Menu Icon

Raúl Ilargi Meijer

Debt Rattle October 16 2026

Oct 162026
 
 October 16, 2026  Posted by at 8:50 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  20 Responses »


Paul Cézanne Young Italian Woman at a Table c1900


• Zelensky Says ‘We’re Done’ With Trump Energy Truce, Hits Russian Refinery (JTN)
• Trump Begins Highlighting “The Zelenskyy Problem” (CTH)
• “It’s A Pity…”: Zelensky Feels ‘Betrayed’ By Trump & Elon Musk (ZH)
• Millions Are Fleeing Blue States, and It’s Not for the Sunshine (Aaron Hanscom)
• The Problem Of Immigrants Whose Faith Mandates Conquest (Allan J. Feifer)
• Trump Admin Floats Unfreezing Russian Assets In Big Move To Restart Talks (ZH)
• Bulgarian PM Stuns EU With Full-Throated Backing Of Trump-Putin Diesel Deal (ZH)
• Has Trump Handed Dems the Rope with which to Hang Him? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• The Lie Behind the Gaza Genocide Accusations (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Hamas is a Complete Death Cult (Victor Davis Hanson)
• The Masks Were Never About Science (Peter Navarro)
• Nord Stream Sabotage Trial Begins With Explosive Allegations Against Ukraine (RFE/RL)

 

 

https://twitter.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/2110361208985661753?s=20 https://twitter.com/Rusia_HD/status/2110468522455535725?s=20

 

 


Does Europe tell him to turm his back on Trump?

• Zelensky Says ‘We’re Done’ With Trump Energy Truce, Hits Russian Refinery (JTN)

Ukraine resumed drone strikes on Russian refineries after holding off for the three days to adhere to a unilateral “energy ceasefire” President Donald Trump initiated.


Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky accused Russia of repeatedly attacking its power grid during the ceasefire, and he accused the U.S. of betraying Kyiv by withdrawing support critical to its defense against Russia.

On Wednesday, Ukrainian military officials alleged that SpaceX interrupted military-grade Starlink terminals, which prevented Kyiv from using them to guide drone strikes. Functionality had been restored as of Thursday, NBC News reported, citing an unnamed source in Ukraine’s defense ministry.

Zelensky said in an interview with the Financial Times, published on Thursday, that Ukraine was “done” with the ceasefire, and would resume attacks on Russian refineries. Hours later, the Russian defense ministry said Ukraine “attempted a massive attack on the Ryazan oil refinery.”

“The block (on attacking refineries) is out. We’re done,” he told the newspaper.

Read more …

“Zelenskyy Urgently Sits Down for Interviews as …”

“It is a violation of commercial Starlink terms of service to use the terminal for weapon systems. This applies to all users and is shut down when discovered. There is a separate network called Starshield, which is operated by the US government. This is not under SpaceX control.” ~ Elon Musk, March 2026 “

• Trump Begins Highlighting “The Zelenskyy Problem” (CTH)

It is almost impossible to explain what is happening to those who have not followed the last five years of events closely. In the latest development, yesterday Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy -attempting his best Churchill performance- rushes to British media outlets to give lengthy interviews. Zelenskyy is in London because that is the center of his support system.


If you are a denier of CTH’s long standing outline about Ukraine being World War Reddit, yet you hold some intellectual honesty permitting you to accept uncomfortable truth, you might perhaps pause and think about what is happening carefully. Zelenskyy is in a crisis moment within the Russia conflict. Ukraine is getting pummeled by Russia’s fast moving and highly accurate drones and missiles. Yet, at this moment of consequence, Volodymyr Zelenskyy finds the time to travel to the U.K and give long interviews with pro-Ukraine media outlets.

What exactly is the priority here? …. Zelenskyy is fighting a narrative war. That’s why the term World War Reddit applies. It is transparently obvious what is going on. Zelenskyy has one primary demand, more money. That’s it. The rest is positioning and false presentations of patriotism. The “defense of Ukraine” narrative is not about defending Ukraine in the traditional sense; it’s about using the defense of Ukraine to get money.

Five Days Ago we wrote this on X: “We have been watching everything for many years. Your next move will be for Ukraine intelligence, which we all know is EU-NATO intelligence, to launch a kinetic operation against your own energy infrastructure. You will then blame Russia, and your EU-NATO enablers will cite that example in opposition to President Trump. We can see you.“

In the last four days, exactly this predicted situation has been unfolding. To enhance the sympathetic narrative, Zelenskyy then claims the USA is no longer providing early warning intelligence or permitting Ukraine to launch offensive military strike operations using Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite communications. Again, more nonsense.

“It is a violation of commercial Starlink terms of service to use the terminal for weapon systems. This applies to all users and is shut down when discovered. There is a separate network called Starshield, which is operated by the US government. This is not under SpaceX control.” ~ Elon Musk, March 2026

President Trump, Secretary Rubio and even Elon Musk have had enough. However, from a perspective of money all U.S. and EU interests position sympathy for Ukraine through the same self-interest prism. Secretary Rubio was correct when at his brutally honest moment in February 2025 he said, “Ukraine is a proxy war between the United States and Russia”, and the Trump administration had no interest in maintaining this proxy war of foolishness built upon a foundation of grift, fraud and financial self-interest.

That was and remains the non-pretending reality. Western influence agents, led by the United States (before Trump) created this mess. There is a painful Gordian knot that needs to be cut in order to end this madness. President Trump is now pushing back against the entirety of the false Ukraine constructs. I hope he succeeds because this has been going on far too long.

TRUTH SOCIAL 2025 – “Think of it, a modestly successful comedian, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn’t be won, that never had to start, but a War that he, without the U.S. and “TRUMP,” will never be able to settle.

The United States has spent $200 Billion Dollars more than Europe, and Europe’s money is guaranteed, while the United States will get nothing back. Why didn’t Sleepy Joe Biden demand Equalization, in that this War is far more important to Europe than it is to us — We have a big, beautiful Ocean as separation. On top of this, Zelenskyy admits that half of the money we sent him is “MISSING.”

He refuses to have Elections, is very low in Ukrainian Polls, and the only thing he was good at was playing Biden “like a fiddle.” A Dictator without Elections, Zelenskyy better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left. In the meantime, we are successfully negotiating an end to the War with Russia, something all admit only “TRUMP,” and the Trump Administration, can do. Biden never tried, Europe has failed to bring Peace, and Zelenskyy probably wants to keep the “gravy train” going. I love Ukraine, but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job, his Country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died – And so it continues…..


Read more …

“Switch Starlink on?” Doesn’t he know about Starshield?

• “It’s A Pity…”: Zelensky Feels ‘Betrayed’ By Trump & Elon Musk (ZH)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he feels betrayed by President Trump in the wake of the US deal to buy Russian fuel from Moscow, which was announced last week. Zelensky went on a newly aired episode of Piers Morgan’s show, and he was asked point blank by the British show host if he had been “betrayed” by the Trump administration, to which Zelensky answered, “Really, Yes.” Russian media was quick to seize on the increasingly open schism between Trump and Zelensky…


Zelensky tells Piers Morgan he feels ‘BETRAYED’ BY TRUMP: ‘really YES, really, between us’ “It’s a pity that we are losing a strong partner,” the Ukrainian leader told Morgan on Wednesday. “This is our country, our body, our home, our children… That’s why it’s painful when Trump chooses one side,” Zelensky at one point also stated.

“If you’re in the middle, you have to stay in the middle. Not on the wrong side,” said Zelensky. “This is not the right side of history.” Here, Zelensky seemed to suggest Trump is actually more on the Kremlin side of things at this point. The interview also came amid reports that the US is throttling intelligence-sharing with Kiev. The White House has thus far neither confirmed nor denied the allegations.


But Zelensky has himself for the past two night of Russian airstrikes made a point to publicize that Western partners have not provided the typical early warning notices of inbound missiles that were available in prior such attacks. There’s been another apparently ‘betrayal’ (in Zelensky’s assessment) by the White House of late: reports say that SpaceX has imposed a movement-speed restriction on certain Starlink terminals used in Ukraine. This has deeply impacted Ukraine’s military, which is greatly reliant on Starlink for rapid battlefield communications and functions. Zelensky used the Piers Morgan appears to plead that it be ‘switched on’.


“People will die, of course, if attacks will continue and if Starlink will not work… it’s not helpful,” he continued. The Ukrainian leader expressed home the limitation was merely a “mistake,” suggesting it could “maybe a huge technical problem” at SpaceX. Overall, Zelensky’s message was that Ukraine is ‘losing’ American support and that he feels betrayed not only be Trump, but by Elon Musk too. Musk has directly chimed in on the controversy, clarifying “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government” – and so ultimately it’s the US government, not SpaceX, behind whatever cut happened that impacted Ukraine.



Read more …


Now Zelensky can feel really betrayed…

“European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that Moscow “must pay for the destruction it has caused. And we are using the proceeds from the immobilized Russian assets to make sure it does.”

• Trump Admin Floats Unfreezing Russian Assets In Big Move To Restart Talks (ZH)

President Trump appears to be busy rolling back years of entrenched Ukraine policy. Starting last week he announced the controversial diesel deal with Putin, and this week Ukraine’s Zelensky is complaining that intelligence-sharing has been throttled, and possibly even cut off.


The possibility or even likelihood of this heading to another TACO moment aside, what’s next? New reporting in the Financial Times gives an idea. The United States has floated a proposal that European countries unfreeze some of Russia’s sovereign assets and deposit them in an entity controlled by Washington.

via Associated Press: The FT report cites four people familiar with the matter, who describe that the idea was formally presented by envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner during a meeting of Western allies and Ukraine in Miami on Oct.10. “The US suggested several possible methods for unfreezing the assets, including for them to be moved into a new special-purpose financial vehicle overseen by Washington,” the sources said.

This US plan would be enacted in the hope of opening up momentum toward a comprehensive Ukraine peace plan. Moscow has of late rejected any ‘temporary’ proposal, including a 60-day pause in fighting recently offered by Zelensky. It wants a lasting political settlement and not a mere ‘pause’ along the front lines. At the Miami meeting were NATO representatives, as well as officials from the US, France, Germany, and the EU.

“Many ideas have been floated as to how Moscow’s frozen assets could be used after the war, the US official added,” the FT says. European officials are said to have balked at any initiative to let go of Russian assets. “They were told that this was just simply not going to happen,” one source said. For example, Germany has voiced its clear position:m”Those are assets that are frozen in Europe and they should remain frozen in Europe. This is our business and we are deciding over “it,” Merz said in Brussels ahead of an EU summit.

At least €260 billion in sovereign assets belonging to Russia’s central bank were frozen in 2022 as a result of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February of that year. Most of this is held at the Belgian securities depository Euroclear. The vast majority, or over €210 billion of the sum, is held in the EU.

The last couple years of war has seen the EU work out a scheme wherein payments are made to Ukraine utilizing interest gained from Russa’s funds. Washington’s sudden willingness to ease off the pressure on Moscow has interesting implications regarding the Iran war…


European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that Moscow “must pay for the destruction it has caused. And we are using the proceeds from the immobilized Russian assets to make sure it does.” “We are making a further [$1.62] billion of them available to Ukraine. This will support Ukraine’s continued resistance against Russia’s illegal war,” she had announced in August.

Read more …

“It’s the affordability, stupid. Why is everything so darn expensive in blue states?”

• Millions Are Fleeing Blue States, and It’s Not for the Sunshine (Aaron Hanscom)

It’s the weather, stupid.


That’s one of the left’s ready responses when confronted with the fact that millions of people are moving from blue states to red states, economist Stephen Moore says in a new PragerU video. While acknowledging that weather has long explained why people move west and south, Moore points to the state that pokes holes in that argument today: California.

Warm weather isn’t all the Golden State offers prospective residents. Moore mentions its other appeals: beaches, mountains, top-tier universities, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, and a productive economy. So why have nearly 2 million more people left California for other states than arrived since 2012? For the same reasons that New York lost a net of more than 2 million and Illinois nearly 1 million from 2012 to 2024, according to Census Bureau estimates.

It’s the taxes, stupid. Florida, Tennessee, and Texas don’t tax wage income at the state level. California and New York, meanwhile, are near the top of the list of highest state income tax rates.

The Democratic Socialists of America would say we shouldn’t shed any tears over top 1 percenters like Google cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin deciding to leave California, but when wealthy people leave a state, their taxable income goes with them. Moore says it’s not just billionaires and millionaires who suffer in high-tax states: “Taxes affect small business owners, young families trying to buy a house, retirees trying to make their savings last.”

It’s the poor education and high crime, stupid. Leftists like to say that more government spending will lead to safer streets and better schools. Moore explains why that’s not the case:

From 2000 to 2024, New York’s per capita government spending quadrupled compared to Florida’s. You’d expect then New York to be cleaner, safer, and [to have] better public schools than Florida. But that’s not the reality. By most measures, while taking far less of its citizens’ money, Florida delivers better municipal services than its high tax counterpart and its educational outcomes are equal, if not better.

It’s the inequality and uneven law enforcement, stupid. Income inequality is worse in New York than in Florida, and in blue states the gap shows up in how the law is enforced, too. Michael Shellenberger describes a progressive Los Angeles that is all but lawless in certain parts: In wealthy neighborhoods, the law is still enforced. In poor and working-class neighborhoods, it is not. If you torch a car in Beverly Hills, you’re arrested. If you do it in East LA while shouting political slogans, you’re “engaging in protest.”

This two-tiered enforcement is not progressive. It is segregation by another name. It creates one set of expectations for the politically connected and another for the disposable. And in that framework, working people, especially immigrants, families, and hourly wage earners, are abandoned. They are the ones who walk their kids past open-air drug markets. They are the ones whose shops are looted and whose cars are stolen. They are the ones who call 911 and wait, and wait, and wait.

It’s the affordability, stupid. Why is everything so darn expensive in blue states? Moore offers one reason:

“Let’s look at energy prices. Eight of the 10 most expensive states for electricity were blue states, while nine of the 10 cheapest were red states. Among the large states, electricity prices in blue states were almost double those in red states. And higher electricity costs raised the price of everything: rent, transportation, groceries.

Moore says that because of our federal system, we can treat the states as “laboratories of democracy” and study their successes and failures in taxing, regulating, spending, and governing. And the best way to grade them? “Watch where Americans decide to live and work,” he says.

It’s not cheap to move out of state, yet from 2012 to 2024, Florida gained a net 1.7 million-plus residents, Texas 1.5 million-plus, and Tennessee 400,000-plus.

Roger L. Simon, a PJ Media co-founder, is one of the many Californians who decided to leave for the Volunteer State. He moved in 2018 after living in California since 1968, and wrote about it in his book American Refugees: The Untold Story of the Mass Exodus From Blue States to Red States. He had no regrets when he wrote a post titled “Thank God I Left California” on his Substack in 2025, in which he said, “The leadership of California is a litany of some of the most immoral politicians in the country, every one of them a hypocritical fake: Governor Gavin Newsom, Mayor Karen Bass, Sen. Adam Schiff, Rep. Maxine Waters, and former VP Kamala Harris, among a raft of malignant narcissists in a one-party state.”

In the upcoming midterms, voters should ask whether the records of Democratic candidates like Abdul El-Sayed, James Talarico, and Peggy Flanagan show the same self-serving politics Simon describes in California.

Read more …

“These are not the hard-working economic immigrants of old; this is a whole new type of immigrant, and America must address the change soon.”

• The Problem Of Immigrants Whose Faith Mandates Conquest (Allan J. Feifer)

In Wednesday’s Pluralism Is Broken, I argued that pluralism only works when cultural differences operate within a shared civic framework. Multiculturalism reverses that premise by asking America to accommodate differences without requiring assimilation. When immigration policy no longer reinforces a common framework—and when we become unwilling to examine its consequences—we are not preserving pluralism; we have sown the seeds of our own destruction.


The central question is whether a society committed to individual liberty can remain coherent when it loses the will to reject individuals or groups whose norms contradict its foundational values. Over time, we have deliberately bent our rules to accommodate two categories: those who come here solely for economic reasons and those who seem to come in a spirit of religious conquest.

Economic migration has existed since the nation’s founding, but two modern developments transformed it from beneficial to detrimental: easier entry from around the globe and a benefits system that attracts those seeking opportunity regardless of their ability to contribute.

That created a second, more complex challenge: the arrival of migrants whose religious framework is not merely a set of private beliefs but a complete system governing how believers live, their obligations to others, and a requirement to proselytize or even conquer—and that makes welfare not a gift, but a mandate from the new host country.

Classical Islamic scholarship draws this distinction through ibadat—acts of worship governing the relationship between God and the believer—andmuamalat—rules governing relationships among human beings, including family, inheritance, commerce, sexuality, and community life. Islam is not merely a faith; it also prescribes how believers must live and what to believe. Devout Muslims accept these obligations as divinely mandated, not optional. The concept of the ummah reinforces this: believers are members of a religiously defined community with obligations toward one another that extend across national boundaries.

In a religiously tolerant country like ours, we have no natural immune system to fend off a culture with a high birth rate that frequently rejects assimilation. This leads to an unavoidable question: whose culture will survive? This unprecedented question demands that we rethink our laws and beliefs while we still can.

