on to buses, presumably headed to the airport” and are at risk of being sent to a prison in El Salvador, according to the application. On March 15, the Trump administration used the Alien Enemies Act to deport at least 137 Venezuelans to El Salvador, where they are now incarcerated “possibly for the rest of their lives” at the Salvadoran Terrorism Confinement Center, which is “one of the most notorious prisons in the world,” the application said.

Read more …

Turley ignores that there are a million+ cases, and they cannot possibly all be heard.

Yeah, the law works on paper. But the people do not.

SCOTUS Halts Venezuelan Deportations, 4th Circuit Upholds Garcia Order (Turley)

It has been a busy 24 hours in the courts. Early this morning, the Supreme Court blocked (for now) the deportations of any Venezuelans held in northern Texas under the Alien Enemies Act, a law only used three times before in our history. At the same time, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the lower court’s order in the case of Abrego Garcia. Despite the growing counter-constitutional movement, both decisions show how the courts are functioning appropriately and expeditiously in sorting out these difficult cases. Indeed, I wanted to flag a couple of paragraphs in the Fourth Circuit case that I hope everyone will take a second to read and consider from Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson, a widely respected conservative judge. The justices ordered the Trump administration not to remove Venezuelans being held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the order. However, this is merely a hold on deportations pending further review of the emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union, which is challenging the use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. This rarely used and highly controversial law stretches back to the Adams Administration. There are good-faith arguments on both sides of the case that the Court wants to consider. Accordingly, this is not surprising. The Fourth Circuit also correctly upheld the lower court order in the Garcia case. I remain confused by the administration’s appeal. The Supreme Court already upheld the order requiring the Administration to facilitate Garcia’s return. I have been critical of that opinion, but it clearly recognized the authority of the district court to issue that part of the earlier order.

However, Judge Wilkinson’s opinion contains one passage that I wanted to excerpt. It is a measured and important point that both branches need to show mutual respect in these cases. This sage advice is not coming from a critic or a liberal jurist. It is coming from someone who has been at the heart of conservative jurisprudence for decades:

“The basic differences between the branches mandate a serious effort at mutual respect. The respect that courts must accord the Executive must be reciprocated by the Executive’s respect for the courts. Too often today this has not been the case, as calls for impeachment of judges for decisions the Executive disfavors and exhortations to disregard court orders sadly illustrate.

Now the branches come too close to grinding irrevocably against one another in a conflict that promises to diminish both. This is a losing proposition all around. The Judiciary will lose much from the constant intimations of its illegitimacy, to which by dent of custom and detachment we can only sparingly reply. The Executive will lose much from a public perception of its lawlessness and all of its attendant contagions. The Executive may succeed for a time in weakening the courts, but over time history will script the tragic gap between what was and all that might have been, and law in time will sign its epitaph. It is, as we have noted, all too possible to see in this case an incipient crisis, but it may present an opportunity as well. We yet cling to the hope that it is not naïve to believe our good brethren in the Executive Branch perceive the rule of law as vital to the American ethos. This case presents their unique chance to vindicate that value and to summon the best that is within us while there is still time.”

Well said, your honor. One can disagree with the ultimate merits on legal issues. However, as I have previously written, the disagreement on those issues should not trigger demands for impeachment or other extreme measures.

Read more …

At first I thought Elon Musk had filed a lawsuit.

Judge Blocks Trump’s Order Ending ‘X’ Gender Marker on Passports (ET)

A federal judge ruled against the Trump administration’s executive order banning the use of an “X” on passports marked by people self-identifying as neither male nor female. U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick of the District Court of Massachusetts awarded the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) a preliminary injunction on April 18, staying the president’s executive action requiring sex, instead of gender identity, to be used as an identifier on government-issued identification documents. The executive order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” was one of several signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office. “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female,” the order stated. ”These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.”

The order stated that gender identity “reflects a fully internal and subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality and sex and existing on an infinite continuum, that does not provide a meaningful basis for identification and cannot be recognized as a replacement for sex.” It ordered the secretaries of State and Homeland Security, and the director of the Office of Personnel Management to “implement changes to require that government-issued identification documents, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards, accurately reflect the holder’s sex.” It also ordered the rescinding of prior federal guidance documents, including “The White House Toolkit on Transgender Equality.”

The ACLU took legal action against the order on behalf of five plaintiffs who identify as transgender and two who identify as nonbinary, seeking to preserve the pro-LGBT policies put in place under President Joe Biden, allowing a third option on identification documents. “We all have a right to accurate identity documents, and this policy invites harassment, discrimination, and violence against transgender Americans who can no longer obtain or renew a passport that matches who they are,” ACLU lawyer Sruti Swaminathan said in a statement. The Trump administration argued that the president had broad discretion in setting the passport policy, and those policy changes did not “violate the equal protection guarantees of the Constitution.”

The federal government also denied any harm befalling the plaintiffs due to the policy, since they were still free to travel abroad. The judge said the administration didn’t demonstrate substantial government interests in changing the rule. “The Executive Order and the Passport Policy on their face classify passport applicants on the basis of sex and thus must be reviewed under intermediate judicial scrutiny,” Kobick wrote. “That standard requires the government to demonstrate that its actions are substantially related to an important governmental interest. The government has failed to meet this standard.”

Read more …

“Overall during the first 3 months of 2025, Tesla sold more EVs than the next 10 EV makers combined in the United States..”

Tesla Continues to Reign Supreme Despite Leftist Violence (Blackmon)

The obviously organized attacks on electric carmaker Tesla’s infrastructure and owners of Tesla cars by leftists apparently suffering from Musk Derangement Syndrome dominated the news throughout much of February and March. Sadly, the campaign was supported by a variety of virtue signaling celebrities and cynical politicians like Arizona Democrat Sen. Mark Kelly putting out videos of themselves selling off their own Teslas and replacing them with other electric vehicles or, in Kelly’s case, a gas-guzzling SUV. You can’t make this stuff up, you really can’t.

The frequency of these attacks appears to have largely died down after law enforcement officials, including Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Justice Department, arrested and charged a number of the activists with felonies, but the objective was clear: The campaign of attacks was designed to damage Tesla’s brand, in the process hoping to punish founder and CEO Elon Musk for his efforts to support the Donald Trump administration by leading the DOGE project to cut government waste and fraud.Certainly, some damage was done to Tesla’s infrastructure, and to its reputation among its liberal-heavy consumer base. But if the goal was to dethrone Musk’s EV juggernaut as the dominant player in the U.S. and global EV industry, first quarter results show the campaign of violence, vandalism, and virtue signaling to have been a miserable failure.

Web-based EV news site Teslarati compiled the numbers, and reports that Tesla still dominated the US market during the first quarter of 2025, and not just by a little, but by a lot. Tesla’s Model Y and Model 3 cars lead all others in total sales for the quarter with 64,051 and 52,520 units, respectively. Coming in a very distant third was Ford’s Mustang Mach E with just 11,607 units sold. Tesla’s vaunted, weirdly designed Cybertruck continued to be more than a bit of a disappointment, selling just 6,406 units, trailing the equally underperforming Ford F-150 Lightning by more than 700 units sold. But here’s the kicker: Overall during the first 3 months of 2025, Tesla sold more EVs than the next 10 EV makers combined in the United States. Musk’s car company dominates the EV space every bit as overwhelmingly as Google dominates the search engine space in the U.S.

Obviously, as I wrote here a few weeks ago, rumors of Tesla’s looming demise are highly overblown. And its dominant status in the market is not limited to the United States. Germany-based Blackout News reported on April 9 that just four EV companies worldwide are operating profitably today. The only one of those four EV makers not based in China – where we must admit that financial reporting is suspect at best – is, you guessed it, Tesla. That’s right: Not a single pure-play EV maker in the United States, Europe, or anywhere else outside of China is operating in the black even after 30 years of heavy financial subsidization by western governments and regulatory actions tilting the automaker playing field in their favor.

But Blackout News does not limit its report to pure-play EV companies like Rivian, Lucid and Fisker, all of which are either in bankruptcy or teetering on the brink today. The report also details the struggles of traditional car companies like Ford, GM, BMW, and others to record profits in their own EV business units, a topic I’ve covered here several times in the past few years. What it all boils down to is this: No matter how hard cynical Democrats like Sen. Kelly and crazed activists try to damage what has become one of America’s great automakers and its thousands of employees, the market is going to be the ultimate decider of the company’s fate. For the first quarter of 2025, the market has spoken, and Tesla and Musk have come out as the clear winners. That may be a bad thing for Democrats, but it’s a great thing for America.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Severe autism

Makary

Measles

Fauci

Neura

Maculatus

Catmouflage

Santorini
https://twitter.com/mamboitaliano__/status/1913482407660990550

Malaga

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 192025
 
 April 19, 2025  Posted by at 9:30 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  39 Responses »


Claude Monet Impression, sunrise 1872

 

West Lost Proxy War To Russia – Orban (RT)
US Proposes Leaving Former Ukrainian Territories Under Russian Control (RT)
Trump Ready To Recognize Crimea As Russian After Warning He May Walk Away (ZH)
Ukraine Ceasefire ‘Unrealistic’ For Now – Moscow (RT)
Europe, You Can’t Sit on the Sidelines Anymore (Victor Davis Hanson)
Trump Takes ‘Art Of The Deal’ To World Stage (Stepman)
Tulsi Exposes a Terrifying Biden-Era Program Meant To Be Secret (Margolis)
NATO To Abandon ‘Woke Language’ – Politico (RT)
Kilmar for President! (James Howard Kunstler)
IRS Hunter Biden Whistleblower Gary Shapley Ousted As Acting Commissioner (NYP)
Indian PM Modi Dials Musk Ahead of Vance’s Visit (RT)
Soros-Funded Groups Go To War Against DOGE (Tyler O’Neil)
Trump Axes A Stricken World Order (Alastair Crooke)
Trump’s Counterrevolution: Flood the Zone, Drain the Swamp (Victor Davis Hanson)
There’s Real Evidence for Easter (Joecks)

 

 

 

 

MacGregor

Tucker

Meloni
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1912952813023297538

NGOs

Miiller

Bondi

VDH

Dowd
Basel III full implementation — June 30, 2025
Gold is being hardwired into global banking.

 

 

 

 

Much today about Trump leaving the ceasefire talks. Orban is the only voice who’s both right and willing to say it.

“..the West has lost but “European leaders are hesitant to admit” failure. He argued that this outcome will have a big impact on the entire West, as “losing a war is a serious thing.”

“..Trump “saved the US from a serious defeat.”

West Lost Proxy War To Russia – Orban (RT)

The West has waged a “proxy war” against Russia via Ukraine and lost it, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said. Hungary, a member of the EU, has repeatedly criticized the bloc’s policies on the Ukraine conflict, particularly its sanctions on Moscow and weapons deliveries to Kiev. In an interview with OT YouTube channel published on Thursday, Orban said the whole “Western world” has thrown its weight behind Ukraine in its conflict with Russia, which he described as a “proxy war.” His assessment echoed that of Moscow, which has long characterized the hostilities as a de facto conflict with the West. According to the Hungarian prime minister, the West has lost but “European leaders are hesitant to admit” failure. He argued that this outcome will have a big impact on the entire West, as “losing a war is a serious thing.”

Orban went on to say that European leaders are “offering Ukraine to continue the war and in return receive European Union membership.” He argued that this would be problematic as Ukraine is no longer sovereign and cannot support itself. Regarding the US, the Hungarian prime minister said Washington is in a better position thanks to President Donald Trump’s approach, having broken with the Ukraine policies pursued by his predecessor, Joe Biden. According to Orban, Trump “saved the US from a serious defeat.” Speaking to Hungary’s Kossuth Radio last month, Orban described the EU’s policies on Ukraine as “rudderless.” He warned that Brussels, with its hardline position, risks becoming irrelevant as Trump actively works toward securing a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

Earlier in March, Orban told the YouTube channel Patriota that the EU was feeding Kiev “empty promises” as it “doesn’t have a single penny left… [to] continue arming Ukraine, maintaining the Ukrainian army, and funding the functioning of the Ukrainian state.” His comments came after Budapest refused to endorse a joint EU communique calling for an increase in military aid to Kiev.

Read more …

A start to the only viable solution. Which EU and Kiev will fight as long as you let them.

US Proposes Leaving Former Ukrainian Territories Under Russian Control (RT)

The US has presented its allies with the details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing European officials familiar with the matter. The contours of the plan were outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday. The proposal reportedly includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the war, with the formerly Ukrainian territories held by Russia remaining under Moscow’s control, the sources suggested. One of the officials told Bloomberg that the proposal still had to be discussed with Kiev, adding that the plan would not actually amount to a definitive settlement of the conflict. Moreover, Kiev’s European backers would not recognize the territories as Russian, the source suggested.

The Paris meetings involved senior officials from several countries. The US delegation was led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House special envoy Steve Witkoff. They met with French President Emmanuel Macron and also held discussions with top officials and negotiators from France, Germany, the UK, and Ukraine. Earlier on Friday, Rubio signaled Washington was ready to “move on” if a way to end the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev could not be found shortly. “We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio told reporters before departing from France.

Moscow has signaled a full ceasefire with Ukraine was highly unlikely, citing Kiev’s violations of previous deals. Speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters on Thursday, Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” recalling the fate of the now-defunct Minsk agreements, which were “misused and abused to prepare Ukraine for the confrontation.” The diplomat also cited repeated Ukrainian violations of a US-brokered 30-day moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes, implemented on March 18. “How close we are to the ceasefire is a big question to me personally, because, as I said, we had an attempt at a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure, which was not observed by the Ukrainian side. So, in these circumstances, to speak about a ceasefire is simply unrealistic at this stage,” Nebenzia said.

Read more …

“The war in Ukraine “has no military solution to it” as “neither side has some strategic capability to end this war quickly”, Rubio said.”

He’s wrong.

Trump Ready To Recognize Crimea As Russian After Warning He May Walk Away (ZH)

President Trump warned he could walk way from efforts to end the war in Ukraine if a deal can’t be found soon, as Russia said a one-month pause on targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure had ended. “If for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say, you’re foolish,” Trump told reporters Friday in the Oval Office. “You’re fools, you’re horrible people, and we’re going to just take a pass. But hopefully we won’t have to do that.” While Trump did not say he has a “specific number of days” in mind by which he wanted to see an agreement before walking away, he needed to see quick progress. “I know when people are playing us, and I know when they’re not,” Trump said. “And I have to see an enthusiasm to want to end it. And I think I see that enthusiasm. I think I see it from both sides.”

His comments followed a meeting of US officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US special envoy Steve Witkoff, with representatives from France, Germany and the UK in Paris on Thursday, where the US indicated its aim was to secure a full ceasefire in Ukraine within weeks, according to people familiar. Following the meeting, Rubio said the US needed to see in “a matter of days” whether a deal was “doable in the short term…. because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio told reporters at Le Bourget airport outside of Paris on Friday morning, according to a transcript provided by the State Department. Rubio also said the European nations could help “move the ball” to get a resolution and that their ideas had been “very helpful and constructive.” “We had a good meeting yesterday,” he added. “But this isn’t going to go on forever.” The war in Ukraine “has no military solution to it” as “neither side has some strategic capability to end this war quickly”, Rubio said.

Trump, who predicted on the campaign trail that he could quickly secure a ceasefire, hits the 100-day mark of his second stint in the White House on April 30. Trump “has dedicated a lot of time and energy to this, and there are a lot of things going on in the world right now that we need to be focused on,” Rubio told reporters. “There are a lot of other really important things going on that deserve just as much if not more attention.” Bloomberg reports that Thursday’s talks in Paris also included a meeting between Witkoff and French president Emmanuel Macron and were attended by Ukrainian officials. US officials indicated they expected to make significant progress soon, and the participants agreed to work toward that. National security advisers and negotiators from Germany, France, the US and the UK plan to gather again in London next week to follow up on their discussions.

More importantly, Bloomberg also reported that the US presented its allies with details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end. The proposal, outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday, includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the conflict and leave former Ukrainian territories that are part of Russia under Moscow’s control. An official told Bloomberg that the proposal still had to be discussed with Kiev, which will certainly balk, adding that the plan would not actually amount to a definitive conflict settlement as Kiev’s European backers would not recognize the territories as Russian.

The meetings came almost a week after Witkoff traveled to St. Petersburg, where he spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin for almost five hours. He described the conversation as “compelling,” saying they discussed steps that could end the war and perhaps lead to business opportunities for Russia as well, including dropping sanctions. The US has presented its allies with details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing European officials familiar with the matter. The proposal, outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday, reportedly includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the conflict and leave former Ukrainian territories that are part of Russia under Moscow’s control, the sources suggested.

European officials have attempted to influence the outcome of peace efforts kicked off by the Trump administration, especially after being sidelined during recent bilateral talks between Russia and the US. So far they are failing: a follow up report from Bloomberg on Friday afternoon confirmed that the US is prepared to recognize Russian control of the Ukrainian region of Crimea as part of a broader peace agreement between Moscow and Kyiv. The concession is the latest signal that Trump is eager to rush through a ceasefire deal, and comes as he and Marco Rubio suggested on Friday that the administration is prepared to move on from its peace-brokering efforts unless progress is made quickly.

Read more …

“We need to determine very quickly now, and I’m talking about a matter of days, whether or not this is doable,” Rubio said..”

Ukraine Ceasefire ‘Unrealistic’ For Now – Moscow (RT)

Russia and Ukraine are highly unlikely to agree to a full ceasefire at present, Vassily Nebenzia, Moscow’s envoy to the United Nations, has said. He cited Ukrainian violations of a US-brokered truce on energy infrastructure strikes as among the reasons. Speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters on Thursday, Nebenzia addressed comments by US President Donald Trump, who said he expects a response from Russia on a ceasefire proposal as early as “this week.” “How close we are to the ceasefire is a big question to me personally, because, as I said, we had an attempt on a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure, which was not observed by the Ukrainian side. So, in these circumstances, to speak about a ceasefire is simply unrealistic at this stage,” Nebenzia said.

Moscow and Kiev agreed a 30-day moratorium on strikes on energy facilities following a phone call between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin last month. Russia, however, has accused Ukraine of repeatedly violating the ceasefire. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that the moratorium had expired, but that Putin had not yet announced a decision on further steps. Nebenzia noted that there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” recalling the fate of the now-defunct Minsk agreements, which were designed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within the Ukrainian state. According to Nebenzia, the deal was “misused and abused to prepare Ukraine for the confrontation [with Russia].” The envoy added that another concern is the feasibility of monitoring any potential ceasefire, as it is unclear who could take on this task.

His comments come amid diplomatic efforts between the US and Russia to resolve the Ukraine conflict. Earlier this month, US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff met with Putin in St. Petersburg, stating after the talks that a potential peace deal hinges on “these so-called five territories,” referring to former Ukrainian regions which overwhelmingly voted to join Russia. However, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has indicated that Washington could withdraw from peace negotiations if no progress is made soon. “We need to determine very quickly now, and I’m talking about a matter of days, whether or not this is doable,” Rubio said on Friday.

Read more …

It’s the only place where it can stay alive.

Europe, You Can’t Sit on the Sidelines Anymore (Victor Davis Hanson)

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. I’d like to talk today about the role of China, the United States, and the European Union, or just Europe in general, in the context of these tariffs and the so-called trade wars. Right now, President Donald Trump has given a 90-day reprieve from high tariffs. I think that 10% tariffs are still in existence. And they are negotiating with a number of European countries and particularly, Asian dynamic economies, such as South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. In addition to that, they are targeting China with tit-for-tat tariffs. And we are maybe on the brink—nobody wants it, but we might be on the brink of a trade war, which we’ve addressed in earlier videos.

But here’s my point. What is the attitude of Europe? Roughly, China has a $1 trillion deficit with the world. We have about a $1 trillion deficit in trade with the world. But here’s the ratios. About a third of our deficit is with China, which makes up a third of their surplus. In addition to that, Europe makes up about a third of their surplus. So, China has called on Europe to join forces with it to prevent all of the retaliatory tariffs that the United States has threatened Europe, which has a $200 billion surplus with us, and China, which has a nearly high $300 billion, maybe even $400 billion, who knows? It’s kind of crazy, isn’t it, that these illiberal apparatchiks in China would think that a Western democracy would want to join them against the United States? I don’t think that’s gonna happen. But the European Left is very angry at the Trump administration.

So, Choice One might be, “Well, we don’t like the Chinese and we are an ally of the Americans, who subsidize our defense, but we detest the Trump administration. So maybe, (wink and nod) we’ll either be quiet or hope China wins that trade war and the United States, under the Trump administration, backs off all tariffs.” That would be a big mistake given their vulnerabilities they have with the United States vis-a-vis security. The second attitude might be the Europeans will just say, “We’ll lay low. We won’t say much at all. We’ll kind of drag out our tariff negotiations with the Trump administration. And we’ll let the Chinese and the United States battle it out. And if Trump should win and he lowers the amount of trade with China, maybe that will be an opening for us to replace China as the United States chief importer.” That is something that I don’t think will happen.

The third scenario is what I would suggest for the Europeans. They should say the following: “Despite our disagreements with the Trump administration, the United States is an ally. And we know that we have been as victimized by Chinese mercantilism, high tariffs, cheating on patents, copyrights, dumping, financial money manipulation—all the things the United States complains about, we do too. In fact, we as Europeans in a whole have about the same deficit with China as the United States does. So, we are kindred spirits. So, what we will do is, even though we have disagreements on our surplus with the United States and their efforts to reduce it, we will ally with the United States.” And that would represent about two-thirds of China’s total trade action or monetary value. And especially, if Japan and our allies in South Korea, Taiwan would join, then China would find out that about 85% of its trade is in a block. That is, they are united. And they have common complaints against China.

And China would not be able to say to the United States, “We’re going to cut deals with Vietnam and Japan and Taiwan and South Korea and the EU and leave you out in the cold.” Instead, the Europeans and, to a lesser extent, the Asian powerhouses would join the United States and say, “You know what? We’ve been quiet. We’re afraid of China. They’re bullies. But now that you’ve stood up, we’re embolden ourselves to air the same complaints as you are and hope that you win. And maybe a byproduct of reduced trade with China from the United States will open a door. So, even though we might have to lower our tariffs, there will be more opportunity in the American market with a less prominent Chinese trade profile that we can then be welcomed in as a kindred ally.” So, Europe has two or three choices in this proposed Chinese-American trade standoff. Nobody wants a trade war with anybody. No one wants it with China. But this is long overdue. And Europe has to decide what course they’re going to take. And for everybody’s sake, let’s hope they choose wisely.

Read more …

“Start with a big ask, create a sense of urgency, use leverage, don’t back down, make things happen. That’s how Trump is getting this all done.”

Trump Takes ‘Art Of The Deal’ To World Stage (Stepman)

President Donald Trump, like one of his heroes Andrew Jackson, was born for a storm. Trump is disrupting national and international systems that no longer work for the American people. In the domestic realm, he’s launched a political counterrevolution on a scale of change not seen since the New Deal. But it isn’t just on the home front that Trump is making the greatest pivot.He’s dramatically shifting the global chess board. Instead of coasting on the “postwar order” that long ago morphed into the failing and incoherent post-Cold War order, Trump is using America’s still-considerable position in the world to reorient the focus of our national security. He’s doing this by using the skill that he long ago became famous for and that so many of his critics misunderstand. Start with a big ask, create a sense of urgency, use leverage, don’t back down, make things happen. That’s how Trump is getting this all done.