The problem is not that Muslims are different; America has always absorbed differences. The question is whether those differences encompass fundamentally exclusionary ideas. America’s original social compact was built around the individual. The people who came here differed in nationality, language, and denomination, but generally shared a recognizable conception of society: individual liberty bounded by responsibility, private property, family, voluntary association, rule of law, and government constrained by citizens’ rights. We need not be homogeneous; we need only function within the same framework.

Islam is different. Muslims may understand and practice their faith differently, but Islamic obligations encompass family, inheritance, commerce, sexuality, charity, and relationships with the broader community. A religious obligation is different from a cultural preference. One can abandon a custom; abandoning a religious obligation can be understood as violating God’s commandments.

That confronts an American assumption: that religion can be neatly separated from civic life. And it raises the question America increasingly avoids: What happens when religious obligation and the American civic can no longer be reconciled? The First Amendment protects free exercise, not parallel legal systems. Americans are free to practice their religion and organize religious communities, but American law governs. A religious obligation can compel the believer, not someone else.

The problem comes when religious obligation involves matters American law treats differently: marriage, divorce, inheritance, women’s status, sexual conduct, speech, and religious criticism. When Islamic law addresses these areas, the issue is no longer merely private religious belief. It becomes a question of whether a religious framework can coexist with a civic framework built around individual autonomy and our Constitution.

Our society accommodates religious belief and practice—but not without limits. Muslims may pray, observe Ramadan, eat halal food, and establish a mosque, as long as they respect others’ rights. But religious freedom does not shield practices that violate our laws or undermine core civic norms. Customs that impose coercive dress requirements, restrict women’s autonomy, or involve genital mutilation, among other customs, are categorically incompatible with American legal and moral standards. Tolerance has boundaries; beyond them, accommodation constitutes societal surrender.

The problem intensifies when accommodation shifts from religious practice to reshaping society, allowing religious requirements to become institutionalized and requiring others to acquiesce. Beware exceptions granted on religious grounds; more will endlessly follow. Over time, tolerance of an individual practice can become pressure on institutions to accept norms fundamentally at odds with our culture.

At that point, we are no longer discussing religious freedom; we have breached the boundaries of our common civic order. We can’t stop at diagnosing incompatibilities; we must establish policies that prevent the erosion of civic order—not by restricting religion, but by restricting practices that violate American law, undermine individual rights, or create parallel social systems. What we must do:

First, the United States must enforce laws against coercive or abusive practices more consistently. Customs such as forced marriages, genital mutilation, or dress requirements imposed through religious strictures are not protected expressions of faith; they violate individual rights. Immigration screening should identify applicants who endorse or participate in such practices and deny entry to those who will not swear allegiance to American legal norms and our Constitution.

Second, the government must prohibit parallel legal systems. Any institution—religious or otherwise—that attempts to adjudicate family law, inheritance, or criminal matters outside the American legal system should be sanctioned.

Third, immigration policy must incorporate cultural compatibility as a legitimate criterion. This does not necessarily mean excluding people based on belief, but evaluating whether an applicant’s stated expectations and social media history align with America’s constitutional order and societal structure.

Fourth, assimilation must be a requirement for naturalization. This includes English proficiency, civic education, demonstrated lack of criminality, self-sufficiency, and a verifiable understanding that American law—not religious obligation—governs public life.

Finally, policymakers must recognize that immigration scale matters. Even compatible cultural differences will overwhelm our society when numbers exceed our capacity to integrate immigrants. Immigration levels must reflect not only economic needs but the nation’s ability to maintain our civic identity.

These policies do not directly target Muslims; they target their practices and frameworks that conflict with the American civic order. A pluralistic society can welcome many faiths, but it cannot survive the institutionalization of norms that contradict its foundational principles. Policy does not punish difference; it preserves the norms that make differences possible.

We have treated immigration as though the primary question is: how many people can we absorb? The more important question is what America becomes by absorbing them. A constitutional society can tolerate individual differences, but not indefinitely competing conceptions of the proper social order without becoming something different itself.

That is the transformation we should be discussing—not whether America is tolerant enough, but whether tolerance has become the mechanism by which a tolerant society is transformed, and what decisions we must undertake to preserve our own civic culture.

God Bless America.

Read more …

“Prime Minister Radev told the summit “Any step in reducing fuel prices and to guarantee our competitiveness, we appreciate” – in a clear reference to the US-Russia diesel agreement.”

• Bulgarian PM Stuns EU With Full-Throated Backing Of Trump-Putin Diesel Deal (ZH)

Bulgaria has just broken ranks amid widespread European criticism over the Trump-Putin diesel deal announced last week, with the NATO country’s Prime Minister Rumen Radev stunning Brussels in fresh remarks. “You know what is our problem right now in Europe? High fuel prices,” Radev said in English as he attended a two-day summit of leaders.


Reuters described of the top level meeting in Brussels, “the European Union began a packed summit on Thursday that quickly underscored wrangles over how to tame soaring energy prices, design a budget to keep the bloc competitive and curb surging exports from China that are blamed for job losses.”

Prime Minister Radev told the summit “Any step in reducing fuel prices and to guarantee our competitiveness, we appreciate” – in a clear reference to the US-Russia diesel agreement.

And even as most continue to vocally support Ukrainian President Zelensky in his ongoing standoff with Trump and defiance of US wishes, Radev criticized Ukraine’s strikes against Russia’s oil refineries, again siding with the White House. “I don’t support strikes on any refineries,” Radev said, at a moment Trump is strongly warning that Kiev better halt this tactic.

“I don’t support strikes on any energy power plants, like Russian attacks on energy power plants in Ukraine, because this hits us back,” he added. “The prices in Europe are (skyrocketing).” Fellow European leaders voiced wide disagreement, with EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas echoing Zelensky’s words that the diesel deal was a “gift” to Vladimir Putin.

“The question is: what has he (Putin) given in return? What we see is that he’s actually increasing the attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure. The ceasefire that was also announced is not really working on the Russian side,” Kallas said. The recently installed Radev, whose Progressive Bulgaria party won the April election, has been busy rolling back the NATO ‘eastern flank’ country’s prior policy on Ukraine, including related to arms shipments.

The new government has made clear it has a new peace agenda, and its position is that nothing will be resolved by just pouring more heavy arms into the conflict, now in its fifth year. It was given a new mandate. This was also notable amid the AfD’s continued rise in Germany…


He has repeatedly criticized EU overreach on green-energy mandates, sanctions policies and what he describes as moral posturing in a “world without rules.” While analysts have lately noted he is unlikely to ultimately jeopardize the flow of EU funds that sustain Bulgaria’s economy, the result installs a distinctly Russia-friendly government at the heart of the EU’s southeastern flank – a shift that has been drawing close scrutiny in Brussels, Washington and Kiev.

Read more …

“The Democrats will use lawfare to turn the US into a one party political system.”

• Has Trump Handed Dems the Rope with which to Hang Him? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Alexander Dugin thinks that if the Republicans lose control of Congress in the November 3 midterm elections, the Democrats will renew their attempt to prosecute Trump as a criminal and members of his administration as well. This is a real possibility.


We witnessed the Democrats during Trump’s term and during Biden’s four years use lawfare against Trump. It was Trump’s reelection in 2024 that saved him from being turned into a criminal by the Democrats. Since then Democrats have made further inroads into transforming law from serving justice to serving Democrat agendas.

As Democrats have become ideologues convinced that whites are racists whose speech needs to be curtailed along with their 14th Amendment protection to equality under law, Democrats in the justice (sic) system have been perfecting their ability to use their offices not to serve justice but to serve their ideological agendas. This is what ideological parties always do.

New York Assistant Attorney General Rick Sawyer explained to the Jewish Anti-Defamation League in a 2022 conference that “Attorney General’s offices have a massive amount of power within their jurisdiction.” He pointed out that they do not have to charge a crime in order to bankrupt a target with subpoenas, massive investigations, and force them to enter into “creative settlements” without ever going to court. Sawyer explained that these means of harassment and intimidation can be used to negate free speech rights. Peter Brimelow and Emerald Robinson discuss how NY Attorney General Letitia James used these highly unethical tactics to close down the immigration website Vdare by imposing a $1 to $2 million legal bill caused by complying with subpoenas.

Another trick Democrats have devised is when a state attorney general transgresses on a target’s First Amendment rights, the Democrat federal judge to whom the First Amendment issue is brought refuses to hear the case and reassigns it to the state. In this way Democrat federal judges condone trampling on the victim’s First Amendment rights by state prosecutors serving some Democrat agenda.

This development is hardly surprising. American law schools have been teaching for a couple of decades that the purpose of law is not to serve justice but to transform society in a leftward direction. Shutting up one’s opponents advances the leftward direction. The same has happened in journalism schools where the students are taught that their purpose is not to objectively report the news but to use “news” as a weapon to transform society. The American people are unaware of these developments, because it is not in the interest of those bringing changes in this way to tell them.

It was not only Trump who was a victim of Democrat lawfare, but also others such as Mike Lindell, General Flynn, and Rudy Giuliani. When the Democrats return to power, expect to see an increase in the use of lawfare to destroy Republicans. The Democrats will use lawfare to turn the US into a one party political system.

In contrast, Trump has been unable to bring justice to the Democrats who abused power in efforts to frame the President of the United States. NY Attorney General Letitia James, who attempted to frame Trump for mortgage fraud when there were no complaints is herself known to have committed mortgage fraud. But Democrat prosecutors and judges in the state with jurisdiction prevent charges from being brought against her. We hear a lot about alleged “white privilege,” but here we see real black Democrat privilege.

Trump might have handed both the rope and tree limb to the Democrats to hang both him and the Republican Party by letting Netanyahu and the Israel Lobby drag the US into a war with Iran that has imposed hardship on Americans by reducing energy flows and sending up energy costs and inflation at the very time that AI data centers championed by Trump are driving up the cost of electricity. In effect, Netanyahu has succeeded in pushing America leftward into more policies destructive of the economy and the Constitution.

Read more …

Victor Davis Hanson has 2 articles about October 7. He makes some good points.

• The Lie Behind the Gaza Genocide Accusations (Victor Davis Hanson)

We’re at the third anniversary week, just last week, of the Oct. 7, 2023 massacres. Remember what happened? About 4,000 terrorists from Gaza, Hamas terrorists, accompanied by 2,000 opportunistic Gazan civilians, swarmed into Israel in a pre-planned assault. They penetrated 17 miles. They would have gone a lot further had the IDF and armed civilians not beaten them back. They killed almost 1,000 of the terrorists and their accompaniment.


But the question I have is: Why is Gaza now in rubble? We hear about genocide, we hear about settler colonialism, we hear about apartheid, but why is Gaza in rubble? And I think I can answer that in two ways. What happened before Oct. 7, and what happened after.

Let’s go first to what happened after. The Israeli government on Oct. 8, and subsequently for the next 20 days, asked Hamas, such as it is, to do two things: turn over the 251 hostages and turn over the architects and those who participated in the murder. They waited 20 days before invading Gaza. In those 20 days, the Gazans sent about 8,500 rockets into Israel’s civilian centers. These were not aimed at military targets or even dual-use targets. They were aimed at civilian targets.

So for 20 days, while Israel waited for them to give back the hostages before they invaded, give back the architects of this terror, they refused both counts, and they sent about 8,500 rockets. They would altogether send 13,000 rockets, we forget that, at Israel. So that’s number one and two.

And next, they exposed civilians at the entries and exits into the tunnels below Gaza. There was almost 500 miles in this labyrinth, and to get in and out, you had to go through a hospital, a mosque, or a school, or in some cases private homes. The Hamas terrorists, the people responsible for killing everybody, were hiding in this labyrinth quite safe while they were exposing their own civilians to retaliation for the crimes that they had committed.

Can you imagine during the Blitz, for example, if British civil defense people who were manning the barricades and were afraid of bombing went down into the subway and they denied the use of the subway to British civilians? That would be unheard of. But that’s exactly what Hamas did.

So number three, there were about 2,000 to 3,000 civilians that either planned all along to go into Israel to be opportunistic killers, looters, thieves, and rapists. And they participated in the mutilation and the desecration and the hostage taking. We know that. We had about a couple of hundred people who were captured. We had their GoPro cameras. We had security cameras in the kibbutzes.

And by the way, of the 6,000 who participated, the Israeli government has taken out about 4,000. The next 2,000 must know that they are marked people, and they will not be here very long.

Another reason. Why, when they brought back hostages and corpses and they paraded them in the streets of Gaza, were they not only met by a mob that was cheering, but the mob actually tried to spit, hit, club those hostages who were alive and mutilate the bodies of those who were dead and brought back as trophies?

In other words, the civilians, think of this, the civilians of Gaza that we say were innocent had to be stopped from further atrocities by the people who created the atrocities, the Hamas terrorists.

Let’s ask another reason why Gaza is in rubble, and in the context of before Oct. 7.

In September 2005, all Israelis were out of Gaza. There was not one Jew, there was not one Israeli inside Gaza. American philanthropic organizations and donors bought key infrastructure, especially greenhouses, and the Israelis turned them over to the Gazans, who immediately looted them and destroyed them against their own self-interest. They were very lucrative businesses, and they could have been using them.

So my point is, there were no Jews in Gaza. This is 22 years ago, or 18 years ago by the time of the October massacres. So Gazans and Hamas terrorists wanted to kill Israelis even though no Israelis were in Gaza. And they had not been there for about 18 years on Oct. 7.

And the West, mainly the United States and Europe and the U.N., had given Gaza in that period from 2005 to the date of the massacres about $40 billion. Did they build a Dubai-like resort? Did Hamas have regular elections? Did they have a constitution that encouraged the equality of the sexes, that allowed religious freedom, that called for protection of individual civil liberties? No.

Did they take their 25 miles or so of pristine Mediterranean beaches and turn it into a Dubai? No. What did they do? First thing they did is they murdered any contestant to the election. They held the election in 2006. They got elected, and then they canceled the election. And then for the next 18 years, they killed anybody who questioned this Hamas theocratic terrorist clique that ruled Gaza.

Let me emphasize again, they diverted $40 billion and built a tunnel labyrinth for one reason, to protect the terrorists and to expose their own civilians to retaliation when they committed their next planned atrocity.

Think of the argument. They are essentially telling the world we expect the Israelis to be more humane about our own civilians than we are. Therefore, we are putting our entries and exits in places where civilians will be there, in schools, mosques, and hospitals, because we think the Israelis are so humanitarian they won’t bomb those places and we will be safe. In other words, We don’t care if they get killed, but we want to save ourselves and we think the Israelis will treat our civilians better than we do who are exposing them.

Let me just sum up.

After Oct. 7, they had 20 days to come to an agreement and turn over the perpetrators and give back the hostages. They refused. Instead, they answered that with rockets aimed at Israeli civilians. When the Israelis went in there to get the perpetrators, they hid in tunnels, committed terrorist acts, sent thousands more rockets into Israel, deliberately at civilian areas, and put their civilians as human shields to ensure there would be civilian casualties even as the Israelis were dropping leaflets and texting individual apartment dwellers to get out and not be collateral damage.

Before Oct. 7, Israel had completely evacuated Gaza for 18 years. They had allowed an election. They were supplying, I should say, about 20% to 50% of the food, water, sewage treatment, chemicals, fuel, and power to Gaza. Gaza had a border with Egypt. Did Egypt want to let Gazans in there, and did they want to help? No. They wanted nothing to do with them. Nothing to do with them.

They had an election, then they canceled all elections, and they tormented and terrorized their own people. And we are supposed to believe now that Israel created a genocide when the population of Gaza, when they left in 2005, was what? It’s about 1.3 million. And what was it on Oct. 7? About 2.4 million. Nations or countries that want to commit genocide do not pull all of their military and civilians out of the area that is targeted and then see it increase by one million people in a mere 20 years.

The charge is absurd. The whole situation is absurd. And what’s most absurd, Westerners still parrot this word genocide, which applies to a lot of places in the world that they omit, but it surely doesn’t apply to what Israel did after Oct. 7.

Read more …

“Why Are Campuses Not Condemning Them?..”

• Hamas is a Complete Death Cult (Victor Davis Hanson)


Jack Fowler: Well, Victor, let’s go to some campuses—two campuses. I’ll throw both stories out there and your take on them. They both have to do with antisemitism, and one is at Columbia, which has always been a hotbed since Oct. 7 for antisemitism.

And the headline here is, from Fox News: “Columbia University Says Oct. 7 Dining Menu Listing Was a Mistake.” And part of what it said here on the menu at the school was Oct. 7 blush sauce, which is like—what the f–? This is, this is… “Oh, that was a printing typo.” How the hell does that get to be a printing typo? Anyway, that was one thing.

The other thing that’s antisemitic and really troubling has to do with this professor at Haverford College in Pennsylvania. Professor Guangtian Ha he’s been arrested and charged with cyberstalking a Jewish colleague. He was posing as a MAGA anonymous person on X.

Let me just read this. It says, “In addition to posting vile antisemitic messages, he allegedly posted his colleague’s home address, infant child’s name, a photograph of the family’s mailbox, countless antisemitic slurs and threats, and reference of real-time observation of their home,” etc. And he was a wackadoo, I think, if you look at the courses he was teaching. But someone with that mentality could be hired at a prestigious college, maybe it shouldn’t be surprising, Victor.

Victor Davis Hanson: He’s DEI. He’s DEI. Remember what DEI is. DEI is just as if you and I go into an insurance company and say, “We’re gonna go take a trip, and we wanna get insurance. We’re gonna fly, and wanna get airline insurance.” And so we’re indemnified. I have a small little 40 acres, and I have a renter now, and I get insurance that says if anyone who wants to sue me, I have X amount.

Basically, in California, it’s happened five times. If you’re drunk, and you’re driving at a high speed, and you go aerial, and you go into an orchard or vineyard and you destroy $30,000 or $40,000 worth of damage, you get nothing, and the person leaves the scene of the accident. And if you try to take the car, of course you’ll be arrested as a deposit.

But they can… We’ve had cases where they sue people if they hit a pipe or something or, “Well, that pipeline shouldn’t be there.” So you get these expensive policies. Well, that’s what DEI is. It’s basically saying, “I got a DEI policy, and that means that if I want to make up a false identity and attack this person, I’m not a part of the oppressor class. I’m the oppressed class, so I get an exemption. If I wanna walk out of this store and shoplift, I get an exemption if it’s under $950, maybe even above.”

And that’s the very worst thing about DEI. And that’s all these things have something in common. If you are a victim and you say, “The Jews did this,” or “The Jews did that,” then you’re going to be protected.

I think the Jewish community, I think, knows that. I mean, there are right-wing antisemites. I think you can make the argument that Tucker [Carlson] detests Israel and is an antisemite, given the things he said. And I say that because I remember I had no evidence of that, but I remember when he, in his early career, he was a critic of Pat Buchanan, remember? And he said that Buchanan was really sending coded antisemitic themes. Tucker said that. So I think he’s gone from that to something completely opposite.

But what I’m getting at is if it’s [Nick] Fuentes or Candace [Owens] or Tucker, that’s an isolated group. What we’re talking about is the whole left-wing party now is antisemitic. Basically, the mixture of socialism and the whole Islamism, you get the people in the United States who are always accusing the Jews of running cabals, and you get the people from the Middle East who say Israel is the source of all of our self-inflicted problems, and they combine, and they’re powerful, and people are not speaking out against it.

But it’s from the Left, and that professor will be found out to be on the Left. That’s why he disguised himself as a MAGA person. But I think it’s accelerating so fast, Jack, I don’t think they’re ashamed of it. I think they’re happy about it. You know, you can see that with [Zohran] Mamdani. They’re talking now about firing Police Commissioner [Jessica] Tisch in New York. You know, the only Jewish member of his… I mean, mainstream Jewish. You know, she’s done a wonderful job.

And Hasan Piker, whom they all invite to be seen with, he said that Orthodox Jews are inbred, and he said you will not see a Jew nominated ever again as a Democratic candidate for president. So they’re open about it, and it’s gonna keep going.

Jack Fowler: By the way, we should just, since you stumbled into—you didn’t stumble into this, you brought us into this. About Mamdani, he did on Oct. 7 paid lip service to what happened three years ago. But then, of course, he also added all those other things. It was some event— But now he’s being attacked by — could you be further left than Mamdani? By those who say that his participation at an event that recognized the murders on Oct. 7 was inexcusable…

Victor Davis Hanson: Well, people who have been flying—at some of these demonstrations, not all, but some, they fly Hezbollah flags. They’re happy. They believe in terrorism. [Abdul] El-Sayed said, “Hurt people hurt people,” i.e. translated, people that are hurt by Jews then hurt Jews. What do you expect? Right.

The funny thing is, you take away Oct. 7 right now, and there would be no problem in Gaza. We would still go back to square one. The Gaza wall would be pathetic. It’s nothing compared to pictures of the Gaza Egyptian wall. In other words, the Egyptians were firmer that they didn’t want Gazans going into fellow Muslim Arab Egypt than the Jews were into Jewish Israel.

There would be 18,000 work permits, with people still going in making $11 to $13 an hour in Israel working side by side. All the buildings would be there, da, da, da. All they had to do was not go in under the guise of being workers and conduct intelligence operations, find out where the kibbutzes are, plan the whole thing.

Iran was the brain and the bank of the whole thing. Hezbollah was supposed to join in. The Houthis were supposed to join in. And they really did believe they would get further than 17 miles. They thought they were gonna go 50, 60, 80 miles because they thought that 150,000 rockets from Hezbollah would come in, Houthis would come in. They did fire right after—People forget this. They fired about 4,000 rockets after, Oct. 7 into civilian centers, before Oct. 20 when the Israelis went in. And then they ended up firing almost 14,000 in total. But they really did, and Iran really did believe that it could have deniability of culpability, and everything that we’re looking at now wouldn’t have happened. I mean, we might have —

– Jack Fowler: But on that point, on that point, Victor, it’s still hard to grasp that on Oct. 8 what happened and that it wasn’t latent. It was there. It wasn’t created on Oct. 8.
– Victor Davis Hanson: Absolutely.
– Jack Fowler: It was sitting there waiting to be unleashed.
– Victor Davis Hanson: Yeah. That’s what I pointed out.

They were trying to hide it. And everybody thought people on both sides of good intelligence and a good heart said, “This was a horrible atrocity. We have to look at this.” Never in their right mind did they think that people would come out and cheer and think, oh my gosh, we killed 1,200 and we got to rape them and mutilate them and dismember them and torture them and take hostages. This is so wonderful. Now we’re going to celebrate. This is so…

And then they really did go to the next leap, And the Israelis are losing. We’ve got inside Israel with only 6,000 people, and now they’re surrounded, and the Hezbollah is gonna wipe them out with the Houthis, and everything’s gonna get better, and Hamas has got 50,000, and Hezbollah’s got 100,000, and the Houthis got 20,000 rockets and drones, and Iran’s got all … It’s gonna be wonderful. Let’s celebrate. That was the whole climate.

And the only reason Gaza is in rubble today, the Israelis said we want all of them back. We want all the people who did this. Send them back here. We want to try them. And by the way, give up the 251 hostages. That’s all we’re asking. And they said no. Why did they say no? Because we’re winning. We’re winning. We got people in the United States that are cheering on campuses. We got all of Europe is on our side. We’ve got 250,000 rockets, missiles, and drones in our ring of fire in Iran. We’re gonna win. And then Israel went in. And, when they went in, they were attacked.

Probably 40,000 missiles and rockets have been shot at Israeli civilians from Lebanon, from Hamas, from Yemen, from Iran. And they lost. They lost badly. And that was all they had to …

And if they didn’t wanna give them up, and they didn’t wanna give the hostages up, all they had to do was do this. They had to say, “You know what? The Israelis are gonna blitz us. We’ve got over 300 miles of tunnels. They have food. They have water. They’re safe from bombing. We want all you Gazan people who live anywhere near us, who might be in danger, get in those tunnels, because we’re gonna go out and fight these Jews. We’re gonna go out and fight the Israeli, the IDF. We’re gonna fight house to house. But we don’t want you hurt.”

They did just the opposite. They put the entries and exits under hospitals, private homes, mosques, and schools, and they kept the civilians out. And they used it because they really did believe the Israelis would be more reluctant to inflict damage or death on their own Gazan brotherhood than they were in exposing them to that.

So basically, Hamas made the calculation. You know, it’s easy. Anybody who knows any logic, A plus B equals C, will see that they said, “You know what? Those awful Jews in Israel, in their naivete, care more about human life than we do. And no, even worse for them, they care more about the Gazans than we do. So if we put our people out there to be killed, a lot of them are gonna get killed, but they’re not going to hit our entries and exits in the hospitals, the mosques, and the schools because they’re gonna pull back from those places. So we’re gonna sit here safe, and the Gazans will get killed, and that’ll be good for propaganda.”

What they didn’t count on was the Israelis went down and got them and pulled them out and fought. But that would have all been avoided. And we’re not even getting into not one Jewish person was in Gaza for 18 years—since 2005. Or we’re not getting out, they had an election. All they had to do was say, “We’re gonna have an election. Let’s not kill Palestinian Authority rivals. They’re a different party, but please, Hamas people, don’t throw them off houses anymore. Please, that’s all we’re asking. Don’t kill 150 of our own people and throw them off. And don’t go to people’s houses and threaten them to vote for us. And then, once we elect Hamas, let’s have a free press, habeas corpus, a constitution, and let’s every four years hold regular elections.”

They couldn’t even do that. And then if they couldn’t even do that, they could say, “Well, we’re gonna be an autocracy like, oh, the UAE or Saudi Arabia, but we’re gonna show the Jews in Israel that we’re smarter and better, so we’re gonna build a Kuwait City or a Dubai right here on 24 miles of priceless Mediterranean beaches, and we’re gonna make this. We’re gonna put the Israelis to shame. We’re gonna have more money, nicer places, tourists.”

They couldn’t even do that. They were a complete death cult.

Read more …

Navarro was there, as part of Trump1.

• The Masks Were Never About Science (Peter Navarro)

On March 8, 2020, Anthony Fauci told “60 Minutes” that a healthy person had “no reason to be walking around with a mask.” Within a year, he was applauding the idea of wearing two. The official explanation is that the science changed—that we learned about presymptomatic and asymptomatic spread. Fauci’s own diary destroys that explanation twice, in his own hand, and what it leaves behind is inventory management, sold to a frightened country as medicine.


I pull back the curtain on the mask war in my new book, “Why Fauci MUST Rot in Prison”—and I can tell you what the other side of it looked like, because I was fighting it. While Fauci was on television explaining why Americans did not need masks, I was in the West Wing getting them some—the good kind, the N95 kind essential for first responders.

On Feb. 9, 2020—31 days before the World Health Organization declared a pandemic—I wrote a memo to the Coronavirus Task Force warning that China produced about half the world’s N95 masks, was blocking their export, and that “The U.S. therefore faces the real prospect of a severe mask shortage!” I asked for an export halt, purchase guarantees for every domestic producer at maximum output, and Buy American rules for the masks that cover an American face.

Then the phone rang. On March 12, a Honeywell vice president told me the company could stand up two new N95 manufacturing lines, in Rhode Island and Arizona, if Washington moved fast. Washington does not move fast. So I gave her my word—no signature, no paper.

Within 24 hours, Honeywell’s trucks, on my word, were hauling production machinery out of Massachusetts. By the end of the first Trump administration, those two manufacturing lines were turning out tens of millions of American-made N95s a month and employing more than a thousand Americans.

That was my mask war. Making masks. Now Fauci’s.

Here is the first thing his diary kills: his alibi for switching his position on masks. Supposedly the guidance changed when science learned that people without symptoms could spread the virus. But in the first days of February 2020, George Gao—the director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention—told Fauci directly, in Fauci’s words, “that infected people can be asymptomatic and that asymptomatic people can transmit.”

He knew in the first week of February. He told “60 Minutes” there was no reason for a mask a month later.Here is the second thing, and it is worse. On June 23, 2020, after a six-hour House hearing, Fauci recorded a run-in with a West Virginia congressman who was “giving me s— about saying early on that we should not wear masks to save them for the HCWs [health care workers] at a time when there was a shortage.”

Read it again. Save them for the health care workers. On Fauci’s own telling, the “no reason” of March 8 was never an assessment of the evidence. It was supply triage. Tell the public not to worry about getting masks—so the masks stay on the shelf for the people who need them, in his judgment, more.

In the same March weeks Anthony Fauci was managing a shortage by misleading Americans about masks, Honeywell’s trucks were rolling toward Rhode Island on nothing but my word, and two factories were preparing to end the shortage he was lying to accommodate. One of us treated it as a production problem and fixed it. The other treated it as a communications problem.

And watch the staircase he climbed. March 31, in the diary: “We probably were too strong in saying masks do not work.” Not the science changed—we were too strong.By summer: “There’s no doubt that wearing masks protects you.” By autumn: “begging people to wear masks.” By February 2021, two of them.

No reason, to too strong, to no doubt, to begging, to double up—each certainty delivered with exactly the confidence of the one it silently replaced. A scientist updating his communication based on evidence says what he said, what changed, and why. This was a ratchet.

Let me be precise, because flattening this debate was itself the trick. I was never anti-mask; I ran mask production. The mask on those trucks had a federal filtration standard, a fit requirement, and a nurse’s face to protect. What Washington eventually sold under that same four-letter word ran down to a damp and floppy bandanna on a 5-year-old.

And the children paid for it. Fauci’s influence imposed years of face covering on small children at low risk from the disease, without evidence of benefit at that age, while treating the developmental cost to children as not important enough to measure. Everything I did in that war was supply. What President Trump and I never did was order one free citizen to wear anything.

As for Tony, there is an old line that you can tell when he is lying because his lips are moving. Maybe that is the real reason he wore the mask.

Read more …

Oh no, the CIA didn’t do it. No!

Do the Germans get together a show trial to please Langley?

To piss off Kiev?

• Nord Stream Sabotage Trial Begins With Explosive Allegations Against Ukraine (RFE/RL)

A German court is trying former Ukrainian officer Serhii Kuznetsov over his alleged role in coordinating the September 2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage. German prosecutors allege the operation was conducted on behalf of Ukrainian state authorities, although Kyiv denies involvement and no Ukrainian political leadership role has been established. The trial could intensify political disputes in Germany over continued military assistance to Ukraine, particularly among opposition parties critical of Berlin’s support.


After four years of speculation, leaks, and briefings by anonymous sources, the world is finally about to hear evidence given publicly under oath in a German courtroom about how the Nord Stream gas pipelines were blown up – in a case that could prove politically explosive. German prosecutors have identified seven Ukrainian suspects, but just one of them is in the dock in the trial beginning on October 14. He is named as Serhii K. in court documents that say he is suspected of being an accomplice to a war crime.

That classification has caused outrage. But German prosecutors have further raised the stakes by stating the suspects were operating “on behalf of state authorities in Ukraine. Kyiv has always strictly denied any involvement in the attack, which damaged crucial energy infrastructure serving Germany – one of its most important military backers in its fight since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022. Serhii K., who has been identified elsewhere as Serhiy Kuznetsov, says he is innocent.

‘Two Crazy Military Men’
Nord Stream is majority-owned by Russia’s state-controlled Gazprom and co-financed by major European energy companies. It was constructed to deliver Russian gas directly to Germany, bypassing transit states such as Ukraine and Poland, which had tense relations with Moscow. The suspected sabotage and subsequent gas leaks happened in September 2022, rendering the pipelines as inoperable.

Western governments originally accused Russia of carrying out the blasts, but German investigators started forming a case that said a group of Ukrainian divers hired a yacht and planted explosives on the seabed. They say Kuznetsov, a former military officer, was the ringleader. “

At the end of February 2022, he and other military personnel, on behalf of state authorities in Ukraine, developed the plan,” says a summary of the indictment released by prosecutors. “The aim was to permanently halt gas deliveries via the pipelines and prevent Russia from using the revenue from the natural gas trade to finance its war efforts.” The prosecutors have not stated publicly the full extent of the alleged conspiracy.

The full indictment contains some further details, according to three German media outlets that say they have seen it: public-service TV station ARD and two print-era heavyweights, Sueddeutsche Zeitung and Die Zeit. They all reported that, while in custody in Italy, Kuznetsov had phoned his wife in Kyiv and investigators were secretly listening in as he said he’d been advised by a lawyer that it was time to admit this had been “an official military operation.” His commander should state that they were not just “two crazy military men.”

Kuznetsov’s Italian lawyer, Nicola Canestrini, has played down the importance of this evidence, saying there was “no smoking gun” in the case. “It is hard to believe that, after Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, a German court should hold a war crimes trial against a Ukrainian serviceman,” he added in comments to RFE/RL.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 15 2026

Oct 152026
 
 October 15, 2026  Posted by at 8:57 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , ,  43 Responses »


Walter Langley Never morning wore to evening but some heart did break 1894


• “I Come From Your Future”: A Frenchman’s Warning To All US Democrat Voters (ZH)
• Zelensky Thinks He Can Bully Trump Like He Does EU Leaders (Romanenko)
• Zelensky Prolongs Fighting To Avoid Answering For Corruption – Polish MEP (RT)
• The Warsaw Security Forum Is Dangerously Deluded (RT)
• Nord Stream Bomber Says Was Operating on Instructions from Ukraine (CTH)
• Kremlin Comments On Ukraine’s Restricted Access To Starlink (TASS)
• Loud Rhetoric and Quiet Actions (Rabbi Michael Barclay)
• Democrats Running for President in 2028 (Moran)
• Treasury Hits Bank of America with $1.2 Billion Fine for Money Laundering (CTH)
• Major Banks Discriminated Against Conservatives (Matt Margolis)
• Racism in the False History of The NY Times 1619 Project (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Supreme Court Challenge to Sharing of Viewing Records on Free Sites (Turley)

 

 

 

 


“It’s too late for us, but you still have a chance.”

“Trust me. You don’t want to be France.”

• “I Come From Your Future”: A Frenchman’s Warning To All US Democrat Voters (ZH)

France’s welfare-state promises are colliding with a bill that keeps getting bigger. Far-left radicals rioting, fiscal crisis, and political uncertainty are exposing the upper limits of a system built on handouts, heavy taxation, uncontrolled borrowing, and mass migration.


For American voters heading into the midterms in the next several weeks, the warning from France is worth considering as far-left Democratic Socialist of America gains power within the Democratic Party: Promises of more and more and more government handouts come with consequences, just as France is finding out the hard way today. nAs President Emmanuel Macron ends his term in crisis, right-wing Marine Le Pen is positioning herself as the savior candidate as France’s finances rapidly deteriorate.