It’s the art of the deal, and it’s funny that so many commentators miss this given that Trump wrote a famous book about it and has been pulling off deals in the public eye for decades. What the 47th president is doing is renegotiating America’s position vis-à-vis both our international rivals and our allies. Whether it be on tariffs, or acquiring Greenland, or securing the Panama Canal, or peace with Russia and Iran, Trump is clearly aiming to reset America’s international situation. He’s doing this, I believe, to ensure that the United States and not Communist China will remain the most dominant country globally going forward. Let’s take the Greenland issue for instance. Greenland may seem irrelevant, but its position on the globe and considerable natural resources vital to a modern economy make it extremely important for U.S. security. Acquiring it would send a message to Americans that we are thinking big once again and a message to Russia and China that the U.S. means to prevent them from dominating the Arctic and threatening the U.S. mainland.

The U.S. has sought to acquire the massive Arctic island since at least the 1860s. When William H. Seward bought Alaska, he really wanted Greenland too. The U.S. became close to buying Greenland a few other times, but ultimately Denmark held onto it. Trump’s aggressive words may have unsettled U.S. relations with Denmark in the short term, but maybe that’s what’s needed to create pressure and a sense of urgency to get a deal done. Trump knows that the U.S. can offer Greenland more than any other nation, he can make the territory rich and provide long-term defense. It’s now more likely than ever that Greenland will go independent and fall under U.S. sway in one way or another. Now consider Panama. The Panama Canal has long been critical for American national security. Perhaps we should have never given it to Panama after building it in the first place, but here we are.

It’s clear that China has made major inroads into subtly influencing Panama. A Hong Kong-based company controls ports on both sides of the canal. What would happen if they even just delayed U.S. ships during a sudden military conflict in the Pacific? Not good. Trump’s strong rhetoric about retaking the canal and putting immediate pressure on the country has forced them to act. The Hong Kong company sold those ports (and over 40 others around the globe) to an American-led group of companies. China has blocked the sale, but there is a good chance that a deal will go through at some point. Panama has abandoned China’s Belt and Road investments and even recently agreed to allow some U.S. troops to be stationed in the country. The Panamanian government would clearly rather remain in the good graces of the U.S. rather than kowtow to China. The Monroe Doctrine is back and it should have never gone away.

Now consider Panama. The Panama Canal has long been critical for American national security. Perhaps we should have never given it to Panama after building it in the first place, but here we are. It’s clear that China has made major inroads into subtly influencing Panama. A Hong Kong-based company controls ports on both sides of the canal. What would happen if they even just delayed U.S. ships during a sudden military conflict in the Pacific? Not good. Trump’s strong rhetoric about retaking the canal and putting immediate pressure on the country has forced them to act. The Hong Kong company sold those ports (and over 40 others around the globe) to an American-led group of companies. China has blocked the sale, but there is a good chance that a deal will go through at some point.

Panama has abandoned China’s Belt and Road investments and even recently agreed to allow some U.S. troops to be stationed in the country. The Panamanian government would clearly rather remain in the good graces of the U.S. rather than kowtow to China. The Monroe Doctrine is back and it should have never gone away. Of course, where Trump has operated most dramatically and has taken the greatest risk is on trade. Trump threatened to put significant tariffs on virtually every nation on earth. This sent markets and countless political commentators into a panic. But at seemingly the last minute, Trump adjusted and froze the highest tariffs. He kept an enormous 145% tariff on China.

The turbulent tariff talk has resulted in China being economically singled out. U.S. trade partners around the globe are offering to reduce their tariffs on U.S. goods out of concern about losing access to the American domestic market. Countries are now being pushed into the position of doing business with China or America. And they can’t go back to being pass-throughs for Chinese goods.

Read more …

“While Biden was preaching “unity” from his teleprompter, his administration was quietly crafting plans to turn Big Tech into their personal censorship machine.”

Tulsi Exposes a Terrifying Biden-Era Program Meant To Be Secret (Margolis)

They thought they could keep it hidden forever. Buried under layers of classification and bureaucratic doublespeak, the Biden administration’s masterplan for undermining American liberty was supposed to stay safely locked away from public scrutiny. But they didn’t count on Tulsi Gabbard. In a stunning move that has the DC establishment scrambling, Director of National Intelligence Gabbard just declassified what might be the most disturbing government document of the Biden era: their deceptively-named “Strategic Implementation Plan for Countering Domestic Terrorism.” Let’s cut through the bureaucratic noise and call this what it really is: a systematic blueprint for targeting and silencing conservative Americans. While Biden was preaching “unity” from his teleprompter, his administration was quietly crafting plans to turn Big Tech into their personal censorship machine.

The scheme reads like a progressive wish list: monitoring “suspicious” online speech (translation: conservative viewpoints), expanding federal watchlists to include Americans with the “wrong” political beliefs, and – you guessed it – finding new ways to chip away at Second Amendment rights. Don’t be fooled by their carefully crafted language about “protecting democracy.” The Government Accountability Office has confirmed these weren’t just ideas on paper—they were actively being implemented. How many Americans have already been labeled “suspicious” for nothing more than expressing conservative views? Heck, Tulsi Gabbard ended up on the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) terrorist watchlist under Joe Biden. Enough said.

The plan’s centerpiece? A comprehensive strategy to leverage federal power for pushing red flag laws and restricting access to firearms, all under the guise of preventing “lethal means.” Because apparently, in Biden’s America, exercising your Constitutional rights made you a potential threat under the guise of combating domestic terrorism. The strategic implementation plan (SIP) pushed agencies to crack down on what it labels “DT (domestic terrorism)-related content” online, encouraging collaboration with Big Tech to monitor, report, and censor speech—raising serious First Amendment concerns about free speech and assembly. You may remember that this practice was exposed after Elon Musk acquired Twitter, when the Twitter Files showed “extensive government efforts to silence dissenting views” on everything from COVID-19 to elections.

The report further reveals that agencies were told to “Share with relevant technology and other private-industry companies… relevant information on DT-related and associated transnational terrorist online content.” This wasn’t just government overreach, it was a calculated assault on the fundamental rights that make America exceptional. While the left was hyperventilating about “threats to democracy,” they were building the infrastructure for genuine governmental tyranny. Thanks to Gabbard’s courage in bringing this to light, we can finally see what Biden’s “moderate” administration was really planning behind closed doors. The question now isn’t just who approved this un-American scheme—it’s how many other similar programs are still hiding in classified files, waiting to be exposed.

The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves. But perhaps this revelation is exactly what America needs right now – a wake-up call about what happens when we let power-hungry bureaucrats operate in the shadows, far from public scrutiny and accountability. Remember this the next time you hear Democrats pontificating about “defending democracy.” They’ve shown us exactly what they mean by “democracy,” and it looks nothing like the Constitutional Republic our founders envisioned.

Read more …

”Everyone sees on the news where the Trump admin stands; you don’t want to do anything that shoots yourself in the foot..”

NATO To Abandon ‘Woke Language’ – Politico (RT)

NATO staff are softening language related to climate, gender, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to avoid a potential backlash from the administration of US President Donald Trump, Politico has reported, citing sources familiar with the situation. Phrases concerning climate, as well as gender diversity and security, have been reworded in new NATO legislation drafted by its committees and working groups, using language deemed more palatable to Washington, the outlet said on Thursday. The Trump administration took sweeping action aimed at dismantling gender and DEI programs shortly after Trump assumed office in January. The new administration is working to cut funding for universities and dismantle federal programs that include DEI practices. It is also carrying out a purge within the Pentagon to eliminate these programs.

”Everyone sees on the news where the Trump admin stands; you don’t want to do anything that shoots yourself in the foot,” one NATO official told Politico. ”Green technologies” have reportedly been replaced with “innovative technologies,” while “climate” has been described as an “operational environment,” another official said. NATO officials are steering clear of any language referencing “gender” or “women, peace, and security” in an effort to secure approval from all 32 member countries, including the US, the outlet said. ”Everyone knows that the worst thing you can do is present it as a diversity issue,” one of the officials said. “It’s not a woke agenda, it’s part of a military agenda, and now more people are pricking up their ears to make sure it is spoken about in military terms.” The fight against “woke policies,” such as the promotion of gender reassignment treatment among minors, was a key part of Trump’s presidential campaign. He has signed multiple executive orders rolling back DEI initiatives since taking office.

Trump has also consistently criticized NATO countries, accusing them of “freeloading” on US military support. He has pushed for members to increase their defense spending target from the current 2% of GDP to 5%. On Tuesday, the Trump administration unveiled a plan to slash the State Department’s budget by nearly 50%, a reduction that would deeply affect contributions to NATO’s internal operations, the UN, and roughly 20 other international bodies. The proposal, put forward by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, seeks to reduce combined funding for the State Department and USAID from $54.4 billion to $28.4 billion for the next fiscal year. Among the most significant changes is the proposed elimination of financial support for nearly all international organizations, including the UN and NATO headquarters.

Read more …

“Autistic people contribute every day to our nation’s greatness.” —Senator Elizabeth Warren

Kilmar for President! (James Howard Kunstler)

So, you wonder why Democrats are so anxious to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the USA. Is it to lead the national ticket in 2028? Who else have they got? Pete Buttigieg doesn’t have half of Kilmar’s charisma. AOC is just pretending to be Sandy-from-the-block — and everybody knows it. Who else best represents the party’s newest constituency: the undocumented (people unfairly deprived of documents by a cruel and careless bureaucracy)? Who best represents the Democratic Party’s number one policy goal: diversity fosterization! Kilmar, of course! Viva Kilmar!

It’s also pretty obvious by his recent actions, that Judge “Jeb” Boasberg is angling to be Kilmar’s running mate in ‘28. Perfect! He could fulfil the traditional role of vice-president by doing nothing for four years, which is exactly what people of non-color should do in the Democratic Party’s new national order. (Haven’t they already done enough?) Boasberg could set an example for the rest of America’s dwindling color-deficient population: quit hogging all the action, stop collecting all those dividends and annuities, step aside and give the other a chance at the American Dream!

Did you happen to notice how enterprising Kilmar Abrego Garcia has been since he boldly breached the border in 2011, fleeing persecution from the vicious gangs of his native El Salvador? Running a one-man jobs program, he crossed the country countless times indefatigably from Maryland to California in his mobile office — the legendary KAG SUV — seeking employment opportunities for young women of color otherwise condemned to clean hotel rooms and labor in senior care facilities filled with abusive people of non-color clinging pointlessly to life only to oppress their caretakers with never-ending demands for medication and extra portions of Jello.

Kilmar’s gritty organization, Mara Salvatrucha-13, has been among the Democratic Party’s most effective NGOs in a greater galaxy of justice-seeking ventures marshaled under the USAID umbrella — recently vandalized by Elon Musk’s DOGE band of pillaging oligarchs. MS-13, for short, was beloved among the undocumented for its fund-raising abilities, its networking expertise, and its relentless search for the missing documents the undocumented have been looking high-and-low for lo these many decades — rumored to be concealed in a vast underground complex in the Catoctin Mountains of Frederick County, MD. (More white peoples’ mischief!)

Thus, it came to pass that Kilmar Abrego Garcia, Maryland Dad-of-the-Year, was cruelly snatched from an MS-13 board meeting last month and transported without benefit of due process to the Salvadorean hell-hole known as CECOT (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo). And so, his Senator, Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) traveled this week to Central America on his one-man rescue mission. The Senator claimed he was detained miles from the gate of CECOT, and yet we have this photograph of Mr. Van Hollen meeting with Kilmar (and an unidentified aide) over Margaritas and pupusas at a cantina in the nearby town of Tecoluca. Asked to comment on the photo, El Savador’s Presidente, Nayib Bukele, declared: “Kilmar Abrego Garcia, miraculously risen from the ‘death camp’ & ‘torture!’ Now that he’s been confirmed healthy, he gets the honor of staying in El Salvador’s custody,” Mr. Bukele added.

Oh, so you say Señor Presidente! But not if “Jeb” Boasberg can help it. The dauntless super-judge has ordered Kilmar to be returned the USA pronto expressimo, or else he, the judge, is laying criminal contempt charges on the entire West Wing staff of Donald Trump’s White House. They will go to jail just like Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, two capos regime of Trump’s MAGA gang, did last year for the insolence of refusing to testify in Congress. Only, they will get life-without-parole! Lessons to be learned, ye miserable color-deficient, oppressors!

Alas, the DC federal district court is a bit short of enforcement officers, so Judge “Jeb” has enlisted the Harvard rowing crew to bring Kilmar back home. Kilmar will take the coxswain’s place in the racing shell as the crew rows up the Pacific Coast to their planned landing spot at Las Olas, CA, just south of San Diego. Joy will reign in Wokeville.

Having displayed such pluck at diplomacy, unnamed sources say Senator Van Hollen is under consideration for Secretary of State when Kilmar wins the 2028 election. Up until now, we’d been hoping for Senator Adam Schiff to fill that spot, but he has his hands full fighting the influence of the Soviet Union on the Trump cabinet. Looking forward, though, to the bold prosecutor, New York AG Letitia ‘Tish” James, moving into the top spot at DOJ, if her term for mortgage fraud ends before Jan-20, 2029. The Democratic Party — such bright prospects! Forward together, with Kilmar and company! Documents for all, at long last!

Read more …

That was fast! Trouble in the ranks?!

IRS Hunter Biden Whistleblower Gary Shapley Ousted As Acting Commissioner (NYP)

Gary Shapley, who became a folk hero to conservatives when he revealed the Justice Department played favorites in its investigation of former first son Hunter Biden, was ousted from his role as acting IRS commissioner just days after being elevated to the position, sources familiar with the shake-up told The Post Friday. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has replaced Shapley with deputy treasury secretary Michael Faulkender following a power struggle with key Trump adviser Elon Musk over the appointment. The reorganization was first reported by the New York Times. Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had pressed the White House for Shapley to take over the IRS. But Bessent felt left out of the decision-making — and asked President Trump if he could install Faulkender instead.

The acting commissioner will only be in place until former GOP congressman Billy Long can be vetted and confirmed by the Senate to lead the tax collection agency. “It’s no secret President Trump has put together a team of people who are incredibly passionate about the issues impacting our country,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. “Disagreements are a normal part of any healthy policy process, and ultimately everyone knows they serve at the pleasure of President Trump.” Shapley, who last month was tapped as a senior adviser to Bessent, was named acting IRS head after the departure of Melanie Krause, who resigned due to disagreements with the treasury secretary over the sharing of tax information on illegal immigrants with the Department of Homeland Security. While Krause left the IRS on Tuesday, Shapley remains in a senior position in the commissioner’s office despite being removed from the top interim role.

Musk had been lashing out at Bessent publicly before Shapley’s apparent demotion. On Thursday evening, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO posted on X in response to right-wing provocateur Laura Loomer that Bessent’s meetings with a purported “Trump hater” earlier this month were “troubling.” The line of attack came after Loomer had a White House meeting that precipitated the mass firing of several National Security Council staffers due to a lack of perceived loyalty to the president’s agenda. Musk had backed current Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick for the Treasury role, criticizing Bessent as a “business-as-usual choice.” Lutnick, by contrast, would “actually enact change,” Musk wrote on X before Bessent’s nomination.

Shapley and fellow IRS whistleblower Joseph Ziegler had testified before Congress in July 2023 that former President Joe Biden’s Justice Department had slow-walked a criminal probe of his son Hunter and blocked their tax team from taking certain investigatory steps. Among the damning claims were that Biden-appointed US attorneys based in Washington DC and Los Angeles had declined to bring charges against the then-first son, while then-Assistant Delaware US Attorney Lesley Wolf discouraged investigators from pursuing lines of questioning related to Joe Biden, saying at one point that there was “no specific criminality.”

Read more …

“Following the February meeting between Modi and Musk in Washington, the company started hiring in India..”

Indian PM Modi Dials Musk Ahead of Vance’s Visit (RT)

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Friday that he has had a phone call with Elon Musk during which they discussed several issues, including collaboration on technology and innovation. The call comes ahead of a visit to New Delhi next week by US Vice President J.D. Vance as the two nations aim to resolve trade issues. “India remains committed to advancing our partnerships with the US in these domains,” Modi said on X. During a two-day visit to the US in February, Modi met with Musk, whose business empire includes Tesla and SpaceX. India’s Ministry of External Affairs stated at the time that Modi and Musk discussed enhancing collaboration between Indian and US entities in areas such as innovation, space exploration, artificial intelligence, and sustainable development. They also explored opportunities for increased cooperation in emerging technologies, entrepreneurship, and good governance, the ministry said.

Musk’s SpaceX has already signed agreements with the top two telecom operators in India – Reliance Jio and Airtel to start Starlink internet services to India. Tesla has also made a move toward entering the Indian market. Following the February meeting between Modi and Musk in Washington, the company started hiring in India, advertising 13 job openings on LinkedIn for various positions, including back-end and customer-facing roles, according to local media reports. Meanwhile, India is one of the first countries to have initiated formal discussions with Washington on a trade deal that would allow it to avoid being charged a higher reciprocal tariff. The two countries have agreed on a deadline for completing an agreement, according to a government official cited by Reuters.

Read more …

They should use their money and clout for something positive.

Soros-Funded Groups Go To War Against DOGE (Tyler O’Neil)

The far-left groups that staffed and advised the Biden administration—a network that I call the Woketopus—are going to war against DOGE’s efforts to root out waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government. Activist groups like the Center for American Progress and the ACLU are working alongside unions like the AFL-CIO and the American Federation of Teachers to block DOGE through lawsuits or public campaigns. My book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government,” exposes how these activist groups—bankrolled through the Left’s dark money network by big donors like Hungarian American billionaire George Soros and his son, Alex—used the administrative state to force their woke agendas on the American people. The Trump administration is rooting woke ideology out of the federal government, so the Woketopus’ opposition comes as no surprise. Yet the campaign against DOGE seems particularly noteworthy, since DOGE represents an effort to tighten the government’s belt and make it more accountable to the people.

The Dark Money Playbook
A little-known and once secretive nonprofit called Governing for Impact appears to have orchestrated the Left’s campaigns against DOGE. As I document in the book, Governing for Impact began as a project of New Venture Fund, one of the nonprofit entities created by the for-profit company Arabella Advisors. Governing for Impact’s website did not even appear on Google in 2022, but the nonprofit bragged about hosting a “listening tour” that involved some of the most influential regulators in the Biden administration. The Open Society Foundations, which George Soros founded and which his son Alex now runs, funneled $9.98 million into Governing for Impact through New Venture Fund between 2019 and 2021. Rachel Klarman, Governing for Impact’s executive director, previously worked as a legal policy analyst at Democracy Forward, identifying and developing litigation challenging the first Trump administration’s actions on health care, labor, and education.

Perhaps it should be no surprise, then, that Governing for Impact published a series of memos laying out legal strategies to sue the second Trump administration, particularly on DOGE. The memo titled “Challenging DOGE,” published in February, lays out a strategy to claim that DOGE “lacks lawful authority to act as an agency.” “One potential legal claim would assert that DOGE, as embodied in [the U.S. Digital Service, the department Trump re-tasked to house DOGE], lacks any statutory authority,” since Congress did not pass a law explicitly creating DOGE. The memo admits that Trump has an alternate explanation for DOGE’s involvement, but it insists that the effort is unlawful. It goes on to state that since DOGE “lacks lawful authority to act as an agency,” it “cannot enter Economy Act agreements.” The Economy Act, signed in 1932, allows federal agencies to share resources.

The AFL-CIO, America’s largest union, filed a lawsuit against DOGE that same month, arguing that DOGE lacks the authority to place orders with other federal agencies under the Economy Act, The Washington Examiner reported. Not only did the AFL-CIO—one of the unions with influence in the Biden administration—bring this lawsuit, but its legal representation comes from none other than the Democracy Forward Foundation, Klarman’s former employer. Democratic lawyer Marc Elias, who recently challenged the U.S. Senate election results in Pennsylvania and who helped orchestrate the Trump-Russia hoax, chairs Democracy Forward’s board. Democracy Forward is representing many of the lawsuits against the Trump administration.

Other Woketopus Lawsuits Against DOGE
The American Federation of Government Employees—the largest public-sector union in the federal government and a member of the AFL-CIO—has filed multiple lawsuits against DOGE. In the first anti-DOGE lawsuit filed on Trump’s first day in office, AFGE joined Public Citizen and State Democracy Defenders Fund (a group led by Democratic lawyer Norm Eisen) in suing to make sure DOGE complies with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. AFGE teamed up with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees to sue Acting DOGE Administrator Charles Ezell to block the Trump administration’s offer for federal employees to resign in a buyout.

Read more …

“The ‘tariff solution’ had been pre-prepared by his team over recent years, and formed an integral part to a more complex framework..”

Trump Axes A Stricken World Order (Alastair Crooke)

The Trump ‘shock’ – his ‘de-centring’ of America from serving as pivot to the post-war ‘order’ via the dollar – has triggered a deep cleavage between those who gained huge benefit from the status quo, on the one hand; and on the other, the MAGA faction who have come to regard the status quo as inimical – even an existential threat – to U.S. interests. The sides have descended into bitter, accusatory polarisation. It is one of the ironies of the moment that President Trump and right-wing Republicans have insisted on decrying – as a “resource curse” – the benefits of the Reserve Currency status that precisely brought the U.S. the wave of inward global savings that has permitted the U.S. to enjoy the unique privilege of printing money, without adverse consequence: Until now that is! Debt levels finally matter, it seems, even for the Leviathan.

Vice-President Vance now likens the Reserve Currency to a “parasite” that has eaten away the substance of its ‘host’ – the U.S. economy – by forcing an overvalued dollar. Just to be clear, President Trump believed there was no choice: Either he could upend the existing paradigm, at the cost of considerable pain for many of those dependent on the financialised system, or he could allow events to wend their way towards an inevitable U.S. economic collapse. Even those who understood the dilemma the U.S. faces, nonetheless have been somewhat shocked by the self-serving brazenness of him simply ‘tariffing the world’. Trump’s actions, (as many claim), were neither ‘spur of the moment’, nor whimsical. The ‘tariff solution’ had been pre-prepared by his team over recent years, and formed an integral part to a more complex framework – one that complemented the debt-reduction and revenue effects of tariffs, by a programme to coerce the repatriation of vanished manufacturing industry back to America.

Trump’s is a gamble that may, or may not, succeed: It risks a bigger financial crisis, as financial markets are over-leveraged and fragile. But what is clear is that the de-centring of America that will follow from his crude threats and humiliation of world leaders ultimately will cause a counter-reaction both for relations with the U.S., and also in global willingness to continue to hold U.S. assets (such as U.S. Treasuries). China’s defiance of Trump will set a ‘tone’, even for those who lack China’s ‘heft’. Why then should Trump take such a risk? Because, behind Trump’s boldfaced actions, notes Simplicius, lies a harsh reality facing many MAGA supporters:

“it remains inarguable that the American workforce has been gutted by the triple threat of mass migration; general worker anomie as consequence of cultural decay – and in particular, by the mass alienation and disenfranchisement of conservatively-minded men. These have been strongly contributing factors to the current crisis of doubt about the ability of ‘American manufacturing’ to ever return to a semblance of its previous glory, no matter how big an axe Trump takes to the stricken ‘World Order’”. Trump is mounting a Revolution in order to invert this reality – an end to the American anomie – by (Trump hopes) bringing back U.S. industry.

There is a current of western public opinion – “by no means limited to intellectuals”, nor to Americans alone – that despairs of their own country’s ‘lack of will’, or its inability to do what needs to be done – its fecklessness and its ‘crisis of competence’. These people hanker for a leadership believed to be tougher and more decisive – a longing for unconstrained power and ruthlessness.

One highly-placed Trump supporter puts it quite brutally: “We are now at a very important inflection point. If we are going to face ‘The Big Ugly’ with China, we cannot afford divided loyalties … It’s time to get mean, brutally, harshly mean. Delicate sensibilities must be dispatched like a feather in a hurricane”. It is no surprise that, against the general context of western nihilism, a mindset that admires power and ruthless technocratic solutions – almost ruthlessness for its own sake – could take hold. Take note – we are all in for a turbulent future.