Her shadow budget proposes shrinking the deficit to 3.7% of economic output next year, well below the government’s 5% target, before bringing it to 2.2% by 2032. Savings would come largely from spending cuts, lower transfers to the EU and reduced migrant spending.

The proposals come as high uncertainty clouds the political landscape and deteriorating public finances drive up France’s borrowing costs. Le Pen has warned that maintaining the current spending trajectory risks a default crisis.


The size of the welfare state helps put things into proportion. Public spending has topped 57.3% of France’s economic output in 2025, the second-highest share in the European Union. Public debt is projected to reach 120% of GDP in 2027, behind only Greece and Italy among EU members.

Higher borrowing costs make funding the welfare increasingly impossible. Spending more on debt service leaves the government less flexibility to fund services, absorb economic shocks, or deliver the next round of handout promises as services continue to degrade.

The choices of what the government has proposed become increasingly uncomfortable: higher taxes, spending cuts, or still more borrowing That is the backdrop to a warning described by French technology entrepreneur Brivael Le Pogam, co-founder of AI video startup Argil, aimed at Americans considering voting Democrat.

“I come from your future,” he wrote on X. In the warning letter to America, he said France already embraced many of the policies American progressives promote, only to discover that more and more government handouts don’t translate into the socialist utopia politicians pitched; in fact, quite the opposite. “The promise was protection. The result is stagnation,” Le Pogam wrote.

Le Pogam wrote: “I’m French. I want to talk to Americans who are about to vote Democrat. Not to insult you. To warn you. “I come from your future. In France we did everything your progressive politicians promise. Free healthcare, free college, generous welfare, strong unions, heavy regulation, high taxes on the rich, a state that takes care of everything. Public spending close to 57% of GDP, one of the highest on the planet. On paper, it’s the dream.

Here’s what it looks like from the inside. France hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 1974. Our debt is above 3,300 billion euros. Interest on that debt is becoming one of the biggest items in the national budget. Our hospitals are collapsing despite record funding. Our schools rank lower every year. Young people with degrees can’t afford an apartment in the city they were born in. Our best engineers leave for London, Zurich and San Francisco. And the rich you wanted to tax? They left too, and took the jobs with them.

The promise was protection. The result is stagnation. The worst part is that nobody in France voted for decline. Every single step sounded generous, compassionate, reasonable. One more program. One more regulation. One more tax to fund it. Each step alone makes sense. Fifty years of them, and you wake up in a country that can no longer build a nuclear plant on time or keep its streets safe.

I love America because it’s the one place on earth where people still believe they can build something from nothing. I came to Silicon Valley as a self-taught kid and it changed my life. That spirit is the most precious thing your country has. Before you vote, ask yourself one question: is the program you’re voting for making America more like America, or more like France?

Trust me. You don’t want to be France.


Le Pogam wrote in a second warning: “My post about France went viral. Thousands of likes. Many Americans told me: “Democrats aren’t socialists. America will never be France.” I want to answer that seriously, step by step. Start with a simple observation. Look at what has gotten cheaper in America over the last 25 years: TVs, phones, software, clothes, toys. Now look at what has exploded: college tuition, healthcare, childcare, housing.

What separates the two lists? The first lives in competitive markets. The second is exactly where government is most involved: subsidies, mandates, licensing, zoning, regulation. College. Washington lends students almost unlimited money. Universities know the money will always come, so they raise tuition and hire more administrators. The student pays the bill for twenty years. More government money, higher prices.

Housing. Why can’t a nurse buy a home in the city where she works? Not because of capitalism. Because of zoning laws, permits, environmental reviews, years of procedure to build a single building. The most expensive places to live in America are the places where it’s hardest to build. When building is nearly illegal, prices explode.

Healthcare. The patient almost never sees the price. A third party pays, regulations limit who can compete, and costs climb year after year with no one able to say no.

So here is the trap. The problems you suffer from are not the failure of free markets. They are the places where the market has already been replaced by the state. And the solution you’re being offered is more of the same. That’s the Trojan horse. It always works the same way. A real problem. A generous-sounding promise. A program that makes things worse. Then the failure of that program becomes the argument for the next one.

People who lived under communism in Poland learned to recognize the lie and the mask the lie wears. The lie never presents itself as a lie. It presents itself as compassion. In France we are at the end of that road. Debt we can never repay. Young people who can’t afford a home. Our best people leaving. And every few years our cities burn. Nobody voted for this. They voted for one more generous promise, fifty years in a row.

If you’re a Republican, share this with the Democrat in your life. Not to win an argument. To start a conversation. If you’re a Democrat, I’m not asking you to switch teams. I’m asking you to look at the pattern. Wherever the state took over, life became unaffordable. Don’t fix the failures of government with more government.

Stay American. Ask for less state, not more.”


The worst part is that no sound person voted for this Western decline.

Read more …

“Kiev’s public shaming of allies may no longer pay off once Washington starts treating its leader, not Moscow, as the obstacle ..”

• Zelensky Thinks He Can Bully Trump Like He Does EU Leaders (Romanenko)

Vladimir Zelensky has a pattern in dealing with Western partners who disappoint him: raise the disagreement in public, question the partner’s judgment and explain why the decision benefits Russia and Vladimir Putin.


Former German Chancellor Olaf Scholz heard variations of that argument for years, and now US President Donald Trump is hearing them again. The question is whether Zelensky can keep increasing the political cost of refusing Kiev without increasing the cost to Ukraine.

On October 9, Zelensky described Washington’s decision to ease restrictions on Russian diesel as a “weak decision by strong partners.” The announcement came while Ukrainian officials were discussing an end to the Russia-Ukraine conflict with their American counterparts in Miami. Zelensky argued that the arrangement would give Moscow additional resources to continue fighting. His criticism challenged the judgment of the government on which he still depends.

Kiev has an obvious interest in opposing measures that improve Russia’s economic position. But when a partner makes a decision Zelensky doesn’t like, he repeatedly turns a policy disagreement into a public test of that partner’s resolve and overall capabilities as a politician. German leaders have been the target of this manipulation for years now.

In March 2022, addressing the Bundestag, Zelensky used the country’s own historical memory to indict its policy toward Russia. Invoking Ronald Reagan’s famous appeal in Berlin, he called on Scholz to tear down the new wall he saw dividing Europe – that is, to cut off economic ties with Russia, which had benefitted Germany for decades before.

By June, the demand was more explicit. In an interview with ZDF, Zelensky said Scholz and his government had to decide where they stood. Berlin, he argued, could not balance support for Ukraine against its relationship with Russia. He also criticized Germany’s delay in supplying weapons.

Germany’s government had to consider its own security, resources and voters. Zelensky’s tirades made that look like a choice between the ‘right’ and the ‘wrong’ side.

In November 2024, with Nord Stream already sabotaged and German industry in decline for a second consecutive year, even just talking to Putin earned Scholz another reprimand from Zelensky. The Russian and German leaders held a phone conversation, which Zelensky promptly called a “Pandora’s box,” because apparently it would help Russia escape international ‘isolation.’ That’s despite the fact that Scholz’s message for Putin was a demand for the withdrawal of Russian troops and a reaffirmation of German support for Ukraine. You can denounce Moscow and supply arms to Kiev, but even the most rudimentary attempt at keeping diplomatic channels open is a no-no.

The same approach extended beyond Berlin. In May 2024, Zelensky warned that Putin would personally applaud Joe Biden’s absence from a planned ‘peace summit’ in Switzerland. Biden’s attendance was framed as a test with an audience in the Kremlin.

Poland received a similar message during a grain dispute in September 2023. Speaking at the UN, Zelensky accused some European partners of performing solidarity in a “political theater” that helped Moscow. He named no country, but Warsaw understood the implication, summoned Ukraine’s ambassador and protested. Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki subsequently told him never to insult Poles again.

With Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, Zelensky made it personal. In January 2025, amid a confrontation over Russian gas transit, he mocked Fico’s reported vacation in Vietnam and accused him of pursuing shadowy arrangements with Moscow.

Zelensky seems to assume that Ukraine’s supposed cause of being a barrier to Putin’s phantom Europe invasion plans gives him the authority to judge how other governments exercise their responsibilities. A leader who refuses Kiev’s nagging demands must then answer accusations of weakness, misplaced priorities or assistance to Russia. Trump had already encountered this treatment even before returning to office in 2025.

In an interview published in September 2024, Zelensky questioned whether Trump understood how to end the conflict. He also described his running mate JD Vance as too radical and urged him to study the history of the Second World War. These were public judgments about the competence of men who might soon determine American policy.

In February 2025, responding to Trump’s statements about the conflict and his approval rating, Zelensky claimed the American president lived in a space of disinformation. Later that month, the Oval Office meeting turned into an argument in front of the cameras. Zelensky challenged Vance’s understanding of Ukraine and warned that Americans would eventually feel the consequences of the war despite their distance from it. Trump angrily rejected the suggestion that his guest could dictate what Americans would feel.

One would think Zelensky would take the hint: unlike the meek Europeans, the American president has the willpower to resist political blackmail, and is not liable to take personal insults and turn the other cheek. One would also think that with crucial wartime assets like weapon supplies and intelligence sharing in the balance, Zelensky would cool off and rethink his negotiation tactics. One would be wrong.

After Zelensky criticized the diesel arrangement, Trump suggested that Ukraine get a new leader capable of making a deal. That statement is not a formal policy to remove him, but it does raise the question whether Zelensky himself is the obstacle that prevents a settlement.

Zelensky may believe that confrontation will rally European support, improve his own optics at home or force Washington to offer better terms. Public pressure could be a viable last resort for a leader out of option, allowing him to appeal over the heads of foreign governments to their voters, lawmakers and media.

But that approach depends on those governments accepting the terms of the argument. They must feel that refusing Kiev carries a greater political cost than accommodating it. And some leaders, as misguided as that seems, may truly believe that – or may have painted themselves into a corner by submitting to Zelensky’s earlier bullying, sacrificing their own economies and losing their voters’ trust.

Trump is not one of those leaders. Instead of accepting Zelensky’s accusation of weakness, he has accused the Ukrainian leader of obstructing an agreement. It’s unclear if Zelensky understands that the potential consequences of their quarrel are much worse for Ukraine than for the US.

For Trump, lowering American fuel costs and pursuing an agreement with Moscow are stated objectives. Zelensky cannot assume that he can bully those objectives away. What he might achieve instead is an end to crucial lifelines propping up his crumbling military – like intelligence sharing.

Zelensky has repeatedly tried to make Western leaders pay a political price for saying no to Kiev. Except some of those leaders may have the backbone to turn that price right back on him.

Read more …

“Ending the conflict would force the Ukrainian leader to hold elections that he fears losing, Ewa Zajaczkowska-Hernik believes ..”

• Zelensky Prolongs Fighting To Avoid Answering For Corruption – Polish MEP (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is deliberately prolonging the conflict with Russia to avoid being held accountable for his policies and rampant corruption within his inner circle, Polish MEP Ewa Zajaczkowska-Hernik has said.


Zajaczkowska-Hernik’s remarks came after Zelensky demanded a 60-day “total truce” to prepare for a presidential election, which he has repeatedly postponed since his term expired in spring 2024, citing martial law. Moscow dismissed the request as a pretext to buy time to rearm Ukrainian forces and prolong the conflict.

“Vladimir Zelensky’s term in office expired long ago, yet by dragging out the war, he manages to evade accountability, specifically for corruption,” Zajaczkowska-Hernik told Poland’s Zet Radio on Monday.

According to Zajaczkowska-Hernik, the Ukrainian leader had many opportunities to make peace but “rejected [them] every time precisely to avoid facing the consequences, since he knew that [peace] would necessitate holding elections, which Vladimir Zelensky might lose.”

Zelensky’s popularity at home is “not so great,” the MEP argued, attributing it not only to the prolonged fighting but also to “massive corruption” within his inner circle. “The Ukrainians see it,” Zajaczkowska-Hernik said.

Ukraine has been rocked by a series of high-profile corruption scandals since last year, with the largest centering on a $100 million kickback scheme at state nuclear operator Energoatom reportedly led by Timur Mindich, a former business partner of Zelensky. Other recent graft probes have targeted former Ukrainian ministers, prosecutors, diplomats, and senior officials.

Zajaczkowska-Hernik has been a vocal critic of the Ukrainian government, particularly Kiev’s glorification of Nazi collaborators. In July, she tore up a flag of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) during a debate on Kiev’s bid to join the EU. UPA fighters massacred up to 100,000 ethnic Poles in one of World War II’s worst atrocities. The move landed the MEP on Ukraine’s notorious Mirotvorets ‘kill list’.

Zajaczkowska-Hernik’s remarks on Monday came just days after US President Donald Trump called for Zelensky to be replaced, accusing him of creating “problems for the world” by continuing to target Russian oil refineries and ignoring Washington’s objections. Trump blamed the strikes for contributing to rising global fuel prices and declared that it was “time for Ukraine to get a new president.”

Zelensky hit back by telling ABC that, if Trump “really wants some changes,” he should “tell [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, give us two months, 60 days off.”

Moscow, however, said it was ready to suspend strikes on Ukraine only on the election day itself, despite Kiev having launched an “unprecedented” drone attack on Moscow during Russia’s parliamentary elections last month. Russian officials also said Ukrainian strikes had damaged or destroyed 74 buildings housing election commissions.

Zelensky’s goal is “very simple: to bargain for time in order to secure a respite,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Monday. During that period, Europe would be able to supply him “with new weapons to continue the terrorist war against the Russian people.”

Read more …

“Poland’s most bellicose security conference is openly flirting with the idea of dismembering Russia..”

• The Warsaw Security Forum Is Dangerously Deluded (RT)

The Warsaw Security Forum has long been a soapbox for Eastern Europe’s most belligerent elites to air their fantasies of inflicting a military defeat upon Russia. This year, with nuclear weapons on the table, the forum has taken on a dangerous new dimension.


Running from Monday to Tuesday in the Polish capital, this year’s WSF takes place at a critical juncture for Europe. With Vladimir Zelensky’s Ukraine taking nightly punishment from Russian missiles and drones, his British and EU backers have spent months ramping up their war rhetoric, in a seemingly coordinated attempt to telegraph their intent to join the conflict.

The UK”s Labour and Conservative parties have spoken of the need to prepare for a high-casualty war on the continent; Germany’s foreign intelligence chief has warned that the country ” is in danger” of becoming embroiled in a violent conflict with Russia; France has fired a nuclear-capable ballistic missile in a demonstration that President Emmanuel Macron described as an explicit “message” to Moscow. Meanwhile, politicians and military brass in multiple countries have accused Russia of waging an invisible – and unprovable – “hybrid war” against the West.

Amid this gyre of escalation, the WSF should serve as a stage for Eastern Europe’s political leaders and military strategists to share their rational assessments of the situation. However, realpolitik is not on the agenda in Warsaw. Several weeks before the forum kicked off on Monday, the WSF’s annual report offered a preview of what was in store. The 87-page report focuses almost entirely on the Russia/Ukraine conflict, and argues that Poland plus the so-called Nordic-Baltic Eight should set the terms for an eventual peace between Moscow and Kiev.


Their demands read like terms of surrender. Russia, they argue, should be subjected to permanent sanctions; dialogue with Russia may not be allowed to “evolve into political normalization;” Russia must be forced to pay reparations to Ukraine; Russian assets must be seized to finance Ukraine’s bid for EU membership; and Ukraine must be offered NATO and EU membership as a prerequisite to a peace deal.

That these demands are identical to Kiev’s own maximalist goals is not a coincidence. The report was authored by WSF Chair Katarzyna Pisarska, founder of the International Center for Ukrainian Victory (ICUV). The ICUV, which advocates for the breakup and Balkanization of Russia and the imposition of a “war tax” on European citizens, is funded by the EU, George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, and – prior to the election of US President Donald Trump – by the US State Department and USAID.


Among the report’s contributors are anti-Russia hardliners like former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis, former Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, and Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna. The latter claimed last week that NATO possesses the ability to close the Baltic Sea “within hours,” strangling Russia’s economic “lifeline” and creating an “existential” crisis for the country.

The Kaliningrad gambit
The report goes far beyond Ukraine’s immediate wartime demands. NATO, it recommends, should treat sustained “hybrid attacks” as “an Article 5 contingency,” even “if no single incident” justifies activating the bloc’s common-defense clause. After arguing that invisible – and often nonexistent – attacks should constitute grounds for war between nuclear powers, the report then makes its single most escalatory statement:

Any peace deal, it argues, should include “the demilitarization of Kaliningrad,” a Russian exclave that the report describes as “a hostage within range” of European missiles. NATO forces have held three separate military exercises on the borders of Kaliningrad this year. Last month, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski suggested that NATO “exercise so aggressively” on the borders of the exclave, to keep Moscow “uncertain of what we will do.”

The consequences of miscalculation or overreach by the West are huge. In a statement released by three of its embassies this month, Moscow’s Foreign Ministry warned that Russia is “ready to use all its arsenal, including nuclear weapons, to defend its territory if NATO countries try to isolate Kaliningrad.”

Read more …

No, Sundance this is a useless exercise if you don’t address Seymour Hersh. There’s plenty people who like just that on this topic: useless banter.

• Nord Stream Bomber Says Was Operating on Instructions from Ukraine (CTH)

Well, well well… Interesting development. The conspiracy theorists were correct all along. Four years after the attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines in the Baltic Sea, one of the alleged perpetrators has to answer in court for the first time. The trial of Serhiy Kuznetsov began today in Hamburg, Germany. During opening arguments, lawyers representing Kuznetsov informed the judge that he was acting on instructions given to him by the government of Ukraine when he led a team to detonate explosives on the Nord Stream pipeline.


GERMANY – According to the indictment, Serhiy K., together with other military personnel and on behalf of Ukrainian state agencies, is said to have developed the plan to destroy the natural gas pipelines running from Russia through the Baltic Sea to Lubmin in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. The aim was to prevent Russia from using revenues from the gas trade to finance the war of aggression.

Under the leadership of the accused, a commando consisting of several professional divers, a skipper and an explosives expert is said to have brought large quantities of high-performance military explosives into the waters off the Danish island of Bornholm on a sailing yacht chartered in Rostock. There, explosive devices equipped with time fuses were then attached to the gas pipelines running along the seabed.

When they were ignited on September 26, 2022, the two gas pipelines Nord Stream 1 and 2 were severely damaged. There were a total of four leaks on three of the four lines. Serhiy K. was arrested at the end of August 2025 on the basis of a European arrest warrant on the Italian Adriatic coast while on vacation with his family and transferred to Germany three months later. Since then, he has been in custody. (read more – translated)

Read more …

Zelensky was complaining about the speed of the access. “Dmitry Peskov said the Kremlin had seen media reports about restrictions on the Ukrainian army’s access to the Starlink satellite internet service but had no further information..”

“In general, of course, it would be better if brilliant technologies such as Starlink were not used for military purposes at all.”

• Kremlin Comments On Ukraine’s Restricted Access To Starlink (TASS)


Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov

Reports about restrictions on Ukraine’s access to Starlink, the settlement process and the potential weaponization of artificial intelligence were among the main topics of the October 14 briefing by Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov. TASS has compiled the Kremlin spokesman’s key statements.


On Ukrainian settlement
– Moscow has taken note of the risk that Europe could sabotage agreements on resolving the Ukraine conflict: “The risk of sabotage by European countries does exist.”

– Unlike European countries, the US is working to steer the Ukrainian crisis toward a peaceful settlement: “The US, specifically its negotiators and President [Donald] Trump, is making efforts to help steer the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis toward peace.”

– European countries, unlike the United States, which is seeking a peaceful solution, are doing everything they can to prolong the hostilities in Ukraine: “Europeans are taking a different approach: they are doing everything they can to ensure that this war continues.”

– There is currently a lot of “media hype” around proposals for a settlement in Ukraine, and much of this hype does not correspond to reality: “There’s a lot of media hype around all of this right now, and much of it doesn’t correspond to reality; it’s pure fiction.”

– Work on the possibility of an “energy ceasefire” is continuing.

– No international meetings on the Ukraine issue have been agreed upon at present: “There are no agreed-upon meetings on the agenda.”

– Efforts to resolve the Ukraine conflict continue discreetly and will remain so: “This work is ongoing discreetly and it will continue discreetly.”

On restrictions on Ukrainian army’s access to Starlink
– The Kremlin has seen media reports about restrictions on the Ukrainian army’s access to the Starlink satellite internet service but has no further information: “No, we know nothing beyond the media reports that we have read about it.”

– Brilliant technologies such as Starlink would be better off not being used for military purposes at all: “In general, of course, it would be better if brilliant technologies such as Starlink were not used for military purposes at all.”

– It is too early to conclude that Washington has changed its approach to military support for Kiev: “It is too early to draw any systemic conclusions. We proceed from the information available from the statements that are being made.”

– “We have seen numerous media reports on the matter. On the one hand, there are statements that assistance continues to be provided, while on the other, there are reports of various technical restrictions and disruptions in information supplies to Ukraine. We have been carefully recording it all.”

On Russian assets
– Russia sees difficulties in recovering assets frozen by the European Union but will fight to get them back: “In any case, the Russian side will make every possible effort on all fronts, including legal work, court proceedings and litigation, to fight for the return of its stolen assets.”

On detention of Japanese journalist in Russia
– The detention of a Japanese journalist on Sakhalin is evidence that Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) is carrying out its duties to identify and detain spies: “The FSB has made relevant statements [on this matter]. The Federal Security Service is carrying out its duties: if there are spies, they are caught.”

On AI
– Some countries are weaponizing artificial intelligence: “Attempts by a number of countries to turn these new technologies into weapons, the so-called weaponization of artificial intelligence, pose threats to entire sectors of any country’s economy, and, of course, we are no exception.”

– The technology itself remains necessary, as it brings many benefits: “Artificial intelligence technologies bring many benefits, improve efficiency and do a lot of good.”

– Russia must be prepared for its use as a weapon: “We must be prepared for these challenges.”

Read more …

“Do we need to make this world so upside down that God destroys it as he did with the flood, God forbid?”:

• Loud Rhetoric and Quiet Actions (Rabbi Michael Barclay)

The British government made an official announcement, and it will very possibly be used as a reason to initiate attacks on Iran before the midterms.


While we were remembering Columbus Day here in America, UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham said the plot to attack the Fairford Air Force Base was “highly likely” coordinated in Iran and almost certainly directed by the Revolutionary Guards. “We will not tolerate these threats on our soil,” he stated. Iran’s Foreign Ministry quickly condemned Britain and managed to simultaneously throw some insults at the Western nation. “Tehran rejects the baseless accusations directed at it. Britain’s attempts to invent security claims against other countries are no secret to anyone.”

The reason this is all significant is that it opens up other options for Trump, as opposed to waiting until the midterms. Because the intelligence is not from Israel but from the UK; and because it was a direct attack on the U.S., Trump could use it to support attacking Iran at any moment. When you add that Emirati air carrier Etihad and Qatar Airways are both postponing their flights to and from Saudi Arabia; that there is an assemblage of U.S. Naval power that is overwhelming in the region; and that the Israelis are clear about what must ultimately be done, we must all be prepared for significant conflict in the near future.

And we must prepare for the conflicts that are happening politically right now in Israel and in the United States with upcoming elections. In both cases, we can expect more controversy and more attacks. Which is why it is extra important to remember this week’s Torah reading of the week: Noach. Do we need to make this world so upside down that God destroys it as he did with the flood, God forbid? Or can each of us personally make the world a better place by being honest, self-aware, and having the courage to see what needs to be seen, do what needs to be done, and “seek justice and pursue it”?

May we grow and learn through conflict in such a way that it brings a deep peace in our lives and in the world.

Chazak u’Baruch

Rabbi Michael Barclay

October 13, 2026

2nd of Cheshvan, 5787

The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday morning that the Houthis have quietly been developing even more ballistic missiles, but that these are mid-range missiles that could cover 2,000 kilometers. At that range, the Houthis could strike Israel directly, God forbid. They have apparently been developing them with components from China and with Iranian assistance. If this is accurate, and it is based on a report by the Conflict Armament Research organization, it radically increases the dangers to Israel by an institutionalized terrorist organization.

Although this has been happening relatively quietly, the Houthi attacks on the Saudis have been loud and consistent. So much so that President Donald Trump addressed the Houthi issue in a Tuesday morning interview. “The Houthis are behaving very badly. I thought they learned their lesson a year ago when we bombed them hard and at their request we stopped.” He continued, saying that they are “deliberately trying to cause oil prices to rise, probably before the U.S. elections – not nice. I will be there after the election, and I will never forget!”

Trump was also loud on Tuesday about some of his other upcoming intentions in the region as well. During a campaign rally in Alaska, he said, “we will hit Iran hard,” and then added: “Wait and see what we do with Iran, because we’re fed up.” Almost immediately after his statement, “White House officials” told Al Jazeera that “reports of a possible American strike against Iran before the midterm elections are not true.”

There is no way to know what Trump’s actual plan is or its timing. It is public knowledge that Vice President JD Vance does not want to attack Iran under any circumstances and that he believes that we should never have attacked it in the first place. It is also common knowledge that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth wants us to attack Iran as soon as possible and believes that we should have truly finished the job over a year ago. Both men are advisors to Trump, and the president is a great CEO who listens to advisors and ultimately makes his own decision.

Let us all pray that the Holy One inspires President Trump to make the right decision at the right time for the benefit of America, of Israel, and of all of Western Civilization.

Chazak u’Baruch

Rabbi Michael Barclay

October 14, 2026

3rd of Cheshvan, 5787

Read more …

Michigan.

• Democrats Running for President in 2028 (Moran)

Which Democrat will win the presidential nomination in 2028? According to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, it doesn’t matter. At a private fundraiser last week for Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, AOC reached a startling conclusion. “If Abdul can win in Michigan, anybody can win anywhere,” she said. “We are going to break the electoral map everywhere, everywhere, because that is what it is going to take to guarantee health care to every American.”


In fact, while Republicans were sleeping, a seismic shift in attitude toward government-run healthcare took place. According to a KFF Health Tracking Poll, 66% of U.S. adults favor a national health plan (“Medicare-for-all”) where all Americans get insurance from a single government plan. This is the highest level of support KFF has recorded in a decade.

That poll may be an outlier. An Axios/Ipsos survey reported that 43% of Americans support “Medicare for all,” noting that supporters outnumbered opponents by nearly 2-to-1, while a bipartisan majority agreed the federal government should spend more tax dollars to lower healthcare costs. Medicare for all is wildly popular with Democrats, as 84% of self-identified Dems support it.

That’s not surprising. What’s astonishing is that 72% of political independents support it as well, and 34% of Republicans. Overall, healthcare is considered the third most important issue for voters, behind “the future of democracy” and “the economy/affordability.” So if El-Sayed’s support for Medicare for All isn’t damaging his campaign and may be helping it, where can Republicans hit him to damage him the most?

“You don’t have to be a socialist to believe that you should be taxing billionaires [on] their wealth,” El-Sayed told the New York Times in August. “In fact, if you are a capitalist, you should believe in that. So, I’m a capitalist who just knows about capitalism. I have a bad habit of reading; I’m so sorry.”

We all know El-Sayed isn’t a capitalist. But if he can run a winning campaign on his claim to be a capitalist, other DSA candidates could easily take that approach and skate to victory in 2028. Even Chris Cillizza knows that El-Sayed supports many planks in the Democratic Socialists of America platform. He also wonders if that support for socialist ideas will truly hurt him in 2026.

That said, El-Sayed supports a number of key principles and policies at the heart of the DSA movement — from Medicare for All to a strong innate suspicion about the motivations of very wealthy individuals and large corporations. It’s why he has been endorsed by the superstars of the Democratic Socialism movement — from AOC to Bernie Sanders.

It’s also why what happens to El-Sayed on November 3 matters SO much for what direction the Democratic party takes as it heads into 2028. The knock on Democratic Socialists from the non-DSA wing of the party boils down to this: A candidate with DSA views cannot win a general election in anything close to a swing state.

If El-Sayed “beats former Republican Rep. Mike Rogers in 27 days — as polls suggest he is more likely than not to do — you can be damn sure that El-Sayed and AOC will cite that victory as proof positive that the notion of the DSA as a fringe movement that can’t work nationwide is fully debunked,” surmises Cillizza. Like all good little revolutionaries, DSA believes they’re in a “generational fight.”

“We are in a long-term — I’m being very open right now, right? — about our generational project that we have ahead of us,” AOC said at that fundraiser. “Generational. We are here to break the map.”mAt same event, El-Sayed added his voice to the “generational project.”

“What does it say about what America really wants, needs, and deserves if our state bucks all of the pundits and all of the pontificators who think that this is not possible?” he said. “What does it tell them? It tells them just how big America is and exactly what we want.” Later, he said that “this one is for all the marbles” and referred to “the ripple effect that this race will have.”

“Now, do I think an El-Sayed win in Michigan would be indisputable proof that Americans, writ large, are ready to elect a very liberal/DSA-aligned candidate president in 2028?” Cillizza asks. “I do not!” he adds. But I also know how politics works. And the reality is this: If El-Sayed wins, AOC immediately becomes a more viable and serious contender for the Democratic nomination in the eyes of the political class.

Scoff if you like! But ask yourself this: If El-Sayed loses, do you have ANY doubt that it will be used by the governing wing of the Democratic party as evidence that the DSA-aligned candidates can’t win anywhere the party will need to in order to reclaim the White House in 2028? Candidly, I don’t think that sentiment is necessarily true either! El-Sayed losing does not convince me AOC isn’t a serious 2028 candidate if she runs!

But, politics is politics. And perception — and narratives — matter a LOT. And the narrative at stake in 27 days in Michigan is whether or not a Midwest swing state will elect someone in El-Sayed who has very, very liberal views. Establishment Democrats (who have already adopted several DSA planks in their own campaign platforms) would dearly love to pretend that the DSA is an anomaly and that it will go away after it’s trounced in 2026 or 2028.

That’s not going to happen. The DSA has money; it has the support of a sizable number of younger voters as well as ancient hippies and the woke Hollywood crowd. The DSA is not a majority. But it can throw a monkey wrench into both parties’ plans.

Read more …

“.. it processes hundreds of trillions of dollars in transactions across the globe. It has a high, and increasing, risk profile for money laundering, terrorist financing and other illicit activities.”

• Treasury Hits Bank of America with $1.2 Billion Fine for Money Laundering (CTH)

The U.S. Treasury Department said Tuesday it is imposing $1.2 billion in fines on Bank of America for compliance violations resulting in lax efforts to curtail money laundering activity. The fines on America’s second-biggest bank amount to the third-largest in the department’s history. [Treasury Notice Here] Money laundering for Latin-American narcotraffickers, terrorists as well as sketchy individuals/organizations that continue avoiding U.S. Treasury sanctions appear to be the heart of the matter.


WASHINGTON—The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today announced a $750 million civil money penalty against Bank of America, N.A. (bank), for violations of the Bank Secrecy Act and its implementing regulations, including 12 CFR 21.21 and 12 CFR 21.11. This amount is the largest in OCC history. The bank is also subject to a December 2024 cease-and-desist order (2024 Order), which requires the bank to address its deficient Bank Secrecy Act/anti-money laundering (BSA/AML) compliance program.

“Bank of America, N.A., is the second largest bank in the U.S. and the sixth largest in the world. Every year, it processes hundreds of trillions of dollars in transactions across the globe. It has a high, and increasing, risk profile for money laundering, terrorist financing and other illicit activities. Almost two years ago, the bank signed an order with the OCC and committed to fixing its longstanding BSA deficiencies. Despite its obligation to the American people as a national-chartered, global systemically important bank, the bank’s BSA/AML compliance program continues to reflect widespread breakdowns in internal controls, which threatens U.S. national and economic security” said Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan V. Gould.

“The bank’s poor response to its BSA deficiencies is unacceptable. The second largest bank’s egregious and continued BSA violations warrant the OCC imposing its largest CMP ever assessed against a bank. The OCC expects all banks to have an effective BSA/AML compliance program. Those that do not can expect swift and significant action from the OCC.”

The OCC found that the bank’s BSA/AML compliance program has been deficient and ineffective. The bank’s deficient transaction monitoring system resulted in the bank failing to properly monitor trillions of dollars in transactions. This caused the bank to file large numbers of late suspicious activity reports (SARs) involving billions of dollars. Many of the late SARs had indicia of money laundering. The bank knew for years that it was failing to escalate potentially suspicious activities to investigators for review to determine if a SAR should be filed but failed to correct this serious BSA violation.

In addition, the bank’s BSA Officer and staff lacked sufficient skills and expertise to effectively manage the bank’s BSA/AML program. Key BSA personnel did not receive appropriate training regarding suspicious activity identification, investigation, and reporting, which resulted in the bank filing inaccurate and late SARs. The BSA audit function failed to identify long-standing BSA concerns that examiners subsequently uncovered.

After agreeing to the 2024 Order, the bank still failed to prioritize BSA/AML compliance. The bank did not complete many of the significant steps needed to establish an effective BSA/AML compliance program and its program continues to have significant breakdowns. For example, more than a year after the 2024 Order, the bank still failed to escalate potentially suspicious activities to investigators for review. Additionally, the bank processed potential trade-based money laundering transactions due to a systemic gap in its transaction monitoring program. Bank management failed to ensure the bank had an effective BSA/AML compliance program and continued to minimize the program’s significant deficiencies.

The OCC is taking this action in coordination with an action by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), which is assessing a $1.2 billion fine that credits the OCC’s $750 million penalty and is requiring remedial action by the bank. The OCC-assessed penalty will be paid to the U.S. Treasury.

Money laundering is at the core of the issue!

Flashback to July, 2026…

Prime Minister Carney and Volodymr Zelenskyy announced a new Canada-based financial institution called the Defense, Security and Resilience Bank (DSRB).

CANADA – […] “Mark Carney, welcomed the support for the Canada-led DSRB by: Albania, Belgium, Greece, Latvia, Luxembourg, Romania, Türkiye, and Ukraine. These countries will be entrusted with defining the initial policies and directives of the Bank, shaping its operations and ensuring benefits flow to members’ economies.”[…] Leveraging a strong credit rating, the Bank will provide long-term, low-cost financing for defence, security, and resilience initiatives across supply chains.”

When you see the term “resilience initiatives” think climate change. Specifically, think carbon capture and carbon trading mechanisms. Perhaps this move by U.S. Treasury can also be viewed as a countereffort against the financial schemes of the banking elite who have been coordinating efforts against the carbon-friendly nationalists. Just worth remembering.