Read more …

“..then the Left will say, “Well, how can we appeal to the public and get them all angry and frenzy and hysterical when some of our major celebrities, our political figures are in Mar-a-Lago?”

Trump’s Counterrevolution: Flood the Zone, Drain the Swamp (Victor Davis Hanson)

We’re about—getting close to 90 days and even coming up close, in a week, 10 days, to the first 100 days of the Trump administration and this counterrevolution that he’s waging. I thought it might be wise just to see where we are as far as the political landscape and the dynamics of the progress of this counterrevolution. What is President Donald Trump trying to do? I think I would sum it up as flooding the zone. And that is, he’s going to try to propose and enact so many radical corrections or revolutions or reforms or recalibrations that his opposition doesn’t know where to start. So, abroad, he is looking at the Iran deal and he got rid of it. He put sanctions. He’s got maximum pressure. And now, the Iranian economy is about defunct. And they want to negotiate about this nuclear weapon. I don’t think they’re going to negotiate it away, but we’ll see.

And then, he’s dealing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin and trying to get a ceasefire. He’s basically dealt with the Houthis.On the domestic front, there is no more illegal immigration. He’s basically stopped it. Now, the task is what to do with the 12 million illegal aliens that came under former President Joe Biden. And what do you do with the 20 million-plus, maybe 30 million that were here already illegally but for a longer period of time? At the same time, he’s had a blanket mandate that in every Cabinet they will eliminate diversity, equity, inclusion and, by association, things like transsexual, biological males competing in women’s sports. Women—lowering the physical standards so women could compete and pass these very rigorous endurance physical tests so that they would be in combat units on an equal level. No problem that they can’t. But they have to have the same physical requirements as men.

I could go on, but you see what he is doing. He’s doing so many radical corrections in a way that a Romney or a McCain or the Bushes, even Ronald Reagan would not have dreamed of that he feels the opposition will say, “Well, what do we do? Should we reply here? Do we put our interest here? Should we do this?” And so, what is the strategy that the Left is using? They’re flooding the zone, too. But they’re doing it not with counterproposals. They don’t say, “This is what’s wrong with closing the border and we wanna reopen it. This is what’s wrong with the Houthis policy. This is what’s wrong with the trade deficit. This is what’s wrong”—no specific proposal. They’re just flooding it with hysteria, the Spartacus talk, late-night comedy trashing him, another person arrested saying that he wants to kill Donald Trump, keying Teslas, firebombing Tesla agencies, outrageous things from Hollywood stars, videos from Congress. All of a sudden—we didn’t even know who Rep. Jasmine Crockett was. She’s filled that void.

But what I’m saying is they want to be so rambunctious, so crazy, so 360 degrees unhinged that they’ll create an image or a malu—where everybody wants to get almost in a fetal position: “Please, please make it all go away. I don’t know what Trump is doing but it’s so disturbing. Everybody’s so angry.” That is their strategy. Now, what is Trump’s counterstrategy? His counterstrategy is to actually get people on the other side of the aisle in Congress or in the country at large or in the popular culture and try to at least be friendly to them so then they can say, “I don’t agree with Trump but what he’s doing might be needed.” So, we have Bill Maher going to Mar-a-Lago and actually saying very nice things about Donald Trump.

On the one hand, we have Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fighting with a bulwark of the Left at one time, fighting with left-wing people who were calling him all sorts of names and saying that he is illiberal. We had Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan. She was in the White House. Can you believe it? She was so embarrassed about a photo-op. She had to almost cover her face.But you can see what Trump is doing. He’s trying to get people from all sides of the Democratic and liberal progressive movement and not compromise them, but get in the picture, so then the Left will say, “Well, how can we appeal to the public and get them all angry and frenzy and hysterical when some of our major celebrities, our political figures are in Mar-a-Lago?”

Read more …

‘Tis the season.

There’s Real Evidence for Easter (Joecks)

If you think politicians make outlandish claims, consider what Christians celebrate at Easter. They believe a man named Jesus was brutally tortured, murdered, and buried for three days before rising from the dead. Furthermore, they assert this man was also fully God and that your belief or lack of belief in him determines your eternal destiny. Christians have no video evidence or DNA tests to prove this. That’s understandable since Christians say the event Easter celebrates took place almost 2,000 years ago. Americans can’t even agree on things that happened two weeks ago. Isn’t Easter an ancient example of “fake news,” a myth propagated by people putting faith over historical realities? It’s a valid question. The answer starts with looking at the books of the New Testament. How can you determine if what you read today is what the author wrote 2,000 years ago?

That question isn’t unique to the Bible. There are no original copies of any ancient work. Historians use a twofold test to determine how accurately copyists transmitted a manuscript throughout the ages. Scholars look at how many copies exist and the number of years between the original and the earliest surviving copy. For example, Julius Caesar fought and won a series of battles against the Gauls from 58 to 50 B.C. He chronicled his conquests in “On the Gallic War.” Historians have 251 manuscripts of this book, and the earliest is from the ninth century, a gap of over 850 years. Plato was one of the most important ancient philosophers. He wrote a series of dialogues before he died in 348/347 B.C. Scholars have 210 manuscripts of those writings. The oldest is from 895 A.D., a gap of over 1,200 years.

Aside from the Bible, the ancient work with the greatest number of copies is Homer’s “Iliad,” created around 800 B.C. There are over 1,800 copies of it, and the earliest is from around 400 B.C., a gap of just 400 years. The books of the New Testament were written between 50 and 100 A.D. There are over 5,800 New Testament manuscripts in Greek and over 18,500 New Testament manuscripts in other languages. The time gap between authorship and the earliest manuscript is just 50 years. All statistics are from a 2014 review by Josh McDowell and Clay Jones. Try telling a history professor that there isn’t enough historical evidence to confirm Julius Caesar conquered the Gaels or that Plato wrote philosophy. Yet there is a much greater track record for the accurate transmittal of the books depicting the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

An accurate transmission doesn’t mean what is written is true. “The Iliad” is, after all, a work of fiction. A key group, however, did believe the events recorded in the writings that became the New Testament—its authors. Some even explicitly emphasized that their writings were trustworthy and accurate recordings. It wasn’t just idle talk. Their actions changed too.Jesus’ disciples abandoned him when he was arrested. Within weeks, however, those cowards became bold preachers of a gospel message that would transform the world. They didn’t preach to get rich. Rather their preaching led to imprisonments and executions. Faith doesn’t have to mean turning off your brain. Rather, having faith can be the step one takes based on the evidence, including the historical documentation of an empty tomb.

Happy Easter.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Vax

 

 

Makary
https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1912947217473626610

 

 

Solari
https://twitter.com/ChildrensHD/status/1913019646862643353

 

 

Stem cells
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1913200483205800187

 

 

Pelican
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1913080045389697360

 

 

Aeroponic
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1913149496256614820

 

 

Retriever
https://twitter.com/catshealdeprsn/status/1912891302414287214

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 182025
 
 April 18, 2025  Posted by at 10:03 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  33 Responses »


Salvador Dali The knight of death 1934

 

China Is In Much Deeper Trouble Than Most Realize (Strom)
US Expects Ukraine Ceasefire Within Weeks – Bloomberg (RT)
Europe Seeking ‘Direct Line’ With Trump – NYT (RT)
Meloni’s White House Trip Paves Way For European Union Rapprochement (JTN)
US Will Pull EU to Pieces Before Letting It Partner Up With China (Sp.)
Trump Admin Fights Back Against Rogue Judge’s Contempt Warning (Margolis)
Convicted FBI Lawyer Clinesmith Was Spared From Prison By Boasberg (JTN)
REPORT: President Trump Opposed Israeli Strikes on Iran Nuclear Sites (CTH)
Pam Bondi Outlines Timeline and History of MS13 Illegal Alien (CTH)
Bondi Announces Lawsuit Against Maine Over Boys in Girls’ Sports (ET)
Rubio Shuts Down Censorship Program Biden Admin Claimed was Ended (Turley)
A Chihuahua That Thinks It’s A Lion: The Decline of Britain (Bordachev)
China Replacing US Oil With Canadian – Bloomberg (RT)
Trump Tariffs Could Cost EU $1.25 Trillion (RT)
German Anti-Russia Propaganda Is Reaching Nazi-era Levels (Amar)
Court Rules Google Illegally Holds “Monopoly Power” In Online Ad Tech (ZH)
Trump to Make an Epic Move at the IRS (Margolis)
Climate Myths (John Stossel)

 

 

 

 

Trust

Ritter

Poso
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1912573038303863007

What is China’s messsage here? That you might as well make it at home?No wait, that’s Trump’s message.
https://twitter.com/acnewsitics/status/1912841340968395205

 

 

Pepe

 

 

 

 

Contentious topic.

“[Xi] has counted on making the US economy dependent on China to keep us cowed. Trump is turning that logic on its head.”

China Is In Much Deeper Trouble Than Most Realize (Strom)

In the tariff war between China and the United States, a lot of chatter in the Pravda Media is about Xi Jinping’s defiance, his outreach to European countries and other less important but collectively significant developing countries, and his retaliatory moves against America. They make it sound like China has a lot of cards to play in the trade war with America. Collectively, these stories tell a tale: Donald Trump may have bitten off more than he can chew in his economic war with China. Trump’s moves will hollow out the American middle class! Europe will choose China over the United States! We are doomed! The Chinese are putting up a very brave front, until recently matching Trump’s blow for blow and pointing to Chinese willingness to endure everything up to eating grass for a year to defeat their adversaries. The Chinese plan for the long term! Yeah, well, not so much.

It all sounds impressive, and some pissed-off ally countries have even hinted at turning Chinaward as a response to what they consider a stab in the back from President Trump. Except…Reality. Our ticked-off allies are acting like 6-year-old children angry at their parents, threatening to run away. As much as they resent the United States, they are utterly dependent upon us and chose to be so. They are militarily weak and have sputtering economies that rely on the US as an export market. The United States, not themselves, defends its sea lines of communication, and they all know that China is a predatory power and not a reliable economic partner. The US not only represents 25% of the world economy, which is quite impressive in itself. But it has about 40% of the world’s consumer spending. No manufacturer of consumer products can afford to turn their backs on the US.

China may be an attractive market, but it is not sufficiently large enough to make a dent in their losses should the US close our markets to them. Which brings us to China itself. All that bluster sounds good, but it hides a stark reality: their economy is utterly dependent on US consumption. As much power as they have over us–they can cause us temporary pain as we adjust to finding new suppliers–we have infinitely more over them. Even their holdings in US debt are a double-edged sword. The US has relied on China to purchase government bonds, but as the old saying goes–If you owe the bank a billion dollars, you have power over them. The tariffs on China have been DEVASTATING. Not will be devastating. They are already devastating. China’s economy is reeling from the impact of tariffs, and public discontent is growing.

On Douyin, China’s version of TikTok, videos show citizens openly criticizing the government’s rigid stance on tariffs, with some even taking to the streets in protest. Chinese authorities are cracking down, forcibly dispersing crowds and suppressing evidence of unrest, but these efforts can only hold for so long. As joblessness and food shortages deepen, desperation is setting in, pushing people to the brink. China’s heavy reliance on the U.S. market gives America the upper hand—we can outlast them until they yield or face internal upheaval, potentially threatening President Xi’s leadership. China’s government is and appears quite strong because it is. But something can be both very strong and very brittle–meaning that it performs well until the moment it shatters. Think ceramics or glass, both of which can be very strong until the moment they shatter. They don’t bend and spring back–they are good until the breaking point, and then boom.

China’s government is not loved, but it is tolerated because it is strong and because it generally delivers on its major promise: economic growth, pulling a billion people out of poverty as quickly as possible. Tariffs aren’t just a threat to that strategy. If Trump really pushes, Xi Jinping’s government is in real trouble, and not the kind of trouble that means a midterm loss or failure to get reelected. This is regime-threatening. Xi, who looked to be in the catbird seat, could be facing a collapse of his legitimacy as leader of China. The Trump administration plans to use ongoing tariff negotiations to pressure U.S. trading partners to limit their dealings with China, according to people with knowledge of the conversations. The idea is to extract commitments from U.S. trading partners to isolate China’s economy in exchange for reductions in trade and tariff barriers imposed by the White House.

U.S. officials plan to use negotiations with more than 70 nations to ask them to disallow China from shipping goods through their countries, prevent Chinese firms from locating in their territories to avoid U.S. tariffs, and not absorb China’s cheap industrial goods into their economies. These measures are meant to put a dent in China’s already rickety economy and force Beijing to the negotiating table with less leverage ahead of potential talks between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The exact demands could vary widely by nation, given their degree of involvement with the Chinese economy. China’s strategy of growing its economic power and influence depends on a river of money with its headwaters in the United States. And its ability to make deals in countries not hostile to the United States is only possible because the US tolerates its moves and is committed to using only modest soft power to oppose the moves.

Donald Trump is not in a mood to tolerate expanding Chinese influence. Look at the Panama Canal port deals. Trump’s goal is not so much to own the canal as to deny China influence in the region. China, not Panama, is the target. In fact, most of Trump’s seemingly bizarre foreign policy moves–Canada as the 51st state and annexing Greenland are about trying to change the political geography to keep China from gaining influence in the Arctic. The flow of information out of China on economic performance since the tariffs hit is sparse, but I have been checking in on the social media chatter coming out of China, and the news is bleak. Consumer spending is down, export products are being sold at firesale prices, and business owners are locking doors and leaving employees unpaid. This is all chatter right now, but also likely true.

Trade wars suck for everybody involved, and when the cost of Chinese-made products go up there will be some pain here in the United States, whatever Trump and his people say. But none of this pain will be an existential threat to Trump, the country, or the Republican Party. There will be a price to pay, but it will be modest in the longer term. Not so for China. Their regime is under threat because their hand is much, much weaker. Weaker than Trump’s and weaker than people think. Of course, if China were a normal country, what Trump is doing would be a horrible policy. Generally speaking, destroying a trading partner’s economy is both morally questionable and terrible for business. Normally you would cut a deal. But China and the United States are heading for a war, and a big one at that. Xi Jinping has made that abundantly clear, and he has counted on making the US economy dependent on China to keep us cowed. Trump is turning that logic on its head.

Read more …

I don’t think they do. Looks more like they’re getting ready to pull out.

US Expects Ukraine Ceasefire Within Weeks – Bloomberg (RT)

Senior US officials have told European allies that Washington anticipates a comprehensive ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict within weeks, Bloomberg has reported. US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio outlined the timeline during a series of meetings in Paris on Thursday, hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron, Bloomberg reported the same day, citing anonymous sources. The European side sought to persuade the Americans that President Donald Trump should “harden its position toward Moscow,” the report said, describing the discussions as “the latest attempt by Europe to influence the outcome” of US talks with Russia.

Last week, Witkoff traveled to St. Petersburg for talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which he has characterized as “compelling.” Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has criticized Trump’s envoy, accusing him of echoing “Russian narratives.” Russian officials have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of a ceasefire with Ukraine, asserting that Kiev’s backers in Europe are undermining US efforts. Speaking to journalists on Thursday, Moscow’s UN representative, Vassily Nebenzia, highlighted that Kiev has failed to adhere to a US-mediated moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure.

The diplomat said that the West’s record of using purported peace deals to build up the Ukrainian military means that expectations for a full ceasefire are “simply unrealistic at this stage.” “I cannot speak on behalf of President Trump,” Nebenzia said. “Perhaps, he knows better what I don’t know.” The 30-day energy ceasefire announced on March 18 is set to expire this week. When asked on Wednesday whether Russia would alter its military strategy, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Putin had issued no new directives on the matter.

Read more …

What Europe? Do you mean Von der Leyen, who has no links to any European, or Macron, who’s despised by those he does have a link to? Who would Trump talk to, and why?

Europe Seeking ‘Direct Line’ With Trump – NYT (RT)

European officials are seeking to establish a “direct line” of communication with US President Donald Trump, unsure whether his team can make any real decisions or is willing to cooperate at all, the New York Times reported on Thursday, citing sources. The report, based on interviews with numerous unnamed European officials, describes the US president as “the ultimate decision maker” who is often difficult to predict, making the goal of getting Trump’s ear a priority for the Europeans. Many top-level negotiators in European NATO countries have found traditional diplomatic channels – such as the State Department and embassies – ineffective, the report said. The confusion is compounded by the fact that the most effective interlocutors on the US side are not career diplomats but rather trusted special envoys and advisers, such as Elon Musk and Steve Witkoff, the article said.

The officials also told the NYT that their US counterparts are primarily focused on fulfilling the president’s wishes, showing limited interest in the perspectives of America’s allies. The Trump administration is “not terribly interested in what the Europeans have to say,” a NYT source said. “It’s all about unilateralism and they don’t consult much. After all, if they don’t consider us allies to that extent, why would they?” While senior Trump officials have held “cordial” talks with their European counterparts on a number of issues, “it is never clear to allies” whether they have “real power over foreign policy or trade,” the article said. ”Everyone in D.C. says you have to talk to Trump directly,” a senior European official told the NYT.

However, this has proved difficult even for the highest-ranking EU officials, as Trump “despises the collective power of the European Union and sees many NATO allies as freeloaders,” the paper said, adding that leaders such as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen are struggling to get on Trump’s calendar. The communication breakdown comes at a time of tenuous US-EU relations, marred by Washington’s decision to slap the bloc with tariffs and its push to make European NATO members pay more for their defense. Differences over the Ukraine conflict have also come into play, with Trump pursuing active diplomacy with Russia to end the conflict while the EU insists on supporting Kiev for “as long as it takes.”

Read more …

Yes, Meloni might be the EU contact for Trump. But Brussels would not give her any voice of her own.

Meloni’s White House Trip Paves Way For European Union Rapprochement (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s meeting with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Thursday at the Oval Office came amid the ongoing trade dispute between the European Union and Washington and appeared to pave the way for a presidential visit to the continent to address the matter with its leaders. “I want to thank President Trump for having accepted an invitation to pay an official visit to Rome in the near future and consider the possibility in that occasion to meet also with Europe,” Meloni told reporters in the Oval Office. “The goal for me is to make the West great again, and I think we can do it together. We can and we will keep [working] on that.” The Italian leader generally ranks among those European figures with the strongest relationships with Trump himself.

A stalwart conservative and opponent of illegal immigration, Meloni shares many of Trump’s own positions, putting her on solid footing with her counterpart in the Oval Office. She further acknowledged those points in the meeting, saying “I know that we share lots of things on tackling illegal migration, on fighting against synthetic drugs.” Meloni was the only European Union leader to attend Trump’s 2024 inauguration and was among the first to congratulate him on his reelection. The pair have generally enjoyed a strong relationship and Trump himself called her a “great prime minister” during the meeting. Ahead of her trip to Washington, Meloni had been widely regarded as the European leader best suited to negotiating with Trump.

Italy is the 25th most populous nation globally with more than 59 million residents, according to data from the U.N. Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs, and a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of $2.3 trillion (USD). In January 2025, the United States exported $2.82 billion to and imported $6.11 billion from Italy, resulting in a negative trade balance of $3.29 billion. The Observatory of Economic Complexity reported that in January 2025, the top exports of the United States to Italy were Hormones ($580M), Petroleum Gas ($249M), and Crude Petroleum ($211M). In the same month, the main imports to the United States from Italy were packaged medicines ($634M), vaccines, blood, antisera, toxins and cultures ($436M), and commodities not specified otherwise ($268M).

In early April, Trump declared “Liberation Day” and announced the imposition of sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs on most foreign nations. He later paused some of the largest tariffs, though he maintained a 10% baseline on most countries and left in place large-scale tariffs on China. Shortly after Liberation Day, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced a “zero for zero” tariff offer to the United States, though Washington has yet to agree to any permanent arrangement. Trump initially imposed 20% tariffs on most European goods, but he has since brought Brussels down to the 10% rate for a 90-day period and Meloni was expected to pursue a resolution to the issue. Ahead of the meeting, the White House was optimistic that it would be able to secure agreements with many nations eager to reach lasting agreements. “We’ve got 90 deals in 90 days possibly pending here,” White House advisor Peter Navarro said.

Multiple White House officials have shared that sentiment publicly, though it is not clear which nations have expressed interest in negotiating trade deals. Meloni’s visit was decidedly more jovial than that of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, which resulted in his removal from the White House after a tempestuous press conference. By contrast, the Oval Office meeting with Meloni saw many laughs as the pair exchanged compliments and pronounced the productiveness of their talks. “We have been talking about many bilateral topics and things that we can do together, about defense, about economic [sic], about economy, about space, about energy, Italy will have to increase its LNG imports and also nuclear that we are trying to develop,” Meloni said. “I think there can be ways to work together.” She further highlighted the commitment of Italian firms to American investment, but did not speak to the prospect of an individual trade deal between the United States and Italy.

“And the Italian enterprises will invest, as they’ve been doing for many years, as you know, in the next years, I think around $10 billions,” she added [sic]. “That shows how interconnected our economies are.” Meloni did not arrive officially as an envoy for the EU, though she did emphasize the importance of America’s relationship with the continent. During the Oval Office meeting, she pointed primarily to the economic relationships between Italy and the United States, but used the American relationship with her country as a segue to discuss the continental issue. “Mr. President, it’s not only about Italy, it’s about the entire Europe. The exchange between us is a very big one, investments, trade,” she said. “So I think even if we have some problems okay between the two shores of the Atlantic, it is the time that we try to sit down and find solutions.” “I know that when I speak about the West mainly, I don’t speak about a geographical space. I speak about [the] civilization, and I want to make that civilization stronger,” she added.

Read more …

“In the US’s ‘grand geopolitical chessboard’, the EU remains “one of the big, most important parts..”

US Will Pull EU to Pieces Before Letting It Partner Up With China (Sp.)

Trump’s global trade rampage has left the European Union and China seeking improved trade and investment relations. But that’s not a realistic prospect, says veteran Hong Kong-based Italian financial analyst Angelo Giuliano. For starters, “you need to keep in mind that the EU leaders were pre-selected by the Bilderberg Group and the US. Basically…the EU is actually a US project to destroy nation states,” Giuliano told Sputnik. Much of the bloc’s former and current top leadership (including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Economy Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany, France’s Emmanuel Macron and NATO chief Mark Rutte) are members of the Atlanticist club or have spoken at its meetings.

Second, the EU doesn’t decide its own fate, a reality demonstrated by Washington’s success in decoupling the bloc from Russia’s cheap, plentiful energy resources, and forcing it to import much more costly US LNG, Giuliano said. This left the EU’s industrial output uncompetitive globally and triggered widespread deindustrialization as hundreds of companies downsized, stopped production and shifted production abroad, including to the US. Washington can and will do the same vis-à-vis Europe and China as it consolidates alliances against the emerging, BRICS-led multipolar world order, Giuliano believes. “There’s going to be some backfiring from the business community, but ultimately [Europe’s] leaders are going to side with the US as they see Russia and China as the enemies,” the observer emphasized.

Besides US vassalage, closer EU-China ties are stymied by other factors, like:
• China’s warm relations with Russia, a sharp contrast to active EU support for the anti-Russia proxy war in Ukraine.
• The acrimonious relationship with Russia means new infrastructure like the Northern Sea Route, the North-South Transport Corridor and overland transit via Russia remain closed to the EU. Instead, Europe-China trade relies on transit via the Red Sea, hindered by Houthi ops against the US and Israel.
• Fears of China’s sophisticated and cost-competitive automotive and green tech, which along with consumer goods, chemicals and steel could further deindustrialize the EU, especially as China enjoys access to discounted Russian energy while the bloc is stuck with pricey American gas deliveries.
• Unresolved industrial subsidies, agricultural dumping, IP and tech-related bitterness.