Read more …

“Bombshell Report Reveals How..”

• Major Banks Discriminated Against Conservatives (Matt Margolis)

Nine of the country’s biggest banks spent five years running an outrageous campaign to cut conservatives, Christians, pro-lifers, and Trump supporters out of the financial system, and the federal government now has the receipts.


The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) released its Debanking Review on Wednesday. Miranda Devine first broke the story in the New York Post. The 47-page report, titled “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,” draws on a hundred thousand complaints and fifty thousand internal bank records from 2020 through 2025. It names JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bank, Capital One, PNC, TD Bank, and BMO Bank. Every one of them hid behind the same excuse: “reputation risk.”

What did these banks fear? Bad press, protests, attacks from activist outfits like the Southern Poverty Law Center, and retaliation from regulators and politicians. So they purged anyone who might draw that heat. Christian organizations lost service over their views on abortion, LGBT issues, and traditional family values. Gun makers and retailers, Arctic oil and gas, coal, detention facilities, tobacco, and e-cigarette companies all saw financing dry up.

Let’s start with JPMorgan Chase. Its payment arm, WePay, shut down a merchant selling Trump and MAGA gear, claiming the products “promote[d] hate, violence, or racial intolerance.” JPMorgan’s screening system routinely flagged “MAGA,” “Make America Great,” and “America First” in merchant profiles, websites, and transaction data, and the bank added several of those terms after the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. WePay also dumped a seller of “conservative/republican t-shirts, hats, etc.” after spotting a “Biden-Illegitimate-Tshirt,” a “The-Big-Lie-Sticker,” and a “Trump-Won” flag.

Another merchant lost payment processing because an event organizer’s social media posts called Black Lives Matter “Marxists” and labeled Joe Biden and Anthony Fauci “the enemy.” Bank employees ruled those posts “an incitement of hate.” Think about that for a second: Garden-variety political opinions were enough to get an American cut off.

The banks leaned on the SPLC’s bogus hate-group designations again and again. That’s the same SPLC federal prosecutors indicted in April on fraud and money-laundering charges for allegedly bilking donors out of millions, and the same group FBI Director Kash Patel has called a “partisan smear machine.” WePay closed a religious organization’s account after the SPLC branded it an “extremist hate group,” and employees described it internally as a “[r]ight wing religious conservative non profit with strong anti LGBTQ rhetoric.” WePay also killed an account raising money for a “devout Christian’s” legal challenge to anti-discrimination laws.

Let’s continue, shall we? PNC turned down a line of credit for a successful media company after its ESG group noted that one owner’s foundation funded Christian conservative groups the SPLC had tagged as hate groups, and that another owner was “a conservative political commentator.” The employee who recommended the denial put it in an internal note. “I think it becomes really difficult to justify aligning ourselves with a company whose owners have built very public personas around opinions very contrary to PNC’s beliefs/values,” the employee wrote.

Wells Fargo pressured a payment processor to drop a religious nonprofit over its views on same-sex marriage, and it refused loans to two firearms businesses because — get this — employees feared blowback from the Biden administration, anti-gun activists, and members of Congress. “Under the Biden administration, banks could face greater supervisory pressure to move away from lending to the firearms industry,” a Wells Fargo reputation-risk review of a prospective firearms client warned.

Bank of America cut off private prison businesses, citing “changing policymaker attitudes.” A few months into the Trump administration, it tried to reopen one of those accounts. So much for principle.= To be fair, the report found that some banks also turned away groups on the left. Capital One refused any partisan entity backing candidates from only one party, which meant rejecting both a “reproductive rights” group and a gun-rights group. Yet the overwhelming weight of the evidence points in one direction.

All nine banks told the OCC they’ve revised their practices. The OCC says those reforms fall short and that no bank has “fully and publicly acknowledged” its “weaponization of finance against hardworking Americans.” JPMorgan, for its part, pinned the blame on WePay and claims the problem is now fixed.

“Today’s report provides irrefutable evidence that the nation’s largest banks have denied, debanked and discriminated against customers and lawful businesses,” Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan V. Gould said, adding that the OCC is weighing further action. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has primary supervisory authority over the largest banks, opened its own investigation Wednesday.

“It is appalling that these banks targeted American consumers for their political, social, or religious beliefs that did not align with the Biden Administration or its leftist allies… Many of those targeted were supporters of President Trump,” CFPB Acting Director Mark Paoletta said. “These thuggish tactics… have no place in America.”

Read more …

A lesson on the history of slavery.

Far too long for this format, but not for its own, see at the links.

A topic I would trust PCR with.

“Another Lesson on False History taught by liars determined to destroy America..”

• Racism in the False History of The NY Times 1619 Project (Paul Craig Roberts)

This is a is factually based history lesson. The lesson is about black slaveowners. Larry Koger’s book, Black Slaveowners, is well documented. Koger provides 34 pages of documentation listing the names of black slave owners and the number of slaves they owned in South Carolina and 38 pages of historical notes. Most free blacks only owned a few slaves, but some blacks themselves had plantations and had as many as 30 or 40 slaves. One owned 123 slaves. Another owned 156 slaves. One owned 68. Another 71.


Many owned 10 to 20. In South Carolina alone in 1830 there were 450 black slaveowners who owned between them 2,412 black slaves. The majority were in the city of Charleston, which suggests that these were free black businesses such as bricklayers, cabinet makers, carpenters, coopers, cotton gin makers, millwrights, shoemakers, and tailors. Being artisans meant that the slave employees, some owned and some rented from owners, were likely with the percentage of what they earned they were allowed to keep able to buy themselves out of slavery, and the records show that as time passed the numbers of free blacks increased as did the number of black owned black slaves.

The free blacks, just like the plantation owners, needed labor, and the only labor was black slaves. Slaves constituted the only labor force, because newly arrived immigrants had no need to hire out as laborers when they could simply move a little farther to the West and occupy unoccupied lands taken from Indians or Native Americans. Until the Western frontier closed, it was possible to move westward and take possession of one’s own homestead, so why work for another person? Slavery was a labor institution, not a racist one, with slaves purchased from the black Kingdom of Dahomey on the West Coast of Africa brought to the new world by ship captains many financed by Jews. Neither free blacks nor white plantation owners need to apologize for the slaves they owned.

Slavery was the labor institution that they were born into. It was the only source of labor, without which land is worthless. Slavery’s origin resided in African slave wars between black Africans. The black Kingdom of Dahomey became the main supplier of labor to the new world, because the king had the wits to trade black slaves to Arabs for firearms and thus prevailed in the slave wars. Do not expect any professor in any university black studies program or any white liberal to be receptive to the facts about slavery. They have constructed their own narratives that serve their own agendas.

Koger’s book is pertinent now that black demand for slavery restitution is heating up. It seems that blacks themselves will have to pay reparations. There were always some free blacks, and others were freed by their owners. It was possible for a black to purchase himself out of slavery and to purchase slaves as a work force for his business, and to purchase his relatives and friends, and many did so. Many free blacks actually owned their wives and children, having purchased them with their earnings as artisans, skilled craftsmen, and business owners. This no doubt comes as a surprise to those brought up on the white liberal version of Southern history whose foundation is the extraordinary lies told by Harriet Beecher Stowe in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, a work of hatred against Southern Americans.

During the colonial era under the Georgian Kings, it was possible for slave owners to free their slaves, and many did so. This resulted in a growing population of free blacks whose labor and its monetary earnings belonged to them, unlike “free Americans” today whose labor, depending on their income, belongs to the IRS in the range of 30% to 50%. Today many Americans are as enslaved with the Income Tax as black slaves were in the 19th century.

With their earnings free blacks not only purchased a labor force, but also bought wives and children, relatives and friends, out of bondage. But after the first 24 years of American independence regulation stepped in. The US Constitution left the slavery issue to the states, as President Lincoln acknowledged. In 1800 South Carolina became concerned that slaves were being freed on the death of their owners who had no means of support. South Carolina did not object to the freeing of slaves, only to freeing slaves who had no visible means of support. Being a Christian state, this meant freed slaves would become a support burden on the state and thereby on taxpayers for which no provision existed in law.

A law was passed that required that before slaves could be freed, evidence of their self-support had to be demonstrated. Koger makes clear that not all freed slaves were magnanimous acts as some slaveowners freed aged and unproductive slaves in order to rid themselves of the burden. Nevertheless, the provision that “the racist state of South Carolina” made to protect blacks from starvation was not made by Lincoln who “freed the slaves.” Many of Lincoln’s “freed slaves” starved to death as their homes and livelihood was destroyed by the Union Army. Lincoln’s war against the South was also a war against the black population which refused to rebel.

The Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 was a war measure that failed as the black slaves, occupied only by white females and children, refused to rebel. The 1800 South Carolina law that a slave could be freed on evidence of self-support made it difficult for free blacks to free slaves they purchased. There were ways around this. Blacks who had purchased their wives and children simply reported them to the federal census as free blacks and paid the capitation tax on free blacks. In effect this allowed wives and children who were in bondage to their husband and father to bridge the gap between bondage and a free person.

Koger’s book is intriguing. Although it is not a theme that Koger develops, it shows that blacks were being assimilated into white Southern life. The racism about which we hear so much today from liars such as Nikole Hannah-Jones and the New York Times 1619 Project and from the 19th century liar Harriet Beecher Stowe, are concocted narratives for the purpose of creating hate between blacks and whites when such hate simply was not present. There are always bad actors, but Southern society was not one. Koger reports and documents that a black elite was rising and that this rising class had the protection of white South Carolinians. Black membership in white churches was common. Today after generations of white liberal liberation of blacks the church memberships are separate. .

Read more …

“The Court often gets sticker shock in adopting broader interpretations that could impact whole industries in such a transformative way. It much prefers to defer to Congress on such trade-offs.”

• Supreme Court Challenge to Sharing of Viewing Records on Free Sites (Turley)

Today the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a major case pitting privacy advocates against media companies. By any measure, Salazar v. Paramount Global is a blockbuster case in the making. At issue is the use of viewing habits by companies offering free subscriptions and material to the public. These companies make money by then using that history to make tailored marketing pitches. Michael Salazar is arguing that a Blockbuster-era law should prevent such sharing of his viewing history, a ruling that would have a massive impact on media and entertainment companies.


Salazar involves a law passed 40 years ago after a controversy during the confirmation hearings of Robert Bork, who was nominated by President Ronald Reagan. The press and pundits unleashed an unrelenting campaign against the conservative, including the Washington City Paper releasing his list of 146 movies rented from a video store. Congress moved to stopped the abuse and passed the Video Privacy Protection Act to bar such disclosures.

Now, Michael Salazar is arguing that his free digital subscription for 247Sports.com, which is owned by Paramount Global, should also prevent the company from sharing his viewing habits with marketers. The case could have sweeping impacts on media and entertainment companies, which make much of their revenue through tailored marketing pitches based on such information.

The Video Privacy Protection Act (“VPPA”) bars a “video tape service provider” from “knowingly disclos[ing], to any person, personally identifiable information concerning any consumer of such provider.” 18 U.S.C. § 2710(b)(1). A “consumer” defined as a “subscriber of goods or services from a video tape service provider.” Id. § 2710(a)(1). The act further defines “personally identifiable information” as including information that “identifies a person as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services from a video tape service provider.” Id. § 2710(a)(3).

On one level, the spirit of the Act is to protect the privacy of citizens in watch they choose to watch in their private lives. That is why privacy groups have rallied around the case. According to polls, over seven in ten Americans have concerns that they have little to no control over what companies do with their data.

Conversely, the companies argue that this is a free service and that marketing is how these companies make such material available without charge to the public.

Paramount is arguing for a narrow construction of the statute. It notes that “consumer” is a “renter, purchaser, or subscriber of goods or services” from a “video tape service provider.” 18 U.S.C. 2710(a)(1). It argues that Salazar is not a “consumer” because he did not “rent[], purchase[], or subscribe[]” to the delivery of any “video cassette tapes or similar audio visual materials.” 18 U.S.C. 2710(a)(1) and (4). Rather, it claims that 247Sports is a news website focused on college sports, and any content Salazar allegedly viewed was available, for free, to any user of the Internet.

Salazar insists that he did subscribe when he signed up for a free, written email newsletter. However, the company argues that the newsletter is not a “video cassette tape[] or similar audio visual material[],” ibid., so he is not a “consumer” under the statute.

It is portraying the case as a distortion of a now dated law: “The VPPA is a Blockbuster-era statute barring the non-consensual disclosure by video rental stores of the rental history of individual patrons. Salazar seeks to transmogrify it into a prohibition against targeted advertising on the Internet.”

Like many sites, 247Sports allows access outside of a paywall by making revenue through advertising. While many consumers do not like their viewing history shared, they also do not like the increasing costs of having to pay for access to games and videos. It is a tradeoff that the lower courts felt was permissible in rejecting Salazar’s claims.

This is a tough case of statutory interpretation in seeking to apply an older statute to new media conditions and practices. Courts have found various flaws in Salazar’s claims ranging from claiming to be a “consumer” within the meaning of the VPPA to whether Paramount is a “video tape service provider” or whether the information is “personally identifiable.” If subscribing to a free newsletter is the same as subscribing to actual audiovisual content, the case could deliver a massive blow to media revenue streams.

Ultimately, Congress could step in to tweak the law if the Court rules for Salazar. When the Court accepts a case, there is a higher likelihood that it will reverse the underlying opinion. However, it only takes four justices to accept a case and this Court tends to narrowly construe such laws. The countervailing issue here is that the Act was designed with the state purpose of protecting privacy.

I teach “legisprudence” theories in my torts and Supreme Court classes in how courts interpret statutes with “gaps” or “ambiguities.”

Some would argue that a court should gravitate toward the narrow textual meaning given the sweeping impact of a broader interpretation. Figures such as Judge Frank Easterbrook argued for upholding the “deal” of legislation in strictly interpreting such laws by not gap-filling. Instead, the court can leave it to Congress to resolve ambiguities as the branch accountable to voters.

Another approach, advocated by Professor Jonathan Macey, would apply the “public-regarding purpose” of the law — fill in the gap or ambiguity by reference to the stated public-regarding purpose” of the law. In this case, the public-regarding purpose is privacy.

The Court often gets sticker shock in adopting broader interpretations that could impact whole industries in such a transformative way. It much prefers to defer to Congress on such trade-offs. Yet, rather than letting the Sixth Circuit in favor of Paramount stand, four justices decided that they wanted to deal with this question. It could prove to be a close case.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 14 2026

Oct 142026
 
 October 14, 2026  Posted by at 9:29 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Women Picking Olives 1889


• Russia’s Offensive Ability Is Broken – Kyiv’s Former Top General (BBC)
• UK and Poland Accuse Russia of “Mayhem” (CTH)
• Europe’s Diesel Shortage Is a Problem Created by Political Design (Lacalle)
• Zelenskyy Requests His Own “Diesel Deal” with the United States (CTH)
• German Opposition Demands Trump-style Diesel Deal With Russia (RT)
• Ramifications of the Trump-Putin Energy Deal (CTH)
• President Trump is Making Chopper Pressers Great Again (CTH)
• Jack Smith Could Track Phone Contacts, but What About the Lawyers? (Manney)
• Trump Might Not Be as Bad as He Appears (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Trump Suggests Ilhan Omar’s Money Came From Fraud (Catherine Salgado)
• Corporate Islamification (Stefan Padfield)
• The Midterm Polling Is Absolutely, Positively, 100% Wrong. (Maybe.) (Pinsker)

 

 

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2109616355825569987?s=20

 

 


I want to ask for your help.

When this special operation started in 2022, military experts Douglas MacGregor and Scott Ritter both said Ukraine was losing 7-8 times more men than Russia.

That difference is now supposed to be the other way around, according to a Ukrainian voice.

Which means some 50 times more Russian victims than 4 years ago, compared to Ukrainian victims.

I don’t see how that could have happened.

Do you guys think that is credible?

“Ukraine has stabilised the front line and “broken Russia’s ability to advance” by killing so many of its men, Ukraine’s former commander-in-chief has said in an interview with the BBC.”

• Russia’s Offensive Ability Is Broken – Kyiv’s Former Top General (BBC)


Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi

Ukraine has stabilised the front line and “broken Russia’s ability to advance” by killing so many of its men, Ukraine’s former commander-in-chief has said in an interview with the BBC. Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi made the comments in an exclusive interview, his first since he was dramatically forced from his post in the summer. He addressed his sacking, disagreeing with his critics who declared him too “old school” to command Ukraine’s new, technologically advanced forces.


He also pushed back against allegations made by soldiers who previously served under him, who told the BBC they were ordered to remain at their positions even when they were almost surrounded by Russians, leading to high losses. Syrskyi said that Moscow’s overall losses in the war were six times higher than Ukraine’s. “If you count only dead, then it’s up to 11 times,” he added. Neither Russia nor Ukraine officially release the numbers of their dead. Ukraine’s military says it inflicted record losses this year on Russian soldiers in September, although that cannot be verified.

UK intelligence chiefs estimate Russia has lost around half a million men killed in Ukraine since launching its full-scale invasion in 2022. The US-based Center for Strategic and International Studies meanwhile believes Ukraine has lost up to 150,000 troops killed by June 2026.. He says this difference in death toll – as well as technological advances, and a strategy of attacking weak points in Russia’s lines while containing their advances in other parts – accounts for the current stalemate at the front.