Ultimately, enhanced EU-China would be possible, and advantageous, Giuliano says, but only if Brussels “had a more neutral stance” in international affairs, “siding a little bit with BRICS and also the Belt and Road Initiative. “But again, there are a lot of obstacles for that, and the US would not allow it to happen, because they want to have a sphere of influence between North and South America and the EU. They want to control those blocs. And they fight with the multipolar world and this transition to a multipolar world,” the observer noted. In the US’s ‘grand geopolitical chessboard’, the EU remains “one of the big, most important parts,” Giuliano summed up.

Read more …

“A single Obama-appointed district judge is trying to hamstring the entire executive branch’s ability to enforce immigration law.”

Trump Admin Fights Back Against Rogue Judge’s Contempt Warning (Margolis)

The Trump administration has just shown exactly how to handle judicial activism: by fighting back with everything it has. In a bold move that’s sure to have the Democratic establishment sputtering with rage, Trump’s legal team filed an immediate appeal Wednesday evening against Judge James Boasberg’s outrageous contempt threat. The judge’s unprecedented power grab attempted to block crucial deportation flights, and he’s learning the hard way that the Trump administration isn’t taking his judicial overreach sitting down. The administration’s legal response was swift and devastating. Its appeal systematically dismantled Boasberg’s ruling, pointing out how it represents a “massive, unauthorized imposition on the Executive’s authority” and directly contradicts recent Supreme Court precedent.

The Trump administration’s brief appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court does not include any new details, as the facts of the case have already been heard by the district and appellate court. The appellate court last month ruled 2-1 to uphold Boasberg’s temporary restraining order. The Supreme Court, however, ruled 5-4 last month that the Trump administration could resume its deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act, so long as individuals subject to removal under the law were given due process protections, and the opportunity to pursue habeas relief – or the ability to have their case heard by a U.S. court prior to their removal. Boasberg said Wednesday that the court found that the Trump administration had demonstrated a “willful disregard” for his March 15 emergency order, which temporarily halted all deportation flights to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 statute providing for such deportations during “a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion” by a foreign nation.

What makes this pushback so satisfying is how it exposes the left’s double standard. When Trump follows the law and exercises his constitutional authority to protect Americans, leftists cry “contempt.” But when Democratic appointees like Boasberg ignore Supreme Court rulings they don’t like? Crickets from the mainstream media. Team Trump’s legal filing didn’t pull any punches. It meticulously detailed how Boasberg’s ruling attempts to usurp executive authority that the Supreme Court explicitly confirmed just last month. The 5-4 decision authorized these deportation flights, but apparently, left-wing district court judges think they can override the Supreme Court because “Orange man bad.” The administration’s response demonstrates exactly why Trump’s approach to the judiciary is so necessary.

While previous Republican administrations might have meekly complied with such judicial overreach, Trump’s team recognizes these tactics for what they are — an attempt to legislate from the bench. A single Obama-appointed district judge is trying to hamstring the entire executive branch’s ability to enforce immigration law. The Trump administration isn’t just fighting back against one bad ruling; it’s defending the fundamental separation of powers. This appeal systematically addresses every aspect of Boasberg’s flawed and blatantly partisan reasoning while simultaneously highlighting the urgent national security implications of these deportation flights. Of course, the left is not used to an administration that actually fights back against judicial activism. It expected Trump to roll over like so many Republicans before him. Instead, it’s getting a masterclass in constitutional governance.

Read more …

“Knee-deep in the mud..”

Trump’s present day nemesis judge fulfilled that role also during the Russiagate years. When Clinesmith falsified a FISA application.

Convicted FBI Lawyer Clinesmith Was Spared From Prison By Boasberg (JTN)

Convicted FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith — whom Judge James Boasberg gave a slap on the wrist for his crimes years before becoming a public foe of President Donald Trump’s deportation policies — was more deeply involved in the deeply flawed Crossfire Hurricane investigation than previously known. Clinesmith, who worked on both the FBI’s Hillary Clinton email investigation and on the Trump-Russia collusion inquiry, pleaded guilty to falsifying a document during the bureau’s efforts to renew FISA authority to wiretap Carter Page, who was an adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign. Newly-declassified details about Clinesmith’s involvement include a wide swath of information about his role in the case. He was a key go-to for former FBI lawyer Lisa Page and fired FBI special agent Peter Strzok throughout the debunked collusion saga and a main driver in obtaining a FISA warrant against Page based on the infamous Steele dossier.

Clinesmith also granted his seal of approval on a document describing the FBI’s pretextual briefing of then-candidate Trump, was deeply involved in the investigation into retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, played a role in going after former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, and more. He also helped the FBI push its “Cross Wind” investigation, which Just the News can confirm related to the targeting of security expert Walid Phares, which resulted in no accusations of wrongdoing and no charges. Clinesmith confessed in August 2020 that he had manipulated a CIA email in 2017 to state that Carter Page was “not a source” for the CIA when that agency had actually told the bureau on multiple occasions that Page was in fact an “operational contact” for the CIA.

Boasberg, the federal judge who is blocking Trump’s efforts to deport Venezuelan gang members, also played a key and controversial role in the aftermath of the Trump-Russia collusion saga as the leader of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The judge, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by then-President Barack Obama in 2011, is currently engaged in an all-out legal battle with the Trump Justice Department. But in his role as the head of the FISA Court he made a number of divisive decisions, including a slap on the wrist for a member of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team, the appointment of officials who had defended the FBI’s actions during the Russiagate saga, the renewal of the FBI’s FISA powers, and more. Boasberg ruled this week that “probable cause exists” to hold Trump administration officials in criminal contempt after they violated his orders by continuing deportation flights. But his ruling follows the Supreme Court holding that Boasberg’s court was in an improper venue for the case altogether.

Boasberg, in his role as a federal judge, denied the Justice Department’s efforts to seek up to six months behind bars for Clinesmith, who pleaded guilty in Special Counsel John Durham’s Trump-Russia investigation — instead giving Clinesmith a year of probation, 400 hours of community service, and no fine. Durham argued that Clinesmith’s “deceptive conduct” related to the FISA application fabrication “was antithetical to the duty of candor and eroded the FISA’s confidence in the accuracy of all previous FISA applications worked on by the defendant,” and said his deception “fueled public distrust of the FBI and of the entire FISA program itself.” But Boasberg seemed to defend Clinesmith’s deceptive FISA-related actions during his January 2021 sentencing.

“Mr. Clinesmith likely believed that what he said was true,” Boasberg wrote, adding, “I do not believe he was attempting to achieve an end he knew was wrong.” The judge claimed that “it is not clear to me that the fourth FISA warrant would not have been signed but for this error. … Even if Mr. Clinesmith had been accurate about Mr. Page’s relationship with the other government agency, the warrant may well have been signed and the surveillance authorized.” Durham had argued that Clinesmith’s deception “fueled public distrust of the FBI and of the entire FISA program itself.” Anthony Scarpelli, then a top prosecutor on Durham’s team, also argued that “the defendant’s criminal conduct tarnished the integrity of the FISA program” and that “the resulting harm is immeasurable.”

Clinesmith told the court that “I am deeply remorseful for any effect my actions may have had” on the FISA process even as he claimed that “I never intended to mislead my colleagues about the status of Dr. Page.” But Boasberg lamented that Clinesmith had been “abused” and “vilified” on a “national scale” when the judge handed down his sentence, though he did acknowledge that the FISA court’s reputation “has suffered” from the ex-FBI attorney’s actions. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz in 2019 found huge flaws with the FBI’s Russia collusion investigation, finding at least 17 “significant errors and omissions” related to the FISA warrants against former Trump campaign associate Carter Page. He also criticized the “central and essential” role of British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s debunked dossier in the FBI’s politicized FISA surveillance. Clinesmith reportedly circulated the dossier to other law enforcement staff.

FBI notes of a January 2017 interview with Steele source Igor Danchenko showed he told the bureau he “did not know the origins” of some of Steele’s claims and “did not recall” other dossier information. Danchenko also noted much of what he gave to Steele was “word of mouth and hearsay,” some of which stemmed from a “conversation that [he] had with friends over beers,” and the most salacious allegations may have been made in “jest.” The special counsel assessed that “the FBI ignored the fact that at no time before, during, or after Crossfire Hurricane were investigators able to corroborate a single substantive allegation in the Steele dossier reporting.” The new revelations about Clinesmith come partly through further declassified text messages sent by Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and others involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

Read more …

“We keep watching….”

REPORT: President Trump Opposed Israeli Strikes on Iran Nuclear Sites (CTH)

The report comes as a result of leaks to the New York Times. Which, given the nature of the subject matter and administration officials involved, indicates the sourcing is from the domestic IC side of things. Specifically, the greatest likelihood is from someone in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) talking to media. Keep that in mind. According to leaked information to the New York Times, President Trump did not agree with an Israeli proposal to launch military strikes against Iran. According to the narrative as advanced, President Trump, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth were in agreement to attempt diplomatic solutions instead of bombing Iran. Israel could not conduct the attack without U.S. support, which President Trump decided not to give. Instead, Trump wanted a more forceful push toward engagement and diplomacy with Iran surrounding the ongoing contentious issue of nuclear development.

NEW YORK TIMES – “Israel had planned to strike Iranian nuclear sites as soon as next month but was waved off by President Trump in recent weeks in favor of negotiating a deal with Tehran to limit its nuclear program, according to administration officials and others briefed on the discussions. Mr. Trump made his decision after months of internal debate over whether to pursue diplomacy or support Israel in seeking to set back Iran’s ability to build a bomb, at a time when Iran has been weakened militarily and economically. The debate highlighted fault lines between historically hawkish American cabinet officials and other aides more skeptical that a military assault on Iran could destroy the country’s nuclear ambitions and avoid a larger war. It resulted in a rough consensus, for now, against military action, with Iran signaling a willingness to negotiate.

Israeli officials had recently developed plans to attack Iranian nuclear sites in May. They were prepared to carry them out, and at times were optimistic that the United States would sign off. The goal of the proposals, according to officials briefed on them, was to set back Tehran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon by a year or more. Almost all of the plans would have required U.S. help not just to defend Israel from Iranian retaliation, but also to ensure that an Israeli attack was successful, making the United States a central part of the attack itself. For now, Mr. Trump has chosen diplomacy over military action.”

This is where we need to insert the element that all media generally refuse to associate, Russia.” Iran has reengaged with officials from President Trump’s administration following a letter Trump wrote to the leadership in Iran. President Trump wants Mideast peace; he also wants to avoid the issue of Iran having a nuclear weapon. President Trump views military action as the last possible resort for failed diplomatic and geopolitical efforts. Israel wants to attack Iran. President Trump wants to support Israel but doesn’t want expanded military conflict that pulls the USA into more Mideast war. As we see in the continued issues within Ukraine, the CIA supports expanded conflict in both Ukraine and Iran. Israel and the CIA are in alignment. Hence, in our ongoing restaurant analogy, the CIA is the kitchen, and Israel has a table there. Russian President Vladimir Putin could be an influential geopolitical partner with President Trump, if Trump can get the issues of Ukraine and Russia solved and then pivot to Iran.

Unfortunately, the CIA does not want the issues within Ukraine solved, doesn’t want Trump and Putin coordinating and certainly doesn’t want Trump and Putin to work out a new strategic global map that does not contain useful conflict. Again, Israel and the CIA are in alignment. If President Trump builds a new bridge to Putin the bypass will significantly hurt traffic around the restaurant. The congressional zoning commission (House) is sympathetic to the long-term contract held by the chef, and the Israeli chamber of commerce are paying the county commissioners (senators) ‘indulgency fees’ to maintain the current ingress and egress. With the January change in shingle, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is now the maître d at the front of the house. Secretary Rubio is not using the menu options created by the kitchen team.

The kitchen is not happy (drones into Moscow). DNI Gabbard in place as the IC hostess, is trying to keep the restaurant operation seamless so the customers generally don’t notice. Unfortunately, the kitchen isn’t soundproof, and we can hear plates crashing (NYT leaks). Around the neighborhood, the locals are worried the kitchen staff might start spitting in their food if they are seen enjoying the new service and menu options. A few of the regulars have told the maître d and hostess about the rumors. The issue is being discussed as part of a pre-planned remodel. The interior architect (Trump) and interior designer (Musk) are proposing to remove the walls so the customers can see the kitchen operation as part of a new and modern decor, style and ambiance [transparency]. However, the guys who eat in the kitchen aren’t going to be happy if they are exposed to the riffraff and forced to eat at ordinary tables.

We keep watching….

Read more …

“Pam Bondi: Every American should be thanking Trump tonight..”

“..it was a stealth DOJ Lawfare operative who purposefully wrote in a court filing that Garcia’s deportation was a “mistake.”

Pam Bondi Outlines Timeline and History of MS13 Illegal Alien (CTH)

Not since the Sandra Fluke election operation have the intel democrats coordinated so heavily with their media allies to organize support for a random person within the political/social narrative space, as they have with Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Apparently, the controlled U.S. media and their leftist politicians in office are choosing to use Garcia as a 2026 midterm election cry, similar to 2020’s George Floyd. The professional democrat party, their social media warriors/foot soldiers and the aligned propaganda media are all-in to use Kilmar Abrego Garcia as the face of their politics.

Attempting to counter the false narratives that surround the deportation of Garcia, Attorney General Pam Bondi makes her 77th appearance on Fox News to push back. Sean Hannity provides the Fox venue du jour. The responsibility is accurately applied to Bondi’s effort, considering it was a stealth DOJ Lawfare operative who purposefully wrote in a court filing that Garcia’s deportation was a “mistake.” The failure of Main Justice to catch the Lawfare operation within their ranks, has triggered these media events.

Read more …

“Maine Democrats have doubled down on their far-left agenda, and now our students and families stand poised to lose hundreds of millions in federal funding..”

Maine claims that keeping guys out of girls’ private rooms is “politically motivated”. Huh?

Bondi Announces Lawsuit Against Maine Over Boys in Girls’ Sports (ET)

The Department of Justice is seeking a federal court injunction requiring Pine Tree State schools to immediately stop transgender boys from competing in girls’ sports and return all athletic records and titles to their rightful female owners. The federal agency will also consider retroactively pulling funding from school districts that have not complied with Title IX regulations in the past, Attorney General Pam Bondi said during an April 16 news conference in Washington. “Pretty basic stuff,” she said. “This is about women’s sports. This is also about young women’s personal safety.” Bondi was flanked by Education Secretary Linda McMahon and Maine Assemblywoman Laurel Libby, who was censured by her state’s Democrat-led state legislature for posting photos and the identity of a male transgender athlete from Greely High School who won an indoor track state pole vaulting title this year.

Maine high school athletes who competed against transgender males also appeared on stage, along with Riley Gaines, a former NCAA swimmer who brought this debate to the national stage after losing the championship to a transgender male who had competed in the men’s division until his senior year. Bondi said a Maine transgender male also won a cross-country state title last fall in the girls’ division and placed at state-level skiing competitions this past winter. “That took away a spot from young women in women’s sports,” Bondi said. “Shame on him.” Bondi did not disclose where this federal lawsuit was filed. In a separate court case related to the same debate, a judge ordered the federal government to unfreeze Department of Agriculture funding to schools.

President Donald Trump previously issued executive orders clarifying Title IX and prohibiting males from competing in women’s sports. The NCAA has already complied, and Republican House members are working on a bill to codify that regulation. Maine’s attorney general has already informed Bondi that his state has no intention of complying with the order. School district superintendents told their communities that until directed otherwise, they are expected to comply with state laws that are contrary to Trump’s executive order. Trump publicly sparred with Maine Gov. Janet Mills at a governor’s workshop on Capitol Hill in February, warning her that he would pull funding if she continued to defy his executive order. At the state level, the Greely High School community has shown public support for all transgender athletes, including their state champion pole vaulter, criticizing Trump and the NCAA for its compliance. But Libby has also received plenty of support via her social media presence and continues to state that most Mainers do not support men competing as women in their state.

“Maine Democrats have doubled down on their far-left agenda, and now our students and families stand poised to lose hundreds of millions in federal funding,” Libby said in a statement provided to The Epoch Times. “Their radical gender ideology is endangering the continued existence of women’s sports and penalizing Maine students against the will of Maine citizens.” Mills issued a statement after Bondi’s news conference, saying that Trump and the Department of Justice’s actions are politically motivated. “As I have said previously, this is not just about who can compete on the athletic field, this is about whether a President can force compliance with his will, without regard for the rule of law that governs our nation. I believe he cannot,” the governor said.

Read more …

They would simply rename a office and say they shut it down.

Rubio Shuts Down Censorship Program Biden Admin Claimed was Ended (Turley)

For years, I have written about the Global Engagement Center (GEC) in columns and my book, The Indispensable Right. It was one of the hubs of the censorship network under the Biden Administration, which claimed it was shut down after Congress cut off funding. However, Secretary of State Marco Rubio just announced that he has terminated the office, which was operating under a different name (a familiar tactic by the anti-free speech movement). Secretary Rubio announced the closure of the State Department’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference office, which was previously known as the Global Engagement Center (GEC): “Over the last decade, Americans have been slandered, fired, charged, and even jailed for simply voicing their opinions. That ends today…

When Republicans in Congress sunset GEC’s funding at the end of last year, the Biden State Department slapped on a new name. The GEC became the Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (R-FIMI) office, with the same roster of employees. With this new name, they hoped to survive the transition to the new administration. Today, we are putting that to an end. Whatever name it goes by, GEC is dead. It will not return.” Bravo, Mr. Secretary, Bravo. We previously saw this dishonest practice in the Biden Administration when they claimed to shut down a censorship office only to shift work to other offices.

As we celebrated the demise of the infamous Disinformation Governing Board, the Biden administration never disclosed a larger censorship effort. That includes a recently disclosed back channel to Twitter where dozens of FBI agents tagged citizens for censorship. I have testified on that evidence of evasion and censorship. The new move will remove 50 full-time staff positions at the Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference office. Rubio discussed his decision in an op-ed for The Federalist. The GEC was part of the Election Integrity Partnership, which we have also discussed as a consortium of nonprofits, social media platforms, and government agencies that were key to the censorship system.

The Biden Administration created censorship offices throughout the government while sending massive amounts of federal funding to groups and universities to help target individuals and groups.Rooting out these offices and grants will take a prolonged effort, but great progress has already occurred under the Trump Administration. Of course, this will add to the ranks of censorious Ronins looking for new sponsors. Many will find homes in academia and in Europe. Yet, there is reason to take heart even as we fight to regain the ground lost under Biden. As Winston Churchill said in 1942, “This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

Read more …

A Chihuahua rules the waves…

A Chihuahua That Thinks It’s A Lion: The Decline of Britain (Bordachev)

There are only two countries in the world that have exercised full autonomy over major political decisions for more than 500 years: Russia and Britain. No others come close. That alone makes Moscow and London natural rivals. But now, we can say with confidence that our historical adversary is no longer what it once was. Britain is losing its foreign policy clout and has been reduced to what we might call “Singapore on the Atlantic”: an island trading power, out of sync with the broader trajectory of world affairs. The fall from global relevance is not without irony. For centuries, Britain caused nothing but harm to the international system. It played France and Germany off one another, betrayed its own allies in Eastern Europe, and exploited its colonies to exhaustion. Even within the European Union, from 1972 until Brexit in 2020, the UK worked tirelessly to undermine the project of integration – first from within, and now from without, with backing from Washington.

Today, the British foreign policy establishment still attempts to sabotage European cohesion, acting as an American proxy. The late historian Edward Carr once mocked the British worldview with a fictional headline: “Fog in Channel – Continent Cut Off.” This egoism, common to island nations, is especially pronounced in Britain, which has always existed beside continental civilization. It borrowed freely from Europe’s culture and political ideas, yet always feared them. That fear was not unfounded. Britain has long understood that true unification of Europe – especially involving Germany and Russia – would leave it sidelined. Thus, the primary goal of British policy has always been to prevent cooperation between the major continental powers. Even now, no country is more eager than Britain to see the militarization of Germany. The idea of a stable Russia-Germany alliance has always been a nightmare scenario for London.

Whenever peace between Moscow and Berlin looked possible, Britain would intervene to sabotage it. The British approach to international relations mirrors its domestic political thought: atomized, competitive, distrustful of solidarity. While continental Europe produced theories of political community and mutual obligation, Britain gave the world Thomas Hobbes and his “Leviathan,” a grim vision of life without justice between the state and its citizens. That same combative logic extends to foreign policy. Britain doesn’t cooperate; it divides. It has always preferred enmity among others over engagement with them. But the tools of that strategy are disappearing. Britain today is a power in steep decline, reduced to shouting from the sidelines. Its internal political life is a carousel of increasingly unqualified prime ministers. This is not simply a result of difficult times. It reflects a deeper problem: the absence of serious political leadership in London.

Even the United States, Britain’s closest ally, is now a threat to its autonomy. The Anglosphere no longer needs two powers that speak English and operate under the same oligarchic political order. For a time, Britain found comfort in the Biden administration, which tolerated its role as transatlantic intermediary. London leveraged its anti-Russian stance to stay relevant and inserted itself into US-EU relations. But that space is narrowing. Today’s American leaders are uninterested in mediators. During a recent trip to Washington, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer could barely answer direct questions on foreign policy. His deference reflected a new reality: even the illusion of independence is fading. Meanwhile, France’s Emmanuel Macron, for all his posturing, at least leads a country that actually controls its nuclear arsenal.

Britain claims to have authority over its nuclear submarines, but many doubt it. In ten years, experts believe it may lose even the technical capacity to manage its nuclear weapons without US support. At that point, London will face a choice: full subservience to Washington or exposure to EU pressures, especially from France. Recent talk in London of sending “European peacekeepers” to Ukraine is a case in point. Despite the unrealistic nature of such proposals, British and French officials spent weeks debating operational details. Some reports suggest the plan stalled due to lack of funds. The real motive was likely to project relevance and show the world that Britain still has a role to play. But neither the media spin nor the political theater can change the facts. Britain’s global standing has diminished. It is no longer capable of independent action and has little influence even as a junior partner. Its leaders are consumed by domestic dysfunction and foreign policy fantasy.

In practical terms, Britain remains dangerous to Russia in two ways. First, by supplying weapons and mercenaries to Ukraine, it increases our costs and casualties. Second, in a moment of desperation, it might try to manufacture a small nuclear crisis. If that happens, one hopes the Americans would take the necessary steps to neutralize the threat – even if that means sinking a British submarine.There is nothing positive for Russia, or the world, in the continued existence of Britain as a foreign policy actor. Its legacy is one of division, sabotage, and imperial plunder. Now, it lives off the crumbs of a bygone empire, barking from the Atlantic like a chihuahua with memories of being a lion. The world moves on. Britain does not.

Read more …

Trump will have tariffs for that.

China Replacing US Oil With Canadian – Bloomberg (RT)

China has been importing record amounts of crude oil from Canada and drastically reducing supplies from the US in light of the trade war with Washington, Bloomberg reported on Wednesday. Washington and Beijing have implemented a series of reciprocal tariff hikes over the past two months in light of which the latter has slashed purchases of US oil by roughly 90%, according to the outlet. China previously indicated that it would not implement more tariff hikes against US goods but would rather employ alternative ways to retaliate. Chinese crude imports from a port near Vancouver on Canada’s Pacific coast soared to a record 7.3 million barrels in March and may exceed the figure this month, Bloomberg reported, citing data from London-based global oil and gas cargo tracking firm Vortexa Ltd.