In the first six months of 2026, Russia managed overall to seize 61 sq km, the general said. “It’s an indication that the front line has been stabilised.” The Institute for Study of War (ISW) has also confirmed this trend. One of its recent reports says that in September 2026, Moscow lost more territory than it took.


Syrskyi was appointed Ukraine’s commander-in-chief in 2024. He had previously won praise for defending Kyiv at the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, and for leading the successful counteroffensive east of Kharkiv in the autumn of that year. But President Volodymyr Zelensky fired Syrskyi this summer, amid a major disagreement with then-defence minister Mykhailo Fedorov.

Fedorov had said that instead of adapting to the realities of the changing war, the army under Syrskyi had blocked his initiatives. Zelensky initially fired Fedorov, as tensions burst into the open between the two men. But mass street protests then forced the president to also fire Syrskyi, replacing him with Maj Gen Mykhailo Drapatyi, 43.

Syrskyi told the BBC that he had “disagreements” with Fedorov because the latter “didn’t take into consideration the interests of the army” when procuring weapons and supplies. Fedorov had created an “imbalance” in supplies, Syrskyi said. He had prioritised drones while overlooking key front-line kit such as unmanned ground vehicles, pick-up trucks and motorbikes. Even with drones, Syrskyi said, there were shortages as the army got only half of what they needed.

Fedorov was a popular young minister who was known for his digital and technological initiatives. Many contrasted him with Syrskyi, who critics thought was not fit to lead the new technological arms race with Russia. But Syrskyi disagrees with such criticism. It was during his time the use of drones reached this new, unprecedented level, including deep strikes more than 2,000km (1,200 miles) behind enemy lines, he said.

Ukraine was the first country to create the Unmanned Systems Forces as a separate branch of armed forces, under his command: now, he said, drones account for 80% of Russia’s losses. Under his military leadership, however, Ukrainian troops undertook chaotic withdrawals from the eastern cities of Avdiivka and Vuhledar, and from around Pokrovsk. Soldiers who spoke to the BBC in the past complained that they were ordered to remain at their positions at any costs. By the time they were told to pull back, it was often too late as they were almost surrounded by Russian troops.

Syrskyi does not deny that such situations occur on the front line. But he told the BBC that Ukraine was fighting against a far more powerful army. In 2025, the ratio of jets and bombs was 18 to one in Moscow’s favour, he said. In the same year, Russia had two-and-a-half times more artillery pieces and shells than Ukraine. And with four million militarily trained men who they can mobilise, Russian forces can create chances to push through, he argued.

One of Syrskyi’s most famous operations was an incursion into Russia’s Kursk region that started in August 2024. It ended with a dramatic retreat the following spring, which some soldiers described as “catastrophic”. Syrskyi, however, insisted that the Kursk operation was “a necessity”.

“In the summer 2024, Russian forces were pushing along all main directions on the front line with up to six times more troops than we had,” he explained. The Kursk incursion disrupted Russia’s offensive and forced Moscow to redirect troops, giving Ukraine a respite and a chance for its stretched brigades in the east and south to recover, Syrskyi said.

He also had strong words for European allies who doubt that Russia may have territorial ambitions beyond Ukraine. He advised European partners to start preparing for the war now and “drop all illusions that [it] will not come”. He also said he believed Ukraine’s war was going to become even more technological. There will be more robots, automated systems and artificial intelligence (AI). “Even ordinary weapons now get an AI-based control system to enhance their capabilities,” he said.

Such technologies can give a new life to conventional weapons like tanks. Both Russia and Ukraine were now racing to develop “active systems of defence” to protect armoured vehicles, Syrskyi said. But he insisted that “the human role will remain definitive [on the battlefield] because [people] will need to control those systems”.

Read more …

“UK Prime Minister Says Russia Interfered in Brexit Vote, Polish Prime Minister Says Russia Sabotaged Starlink System ..”

The UK still hasn’t gottten over Brexit?!

And look, of course Russia targets Starlink. it’s used against them in battle.

• UK and Poland Accuse Russia of “Mayhem” (CTH)

As President Trump continues to confront the EU-NATO antagonists who demand increased conflict with Russia, the primary voices of the EU-NATO group shout panic about Putin’s nefarious espionage, mayhem, general mischief and other heinous activity. All of it with the ever-present ‘just trust us‘ evidence. Yesterday, British Prime Minister Andy Burnham blamed Russia for the 2016 Brexit referendum vote that took the U.K out of the European Union.


UK NEWS – […] “The prime minister told The Rest is Politics podcast that upon arriving in No 10, he had asked about possible Russian interference in the 2016 vote, adding: “I’ve had the clear answer that, yes, there was.” […] Burnham did not provide further details about the type or extent of Moscow’s activity during the Brexit referendum.mBritain Unbound, a pro-Brexit campaign group, said Burnham’s comments were “another crude attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the decision that the British people made in 2016”. (read more)

Today, Poland Prime Minister Donald Tusk, a man of notoriously intemperate disposition, said that two Turkish fellows who sabotaged the Starlink satellite station near Warsaw were operating on behalf of Putin.WARSAW, Poland — Poland is blaming Russia for an arson attack on a Starlink satellite station in September and two Turkish citizens have been arrested in connection with the suspected act of sabotage, authorities said.

The suspects, whose names were not released in line with Polish privacy rules, were arrested in Germany, Polish officials said Monday. They are accused of deliberately setting fire to Starlink infrastructure on Sept. 23 in Wola Krobowska, Poland, about 40 kilometres (25 miles) south of Warsaw.[…] Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, in a post on X, called the incident “another act of hybrid warfare.” (read more)

Meanwhile the head of British Intelligence, MI5 chief Sir Ken McCallum, warned Prime Minister Burham that promoting Russian conspiracies without solid evidence to support his claim may lead to an erosion of confidence in the U.K government. Apparently, like the German people, the British are laughing at government leadership.

[He] suggested Russian trolls would be “delighted” to be front page news again, “despite the comparative unimpressiveness” of their efforts. He added: “There is a really important difference between interference attempted and outcome swayed. There are diabolical plots afoot, and serious seriousness is demanded.


ZELENSKYY TODAY – “I spoke with Prime Minister Mark J Carney. Thank you, Canada! I briefed him on the latest Russian strike on Kyiv and no advance warning from our partners about the ballistic missile launch. This is the second time Ukraine has received no warning this week.

A rescue operation is underway – the strike damaged a residential building, and the fire engulfed apartments on the first through eighth floors. All emergency services are on the scene, and residents are being evacuated. So far, one person has been reported killed and six injured. My condolences to their families and loved ones. There was also a strike on the grounds of an energy facility – one of Kyiv’s main power plants. We are counting on our partners’ support.

We also discussed contacts with the United States and diplomatic developments that may take place this week. It is important that the world clearly supports an end to this war and real steps toward de-escalation – genuine steps that Russia will actually take to bring its war and its killings to an end.”

Read more …

Very much so.

• Europe’s Diesel Shortage Is a Problem Created by Political Design (Lacalle)

The diesel agreement between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin will not solve the diesel shortage, considering the magnitude of the problem created by years of misguided, wrongly called “environmental policies.” Complaining about diesel prices and the US-Russia deal while eliminating domestic refining capacity and bombing refineries is just another example of bureaucratic hypocrisy.


Renewables are important, but they cannot substitute diesel, just as they have been unable to offset the importance of natural gas. Diesel is essential for every segment of the economy, from transport, manufacturing, and farming to distribution. Now, European politicians complain. However, governments cannot negotiate away years of lost refining capacity. Europe’s vulnerability is structural. Yes, war has intensified it, but policy choices helped create an energy system increasingly dependent on imported fuels, expensive infrastructure, and high taxation.

Furthermore, the risk is that—as happened in the past—oil and gasoline prices may fall, and the European businesses and families will still pay much higher energy and fuel prices. According to European Commission figures and comparisons based on official European and US data, Europe suffers an enormous energy-cost disadvantage after two decades of massive subsidies and renewable rollout.

Industrial electricity prices are more than twice those in the United States, while industrial natural gas prices reach four times US levels. At the pump, European consumers pay approximately 47% more for diesel and 70% more for gasoline. This is not simply an oil-price problem. It is an enormous competitiveness problem that permeates throughout the economy.


On October 9, Trump announced that Russia would release 300,000 tonnes of diesel immediately, followed by 500,000 tonnes in November, one million thereafter, and another three million, subject to refinery conditions. Washington temporarily authorized Russian diesel transactions until April 7, 2027. However, these are announced commitments, not confirmed deliveries. It may mitigate but not solve the diesel crisis.

The distinction is important. A sanctions exemption may permit trade, but it cannot repair damaged processing units. According to International Energy Agency estimates, Russian diesel production has suffered a temporary but significant blow, declining almost 30% following Ukrainian attacks. The important element is a policy choice, not a consequence of war.

Europe’s refining contraction is the key factor behind the structural diesel problem. It has lost more than 20% of refining capacity since 2009. At the end of 2025, the EU, Britain, Norway, and Switzerland had 72 mainstream refineries and an annual primary processing capacity of 625.4 million tonnes, down 167.6 million tonnes. Industry association FuelsEurope counts 35 closures since 2009.

The deterioration did not stop with the 2022 Ukraine war and has continued recently. Europe lost almost 400,000 barrels per day of refining capacity between 2024 and 2025, with five refineries closing over two years. This trend is a continuing reduction in the infrastructure needed to turn crude into usable fuel.

Environmental policy is part of this story, but taxation and policy choices have aggravated the problem. Governments made it uneconomical to upgrade aging facilities or build new units. Furthermore, at least five closed European facilities abandoned crude processing through conversion into biorefineries. These conversions worsened conventional refining capacity and did not offer a reliable and sustainable alternative.

The policy mistake is obvious and reminds us of the same errors committed with nuclear plants and natural gas supply. Eliminating capacity is a policy mistake without a credible path to reduce diesel’s importance. This move was not a transition but a jump into the void. Europe now relies more heavily on refined products from the Middle East, the United States, and India. Importing products is not an environmental policy success. “Not in my backyard” led to dependency and loss of competitiveness. The EU was the fourth-largest buyer of Russian fossil fuels, accounting for 8% (EUR 1.2 bn) of Russia’s export revenues from the top five importers in August 2026, according to CREA.


Ukraine’s refinery attacks have reduced fuel availability, and Russia has restricted diesel exports. While damaged refineries can be repaired, it will take months. War in the Middle East and disrupted Hormuz flows have compounded the shortage. The European Central Bank estimates reported in September put the refining-margin contribution to diesel prices at €0.41 per liter, approximately 19% of the pump price.

That is why watching Brent alone misses the problem, as crude and diesel are different markets. On September 21, EU diesel averaged €2.226 per liter, the highest reading in the European Commission’s series since 2005. Taxes accounted for €0.861, or 38.6% of the price. VAT applies on top of excise duties, effectively taxing the tax itself.

The EU minimum diesel excise is €0.33 per liter. America’s federal diesel tax is 24.4 cents per gallon, before state taxes and fees. European taxation adds a persistent cost wedge that cheaper crude cannot eliminate. This means that the average EU final diesel price is almost 50% higher than the US one. Thus, falling oil prices can provide relief without restoring competitiveness. Fixed duties remain, and scarce refining capacity may keep diesel expensive even when crude oil becomes cheaper.

Europe needs to abandon ideology in energy, provide solid investment conditions, eliminate regulation, and support an adequate refining system. Even though the European Commission’s newly announced “refinery dialogue” mentions these issues, it does not change the underlying ideological perspective or any of the existing regulations and misses the key measures to reduce the competitiveness gap, which come from lower taxes, more investment, and elimination of punitive regulations. Emergency Russian cargoes may help at the margin, even if European politicians complain about the US-Russia deal. However, none of this is going to repair Europe’s own policy-created vulnerabilities. The solution may take years, even if the changes are implemented today.

Read more …

He wants Russian diesel?!

• Zelenskyy Requests His Own “Diesel Deal” with the United States (CTH)

The people around Zelenskyy, his support network, are struggling trying to find solid footing for a counter narrative.


That’s why these remarks from Zelenskyy sound weird; in reality, they just don’t quite know how to respond because what President Trump is revealing in the “diesel deal” with Russia really doesn’t have much to do with diesel fuel supplies.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy (via X) – “I don’t believe the volume of diesel Russia will export will affect the price. Moreover, we see that they can export from 300,000 to 500,000 tons a month today. Meanwhile, global consumption stands at 120 million tons a month. What kind of impact can that have? I don’t think it would have any. If some people think otherwise, so be it.

So I believe there are entirely different reasons behind these actions. If this is the approach, then why isn’t America making a “diesel deal” with Ukraine? Let Ukraine propose a “diesel deal.” We do have influence over whether these ships can sail or not, whether these refineries can operate or not. If that’s the case, then let’s do it.

Electricity is what matters to us. That’s clear. If we can be guaranteed protection for our power system, then we will not strike Russia’s diesel infrastructure in response. Electricity is first and foremost about helping people – keeping their lights on. It also means helping Europe. Everyone knows that we are connected to the European power grid. And if our energy infrastructure is not being destroyed, we can help some countries that are facing shortages by supplying them with cheaper electricity.

So, yes, let’s sign a corresponding “diesel deal” with the President of the United States.”

Following the lengthy phone call with Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, President Trump noted during remarks on the way to Ohio that his administration was unsure of who exactly would be conducting strikes against Ukraine power infrastructure. The lights going out in Kiev has a similar appearance to the performative air raid sirens whenever a high-profile EU govt official pays a visit [World War Reddit].


The answer to the Zelenskyy question is most likely, because the Trump-Putin diesel deal isn’t just about diesel. Just like the Belarus potash deal was not just about potash. What both the Russian-diesel fuel and Belarusian-potash have in common is an agreed pricing system that is outside western commodity structures.

Whether he intends it or not, President Trump is revealing the banking and finance system that profits from control of how energy products are bought and sold. This is further evidenced when you look at the Ukraine support assembly through the prism of what nations and political interests promote the climate change agenda.

It is not accidental that every nation and political apparatus supporting Ukraine is part of the green energy, climate change, Paris Climate Treaty, Build Back Better advocacy group.

On the banking/finance side, the western control system tries to block funding for coal, oil and gas. Those who price the markets for these energy products operate directly inside the same institutions. Chairman Xi, President Putin, Crown Prince MbS and President Donald Trump represent the other side of that dynamic and support traditional low-price energy development.

Europe is simply Europe, acting hypocritically and trying to survive financially. Europe is governing itself inside a system they built that is unsustainable. They rail against cheap energy yet purchase cheap energy from Russia; all while accusing Vladimir Putin of aggression….. yet demanding their purchase prices flow through the western banking/finance systems they control.

President Trump must be looking at all of this and listening to the arguments by Putin, Xi, Modi et al, that suddenly take on an entirely new context as he watches how this same western control system is leveraging its power structures to diminish his political strength and weaken his office. It is fascinating to watch all of this play out with a context for understanding that is missed by most of our neighbors.

Read more …

Break the EU.

• German Opposition Demands Trump-style Diesel Deal With Russia (RT)

Two German opposition parties have called for restoring economic ties with Russia following US President Donald Trump’s example in striking a diesel deal with Moscow, challenging Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s sanctions policy as soaring fuel prices put further pressure on Europe’s largest economy.


The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the left-wing Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW), which together command a majority in the eastern state of Saxony-Anhalt’s parliament, are preparing a joint resolution demanding an end to anti-Russia sanctions and financial support for Kiev amid growing frustration over Berlin’s foreign policy and its economic consequences. “Germany also needs a diesel deal with Russia,” Claudia Wittig, deputy leader of the BSW parliamentary group, said, according to German media.

Wittig described fuel prices at German filling stations as “a scandal,” arguing that sanctions against Moscow had “failed across the board” and were primarily hurting Germany itself. She insisted that Berlin should go further than a one-off fuel agreement and resume regular imports of Russian oil and gas to help rescue German industry. “We need policies that think more about Köthen than Kiev,” Wittig said earlier, referring to a German town in Saxony-Anhalt. “We can no longer afford this war.”

AfD co-leader Alice Weidel also hailed Trump’s deal with Moscow, accusing Merz of undermining Germany’s economy with sanctions and expensive liquefied natural gas imports. “That’s how it’s done!” she wrote on X on Saturday. “While Merz ruins Germany with sanctions and expensive LNG, Trump practices realpolitik. German interests instead of escalation!”

The initiative comes after Trump reached a surprise agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday to ease a global diesel shortage. Washington subsequently suspended sanctions on Russian diesel exports, allowing Moscow to release hundreds of thousands of tons of fuel onto international markets.

Trump has repeatedly blamed Vladimir Zelensky for exacerbating the global energy crisis by targeting Russian oil refineries despite Washington’s warnings. On Saturday, he suggested that Ukrainians should replace their leader, accusing Zelensky of rejecting numerous opportunities to settle the conflict.

The joint resolution is scheduled for a vote in the Saxony-Anhalt parliament in Magdeburg on October 14. AfD and BSW hold a combined majority following September’s regional elections, although the state legislature has no authority to lift federal or EU sanctions against Russia. The initiative also marks a further breach of Germany’s longstanding political “firewall” against the AfD, which mainstream parties have sought to exclude from power despite its growing electoral support.