Chinese imports of US oil, meanwhile, have fallen to 3 million barrels per month from a peak of 29 million last June, it added. China’s direct imports of Canadian crude oil had historically been minimal, primarily due to infrastructure constraints. Chinese refineries have mainly sourced crude from the Middle East and Russia. Roughly 1.7% of China’s total crude imports came from the US last year, according to Chinese customs data, down from 2.5% in 2023. Nearly all of Canada’s oil is shipped to the US to be processed there or re-exported to Asia. However, the completion last May of the Trans Mountain Expansion pipeline, which takes crude to Canada’s Pacific coast, provided the country with an alternative route to export more volumes directly, primarily to Asia, thus reducing its reliance on the US.

“Given the trade war, it’s unlikely for China to import more US oil,” Bloomberg quoted Wenran Jiang, president of the Canada-China Energy & Environment Forum, as saying. “They are not going to bank on Russian alone or Middle Eastern alone. Anything from Canada will be welcome news.” China accounted for roughly 5% of US crude oil exports last year, according to ship-tracking data from Kpler. Russia remains China’s largest supplier of crude oil. Russian shipments to China reached the highest level on record in 2024. The increase in recent years is largely attributable to the discounts being offered on Russian crude. China’s imports of oil from Saudi Arabia, its second-largest supplier, declined by 9% year-on-year in 2024.

Read more …

EU will buy US LNG. Lots of it.

Trump Tariffs Could Cost EU $1.25 Trillion (RT)

A trade war with the US could cost the EU up to €1.1 trillion ($1.25 trillion) over the next four years if Donald Trump proceeds with proposed tariffs, according to a study by the German Economic Institute (IW). Earlier this month, the Trump administration announced a sweeping 20% tariff on all EU goods and a 25% tariff on all car imports in a bid to eliminate what Washington sees as a large trade deficit with the bloc. Brussels was set to introduce 25% retaliatory tariffs on US imports before Trump announced a 90-day pause on most tariffs to allow for negotiations. If an agreement is not reached and US tariffs are imposed, the EU’s cumulative costs are estimated to range between €780 billion ($886.5 billion) and €1.1 trillion ($1.25 trillion) from 2025 to 2028, depending on the scenario, the study released on Thursday said.

The institute also projects that Germany’s GDP could slump by 1.2% annually during the same period under tariffs. If trading partners respond with similar measures, the costs for Berlin could rise to 1.6%, according to the report. Germany’s economy, already facing challenges, is expected to grow by only 0.1% in 2025 after two consecutive years of contraction. The IW forecasts a total economic output loss of €180 billion (around $205 billion) by 2028 for Germany, primarily due to export losses and declining investments. The US was Germany’s largest trading partner in 2024, with bilateral trade totaling €253 billion ($287.5 billion). A trade conflict could significantly impact key sectors, including automotive and pharmaceuticals, experts have warned.

The IW also pointed out that although the tariffs have been suspended for 90 days, uncertainty remains high, hitting global investment planning.European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen earlier proposed a “zero-for-zero” tariff agreement to eliminate duties on industrial goods between the EU and the US. However, Trump rejected the offer, stating it was insufficient and demanded that the EU commit to purchasing $350 billion worth of American energy to receive tariff relief. Trump has criticized the EU’s trade practices, asserting that the bloc is “very bad to us” and highlighting the US trade deficit as justification for his stance. Officials from Washington and Brussels met for trade talks earlier this week, but made little headway in resolving their differences. US officials signaled that most tariffs on EU goods are likely to remain in place, according to Bloomberg.

Read more …

“The current iteration of traditional German the-Russians-are-coming..”

German Anti-Russia Propaganda Is Reaching Nazi-era Levels (Amar)

Like people almost everywhere in NATO-EU Europe, Germans are currently being subjected to a relentless barrage of shameless, often astonishingly crude propaganda. That’s because their political elites and mainstream media are desperately trying to prepare them for war against Russia. And this time, not by proxy, that is, by way of a devastated Ukraine and dead Ukrainians, but directly. As a former, very evil but in his prime all-too-popular German master of mass manipulation – who also happened to love war with Russia more than was good for him (or Germany) – explained a century ago, effective propaganda keeps the world very, very simple. Or, to add a little detail, propaganda’s sometimes literally stunning success is built on two primitive yet powerful – and very old – tricks: the broken-record principle and the litany effect.

Their meaning, too, is elementary: In essence, if your image of reality is delusional, you don’t have sound arguments, and your case is absurd, do not despair. Instead, ceaselessly drum in a few very basic and bogus ideas until the audience is dizzy with repetition (the broken-record principle), while also eliciting frequent consent from it (the litany effect). In short: Keep shouting the same nonsense at them and make them bleat back “yes” regularly. You know, like a ritual, really. In the case of the manufacturing of the current iteration of traditional German the-Russians-are-coming hysteria as well, it is easy to identify its handful of specious, daft, and childishly simplistic key motifs: Russia and Russia alone is to blame for the war in Ukraine; Russia intends to attack Europe (if not the world) – and soon; and Russia is incredibly devious and scheming, so you cannot find a reasonable compromise with it.

Yet what about the nuts and bolts of this propaganda campaign? Even a simple story needs detail, and, if told and retold almost without letup, that detail at least needs to vary: Same old story but different flavor. That’s where things get tricky. For one thing, if you pick the wrong flavor, your propaganda may start looking as silly as it actually is. A current example in Germany – as well as the EU parliament – would be the recent hysteria over the global hit Sigma Boy from Russia. Its brilliantly catchy tune is a piece of art, like it or not. But its lyrics are about as profound as a margarine commercial.

Yet that won’t stop Germany’s radical-Centrist elite from exploring the song’s ominous depths as a weapon of nefarious Russian cultural warfare. Because Sigma Boy, one EU parliamentarian from Hamburg has noticed – with a little help from Ukraine – is really “a viral Russian trope used on social media that communicates patriarchal and pro-Russian worldviews” as well as “only one example of Russian infiltration of popular discourse through social media.” Also, you see, Sigma Boy is really just code for – scary sound effect – PUTIN!

Read more …

Google is huge, it has many branches and companies, spends a fortune. Still, 77.4% of its revenue came from online ads in 2023. Break it up fast. It’s a threat to a million small companies.

Court Rules Google Illegally Holds “Monopoly Power” In Online Ad Tech (ZH)

A U.S. federal court ruled that Google had illegally monopolized key digital advertising markets, including publisher ad servers, ad exchanges, and advertiser ad networks. This ruling could deal a major blow to Google’s core business pillar: advertising revenue (advertising accounted for about 77.4% of Google’s total revenue in 2023). U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema found on Thursday morning that Google had violated antitrust law by “willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power in the open-web display publisher ad server market and the open-web display ad exchange market.”

Here are the key findings in the landmark antitrust case (U.S. v. Google, 23-cv-00108, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria):
Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power in:
• The open-web display publisher ad server market, and
• The open-web display ad exchange market Google also violated Sections 1 and 2 by unlawfully tying its publisher ad server (DoubleClick for Publishers/DFP) to its ad exchange (AdX). The court did not find that

Google held monopoly power in the third alleged market: advertiser ad networks.
Legal and Procedural Notes:
• The DOJ and 17 states originally brought the suit, accusing Google of monopolizing three key ad tech markets.
• Google had earlier tried to dismiss the case and transfer it to New York but failed.
• The court conducted a three-week bench trial and reviewed extensive expert testimony and evidence.

This case is one of several antitrust actions pending against Google. In a separate lawsuit, the Justice Department seeks to force Alphabet to divest its Chrome browser following a landmark ruling that found the company had monopolized the online search market. “Google will be drastically reshaped by court decrees in the next year or two,” The Information said, adding, “Google will likely be forced, as a result of today’s decision, to dismantle much of its ad tech business which dominates both how advertisers buy ads on independent websites, and how web publishers sell their ad space.”

Here are the next steps for Google, and it appears the court will be deciding on potential remedies:
• Google was found liable on Counts I, II, and IV, violating Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. Count III was dismissed.
• The court will set a schedule for briefing and hearings to determine remedies, potentially including divestiture of DFP and AdX, injunctions against anticompetitive practices, and other measures to restore competition.
• The ruling highlights Google’s decade-long strategy of tying products and imposing exclusionary policies to maintain dominance in digital advertising, harming publishers, competition, and consumers.

Market response: Alphabet shares fell as much as 3.2% after the ruling. Competitor The Trade Desk’s stock jumped nearly 8%, reflecting investor optimism about improved competition in the ad tech space.

Read more …

He put the whistleblowers in charge.

Trump to Make an Epic Move at the IRS (Margolis)

Tax Day was Tuesday, and it goes without saying that we’d all love to see the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disappear into the dustbin of history. But just as it is certain that we’re all going to die, we’re going to have to pay taxes. There have been some welcome changes at the IRS. As PJ Media previously reported, the IRS is now sharing illegal aliens’ tax information with ICE to help facilitate deportations. Trump has been pushing to turn every federal agency into an effective tool for catching and deporting illegal immigrants. And wouldn’t you know it, acting IRS Commissioner Melanie Krause couldn’t handle doing the right thing and resigned. And guess who’s likely to take her place? Gary Shapley, the IRS whistleblower who blew the lid off the Hunter Biden tax probe. He testified under oath that he faced retaliation simply for doing his job and cooperating with congressional investigators looking into the shady business dealings of the president’s son.

Now, according to the Associated Press, Shapley is expected to be promoted to acting commissioner of the IRS. Shapley and fellow IRS investigator Joseph Ziegler were sidelined from the Hunter Biden probe in December 2022 after raising serious concerns with their superiors. According to their testimony, the Justice Department under then-U.S. Attorney David Weiss repeatedly “slow-walked investigative steps” and stalled enforcement actions in the critical months leading up to the 2020 election. The saga over Hunter Biden’s taxes ended when Joe Biden gave Hunter a blanket pardon for any and all crimes he may have committed for a nearly ten-year period. Hunter had been facing trial in California for failing to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes but abruptly agreed to plead guilty just as jury selection was about to begin.

Despite that unfortunate ending to the story, the promotion of Shapley is welcome news. It’s a classic Trump-style move — putting truth-tellers in positions of power and pushing out the bureaucrats who’ve been protecting the swamp. In March, Shapley was promoted to Deputy Chief of IRS Criminal Investigations, and another IRS investigator who testified about Biden’s taxes, Joseph Ziegler, was assigned to the Treasury Secretary’s office as a senior adviser for IRS reform. Now, the tax collection agency is planning to name Shapley to one of the highest-ranking roles at the agency — in an interim role — as former Missouri congressman Billy Long awaits a confirmation hearing to lead the agency permanently, the people say. They were not authorized to speak publicly about the plan.

President Donald Trump nominated Long, who worked as an auctioneer before serving six terms in the House of Representatives, to serve as the next commissioner of the IRS. “Gary is a long-tenured civil servant who has dedicated the last 15 years of his professional life to the IRS,” a Treasury spokesperson told the Associated Press. “Gary has proven his honesty and devotion to enforcing the law without fear or favor, even at great cost to his own career. He’ll be a great asset to the IRS as we rethink and reform this crucial organization.” Shapley may only serve temporarily, but you can’t ignore the symbolism behind the move.

Read more …

“The era of global boiling has arrived!”

Climate Myths (John Stossel)

I guess United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres didn’t think his hyping global warming risks brought him enough attention, so now he says, “The era of global boiling has arrived!” Global boiling? Give me a break. Yes, the climate is warming. We can deal with that. What annoys me is politicians, activists and media pushing hysterical myths.

Myth 1: The Arctic will soon be ice-free. It “could already be ice-free by the summer of 2030!” shrieks a DW report. “‘Doomsday Glacier’ is melting faster than scientists thought,” adds the BBC. “Earth’s biggest cities are at risk!” Nonsense. “It’s not happening at nearly the catastrophic pace that they claim,” says Heartland Institute fellow Linnea Lueken in my new video. But the media show dramatic images of melting and missing ice. “No ice! There’s all these walruses laying out on a stony beach. … It’s because it’s the summertime! In the winter, it all comes right back!”

As far as ice disappearing in winter, too, “Compared to the amount of ice that’s in the Arctic,” says Lueken, it “is like a grain of sand … so minuscule compared to the amount of ice that’s there, it doesn’t even show up on a trend chart when you plot it.” But zealots push hysteria. In 2009, Al Gore, while collecting a Nobel prize, said there was “a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap … during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years!” In just five to seven years! Oh, no! Wait … seven years have passed. In fact, 16 years passed. The ice cap has plenty of ice, even in summer. Yet nobody calls him on it. “They absolutely should be calling him on it,” says Lueken.

Myth 2: Polar bears are going extinct. Polar bears look cute, so environmental groups use them in ads to sucker you into donating money. But Polar bear populations have increased! In the 1960s, 17,000-19,000 was the highest of three scientific estimates of polar bear population. Today, there are about 26,000 polar bears. Yet the Environmental Defense Fund collected almost a quarter-billion dollars from gullible donors running ads that say: “Your support can help Environmental Defense Fund save the polar bears!” The EDF hasn’t agreed to my interview requests. I understand why. I would call their advertising sleazy. “Absolutely,” agrees Lueken, “the data is right there. It’s not hard to find out that polar bears are fine.” OK, maybe polar bears aren’t going extinct, but we might starve!

That’s Myth 3. MSNBC shrieks, “Climate change could create a massive global food shortage.” President Barack Obama said, “Our changing climate is already making it more difficult to produce food!” “There is no claim less true.” sighs Lueken. “Food production has skyrocketed.” She’s right, and the data is there for everyone to see. Agriculture output sets record highs year after year. In fact, the extra carbon dioxide in greenhouse gasses probably increases food production. “We inject CO2 into greenhouses for a reason,” Lueken points out. “It helps to fertilize plants for faster and better growth.” As the climate has warmed, the world experienced the biggest drop in hunger and malnutrition ever.

Still, when food prices rise, media idiots still blame climate change. The New York Times claimed “devastation that climate change had wrought” caused a rise in coffee prices.But global coffee production has increased by 82% since the 1990s.The Times story focused on a brief decline in coffee production in Honduras. But since the ’90s, coffee production there rose more than 200%. “They never apologize,” I note. “They never say, ‘Oh, we got this wrong.'” “No,” replies Lueken. “Even if they did have a retraction, the damage is already done.” Alarmist media and environmental groups never apologize. When doom doesn’t happen, they just move on to the next scare. I’ll cover four more myths about climate change next week..

Read more …

 

 

 

 

IVM

 

 

Alarma

 

 

K2-18b

 

 

Cartoon

 

 

Egret

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 172025
 


Piet Mondriaan Trafalgar Square 1939-43

 

What Is a Woman? The UK Supreme Court Knows the Answer (Margolis)
Trump Shot Down Israel’s Plan To Attack Iran – NYT (RT)
New York AG Letitia James Accused of Alleged Mortgage Fraud (Turley)
Judge to Trump Administration: I Feel Unfacilitated (Turley)
Judge Boasberg Floats ‘Criminal Contempt’ Against Trump Admin (ZH)
Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panel Over Gang Member’s Deportation (PJM)
OpenAI Planning To Take On Musk’s X (RT)
Trump Is Right to Hammer Environmental Lawfare (DS)
What Can We Expect from the Peace Negotiations? (Paul Craig Roberts)
‘Stop Blackmailing’ – China to US (RT)
US To Restrict China’s Access in Exchange for Fewer Tariffs on Allies (Sp.)
US To Tie Tariff Deals To China Curbs – WSJ (RT)
Dutch MPs Call For Ban On Amplified Islamic Calls To Prayer (RMX)
Belgium Eyes Welfare Cuts To Meet NATO Target (RT)
Trump Confronts Economic and Geopolitical Reality (Ring)

 

 


Longhorn beetle’s face.

 

 

Genetics

Hero

AI

CCP

Macleod

Bukele taxes
https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1912335542806802689

Flynn

Tucker Bernier

 

 

 

 

From a bit of an unexpected corner, but we’ll take it. A man’s no. 1 duty is to protect women, and that was not happening.

What Is a Woman? The UK Supreme Court Knows the Answer (Margolis)

The U.K. Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling Wednesday that affirmed that the legal definition of “woman” refers specifically to those born biologically female, excluding biological men who “identify” as women from that category. The decision marks a major course correction after years of gender ideology sweeping Europe. The AP reports: “Several women’s groups that supported the appeal celebrated outside court and hailed it as a major victory in their effort to protect spaces designated for women. “Everyone knows what sex is and you can’t change it,” said Susan Smith, co-director of For Women Scotland, which brought the case. “It’s common sense, basic common sense and the fact that we have been down a rabbit hole where people have tried to deny science and to deny reality and hopefully this will now see us back to, back to reality.” The ruling brings some clarity in the U.K. to a controversial issue that has roiled politics as women, parents, LGBTQ+ groups, lawmakers and athletes have debated gender identity rights.”

This wasn’t some razor-thin ruling divided on ideological grounds. The UK Supreme Court ruled unanimously, with all five judges in agreement: under the Equality Act, biological men can be lawfully excluded from women-only spaces and services even if they “identify” as women. That includes places like changing rooms, female-only shelters, swimming areas, and women-centered medical or counseling services. The court made it explicit that even a transgender person holding a certificate legally recognizing them as female does not qualify as a “woman” under equality law. As far as I know, none of the judges on the UK Supreme Court are biologists, yet they were able to answer the question “What is a woman?” when Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson couldn’t do the same when asked during her confirmation hearings.

The case stems from a 2018 law passed by the Scottish Parliament stating there should be a 50% female representation on the boards of Scottish public bodies. Transgender women with gender recognition certificates were to be included in meeting the quota. “Interpreting ‘sex’ as certificated sex would cut across the definitions of ‘man’ and ‘woman’ … and, thus, the protected characteristic of sex in an incoherent way,” Hodge said. “It would create heterogeneous groupings.” Hannah Ford, an employment lawyer, said that while the judgment will provide clarity, it would be a setback for transgender rights and there would be “an uphill battle” to ensure workplaces are welcoming places for trans people. “This will be really wounding for the trans community,” Ford told Sky News. Groups that had challenged the Scottish government popped the cork on a bottle of champagne outside the court and sang, “women’s rights are human rights.”

The UK Supreme Court’s landmark ruling defining women based on biological sex isn’t just a victory for common sense; it’s a desperately needed course correction following years of radical gender ideology being legitimized worldwide. Thankfully, President Donald Trump has been fighting to bring this return to sanity to America, despite relentless opposition from radical leftists and activist judges who seem determined to deny basic biological reality.

Read more …

Looks like a narrow escape. Bombing Iran is sheer stupidity. A country that has always said it doesn’t want nukes, for religious reasons. Good to see multiple cabinet members get input.

Trump Shot Down Israel’s Plan To Attack Iran – NYT (RT)

US President Donald Trump has rejected Israel’s proposal to strike Iran’s nuclear sites, The New York Times reported on Wednesday evening, citing White House officials and others familiar with the matter. Trump reportedly chose instead to pursue a new deal with Tehran.According to the Times, Israel had drafted plans to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities in early May, aiming to delay its ability to develop a nuclear weapon by a year or more. After considering a combination of airstrikes and commando raids, the Jewish state reportedly proposed “an extensive bombing campaign” that would have lasted more than a week. Israeli officials had hoped that the US would not only greenlight the operation but also actively support it.

Trump, however, shot down the plan earlier this month, following a “rough consensus” in the White House. Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard were among the top administration members who reportedly raised concerns that the strikes would “spark a wider conflict with Iran.” Iran and Israel exchanged strikes in April and October of last year, marking the most dramatic escalation between the regional arch-rivals.

Trump tore up the 2015 UN-backed agreement on Iran’s nuclear program during his first term in office. The president accused Tehran of secretly violating the deal and reimposed sanctions. Iran responded by rolling back its own compliance with the accord and accelerating its enrichment of uranium. Last month, Trump threatened to bomb Iran “if they don’t make a deal,” to which the Islamic Republic vowed not to bow to pressure. Despite the belligerent rhetoric, the US and Iran held a first round of talks in Oman on Saturday. The negotiations took place in a “productive, calm and positive atmosphere,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1912670170977382901

Read more …

She deserves it.

New York AG Letitia James Accused of Alleged Mortgage Fraud (Turley)

“No matter how big, rich or powerful you think you are, no one is above the law.” Those words by New York state Attorney General Letitia James echoed throughout the media, lionizing her after her office secured a judgment against Donald Trump for false business practices, including misrepresentations on loan documents. They may echo even louder this week as James finds herself the subject of a criminal referral for committing alleged financial fraud to secure her own property loans. On April 14, William J. Pulte, Director of US Federal Housing (FHFA), sent a referral letter to the Justice Department detailing alleged false statements made in filings by James to secure housing loans. For an attorney general who just prosecuted Trump for everything short of ripping a label off a mattress, the irony is crushing.

The alleged false statements are particularly damning for someone who insisted that she had zero tolerance for such irregularities or errors in financial filings. Indeed, the greatest danger is that the Letitia James standard could be applied to Letitia James in guaranteeing that “no one is above the law.” The allegations against James run from the demonstrably false to the downright bizarre. In securing a loan for a home in Norfolk, Va., James is accused of claiming through her representative that the property would be her principal residence. As the referral notes, primary residences receive more advantageous rates. However, as “the sitting New York Attorney General of New York [James] is required by law to have her primary residence in the state of New York.” Notably, the Justice Department has prosecuted those who have committed this common fraud.

For example, in 2017, it charged a man in Puerto Rico with false statements on a reverse mortgage loan application in which he falsely claimed the property as his principal residence. It emphasized that “mortgage lenders provide capital so people can purchase homes, not enrich themselves illegally.” There are other such cases under 18 U.S.C. 1014 and related laws. James could claim that these representations were made by a third party acting on her behalf. However, that is precisely the argument that she repeatedly rejected in the Trump case, insisting that he was legally obligated to review all filings made in his name or that of his companies. James is also accused of misrepresenting a five-unit property in Brooklyn as a four-unit property “to receive better interest rates … and to receive mortgage assistance through [the Home Affordable Modification Program].”

The referral also includes a claim that James filed papers that listed herself and her father as a married couple. The referral notes that just last year, Baltimore’s State Attorney, Marilyn Mosby, was convicted by the Biden administration of filing a false mortgage application. Another case resulted in a guilty plea last week for fraudulent filings in a home loan. The timing for James could not be worse. The Trump civil case has languished on appeal for months with a long overdue opinion. The appellate argument did not go well for James in the case that resulted in a grotesque half-billion-dollar fine in a case where no one lost a dime. James accused Trump of inflating property value in filings, a common practice in the real estate field. It did not matter that the company warned banks to do their own evaluations. It did not matter that bank officials testified that they made money on the deal. Indeed, the “victim” wanted more business from Trump. None of that matters.

James not only demanded an even greater fine but wanted to foreclose on Trump properties after Trump was told to secure a ridiculous $455 million bond to simply secure appellate review. Throughout that case, James repeated her mantra that there would be no exceptions for the rich and powerful. She insisted that accuracy on such financial records is essential and must be rigorously enforced. Many of us objected that James was selectively targeting Trump after she ran for office on the pledge to nail him on some unspecified offense.

James insisted that this was not lawfare and that she would prosecute anyone guilty of false or misleading statements on financial filings. She is now allegedly that person. It is not clear what James’ defense will be to these allegations. However, she may cite the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Thompson v. United States, which ruled in March that 18 U.S.C. § 1014 does not criminalize statements that are merely misleading but are not false. The problem is that, if proven, these statements are not misleading. They are false.

Read more …

Two separate judges are on the MS-13 case.

Judge to Trump Administration: I Feel Unfacilitated (Turley)

After the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, I wrote a column disagreeing with the media coverage that claimed that the Trump Administration was ordered to return Garcia to the United States from El Salvador. The Administration mistakingly sent Garcia to a foreign prison. However, the Court only ordered that the Administration “facilitate” such a return, a term it failed to define. Now, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis is indicating that she feels unfacilitated, but it is unclear how a court should address this curious writ of facilitation. After the ruling, many on the left claimed “Supreme Court in a unanimous decision: He has a legal right to be here, and you have to bring him back.” The Court actually warned that the district court could order the government to facilitate but not necessarily “to effectuate” the return.

“The application is granted in part and denied in part, subject to the direction of this order. Due to the administrative stay issued by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, the deadline imposed by the District Court has now passed. To that extent, the Government’s emergency application is effectively granted in part and the deadline in the challenged order is no longer effective. The rest of the District Court’s order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand. The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term “effectuate” in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs. For its part, the Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated.”

So what does that mean? As I asked in the column, “what if the Trump Administration says that inquiries were made, but the matter has proven intractable or unresolvable? Crickets.” The Administration has made clear that it views the orders as meaning that, if El Salvador brings Garcia to its doorstep, it must open the door. The court clearly has a different interpretation. Judge Xinis said yesterday, “I’ve gotten nothing. I’ve gotten no real response, and no real legal justification for not answering,” she continued, adding that if the administration is not going to answer her questions “then justify why. That’s what we do in this house.” There is nothing worse than a feeling of being unfacilitated, but how does the court measure good faith facilitation? Garcia is an El Salvadorian citizen in an El Salvadorian prison. The refusal of El Salvador to send the accused MS-13 gang member back effectively ends the question on any return.

Many of us suspect that El Salvador would send back Garcia if asked, but how can a court measure the effort of an Administration in communications with a foreign country? Judge Xinis is suggesting that she will be holding someone in contempt. However, this is a discussion occurring at the highest level. Would a formal request be enough? Is Judge Xinis suggesting that the court can require punitive or coercive measures against a foreign country to facilitate a change in its position? The fact is that a unanimous decision of the Court is not hard when no one can say conclusively what the order means. If Judge Xinis is going to move ahead with new orders, it will find its way back to the Supreme Court.

The Court clearly (and correctly) held that Garcia deserves due process and that this removal was a mistake. As I have previously stated, the Administration should have brought him back for proper deportation. I still believe that. However, the Court also held that the President’s Article II authority over foreign policy has to weigh heavily in such questions. As the court goes down this road, it can quickly get bogged down in subjective judgments on what constitutes facilitation. That is the can kicked down the road by the Supreme Court and it is now likely to come rattling back to the justices.

Read more …

The de facto ruler of America.

Judge Boasberg Floats ‘Criminal Contempt’ Against Trump Admin (ZH)

US District Judge James Boasberg ruled Wednesday that “probable cause exists” to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt for ignoring oral instructions to turn a plane full of alleged Venezuelan gang members around mid-flight, despite the US Supreme Court determining that Boasberg’s court was an improper venue for the case altogether – and vacating two of his temporary restraining orders related to the case. “The Court ultimately determines that the Government’s actions on that day demonstrate a willful disregard for its Order, sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt,” Boasberg wrote in a “46-page rant” (as Julie Kelly puts it). “The Court does not reach such conclusion lightly or hastily; indeed, it has given Defendants ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions,” Boasberg continues. “None of their responses has been satisfactory.” Oh, and if the DOJ won’t prosecute the Trump admin’s alleged contempt, “the Court will “appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.””

https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1912553159269949783?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1912553159269949783%7Ctwgr%5Ea3688f29ee12125fd4b2930b336905f62a939345%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fpresident-jeb-boasberg-floats-criminal-contempt-against-trump-admin-over-deportations

That said, the Supreme Court is partially to blame here over their refusal to draw clear boundaries for District court judges… Which has created a complete shit-show…

Read more …

“There’s no version of this man’s life where he comes back.”

Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panel Over Gang Member’s Deportation (PJM)

CNN’s Scott Jennings was having none of the hand-wringing on Monday’s panel discussion over the Trump administration’s handling of the deportation of MS-13 gang member Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia — the latest cause célèbre of the radical left. While the liberals on the panel tiptoed around legal technicalities and rhetorical posturing, Jennings delivered a blunt reality check that left the rest of the table scrambling. Anchor Abby Phillip tried to tee up criticism of Trump by focusing on “the optics” of sending “Americans” to El Salvador — even though Abrego Garcia is an illegal immigrant. But Jennings wasn’t distracted. “Yes. He said they were studying the laws. I mean, there wasn’t any definitive statement,” he clarified, before cutting right to the core of the debate: “I think you guys need to understand, for the Trump administration, there’s no version of this man’s life that ends up with him living in the United States.”

Jennings laid out the Trump administration’s reasoning without flinching: “He’s an illegal alien from El Salvador who came to the country illegally, who has a deportation order, who, in their view and in the view of some immigration courts, has an affiliation with MS-13.” Phillip tried to interject by claiming that Garcia’s affiliation with MS-13 isn’t definitive because Abrego Garcia “strongly disputes in court.” Well, I guess that settles it, right? “I’m telling you that their view of it is that… it’s an El Salvador citizen who was sent back to El Salvador, who was in the country illegally,” Jennings reiterated. “According to some people in his long process… he has an existing deportation order, [and they] believe he has an affiliation with MS-13.” Then Jennings repeated his knockout point: “There’s no version of this man’s life where he comes back.”

As the panel continued to push the narrative of unjust exile, Jennings laid out the consequences if Abrego Garcia is returned. “If the president of El Salvador releases him and we do facilitate his return, when he lands in this country, one of two things will happen,” Jennings explained. “He’ll either be arrested… or sent to another country that I promise you you don’t want to go to. He’s not going to be allowed to come back and live in this country as though he is a U.S. citizen.” Harvard Law’s Jay Michaelson jumped in with the melodramatic accusation, “That’s literally the definition of tyranny, right?” Umm, no? What are they teaching at Harvard Law these days? Seriously.

Michaelson continued, “So, here’s what’s going to happen: We’re going to throw him in jail. No, there’s a thing called the rule of law and due process, which has not been followed in this case. And if I have a slightly optimistic take on this; I actually think this is going to come back to bite the Trump administration. Because what’s going to happen is the next time this goes up the court system, they have absolutely zero credibility to say, Don’t worry, you can file a habeas petition. You can get your person back.” But Jennings coolly reminded the panel, “They have the ability to deport people who have deportation orders.” He added that Garcia “got due process. He has a deportation order.”

Later, he dissected the legal victory Trump’s team got last week. “The reason the administration believes they got a big win at the Supreme Court is because the district court was trying to compel the executive on foreign affairs. The Supreme Court threw that out,” Jennings explained. “The courts have long recognized that they cannot compel the executive on foreign policy matters.” As for the politics? Jennings didn’t sugarcoat it. “What they also believe is that, politically, the American people want them to be as aggressive as possible… to solve a crisis that has festered for years,” he asserted. Then he drove the moral argument home with a chilling reminder: “We keep calling this guy ‘Maryland man’ in the press. Nobody seems to worry about the Maryland mother, Rachel Morin, who was murdered by someone that the previous administration let out of jail.”

Read more …

Social media without people. Just AI bots.

OpenAI Planning To Take On Musk’s X (RT)

OpenAI, a San Francisco-based company best known for ChatGPT, has reportedly been working on a new social media app similar to Elon Musk’s X. The early prototype features a feed centered on AI-generated images, according to sources familiar with the project cited by The Verge on Sunday. The experimental platform reportedly includes a social media feed and is being tested internally. CEO Sam Altman has also been seeking private feedback from individuals outside the company, the outlet reported. It remains unclear whether OpenAI intends to release the project as a separate app or integrate it into ChatGPT, which was the most downloaded app worldwide last month, with 46 million new downloads, according to Appfigures.

OpenAI’s potential social media network “would likely increase Altman’s already-bitter rivalry with Elon Musk,” The Verge writes. Musk was a co-founder of OpenAI but left the company in 2018. In February, Musk offered $97.4 billion to acquire OpenAI, but Altman rejected the offer, reportedly saying, “no thank you but we will buy twitter [now known as X] for $9.74 billion if you want,” according to The Verge. Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, could also be in OpenAI’s sights. The report noted that Meta is planning to launch its own AI assistant app with a social media feed. Following reports that Meta is building a ChatGPT rival, Altman responded on X in February: “ok fine maybe we’ll do a social app.”

Having a social media platform would reportedly allow OpenAI to collect unique real-time user data to enhance its AI models, similar to how Meta and Musk’s xAI currently operate, according to The Verge. Musk has merged his AI company xAI with X. Grok is a chatbot developed by xAI. It has been integrated with X and pulls content from the platform to inform its responses. According to a source from another AI lab cited by the Verge, “The Grok integration with X has made everyone jealous,” particularly regarding its role in helping users create viral content. It is reportedly uncertain whether OpenAI’s social media prototype will be released publicly.

Read more …

“Making America Great Again” has to include energy dominance and eradicating the barriers to innovation and growth at all levels of government, including courtrooms.”

Trump Is Right to Hammer Environmental Lawfare (DS)

President Donald Trump’s critics are right about one thing: The first few months of his second term have been a reckoning. Starting with the federal government’s pursuit of law firms and organizations that committed lawfare against the president to hobble his political comeback, Trump has now supercharged executive authority to stop the flood of ideologically based lawsuits targeting America’s energy providers. In an executive order signed last week, Trump empowered Attorney General Pam Bondi to turn up the heat on local prosecutors and state attorneys general abusing the legal system with lawsuits against energy companies. He is right to do so. “Making America Great Again” has to include energy dominance and eradicating the barriers to innovation and growth at all levels of government, including courtrooms.

Trump has directed Bondi to “expeditiously take all appropriate action to stop the enforcement of state laws and continuation of civil actions” that threaten American energy dominance, including restrictive rules and civil actions against oil, natural gas, hydroelectricity, and nuclear energy projects. What Trump is specifically targeting here is the well-resourced cadre of state attorneys general and liability “lawfare” firms that have deployed creative legal strategies to try to extract money from companies by claiming they’ve committed “climate” crimes. This genre of lawsuit relies on the alleged violation of state nuisance or consumer deception laws, and litigators argue that the energy companies actively strove to mislead the public about their products’ impact on the climate.

A local lawsuit in North Carolina against Duke Energy, one of the largest nuclear energy utilities in the nation, provides the most baffling case. Officials in the small suburb town of Carrboro want the company to pay for the “climate-related harm” caused by its electricity generation, even though Duke Energy’s carbon-free nuclear energy fleet powers half the homes in North and South Carolina, and the region’s use of natural gas is one of the lowest per capita in the country. Climate lawfare has a direct impact on consumers who rely on affordable energy of all types by forcing these companies to beef up their legal departments rather than improving the delivery of their goods and services. The end result is higher prices for consumers who already live on tight budgets due to the rising cost of living in other areas of the economy.

Most, if not all, of these cases are filed in blue states and launched by attorneys on behalf of city governments such as Honolulu; Boulder, Colorado; and San Francisco. The states of Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont, Maine, New York, and California each have their own lawsuits aimed at recouping the “costs” of climate change on local communities and enforcing “net-zero” energy policies. Net-zero policies seek to rapidly choke off fossil fuel use in order to reach zero carbon emissions by reducing them as well as removing them from the atmosphere and relying on renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and sometimes, nuclear power. Oil companies like Exxon, Chevron, Shell, and BP get hit hardest, but like in the case of Duke Energy in North Carolina, electricity utility companies get dragged into the mess as well.

But as far as messes go, it’s one carefully orchestrated by the climate litigation industry, armed with deep pockets and patience in its quest to pull the rug out from under Big Energy. That’s why Trump’s revamp of federalism to review many of these laws and statutes is not only legal but deeply necessary. Consumers who need affordable energy and who rely on continued innovation from the companies that power their lives should not have their standard of living cut by greedy environmental lawyers jamming up district courts where judges are ideologically inclined to their side. In March, the Supreme Court declined to weigh in on the deluge of Democrat state-led climate lawsuits, denying the request by red states to put a halt to the lawfare.

In their dissent, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito made clear that the court was punting on a vital constitutional case “for policy reasons.” When the Supreme Court refuses to address the obvious abuse of our litigation system for energy providers and the consumers that rely on them, the intervention of the executive branch becomes a necessity. The most likely unconstitutional state statutes that enable these costly lawsuits should meet the wrath of a president willing to exercise some federal authority. Trump has answered that call, and at least on this specific issue, he’s proved that our government’s unique balancing act between state and federal power does make it possible to get important things done for Americans.

Read more …

PCR won’t give Putin a break. But Putin has a problem with dead Ukrainians: they’re Russia’s brothers.

What Can We Expect from the Peace Negotiations? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Are the peace negotiations leading anywhere we want to go, or are they leading nowhere, or to more conflict? If I had to bet, I would pick one of the last two choices. Most likely more conflict. It is a tendency of peace negotiations to go nowhere except to a ceasefire that is immediately broken. As for the Ukraine negotiations, the Russians are the only party to the limited cease fire in Ukraine that have kept the agreement. Putin’s reward is to be told by Trump to stop fighting and put Russia’s fate in Washington’s hands or there will be more sanctions. Negotiations tend to keep on continuing, because it is in the interest of the negotiating teams. It is their time of fame. They are in the limelight. They enjoy being important. An agreement would make them invisible again. It is their 15 minutes of fame that they stretch into months and years.

Consider how long peace negotiations have been going on between Israel and Palestine to no effect except the utter and total destruction of Palestine and its people. The same could happen to Russia as the Kremlin seems to consist of 19th century naive liberals. In my recent interview on Dialogue Works I wondered why Iran was negotiating when the solution is to invite inspectors in to see if there is any evidence of nuclear weapons production. I wondered why Putin was negotiating when his real responsibility to Russia is to win the conflict and dictate the peace terms. After all his sad costly experiences with negotiating with Washington, why does Putin desire yet another sad experience? As far as I can tell, I am the only person who has answered the question. Putin is trying to use the conflict to negotiate a Great Powers Agreement like Yalta. If he wins the war, as he should have done long ago, to his way of thinking he loses the chance for a new Yalta that naive Russian foreign affairs commentators are talking about.

My view differs from Putin’s. If he won the war, especially if he had done so right away, Russia would be recognized as a great power worthy of a Great Power Agreement. Instead, by preventing the Russian military from winning, Putin has convinced the West that Russia is not a formidable military force, and that its leadership is irresolute. Among the consequences, we have today the French and British considering sending their soldiers to fight against Russia in Ukraine. Only Putin’s irresolution could have convinced the British and French that they could take on Russia. We also have Baltic countries with small populations engaging in unresisted and unanswered aggression against Russia. Both Estonia and Finland have moved to use military force to capture and detain Russian oil tankers.

If you were the captain of a Russian oil tanker delivering oil to somewhere in Europe, you might already be wondering why your government is fueling the ability of its enemies to wage war against Russia. But when you are boarded by a two-bit country whose population is less than Moscow’s and the Kremlin does not intervene, what do you think about the world’s respect for your country? You must be heart-broken. Powerful Russia humiliated by Estonia! Putin does not think about these things. His focus is only on negotiation. He is wedded to it, firmly. He might even be a little crazed by it. It is all that is important. He won’t respond to humiliations because it might queer the all-important negotiations. So the smallest countries on earth can humiliate Russia at will.

This must affect the Russian population, unless they have been so corrupted by Western “culture” that they are no longer Russian. That is the case with many of the Russian intellectuals. If Russia can’t be a part of the West, they feel isolated and alone. Decades of Washington’s propaganda succeeded in diminishing the Russian in them. From the day that Putin, who had erroneously relied on negotiations, was forced by Washington to intervene in Donbas, Putin and his foreign minister have not ceased bleating how welcoming they would be of peace negotiations. Consequently, no one in Western governments thought, or think today, that the Kremlin has an ounce of resolve on the battlefield. This is the problem Putin caused himself.

Do you remember Prigozhin and the Wagner Group? The Wagner Group was the essentially private military force under the command of Yevgeny Prigozhin that Putin had to rely upon when he belatedly intervened in Ukraine. Having erroneously relied on the Minsk Agreement, which the West used to deceive Putin, Putin had no military force prepared to deal with the massive Ukrainian army Washington had trained and equipped. Prigozhin found Putin’s way of fighting a war problematical. He said his top echelon troops were being required to take casualties but were prohibited from fighting to win. The dissatisfaction of the troops with Putin’s strictures that prevented victory, led to a protest march on Moscow, which the jealous Russian General Staff misrepresented as a “rebellion.” Prigozhin was removed and later died in a mysterious airplane crash, and the Wagner Group was broken up, thereby depriving Russia of its hardest hitting military force. This is a huge sacrifice in behalf of a distant possible negotiated settlement.

Prigozhin wasn’t alone. The second most effective Russian force were the Muslim troops from Chechnya. Their leader also complained that his force had to take casualties but were prevented from winning. He asked publicly, why can’t we get this conflict over with? I think the answer is that Putin thinks a negotiated settlement possibly leading to a Great Power Agreement is more important than the reputation of Russian military arms and Russian and Ukrainian casualties. If Washington comes to my conclusion, the settlement imposed on Putin will look good on paper but will perpetuate American hegemony. I have said many times that Putin does not need a mutual security agreement with the West. He does not need a New Yalta. Russia needs a mutual security agreement with China and Iran. A mutual security agreement of these three powers would end all wars. The US, NATO, Israel cannot possibly confront these three countries militarily.

But there is no agreement. Why? Is it a lack of vision of Russian, Chinese, and Iranian leaders? Or is it distrust between them? Russia and Iran walked away from Syria, leaving the country to Israel, Washington, and Turkey. Why wouldn’t they walk away from one another? China, knows that if China wished, China could crush Taiwan, with or without US support to Taiwan, in a few hours. But Putin can’t defeat outclassed Ukraine in more than three years, longer than it took Stalin’s Red Army to destroy the powerful German Wehrmacht, driving the Germans out of thousands of miles of Russia, Eastern Europe, and arriving in the streets of Berlin in a shorter time than Putin has been fighting over a few kilometers in Donbas. China must wonder what sort of military help would Russia be?

My conclusion is, and I much regret it, it is not a conclusion I want, that Putin has so badly handled the Ukrainian situation, the pipeline, and all other matters with Washington that the only agreement that can be reached is Russia’s surrender. Putin has shown no will to fight, only to engage in fruitless negotiation. Putin rolls out all of Russia’s superior weapons systems, which clearly are superior to anything the West has. But no one in the West believes he would use them. Putin has failed to present himself and his country as entities that must be contended with on their terms. Consequently, Putin is dismissed by Trump as someone to be bossed around, and by militarily impotent Britain and France who are talking about sending their soldiers to Ukraine to defeat Russia.

Read more …

Blackmail? Is that what it is?

‘Stop Blackmailing’ – China to US (RT)

China has called on the US to “stop threatening and blackmailing,” if it wants to resolve the escalating trade dispute between the two countries through dialogue. Beijing has stressed that it will continue to protect its interests in the face of US pressure. The two countries have implemented a series of reciprocal tariff hikes over the past two months, with the US imposing a cumulative rate of 145% last week. On Tuesday, the White House warned that Chinese imports to the US could face tariffs as high as 245%, and claimed the ball is in China’s court. “If the United States really wants to solve the problem through dialogue and negotiation, it should give up the extreme pressure, stop threatening and blackmailing,” Foreign Ministry Spokesman Lin Jian told journalists on Wednesday.

The diplomat reiterated that the tariff war was initiated by the US and stated that China’s response was aimed at safeguarding its legitimate rights and interests. Beijing’s retaliation has included a hike to 125% on all American imports, a suspension of global shipments of rare-earth metals and magnets used in tech and military industries. In addition, Beijing ordered Chinese airlines to stop accepting Boeing jets and parts, according to Bloomberg. President Donald Trump previously suggested that the “proud” Chinese want to make a deal, they “just don’t know how quite to go about it.” The Chinese authorities have meanwhile insisted that “the door remains open” for negotiation with the US, but dialogue must be based on mutual respect. The Ministry of Commerce last week dismissed the multiple rounds of duties imposed by the US on China as “numbers game” with no practical meaning and vowed to “fight to the end.”

Read more …

The US wants to prevent China from using third countries to circumvent tarriffs.

US To Restrict China’s Access in Exchange for Fewer Tariffs on Allies (Sp.)

During negotiations with more than 70 countries, the US administration plans to secure commitments from trade partners to economically isolate China in exchange for lower tariffs imposed by the White House, The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported. The White House plans to convince countries to prohibit China from transporting goods through their territories, the report said on Tuesday, adding that Washington also wants to ban Chinese companies from locating in these countries in order to circumvent US tariffs, and prevent cheap Chinese industrial goods from entering their markets.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has become one of the key developers of this strategy, the report read. In his opinion, in the near future, such agreements can be reached primarily with Japan, the United Kingdom, Australia, South Korea and India. On April 2, US President Donald Trump announced reciprocal tariffs on imports from various countries, establishing a baseline rate of 10%. The tariffs were intended to be adjusted based on the rates charged by those countries on US goods. However, on April 9, Trump declared a 90-day pause on tariffs for all countries except China and lowered the rate to 10% to facilitate negotiations.

Read more …

“The ball is in China’s court. China needs to make a deal with us. We don’t have to make a deal with them,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said..”

US To Tie Tariff Deals To China Curbs – WSJ (RT)

The US plans to use tariff negotiations to push trade partners to scale back economic ties with China, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday, citing sources familiar with the talks. The strategy is reportedly aimed at securing commitments from countries hit by recent US tariff hikes to help isolate China’s economy and pressure Beijing to negotiate. US President Donald Trump announced new “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly 90 countries earlier this month, citing unfair trade practices. After global markets reacted by dropping sharply and several governments sought exemptions, he paused most of the tariffs for 90 days, reducing them to a baseline rate of 10%. However, the pause does not apply to China, whose exports to the US are now subject to tariffs of up to 145% amid an ongoing tit-for-tat trade war.

US officials aim to convince trade partners to accept permanent tariff cuts in exchange for curbing their economic engagement with China, according to the WSJ. Proposed commitments may vary by country, but could reportedly include stopping China from rerouting exports through third-party nations, banning Chinese firms from setting up operations locally to avoid US tariffs, and limiting imports of low-cost Chinese industrial goods. Sources said the measures are meant to undermine China’s economy and reduce its leverage ahead of potential negotiations between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The US has already raised the proposal in early discussions with some countries, sources claimed.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was reportedly one of the main architects of the plan. Sources claimed he presented the strategy to Trump during an April 6 meeting at Mar-a-Lago, arguing that obtaining concessions from partners could prevent China from evading tariffs and export controls. He previously named the UK, Australia, South Korea, India, and Japan as countries likely to finalize trade agreements with Washington in the near future.

The White House and Treasury Department declined to comment on the WSJ report. On Tuesday, Trump urged China to initiate negotiations to resolve the tariff dispute. “The ball is in China’s court. China needs to make a deal with us. We don’t have to make a deal with them,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, quoting a statement she claimed was dictated by the president. Beijing, however, has so far refused to back down. On Friday, China announced it would impose a 125% tariff on all US goods, reiterating it will “fight to the end” against Washington’s trade policy. Beijing also signaled this could be the last increase, noting that “at the current tariff level, there is no market acceptance for US goods exported to China,” while adding that other countermeasures are being considered.

Read more …

You grow up in Holland and you’re forced to hear the call to Muslim prayer 5x a day. Get real.

Dutch MPs Call For Ban On Amplified Islamic Calls To Prayer (RMX)

Two minor conservative parties in the Netherlands, the SGP and JA21, have tabled a private members’ bill aiming to ban amplified Islamic calls to prayer in residential areas, arguing that the practice is increasingly at odds with Dutch cultural norms. The proposed legislation, submitted by SGP MP André Flach and JA21 leader Joost Eerdmans, targets the growing use of loudspeakers in mosques to broadcast the adhan — the Islamic call to prayer — across neighborhoods. While amplified calls were rare until the 1990s, the MPs claim they are now heard in dozens of communities nationwide, “from Amsterdam to Alblasserdam.” “It doesn’t fit in with Dutch culture,” Flach said, as cited by De Telegraaf newspaper. He noted that current broadcasts loudly proclaim religious texts such as “Allah is the greatest” and “there is no other god but Allah” several times a day. He argued that when laws were changed in 1988 to allow amplified religious calls under the Public Manifestations Act, lawmakers did not anticipate how pervasive and loud such calls might become.

Eerdmans expressed equal concern over the trend, pointing to what he sees as a steady increase in Islamic practice seeping into the Dutch way of life. “Today, around 40 mosques play the adhan on Fridays, but with about 500 mosques in the Netherlands and that number growing, how many will there be in 10 years?” sIn some neighborhoods, “you really feel like you’re in Istanbul or Marrakesh,” he added. The MPs also cited a poll commissioned from researcher Maurice de Hond, which claims that nearly 80 percent of Dutch citizens view amplified calls to prayer as inconsistent with Dutch culture and find them bothersome. While the government had already signaled plans to tighten regulations on amplified prayer calls earlier this year, Flach and Eerdmans are pushing for a complete ban on sound amplification for such broadcasts.

“This is not about restricting freedom of religion,” Flach insisted. “People can still make the call to prayer, just without sound amplification. The current law simply lacks the word ‘unamplified’ — and we are adding it,” he said. In a statement, JA21 wrote, “More and more Dutch streets are drowned out by amplified Islamic calls to prayer. The public space belongs to everyone – the mosque does not have to rise above it. That is why JA21 and SGP are submitting a private members’ bill to ban the reinforced call.” The proposal follows earlier statements by Integration Secretary Jurgen Nobel, who in February pledged to review existing legislation to better manage noise disturbances from amplified religious expressions. Supporters argue that the measure would restore balance and respond to long-standing complaints from residents in affected areas. The bill will now move to parliamentary debate.

Read more …

Just to get to 2%. Then that becomes 5%. And then Ursula wants $800 billion on top of that.

Belgium Eyes Welfare Cuts To Meet NATO Target (RT)

Belgium is preparing to raise debt and cut welfare to meet NATO’s minimum military spending target, the EU country’s budget minister has said. Vincent Van Peteghem told the Financial Times on Wednesday that Brussels recently agreed to lift its 2025 military budget to 2% of GDP through a mix of temporary cash injections, creative accounting, and structural reforms. The planned hike in military spending could exacerbate the budget crisis as debt mounts. Recent government plans to cut social services have sparked protests, with over 100,000 people rallying in Brussels in February. Belgium had previously planned to meet the 2% target only by 2029. Military spending currently stands at around 1.31% of GDP, or roughly €8 billion ($8.5 billion), according to Defense Minister Theo Francken.

The shift comes amid pressure from Washington and ahead of a NATO summit in June, where members are expected to consider raising the spending target to above 3% of GDP. US President Donald Trump has urged the bloc members to increase military spending to 5%, warning that countries that fail to do so may no longer be guaranteed American protection. Higher spending on military budgets would take a toll on the EU’s welfare programs, Van Peteghem warned. Last month, the European Commission proposed exempting military budgets from fiscal rules and offering €150 billion in loans as part of its ‘ReArm Europe’ plan, which aims to mobilize up to €800 billion through debt and tax incentives for the bloc’s military-industrial complex.

Van Peteghem said Belgium would tap both options to fund additional military spending this year. To maintain the 2% level, the government plans to raise more debt and may privatize state-owned assets, the minister said. The remaining gap would be filled through spending cuts, including curbs on unemployment benefits, pension reforms, and tax changes. “But of course, we will need to do more,” Van Peteghem, who also serves as deputy prime minister, said. France has also announced plans to cut €5 billion from its budget, with some of the savings potentially redirected to military spending. Moscow has condemned the EU’s military buildup. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called it “a matter of deep concern,” noting that it was aimed at Russia.

Read more …

“That would raise the annual federal interest payment on the national debt to $1.5 trillion. At what point does this become a crisis?”

Trump Confronts Economic and Geopolitical Reality (Ring)

By the time this is published, everything may have changed, and that is to be expected. Throughout his career, well before and since becoming a politician, Trump has explicitly stated that he does not think it is always a good strategy to be predictable. And while markets love predictability, sometimes markets, and the systems propping them up, need disruption. This is such a moment. Nobody should deny that the anxiety is genuine. An older friend of mine, well into his 70s, still working but ready to retire, is wondering how he and his wife will survive if their savings are wiped out. That’s true for all of us, but it begs the question: What if the painful restructuring we may be about to endure, and which may last for many years, is necessary to avoid an even worse fate? Trump’s abrupt escalation of import tariffs goes well beyond violating the principles of comparative advantage, but we can start there.

“Comparative advantage” is not all it’s cracked up to be. Repeated in business schools as if it were gospel since the 1980s, it goes something like this: “Wool is cheaper in Scotland, and wine is cheaper in France, so France should sell their wine to Scotland, and Scotland should sell their wool to France.” Everybody wins. Period. That’s the extent of it. That is the essence of free trade theory. In the real world, though, policies that rely on “comparative advantage” doctrine as their moral justification have gotten pretty ugly. While overall economic growth may be maximized when every nation exports products that it produces most cost-effectively, the local impacts are not always benign. Nations that produce coffee at competitive global prices, for example, end up with valuable cropland converted from food production to coffee plantations.

These coffee plantations are typically owned by multinational corporations that repatriate profits to low-tax nations elsewhere while buying off a small local elite that streamlines the regulatory environment. Meanwhile, the nation becomes dependent on imports for everything except coffee, and even the coffee ends up priced out of reach for the average citizen. Replace “coffee” with any specialty product, and all too often, the “gains of trade” translate on the ground into nations with seething, destitute populations dependent on accumulating debt and foreign aid. These examples aren’t restricted to foreign nations, nor are they restricted to commodities. While American multinationals moved manufacturing overseas, in the process destroying millions of jobs and thousands of communities in America, it wasn’t just cheap wool, cheap wine, and dirt-cheap flat-screen TVs that were pouring into the country in exchange. We offshored our production of steel, our chip manufacturers, our pharmaceutical industry, and much more.

And even that devastation was tolerated for decades because its effects were mostly felt in what we now call rust belt states. Our service economy and tech sectors boomed, along with what was left of manufacturing, satiating a majority of the population that loved buying cheaper foreign imports. But this whole scheme could never go on forever. America’s trade deficit in 2024 was up to $918 billion, a new record. America’s cumulative trade deficit, nearly all of it incurred since 2000, is now estimated in excess of $17 trillion.

To balance the trade deficit, there is what economists call the “current account.” If dollars flow overseas for us to purchase foreign imports in excess of foreign nations spending dollars to purchase our exports, the surplus dollars are repatriated in the form of foreigners bidding up the prices for assets they purchase in America. A slight oversimplification would be that trade deficits equate to cheap flat screens and unaffordable homes. But there is another reason America has huge trade deficits. It floods the world with dollar-denominated transactions, and by permitting foreigners to buy American assets, we effectively collateralize our currency. And so long as America is for sale in this manner, that helps sustain the dollar as a hard currency.

That comes in handy. For 46 out of the last 50 years, Americans have logged federal budget deficits. So far, the dollar’s status as the dominant transaction and reserve currency of the world gives America’s federal government the ability to borrow money by selling Treasury Notes. This is all well known and rehashed beyond the need to elaborate further. So, why are people acting like this was sustainable? How long can the global economic model rest on American trade deficits funding the military and industrial development of nations that, in some cases, aren’t even allies, with all of it balanced through foreign purchases of American assets? And how long will international demand for dollars finance federal budget deficits? To understand why this had to come to a head, consider federal budget trends in recent years.

In 2019, the last year of Trump’s first term, the federal budget was $4.4 trillion, with interest payments of $400 billion. For 2025, the first year of Trump’s current term, the projected federal budget is $7.0 trillion, with interest of just under $1.0 trillion. What changed? While the COVID pandemic was used to justify massive infusions of stimulative federal cash into the economy, much of it probably necessary, why hasn’t spending been reduced since the pandemic’s impact has been over for at least two years? Are we supposed to just expect massive federal budget deficits year after year? Is it sustainable to log a federal budget deficit that has grown from an alarming $900 billion in 2019 to $1.9 trillion in 2025, more than twice as much?

A roughly accurate summary of the economic reality we confront is federal budget deficits of $2 trillion per year and trade deficits of $1 trillion per year. Trade deficits translate into growing foreign ownership of American assets. Federal budget deficits add up in the form of accumulating, interest-bearing national debt. In 2019, the interest payments on what at the time was $22 trillion in national debt had already reached $575 billion, at an average interest rate of 2.5 percent. By 2024, the national debt had skyrocketed to $35 trillion, an increase of $13 trillion in just six years. Interest payments in 2024 were $1.1 trillion, and the average interest rate had risen to 3.3 percent. “Average” interest rate requires explanation. Ten-year treasury notes currently pay 4.4 percent. Interest rates have risen over the past few years. Imagine if that continues, and $35 trillion (or more) in treasury notes mature and are reinvested at 4.4 percent. That would raise the annual federal interest payment on the national debt to $1.5 trillion. At what point does this become a crisis?

Read more …

 

 

Favorite Calvin of all time.

 

 

https://twitter.com/khnh80044/status/1911960834559148452

Holy week

 

 

Fairy

 

 

Vancouver
https://twitter.com/dom_lucre/status/1912240470480285729

 

 

Charlie
https://twitter.com/khnh80044/status/1912456564352717089

 

 

Two things
https://twitter.com/RealDonKeith/status/1912496724888690887

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 162025
 


Gustave Moreau Helen on the Walls of Troy 1885

 

Trump’s Holy Week Statement Is Refreshing (Chris Queen)
Putin Wants Permanent Peace In Ukraine – Witkoff (RT)
Kremlin: Russia and US Strive for Peace but Europe Pushes for Conflict (Sp.)
Ukraine Plotting To Overshadow Russia’s Victory Day – Politico (RT)
Trump Aides Clash On Trusting Moscow – WSJ (RT)
This Is China’s Real Problem and Trump’s Real Strength (Stephen Green)
Europe Cannot Be ‘Permanent Security Vassal’ of US – Vance (RT)
Washington Is ‘Frustrated’ With European Leaders – Vance (RT)
Vance Blasts Zelensky For ‘Absurd’ Claim (RT)
Trump’s Budget Axe Takes Swing at State Dept. and Foreign Aid (Sp.)
Zelensky Fires Sumy Head After Russian Strike (RT)
US Blocks G7 Condemnation of Russia Over Sumy Strike – Bloomberg (RT)
Zelensky Moves To Delay Election Again (RT)
A Federal Judge Just Threatened the Trump Administration (Margolis)
Judge Halts Trump Deportation of Half a Million Biden “Parolees” (Turley)
Tucker Carlson Shares Why His Show Was Canceled (DS)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1911977298796138515

Miller
https://twitter.com/TONYxTWO/status/1911931824126955858

Tucker weldon

RICO

 

 

 

 

Holy Week seems a good topic to pay attention to as conflicts are rising. And this time we get to move away from “..Biden gave the transgender lobby more attention than the resurrection of Jesus..”

Trump’s Holy Week Statement Is Refreshing (Chris Queen)

Millions of Christians throughout the country are marking Holy Week, which covers the week between Palm Sunday and Easter. The White House recognized Holy Week with a presidential message on Sunday. President Donald Trump’s statement wasn’t just some milquetoast appreciation of Easter and those Christians who celebrate the resurrection of Jesus this coming Sunday. Instead, there’s a theological richness that was surprising and refreshing: During this sacred week, we acknowledge that the glory of Easter Sunday cannot come without the sacrifice Jesus Christ made on the cross. In His final hours on Earth, Christ willingly endured excruciating pain, torture, and execution on the cross out of a deep and abiding love for all His creation. Through His suffering, we have redemption. Through His death, we are forgiven of our sins. Through His Resurrection, we have hope of eternal life. On Easter morning, the stone is rolled away, the tomb is empty, and light prevails over darkness—signaling that death does not have the final word.

The penultimate paragraph was remarkably Trinitarian: “As we focus on Christ’s redeeming sacrifice, we look to His love, humility, and obedience—even in life’s most difficult and uncertain moments. This week, we pray for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon our beloved Nation. We pray that America will remain a beacon of faith, hope, and freedom for the entire world, and we pray to achieve a future that reflects the truth, beauty, and goodness of Christ’s eternal kingdom in Heaven.” “Now, what stands out in that? What should grab our attention?” Dr. Albert Mohler asked in his podcast on Tuesday morning. “Well, number one, it’s a presidential statement calling for and praying for and outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon our beloved nation. That’s pretty unprecedented in language. You now have clear explicit Trinitarian language as the structure for this statement.”

Later, Mohler referred to the last statement in that paragraph, saying, “That reference to Christ’s eternal kingdom is very, very interesting because it places the kingdom, so to speak, represented by the government of the United States of America, in a very different context than most presidents ever discussed them.” The president also reiterated his commitment to protecting religious freedom in the U.S. “This Holy Week, my Administration renews its promise to defend the Christian faith in our schools, military, workplaces, hospitals, and halls of government,” the statement asserted. “We will never waver in safeguarding the right to religious liberty, upholding the dignity of life, and protecting God in our public square.”

Such a statement from the White House is refreshing enough on its own (even though there’s some phrasing that I don’t 100% agree with theologically), but it catches my attention even more when I compare it to the Biden White House’s treatment of Easter last year. If you forgot, Easter coincided with the left’s high holy day, “Transgender Day of Visibility,” and of course, Biden gave the transgender lobby more attention than the resurrection of Jesus. Last year, I wrote: By now, we’re all aware that the White House managed to commit the most sacrilegious act imaginable — or at least made the biggest possible slap in the faces of Christians — by emphasizing “Transgender Day of Visibility” over Easter. While the holiday honoring our secular state religion of transgenderism is fixed on March 31, it could have and rightly should have taken a backseat to the moveable feast that celebrates the resurrection of Jesus.

Instead, Joe Biden, his handlers, and the rest of his administration chose to double down on honoring a tiny minority of transgender Americans over the millions of Christians who celebrate Easter Sunday. The White House statement on Easter was only 94 words, while the proclamation of “Transgender Day of Visibility” clocked in at a whopping 635 words. On the president’s X/Twitter account, the “Transgender Day of Visibility” tweet was twice as long (45 words) as the Easter tweet (20 words). Aren’t you glad that we don’t have to put up with that sort of nonsense this year? Thank you, President Trump, for standing up for believers and recognizing the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus as the ultimate turning point in history.

Read more …

“There’re security protocols, NATO Article 5 [on collective security] … a lot of detail attached to it. It’s a complicated situation..”

Perhaps your biggest problem: Half of Europe insists Putin wants to conquer their lands.

Putin Wants Permanent Peace In Ukraine – Witkoff (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin is pursuing a permanent peace and a legally binding settlement to the Ukraine conflict, US special envoy Steve Witkoff has told Fox News. Witkoff, tasked by US President Donald Trump to lead negotiations with Moscow, met with Putin and two of his senior advisers on Friday. The US envoy shared details of the talks in an interview on Monday, describing the nearly five-hour meeting with Putin as “compelling” and saying it brought the Ukraine peace process to “the verge” of a breakthrough. According to Witkoff, Putin is pursuing a lasting solution. “So beyond just a ceasefire, we got an answer to that,” the envoy said, adding it “took a while for us to get to this place.” A key part of any deal, Witkoff said, would be the recognition that Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions are part of Russia.

However, he emphasized that the proposed agreement goes beyond territorial issues. “There’re security protocols, NATO Article 5 [on collective security] … a lot of detail attached to it. It’s a complicated situation,” he said. Still, Witkoff said he believed the two sides “might be on the verge of something that would be very, very important for the world at large.” Friday’s meeting was Witkoff’s third with the Russian president since February. Trump has repeatedly said he aims to end the hostilities in Ukraine as quickly as possible. Russia has maintained it is open to peace talks, provided its key security demands are addressed. Moscow opposes any NATO presence on Ukrainian soil and has demanded that Kiev demilitarize, denazify, adhere to a position of neutrality, and recognize the territorial “realities on the ground.”

The Russian government has insisted it will not accept a freeze of the conflict, which it maintains will only lead to renewed hostilities later on. Moscow has cited Ukraine’s violations of a US-proposed moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure as proof of Kiev’s untrustworthiness. Commenting on Putin’s meeting with Witkoff, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Tuesday there were “no clear outlines of any agreement yet,” but that there was the political will to move forward. Moscow, he added, values the “constructive and substantive” contact with the US side.

Read more …

“Once again, we are very, very positive about the constructive and meaningful contacts that have taken place..”

Kremlin: Russia and US Strive for Peace but Europe Pushes for Conflict (Sp.)

Russia and US are working hard for peace, while Europe is working hard for war, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday. “Yes, here also you and I should clearly understand that at the moment there is intense work between Moscow and Washington. And it is taking place in the name of peace. And against this background, European countries continue to work for war,” Peskov told reporters, adding that Russian-US economic cooperation may play a stabilizing role for the world. European countries declare their intention to continue supporting Ukraine and the Kiev regime in its efforts to continue the war, Peskov added. There is quite intensive work on the Ukrainian settlement, but immediate results should not be expected, Peskov said.

“Hard work is going on. Of course, it is such a complex substance that it is hardly possible to expect immediate results, but nevertheless. Of course, we would like to hope for the best, hope that this work will have positive results,” Peskov told reporters. There are no clear outlines of a future Ukrainian settlement agreement, but there is political will to work in its direction, he added. “Once again, we are very, very positive about the constructive and meaningful contacts that have taken place,” the spokesman said. Peskov refused to comment on media reports about an alleged US offer to Iran to transfer its uranium reserves to Russia. The Guardian reported earlier that the United States had allegedly offered Tehran to transfer uranium reserves to Russia during talks with Iran in Oman. “I leave this issue without comment,” Peskov told reporters.

Ukraine keeps launching strikes on Russian energy infrastructure on a daily basis, Kremlin spokesman said. “The temporary moratorium has not been respected and is not being respected by the Ukrainian military. We see daily strikes on Russian energy infrastructure. It is important for everyone to know this,” Peskov said. Unlike the Kiev regime, Russia continues to abide by the order of Russian President Vladimir Putin, given a month ago, and does not target Ukrainian energy infrastructure, he added. “I need to clarify [the dates of the moratorium’s end]. I just need to get corresponding information from [the Russian] Defense Ministry. Of course all will depend on the orders of the Commander-in-Chief [Putin],” the spokesman said when asked about the moratorium’s expiration date.

A conversation between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump within the next few days is not on the schedule, Peskov said. “There is no such conversation on the schedule within the next few days,” Peskov told journalists. Peskov specified that if such a conversation were to take place, the Kremlin would provide information about it. “We will appropriately inform you the way we usually do it,” Peskov said. Russia expects leaders from more than 20 countries to visit Moscow on May 9 and take part in the Victory Day parade, Peskov said. “We are ready to receive anyone who is willing to celebrate this extremely important date with us. It has a special meaning now, when Nazism has reestablished itself in Europe. When we do not see a unanimous European desire to eradicate it immediately. Therefore, this day is extremely important, and we will be happy to welcome everyone. We can already say that we are expecting more than 20 heads of state and government who will be here together with [Russian President Vladimir Putin] to celebrate this day,” Peskov said.

Moscow will be happy to welcome anyone “who is ready to share the pride and joy of this day” and believes that everyone in Europe and the world should understand the significance of Victory Day, he added. Russia has called the statement by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas about the presence of EU countries in Russia on May 9 very harsh, Dmitry Peskov said. “As for Ms. Kallas you mentioned, we draw attention to her very, very harsh statements. We do not consider them correct and we cannot assess these threats. Those threats should be assessed by a sovereign state that is being threatened. And as it seems to us, there are states in Europe that do not accept such rhetoric,” Peskov said, when asked about Kallas’ calls for candidates for EU accession not to participate in the celebration of the 80th anniversary of Victory Day in Russia.

Read more …

EU and Ukraine organize their own ‘victory’ day on May 8. To celebrate the freedom they would not have had without the 26 million dead Russians. How low can one go? How petty?

Ukraine Plotting To Overshadow Russia’s Victory Day – Politico (RT)

Ukraine is seeking to undermine Russia’s Victory Day celebrations by inviting senior European politicians to an event on May 9 in the west of the country, Politico has reported. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga proposed the event in order to “show our unity and resolve in the face of the biggest aggression in Europe since the Second World War,” according to the outlet. The plan was lauded by Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski, who believes that it will “show that Europe is there, in Ukraine, and not near [Russian President Vladimir] Putin in Moscow.” Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is also reportedly pursuing a separate summit, to be held in May, involving countries who are seeking to deploy troops to the country as part of a potential truce. The potential visit could involve several European heads of state, including incoming German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, two sources told Politico.

Russia has voiced opposition against any unauthorized foreign troop deployment in Ukraine, warning they would be considered legitimate targets and that such a move could only escalate the conflict. Russia will celebrate the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany and hold its annual Victory Day parade in Red Square on May 9. More than 20 foreign leaders are expected to attend, including Chinese President Xi Jinping, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico.

While Russia continues to celebrate Victory Day on May 9, Ukraine – which has long sought to sever cultural ties with its neighbor and erase its Soviet heritage – has moved its official WWII remembrance to May 8 and now designates May 9 as Europe Day. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov slated the reported Ukrainian plans. “The very fact that Zelensky doesn’t want to celebrate Victory Day on May 9 shows, at the very least, a lack of respect for the memory of his own grandfather… It once again shows that this is a regime can’t stand such days as May 9. It only confirms that the Russian side is right, and that President Putin is doing what needs to be done.”

Read more …

“..Witkoff said his almost five-hour meeting with Putin was “compelling” and put the Ukraine peace process “on the verge” of a breakthrough..”

Trump Aides Clash On Trusting Moscow – WSJ (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s senior advisers disagree on whether Moscow genuinely wants a peaceful resolution of the Ukraine conflict, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday, citing anonymous sources. A group led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg are urging greater skepticism, the report said. Trump, however, is siding with diplomatic aide Steve Witkoff, who is said to be more trusting of Moscow. Last week, Witkoff met with President Vladimir Putin, after the two already held talks in March. Moscow maintains that it has always been willing to achieve its core objectives in the conflict through diplomatic means, while Kiev and its Western backers have advocated for escalation. The Russian government, however, has said it will not accept a freeze of the conflict, which will only lead to renewed hostilities later on, citing Ukraine’s violations of a US-proposed moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure as proof of Kiev’s untrustworthiness.

As an example of Trump siding with Witkoff, the WSJ cited a missile strike on the city of Sumy on Sunday, in which Kiev claimed that Moscow deliberately targeted civilians, killing 34. Trump, however, referred to the incident as a “mistake,” while Rubio’s State Department called it “horrifying” and Kellogg said it crossed “any line of decency.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the missiles were launched at “another meeting of Ukrainian military leaders with their Western colleagues” masquerading as mercenaries. The Defense Ministry estimated that the strike killed around 60 troops, claiming that Kiev used civilians as human shields for the gathering. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky told CBS News on Sunday that Trump’s criticisms of his leadership indicate that “Russian narratives are winning in the US.”

Senior Russian negotiator Kirill Dmitriev expressed concern about American vulnerability to foreign lobbying after meeting with senior US officials earlier this month, accusing the Western media of waging a coordinated campaign to undermine the normalization of relations. ”We see attempts to misinterpret Russian messages, mischaracterize Russia and its leaders. This happens every day,” he stated, adding that “direct dialogue is the best way to defeat this disinformation.” In an interview on Monday with Fox News, Witkoff said his almost five-hour meeting with Putin was “compelling” and put the Ukraine peace process “on the verge” of a breakthrough.

Read more …

“MORE COWBELL!”

This Is China’s Real Problem and Trump’s Real Strength (Stephen Green)

Chinese Communist Party boss Xi Jinping has a problem, and the answer is — MORE COWBELL! I’m kidding, of course, except for the fundamental truth behind my silly Saturday Night Live gag. Since economic liberalization began under Deng Xiaoping in the 1980s, the answer to China’s economic questions — like Christopher Walken in the famous SNL sketch — has always been the same: MORE EXPORTS. But exports are about to hit a wall. Without getting too technical, China desperately needs to escape what economists call the Middle Income Trap. That’s when a Third World (or even Second World) economy comes this close to making the move from poverty to enjoying a middle-level income, then to joining the wealthy nations of the world.

South Korea escaped. Israel escaped. Singapore and Taiwan did, too. All four used to be dirt poor, or nearly so. All are now among the world’s high earners. Argentina was one of the world’s wealthiest countries a century ago but backslid into the middle rank under a crippling combination of economic populism and political corruption. Javier Milei is working furiously to fix all that, but I digress. These countries escaped in two steps. The first was by exporting well-made manufactured goods. The second was transitioning to a consumer-based economy much like ours. That second step is where China has trouble. China faces all kinds of headwinds as it sits right at the top of the middle-income heap without quite going any higher. Those headwinds include shrinking demographics, stalled productivity growth, a real estate crisis, a consumer confidence deficit, and more.

So instead of creating a political-economic climate free enough to transition to a more consumer-based economy, Xi turned to the “MORE COWBELL!” solution once again. China now pumps out state-subsidized manufactured goods at an unprecedented rate. The hope, I presume, is to crush the rest of the world’s manufacturing before any resistance is mounted. Look at this:

The word you’re looking for is “unsustainable.” While I remain at best cautiously optimistic about the utility of tariffs for restoring American manufacturing — tax cuts and massive deregulation would probably help more — tariffs are a vital tool for dealing with a rival like Communist China. The chart shows it. Everything Xi needs to maintain CCP authority is right there in that big red line. The thing of it is, China has all the tools it needs — particularly in engineering — to escape the Middle Income Trap. All the tools but one: the political and economic stability required to empower the Chinese consumer and escape the Middle Income Trap. Nevertheless, Chinese manufacturing is a 600-pound gorilla, determined to crush smaller economies.

You can find endless reports of just that happening in places like Vietnam and Thailand. But now, enter the other 600-pound gorilla, the U.S. consumer. Without access to our spending power, China’s export power is greatly diminished — particularly if the administration’s trade negotiations get the rest of the world on board with caging the gorilla. Trump’s tariffs are a dam to the flood of Xi’s exports, a pin to prick his bubble economy.

Read more …

Europe is set to arm itself into bankruptcy.

Europe Cannot Be ‘Permanent Security Vassal’ of US – Vance (RT)

Europe cannot remain a “permanent security vassal” of the US, Vice President J.D. Vance has said, stressing that this arrangement is not beneficial for either side. His comments come at time of geopolitical tensions between the US and Europe on a number of issues, including the Ukraine conflict, while the administration of US President Donald Trump demands that other NATO members drastically increase their defense spending. In an interview with UnHerd on Monday, Vance voiced frustration over Europe’s approach to security, arguing that the topic has long been a blind spot for the region. “The reality is – it’s blunt to say it, but it’s also true – that Europe’s entire security infrastructure, for my entire life, has been subsidized by the United States of America.”

At present, he continued, only three European nations – the UK, France, and Poland – have self-sustained militaries. “In some ways, they’re the exceptions that prove the rule, that European leaders have radically underinvested in security, and that has to change.” I certainly recognize, that it’s not in Europe’s interest, and it’s not in America’s interest, for Europe to be a permanent security vassal of the United States. The Trump administration has been pushing European nations to invest more in their militaries since Trump’s first term, arguing that the US is shouldering the main burden. In 2014, NATO members pledged to increase their defense spending to 2% of GDP, though some are still struggling to reach this.

In February, Trump suggested that NATO members should consider spending as much as 5% of GDP on defense, later warning that “if they don’t pay, I’m not going to defend them.” NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte agreed that Trump is right to demand that European members step up defense spending amid tensions with Russia. Numerous Western officials have speculated that Russia could attack European NATO members within a few years. Moscow has dismissed the claim as “nonsense,” saying it has no interest in doing so.

Read more …

Make that “lack of leaders”. There’s two kinds in Europe: Unelected and unpopular.

Washington Is ‘Frustrated’ With European Leaders – Vance (RT)

Washington is “frustrated” by the reluctance of its European allies to respond to their voters on critical issues such as immigration, US Vice President J.D. Vance has stated. In an interview with the British website UnHerd published on Tuesday, he said this sentiment is shared by the entire administration of President Donald Trump. “European populations keep on crying out for more sensible economic and migration policies, and the leaders of Europe keep on going through these elections, and keep on offering the European peoples the opposite of what they seem to have voted for,” Vance explained. He warned that politicians who disregard the will of the people risk ruining “the entire democratic project of the West.”

In February, Vance sent shockwaves through the West by criticizing America’s European allies for what he characterized as backsliding on the democratic values they share with the US. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference in Germany, he warned that if this continues, Washington could conclude that these nations are not worth protecting as NATO members. Vance criticized politicians who shun parties such as the anti-migration Alternative for Germany (AfD). Last week, the AfD surpassed the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) to become the most popular party in Germany, receiving 25% of support in a hypothetical election. The CDU has engaged in coalition negotiations with the Social Democrats (SPD), excluding the AfD from the discussions entirely.

In the UnHerd interview, Vance said his criticism stems from a deep love for Europeans and the shared cultural heritage underpinning Western civilization. He also urged NATO members in Europe to bolster their militaries instead of relying on security “subsidized by the United States of America.” Tensions between the US and its European allies have grown since Trump took office in January. This is in part due to Washington’s refusal to provide further military aid to Ukraine, the US president’s stated goal of claiming Greenland (an autonomous territory of Denmark) for America, and his attempt at rebalancing international trade through tariffs and deals with individual states.

Read more …

“..Zelensky claimed that “Russian narratives are prevailing in the US” and that Moscow has “enormous influence” [on Trump].

Vance Blasts Zelensky For ‘Absurd’ Claim (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance has accused Vladimir Zelensky of making “absurd” statements, after the Ukrainian leader suggested that Washington is on Russia’s side in the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. In an interview with CBS News on Sunday, Zelensky claimed that “Russian narratives are prevailing in the US” and that Moscow has “enormous influence” on the administration of US President Donald Trump and its policies. Responding in a conversation with the UnHerd outlet published on Tuesday, Vance described Zelensky’s remarks as “certainly not productive.” “I think it is sort of absurd for Zelensky to tell the [US] government, which is currently keeping his entire government and war effort together, that we are somehow on the side of the Russians,” he stressed.

“If you want to end the conflict, you have to try to understand where both the Russians and the Ukrainians see their strategic objectives,” Vance added. ‘“That does not mean you morally support the Russian cause, or that you support the full-scale invasion, but you do have to try to understand what are their strategic red lines, in the same way that you have to try to understand what the Ukrainians are trying to get out of the conflict,” he said. Members of the Trump administration “are not on anybody’s side. We are on America’s side,” Vance insisted. Trump and Vance publicly clashed with Zelensky during his visit to the White House in late February, accusing the Ukrainian leader of disrespect toward the US, failing to appreciate American aid, and not being interested in achieving peace with Russia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told the Kommersant newspaper in an interview published on Tuesday that Moscow appreciates that “the Trump administration is trying to get to the bottom of the issue and, most importantly, understand the root cause” of the Ukraine conflict. Lavrov also noted that Trump “has repeatedly said that the colossal mistake which led to the current events in Ukraine was the Biden administration’s decision to drag Ukraine into NATO.” Ukrainian neutrality remains one of Moscow’s key demands for a settlement of the conflict, along with the demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine and recognition by Kiev that Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye regions are part of Russia.

Read more …

Big Plans. Big Numbers.

Trump’s Budget Axe Takes Swing at State Dept. and Foreign Aid (Sp.)

The State Department’s budget may be dropped from $54.4 billion to $28.4 billion in 2026, according to internal planning documents seen by Reuters. Furthermore, nearly 30 US missions, mainly in Africa and Europe, would be shut, with foreign aid slashed from $38.3 billion to $16.9 billion, and programs deemed “redundant” headed for the shredder. America’s soft power toolbox – USAID – is getting the axe too, per the documents; its parts are being folded into the State Department.

Read more …

The story that Russia killed civilians worked for 3 days. Now back to reality.

Zelensky Fires Sumy Head After Russian Strike (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s office announced on Tuesday that it has fired the head of Ukraine’s Sumy Regional Military Administration, Vladimir Artyukh. The move follows accusations that Artyukh organized a military awards ceremony that was targeted in a Russian missile strike. On Monday, the Russian Defense Ministry confirmed that it carried out a precision strike the previous day on a gathering of Ukrainian command staff in the border city of Sumy. Two Iskander-M missiles were used in the attack on Sunday, it said, adding that over 60 senior Ukrainian servicemen were killed in the strike. The local Ukrainian authorities have claimed that the attack targeted a military awards ceremony for the 117th Territorial Defense Brigade. Officials reported that the strike resulted in 35 civilian deaths and 129 others injured.

Several Ukrainian officials, including the mayor of Konotop, Artyom Semenikhin, have since called for the prosecution of Artyukh, accusing him of being directly responsible for the casualties by “organizing an awards ceremony” despite warnings not to do so. Artyukh has effectively confirmed that the ceremony took place on the day of the attack but denied responsibility for the event, telling public broadcaster Suspilne that he “was invited” but did not organize it. Nevertheless, Zelensky signed a decree on Tuesday removing Artyukh from his post. Taras Melnychuk, the cabinet’s representative in parliament, confirmed the move in a post on Telegram on Tuesday and announced that the government has decided on a replacement.

Moscow has stressed that it does not attack civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that the Russian military only strikes “military-related targets.” Russian officials have accused Kiev, however, of deliberately hosting military events in civilian areas. Following the Sumy attack, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the facility targeted in Sunday’s strike was hosting both Ukrainian and NATO officers, and claimed they were posing as mercenaries. Lavrov went on to say that Kiev routinely flouts international law by placing military facilities and weapons in or near civilian infrastructure, and that there have been “a million” examples of this. Sumy is a regional capital and frontline city of over 250,000 people, located 25km from the border with Russia. It has become a focal point of Ukraine’s retreat from Russia’s Kursk Region following its failed incursion.

Read more …

“..Trump’s team had told the group that it couldn’t sign the statement because it is “working to preserve the space to negotiate peace.”

US Blocks G7 Condemnation of Russia Over Sumy Strike – Bloomberg (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s administration has reportedly refused to back a G7 statement condemning Russia’s recent missile strike on the Ukrainian city of Sumy, according to sources cited by Bloomberg. On Monday, the Russian Defense Ministry confirmed firing two Iskander-M missiles the day before, targeting a gathering of Ukrainian and Western command staff, killing at least 60 senior servicemen. The Ukrainian authorities, however, have claimed that the Russian missiles struck a military awards ceremony, leaving 35 civilians dead and 129 others injured. Following the attack, Ukraine and a number of its international backers accused Russia of deliberately targeting civilians and undermining peace talks.

According to Bloomberg, the G7, which is being presided over by Canada this year, has drafted a joint statement denouncing the strike on Sumy but has not released it due to a lack of US support. In a draft of the statement seen by the outlet, the group said that the attack was proof that Russia was determined to continue the hostilities. Bloomberg reported that Trump’s team had told the group that it couldn’t sign the statement because it is “working to preserve the space to negotiate peace.”

Since taking office in January, Trump has pushed to get both Moscow and Kiev to the negotiating table and has resumed direct contacts with Russia in order to facilitate a peace deal. Throughout the Ukraine conflict, Moscow has maintained that it never targets civilian infrastructure. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov recently emphasized that Russia only strikes military targets. Russian officials have also stated that Moscow remains open to a peaceful resolution of the Ukraine conflict but have stressed that any settlement must address its root causes. Moscow has demanded that Kiev demilitarize, denazify, give up its NATO ambitions, and adhere to a position of neutrality, and recognize the territorial “realities on the ground.”

Read more …

If you don’t force him, he won’t do it. And even then, fair election anyone?

Zelensky Moves To Delay Election Again (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has submitted a bill to extend martial law in the country by another 90 days, which would rule out any chance of a new presidential election being held within that time frame. Zelensky – whose presidential term expired almost one year ago – has repeatedly cited martial law as a pretext for refusing to hold a new election. Russia has declared Zelensky “illegitimate” as a leader, insisting that the Ukrainian parliament remains the only legal authority in the country. On Tuesday, Zelensky introduced draft legislation in the Ukrainian parliament proposing a three-month extension of martial law and general mobilization starting from May 9. According to Ukrainian law, elections cannot be held while martial law is in effect, meaning the presidential vote will remain suspended.

If martial law were lifted, parliamentary elections could be held within 60 days after the end of the restrictions, and presidential elections within 90 days. The submitted bills are expected to be approved by parliament between April 15 and 18, Ukrainian MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak has said. Zelensky’s potential run for reelection has been the subject of much media speculation, particularly after Steve Witkoff, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East and a key figure in negotiating a settlement of the Ukraine conflict, claimed in late March that “there will be elections” in the country, although without providing a timeline. His comments also came after Trump himself called Zelensky “a dictator without elections.”

A later report by The Economist claimed that Zelensky and his team were gearing up for a blitzkrieg election campaign to “catch [his] rivals off guard” and win the vote before the opposition could muster its strength. However, Ukrainian officials have dismissed any plans to hold an election anytime soon. David Arakhamia, the head of Zelensky’s faction in the parliament, said that “all parliamentary parties and groups have agreed that elections should be held six months after the lifting of martial law.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said that European NATO members are making every effort to make sure that Zelensky retains power. Even if he fails to do so, Kiev’s backers would seek to maintain “the same Nazi and overtly Russophobic regime” in Ukraine by installing a new “half-Fuhrer” in Zelensky’s stead, Lavrov stated.

Read more …

“U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis is now threatening contempt proceedings against the Trump administration for not complying with her order to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador..”

A Federal Judge Just Threatened the Trump Administration (Margolis)

Make no mistake about it, the left is trying to force President Trump to bring an MS-13 gang member back to the United States. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis is now threatening contempt proceedings against the Trump administration for not complying with her order to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador. The Biden-appointed judge is particularly upset that the administration hasn’t provided evidence of efforts to bring back this suspected gang member. During Tuesday’s hearing, she complained, “I’ve gotten nothing. I’ve gotten no real response, and no real legal justification for not answering.” Attorneys for Abrego Garcia had asked that the administration be found in contempt of court over its inaction. The judge said she wants to review the evidence the administration submits, which is expected to include sworn depositions, before ruling on the matter.

She ordered officials from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security to sit for the depositions, and for the administration to hand over documents by the end of the month to see what steps its taken to comply with her order. Naturally, the liberal media is portraying Abrego Garcia as some innocent victim of an “administrative error.” But they conveniently gloss over the serious concerns about his background. “Abrego Garcia was a foreign terrorist. He is an MS-13 gang member. He was engaged in human trafficking,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt explained Tuesday, setting the record straight. “He illegally came into our country, and so deporting him back to El Salvador was always going to be the end result.”

Xinis previously ordered the administration to try to bring Abrego Garcia back to the U.S., where he could be given due process. The Supreme Court partially affirmed her order last week, saying Abrego Garcia’s removal was “illegal” and that Xinis’ order “properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.” During an Oval Office meeting Monday between President Donald Trump and President Nayib Bukele, the Salvadoran president told a reporter that he wouldn’t send Abrego Garcia back to the U.S., calling the question “preposterous.”

But what about the judge’s previous ruling that supposedly bars Abrego Garcia’s deportation? The administration’s position is clear: as a member of MS-13, which Trump has designated as a foreign terrorist organization, his removal was both legal and necessary for American safety. The left is desperately trying to paint a different picture. They point to the judge’s opinion questioning the evidence used to identify him as an MS-13 member. This case perfectly illustrates the ongoing battle between Trump’s commitment to law and order and activist judges trying to obstruct his immigration policies — and now threatening the administration with contempt proceedings. This is judicial activism run amok, and it has to stop.

Read more …

Yeah, give them all their day in court…

“Parole is not a legal status under immigration laws. It is a status created by executive action and is now being curtailed under that same authority.”

Judge Halts Trump Deportation of Half a Million Biden “Parolees” (Turley)

The intense struggle between the Trump Administration and federal judges continued this week with another court ordering a halt to a nationwide program. In Massachusetts, District Judge Indira Talwani is preventing President Donald Trump from canceling a Biden program granting parole and the right to work to immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (CHNV). Judge Talwani’s order would require individual hearings for the half of a million individuals allowed into the country under this program by President Joe Biden. Under the announcement published in the Federal Register, the Department of Homeland Security officially moved to terminate the CHNV Program. The announcement followed an Executive Order, signed on Trump’s first day in office, entitled “Securing Our Borders,” directing the DHS to end the CHNV program.

Under the notice, DHS said that the parole status would expire in 30 days “unless the Secretary makes an individual determination to the contrary.” It further mandated that parolees who had not obtained a legal basis to be in the United States, such as a green card or other visa, must depart the United States before their parole expires. In the prior hearing, Judge Talwani indicated that she would not allow that to happen, stating that the Administration’s interpretation of the law was “incorrect” and that “[t]he nub of the problem here is that [Homeland Security Secretary Krisit Noem], in cutting short the parole period afforded to these individuals, has to have a reasoned decision.”

In her opinion, Judge Talwani wrote: “If their parole status is allowed to lapse, plaintiffs will be faced with two unfavorable options: continue following the law and leave the country on their own, or await removal proceedings. If plaintiffs leave the country on their own, they will face dangers in their native countries, as set forth in their affidavits.” The court also noted that leaving would cause family separation and jeopardize their ability to seek a remedy based on the Administrative Procedure Act. The Administration argued that it did have a “reasoned decision” to end the CHNV program and weighed the cost to the parolees. It noted that the parolees were always going to face family separation and costs since this was just a temporary, two-year program. It asserted that it did weigh alternative periods for winding down the program. While the court may disagree with its conclusions, it asserts that it has the same discretion used by President Biden in creating the program.

There was another pressing reason for the change. If the parolees were allowed to run the course of the full period, those who did not obtain legal status could force formal removal proceedings rather than the expedited removal under the program. The Justice Department maintained: “DHS’s decision to terminate the CHNV program and existing grants of parole under that program is within this statutory authority and comports with the notice requirements of the statute and regulations,” they wrote. “Additionally, given the temporary nature of CHNV parole and CHNV parolees’ pre-existing inability to seek re-parole under the program, their harms are outweighed by the harms to the public if the Secretary is not permitted to discontinue a program she has determined does not serve the public interest.”

All of this presents another novel legal question. Parole is not a legal status under immigration laws. It is a status created by executive action and is now being curtailed under that same authority. However, these individuals came to the country under the promise of a two-year period. The question is whether a temporary program created by executive fiat can be treated as creating a type of vested right. If Judge Talwani prevails, individual determinations of half a million cases would be an overwhelming burden on the Administration and easily run out the time granted under the program for these individuals. Indeed, for many of the individuals, the appellate process could exceed that period. The court is not weighing the harshness of the decision but the president’s discretion in making such a decision. Judge Talwani suggests that, once created by President Biden, the program cannot be curtailed or shortened by President Trump. That question could very well find itself on the Supreme Court’s ever-lengthening docket.

Read more …

“I don’t read The New York Times,” the former TV host said. “I don’t subscribe to The Washington Post. I don‘t read Politico or any of that crap. It’s just garbage.”

Tucker Carlson Shares Why His Show Was Canceled (DS)

It’s been two years since Tucker Carlson answered a phone call on a Monday morning in late April 2023 to learn that the Fox News Channel had canceled his prime-time show. “I got fired from Fox for saying things they didn’t like,” Carlson told The Daily Signal during an exclusive interview at The Heritage Foundation’s Annual Leadership Conference. “That’s all right, you know. It’s not my company,” Carlson said of his ouster from Fox, adding, “I wasn’t one of those people like, ‘You can’t fire me.’ It’s like, of course you can fire me!” He was replaced in the 8 p.m. Eastern Time slot by Jesse Watters. Fox was not the first major network to end its relationship with Carlson.
“I got fired once for low ratings [and] once for being kind of a lunatic,” he recalled. The political commentator worked at CNN and MSNBC before later going on to work at Fox News.

Looking back on his more than two decades working at Fox News, Carlson said, “I would always say to Fox, ‘I’m not going to take instruction. I mean, you hired me to get decent ratings, I’ve done that. If you don’t like what I say, you can take me off the air, but you’re not going to control my show, just fire me.’ … And that seemed like that had always been our deal.” After spending about 30 years working in the world of cable news, Carlson said, “I liked everyone I worked for, including the people who fired me.” Since his breakup with Fox News, Carlson started his own company and launched a YouTube channel, which now has nearly 4 million subscribers, where he shares multiple video interviews each week. Carlson hosts a wide range of guests on his show. Between March 5 and March 7, for example, Carson released interviews with Sam Bankman-Fried, who is currently in prison for fraud related to the collapse of his cryptocurrency exchange; Jonathan Roumie, who played Jesus in “The Chosen”; and Qatar Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani.

“I have varied interests, you know, but I’m interested in people,” Carlson said. While Carlson said he could have retired after losing his job at Fox News and pursued his passions for trout fishing, bird hunting, and carpentry, his love of people kept him in the news and political commentary space. “But I really love talking to people. I like learning—that sounds like B.S., but it’s actually fully sincere. And I love that more than I love money. I would do that for free,” he said. Despite still working in the field of political commentary, Carlson says he does not “read any news content at all,” but instead gets his news from people. “I’m not following every topic, he said. “I only follow five or six things.” “I’m really interested in the foreign policy stuff, and I’ve spent a lot of time on that topic,” Carlson said.

“I’m not an expert on it, but I certainly know a lot more than most policymakers in the United States who are probably the dumbest people I’ve ever met in my life, and reckless, and not all, but the majority have no right to make the decisions that they make.” “I’m interesting in spiritual questions, he continued. “I’m interest in the outdoors, and I’m interested in the balance of power globally, and in war and preventing it. So, those are my interests.” Life is a lot easier, Carlson said, when you focus on your interests and know that “you don’t have to be an expert on everything. And by the way, no one can be.” Among the people who he says he does talk to in order to stay informed on the issues he cares about, there are “a surprisingly small number of journalists, but there are still a couple who I know because they’re really well-informed.”

“I don’t read The New York Times,” the former TV host said. “I don’t subscribe to The Washington Post. I don‘t read Politico or any of that crap. It’s just garbage. Like, why would you read that? Because it gets in your head and then you can’t remember, ‘How did I know that? Where did I hear that?’ You know? So, I get almost 100% of my information from individuals on the phone or by text.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Boldyboy1975/status/1911855232176251283
https://twitter.com/Boldyboy1975/status/1911784309440074076

 

 

Holy week
https://twitter.com/Sachinettiyil/status/1911857353420656899


https://twitter.com/DiogenisSinopis/status/1912110942336266735
https://twitter.com/CatholicArena/status/1911929738521903128
https://twitter.com/CatholicQuote12/status/1911999731280355356

 

 

Alert

 

 

Lion

 

 

Menace
https://twitter.com/itsme_urstruly/status/1911843708473164266

 

 

 

 

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