Merz’s government flatly rejected any prospects of easing its anti-Russia stance and vowed to pursue even more sanctions against Moscow. Government spokesman Stefan Kornelius insisted on Saturday that Berlin’s support for Kiev remained “unwavering.” Meanwhile, Green Party co-leader Franziska Brantner blasted Trump’s agreement with Putin as the height of “unscrupulousness.”

The chancellor, whose popularity has sunk so low that he faces calls to resign from within his own party, has faced mounting criticism over the impact of his policies on Germany. Wagenknecht previously accused him of turning German citizens into “cash cows for Ukraine.” Moscow has likewise accused Merz of acting more like a “Ukrainian chancellor” than a German leader.

Read more …

“Trump and Putin have exposed the game being played by the City of London..”

• Ramifications of the Trump-Putin Energy Deal (CTH)

It is challenging to put the geopolitical perspective into an easily digestible format because the construct of western finance is the only reference point available for most Americans. We do not have solid references for what exists outside the western monetary constructs that have existed for generations. However, Barbara Boyd tries to expand our cognitive bubble to explore the potential ramifications of a Trump-Putin energy agreement.


I do not personally think President Trump engages these dynamics from a reference of London or the U.K. Instead, he simply seems to recognize the institutional financial constructs are no longer working to the benefit of American interests, and those constructs happen to be from the British Commonwealth financial system and the bank of financial settlements.

Promethean Action’s Barbara Boyd opens with President Trump’s Sunday announcement of an energy ceasefire in the war between Russia and Ukraine, and what led up to it: his remarks to the press that it’s time for Ukraine to get a new president, and Friday’s agreement for Russia to supply diesel to the United States and the world, with a Treasury license authorizing Russian diesel through April 2027.

She argues that Trump and Putin have exposed the game being played by the City of London: Ukraine’s drone strikes on Russia’s refineries, which the Washington Post examined, keep fuel prices high ahead of the November 3 midterms, while the Financial Times reports the administration threatened to cut off weapons and intelligence if the attacks continued, and members of Congress move against the deal.

After President Zelensky’s interview on ABC’s This Week blaming high prices on the war in the Middle East, the episode turns to the energy wars: Russia’s ban on fuel exports, U.S. diesel above $6 a gallon, no major new U.S. refinery since 1977, and Europe’s emergency diesel stocks, held mainly by Germany and France, until Trump’s export threat brought a G7 release of 100 million barrels of oil and diesel.

Her presentation closes with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Operation Economic Outcast against Iran’s regime, the petrodollar system and London’s commodity markets since the 1971 collapse of Bretton Woods, President Putin’s case for long-term contracts between producing and consuming nations, the Conservative Treehouse’s argument that the world’s biggest economy is aligning against the financial schemes of London while retaining the dollar, and Secretary Bessent’s chart on prices under Biden and Trump.


Read more …

“Trump hits on Ilhan Omar, Zelenskyy and Putin, Kimberly Guilfoile, the issues with Ukraine and Russia energy ceasefire.”

• President Trump is Making Chopper Pressers Great Again (CTH)

Chopper Pressers have always been the best pressers, but when there are headline events swirling that capture great attention, chopper pressers are always awesome. I really appreciate them for how Trump cuts through the nonsense.


President Trump gives brief remarks about a variety of headline grabbing events. The first two minutes are captivating in the rapid-fire honesty. Seriously, in just the first two non-pretending minutes Trump hits on Ilhan Omar, Zelenskyy and Putin, Kimberly Guilfoile, the issues with Ukraine and Russia energy ceasefire.

Ilhan Omar is a terrible complainer and sketchy, but I have nothing to do with that. Not sure who is targeting Ukraine energy infrastructure, “we’ll have to take a look at that.” Looking at possibly having to fire the Ambassador to Greece for being a sketchy grifter. Ukraine and Russia “agree to the energy ceasefire because I’m saying they agree.”


Read more …

Jack Smith thought he could do anything.

• Jack Smith Could Track Phone Contacts, but What About the Lawyers? (Manney)

Jack Smith’s investigators wanted to know whom one of President Donald Trump’s closest aides called and when. Newly unsealed court papers show how they got permission. The sharper question is what happened when those phone records led them to Trump’s lawyers.


Two applications filed in February and April 2023 sought permission to monitor a cellular number the Trump administration identified as belonging to Susie Wiles, who then worked with Trump’s political operation and is now White House chief of staff. The public filings redact the subscriber’s identity. Federal judges Beryl Howell and James Boasberg approved the respective requests.

Smith’s team investigated government records and classified documents recovered from Mar-a-Lago, as well as possible obstruction. Prosecutors gave the court an investigative reason to monitor the number. They wrote that AT&T records showed contacts with at least nine witnesses or subjects within two days of interviews or grand jury testimony.

Investigators suspected additional calls might reveal efforts to contact witnesses after federal agents approached them. The applications described that suspicion alone doesn’t establish intimidation, obstruction, or any other crime, even if a phone call occurs near a witness interview.

The government’s request went beyond a simple list of outgoing calls. The pen-register and trap-and-trace applications covered incoming and outgoing phone numbers, communication times and durations, email addresses, IP addresses, and device identifiers. Prosecutors also sought historical call-detail records, and each order authorized up to 60 days of monitoring.

The filings expressly excluded communication content. These orders provide no basis to claim investigators listened to conversations through this surveillance authority. But names, timing, and frequency still show investigators who were talking with whom, including who contacted a lawyer immediately after questioning.

Earlier declassified FBI communications show agents reviewing contacts involving 21 Trump-affiliated defense attorneys and at least five journalists. In a March 24, 2023 message, an agent noted that a lawyer had called Wiles, recorded the call, and compared its 41-second length with earlier contacts. Another note tracked her phone activity after an April 7 FBI interview.

From Just the News: The three-year probe of the ex-president — which put Joe Biden’s administration in charge of the legal fate of his GOP rival in the 2024 election — was approved at the highest levels of the Biden Justice Department, including by Attorney General Merrick Garland, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco and FBI Director Christopher Wray, the memos show.

In March 2022, Wray sent a memo to Garland and Monaco, seeking the attorney general’s approval to open a “Sensitive Investigative Matter” that would become Plasmic Echo. “I recommend you approve,” Lisa Monaco wrote at the end of the memo, leaving her initials “LM.” Days later, Garland signed the memo with his initials, giving his approval.

The new applications don’t specifically alert the judges to possible monitoring of defense-attorney contacts. Investigators sought broad collection from the phone, so such contacts could appear whether or not prosecutors initially intended to focus on them. The critical unanswered question is what agents did after identifying those calls.

Federal law helps explain why the two judges approved the surveillance. Under 18 U.S.C. Sections 3122 and 3123, prosecutors must certify that the information is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation. Unlike a traditional search warrant, the statute doesn’t require probable cause. Meeting that statutory threshold, however, can’t answer every question about how investigators used the information.

Communications between lawyers and clients receive special protections, but a telephone call alone isn’t automatically privileged. The released applications alone don’t demonstrate a violation of attorney-client privilege. They do raise the question of whether prosecutors identified defense-related contacts, restricted their review, or used patterns in those calls to guide further investigative steps.

Smith has defended his investigations and denied political motivation. The newly disclosed documents don’t establish that either judge knowingly approved improper collection, that investigators intercepted privileged conversations under these orders, or that the surveillance itself violated federal law.

From Just the News: Howell has been a central figure in Trump-related litigation for nearly a decade. As chief judge of the D.C. federal court from 2016 to 2023, she oversaw grand juries used by Russia collusion Special Counsel Robert Mueller and by investigators probing efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

In March 2023, she pierced the attorney-client privilege between Trump and one of his lawyers, Evan Corcoran. In that case, she relied on the crime-fraud exception, forcing more testimony in the classified documents vcase. She also enforced Smith’s warrant for Trump’s Twitter account and fined the company $350,000 for slow compliance.

A second application to extend the pen register and tap and trace monitoring of Wiles’s phone came in April and was approved by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, another Washington DC-based jurist famously critical of Trump, the court records show.

Americans deserve something more specific than assurances. Who reviewed the defense-attorney contacts? What safeguards applied? Were any call patterns used to anticipate legal strategy? Congress should seek those answers, and prosecutors should be prepared to supply them. Court approval explains how this monitoring began. The public still deserves to know how it was handled.

Read more …

“..if he is fighting to get out of the Establishment’s traps..”

Is that a caveat?

• Trump Might Not Be as Bad as He Appears (Paul Craig Roberts)

Yesterday Nima and I discussed the lies that are ricocheting around news events and how political figures think they can succeed with such obvious lies as the Strait of Hormuz is open, the US is in control of the Strait, and 20 million barrels of oil are being transported through the Strait daily. https://www.youtube.com/live/V2kwURVOV5Q


Nima was concerned with the latest claim from Trump that a deal has been reached with Russia in which Russia will provide 4.8 million tons of diesel fuel to the market in exchange for Trump removing the sanctions on Russia. To facilitate the deal Trump asked Zelensky to quit attacking Russian diesel facilities, and he asked Putin to stop attacking Kiev. Both Zelensky and Russia, according to reports, say they are unaware of this deal. The Russians say that they have no interest in a temporary ceasefire and that what Russia wants is a negotiated comprehensive end to the conflict with the West. Nima asked how could Trump announce an agreement that Zelensky and Putin didn’t know about.

NOTE: This morning, October 13, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the supply of Russian diesel fuel to the market “is a very mutually beneficial element of Russian-US cooperation,” but there is no direct link between the US decision on Russian diesel fuel and Russia’s position on Ukraine negotiations. Peskov goes on to say that Moscow has only read media reports about a US-European plan to resolve the situation in Ukraine: “No, we have not heard anything about it. We have seen reports in the media, but we have not heard anything about it,” Peskov told reporters. I replied that I could only speculate.

One possible answer, perhaps even a likely answer, is that Trump is putting out a narrative that if it takes hold could lead to a solution. One part of the solution is to protect the Republicans in the midterm elections from higher energy prices and the inflation that rising energy prices cause. Trump might also see that a deal in which sanctions are removed in exchange for more energy supply is a way to extract Washington from the conflict Washington started in Ukraine without it looking like an American defeat.

If sanctions are removed and energy is flowing, what is the point of a return to hostilities? I have always thought that Putin’s choice of Stanford and Harvard educated Kirill Dmitriev as Russia’s negotiator and Trump’s choice of business men Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law as Washington’s negotiators was crafted so as to produce a deal that would present a mutually profitable business arrangement more profitable than an unpopular military conflict.

I am a long time critic of Putin for ignoring Napolean’s important statement that “The reputation of one’s arms in war is everything, and equivalent to real forces.” I and Doctorow have concluded, correctly or incorrectly, that Putin’s refusal to use sufficient force to stop Ukraine’s ability to continue the military conflict has caused the conflict to greatly widen and that this widening implies eventually a nuclear conflict. We see many signs of this as the conflict is no longer limited to the Donbas battlefront but has expanded deep into Mother Russia as a result of long-range weapons supplied by the US and Europe and targeting information supplied by the US and MI6 to Ukraine.

Two more formerly neutral European countries have joined NATO and more NATO countries have agreed to host US nuclear missiles on their territory. Clearly the war has widened. Nevertheless, I understand Putin’s approach which does risk nuclear war when Russia has no further room to back away. Putin understands that if he ends the conflict by striking down Ukraine’s ability to continue the fight, which Russia could have done 4.5 years ago and could do tomorrow with conventional weapons alone, he will have obtained Russia’s aims but without Western acceptance. So in effect the conflict doesn’t end.

If Putin imposes a military solution, the West will say: “See, we told you. Putin intends to resurrect the Soviet Empire and spread it into Europe. Germany will be next.” Indeed, Germany seems already to think that Germany is going to be next as Germany prepares for war with Russia, an ill-advised enterprise.

The disagreement between Putin and myself is which of us has the best odds in the gamble on the table. My concern is that Putin’s sacrifice of a decisive military victory is resulting in more Western provocations that will result in nuclear war. Putin’s concern is that a Russian imposed military victory will not be a good victory because it will harden Western opposition to Russia, whose demonstration of strength would be regarded as a threat to all of Europe.

I cannot say that I am right and that Putin is wrong. I just hope he is aware of the risk. This concludes what Nima and I discussed, so you can save the time of listening to our discussion. Nima’s questions on occasions are provocative and push me into clarifying statements of how I view events as they unfold.

I will end with giving you important information. As a high level Reagan political appointee instrumental to President Reagan’s two important issues–the defeat of stagflation and the end of the Cold War, I can tell you that most presidential appointees are not in office to serve the President but to serve their own careers. It is not unusual for presidents, prime ministers, chancellors, dictators even, to have ministers working against the titular head in behalf of their own agendas and career. In my time in the Reagan administration my main opponents were Reagan’s appointments as his chief of staff, as his budget director, as his chairman of the council of economic advisors and their media whores who thrived on leaks against Reagan’s agenda.

For example the budget director, David Stockman had the intention of being the first budget director to balance the budget. From this achievement he would go on to become US Senator from Michigan or wherever it was he was from, and from there to the presidency. Stockman saw Reagan’s tax rate reduction as an obstacle to his career ambitions.

Murray Weidenbaum, chairman of the council of economic advisers, was busy reassuring conservative foundations that supported his situation at Washington University that he was against budget deficits and thus gave little if any support to Reagan’s economic policy.

Reagan’s chief of staff, Jim Baker, just wanted to reassure Wall Street and believed that a small tax rate reduction of 5%, which would be wiped out by inflation before it could be enacted, sufficed to show a Reagan victory in lowering taxes.

The facts which I had in my hands as Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury for Economic policy had no influence against these agendas. I simply had to run over them, which meant no further government career. But that is what it took to get to get Reagan’s economic policy out of his own administration so that Congress could vote on it.

I prevailed because I was right, had Reagan’s support and support in Congress and was willing to take the hits. Today 45 years later only Elon Musk can afford to take the hits. Today not even the US Secretary of Health, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., can prevail over Big Pharma’s influence over the FDA, CDC, NIH–all of which report to Secretary Kennedy and all of whom obey Big Pharma. Secretary Kennedy cannot even get the proven dangerous Covid-19 vaccines prohibited. Big Pharma’s political campaign contributions are more powerful than the Secretary of Health.

In my opinion, it is the inability of elected governments to prevail over powerful private interests, such as the Israel Lobby, the military-security complex that President Eisenhower warned us about as long ago as 1961, and Big Pharma, that has given rise to an ideological Democrat Party that sees the institutional structure of American society so corrupt that it must be overthrown. The US Supreme Court destroyed the accountability of the US government when it ruled that corporations had First Amendment rights to purchase the US government to serve their agendas.

I doubt that the US will have a French or Leninist revolution, but that is the intention of the new ideological Democrats, and I understand the frustrations that have led them to their war on existing society. There is no doubt whatsoever that the republic established by the Founding Fathers has been corrupted.

Where will redemptive American leadership come from? Trump was defeated by his captivity to the Israel Lobby. The Democrats are committed not to the restoration of America but to America’s overthrow.

It is a true statement that “Where there is no vision the people are lost.” In a world in which the only interests of peoples is in self-affirming narratives the people are doubly lost. A life in false narratives is a life in The Matrix.

Life in The Matrix is life in Western countries today. It is not a life worth living. The question is: In all of the world today do any people other than the Israelis and Zionist MAGA Americans believe in themselves, believe in their country?

Perhaps the Iranians?

Read more …

She supposedly arrived with nothing, just a few years ago.

• Trump Suggests Ilhan Omar’s Money Came From Fraud (Catherine Salgado)

President Donald Trump just implied that there could be evidence linking Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Somalia) to millions of dollars in lucrative fraud.


Early on October 12, federal agents from the Department of Homeland Security, in partnership with the Department of Justice, executed a search warrant at Omar’s D.C. home. Members of the Trump administration including Vice President JD Vance and DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin have alleged that Omar did commit immigration fraud, including by faking a marriage with her own brother. But she and her family are also connected with the massive Somali fraud machine stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from Americans in Minnesota.

On Tuesday, Trump posted on Truth Social, “Why did Ilhan Omar report a Net Worth of up to 30 Million Dollars just a short time ago, and then immediately say, ‘Oh, I made a mistake! It’s really $100,000.’ Could it be that her highly paid accountant actually reported the money that was stolen from her fraudulent activities in Minnesota? Would something like that be possible?”

He pressed his speculative point home. “Do you think the accountant actually gave the right number the first time, 30 Million Dollars, and then she was forced to disavow because she never would have been able to report where that much money came from? She must have freaked out when she saw that money!”


Omar certainly lives a plutocratic life for an alleged refugee to America who supposedly subsists off her congressional salary. “Where did her house come from, where did her cars come from, and what about her lovely place in Washington, D.C.?” Trump asked. “I didn’t know that Congressmen and women made that kind of money, but I do know her husband, according to information and belief, makes almost nothing, so it couldn’t have come from him. How many people did she illegally bring into our Country from Somalia? America wants answers, and we want them, NOW!”

GOP lawmakers and the convicted mastermind of the $250 million “Feeding Our Future” scheme implicated Omar in the fraud. Fraudsters emailed each other about “Ilhan’s Office” and her sister is tentatively identified as one of the USAID fraudsters who registered at the same address as the “Feeding Our Future” criminals.

Sen. Ernst said “One of our spending bills making its way through Congress was a $1 million earmark from Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, which was an earmark that was supposedly going to a substance abuse clinic, which actually happened to be housed in a restaurant and run by three individuals that share the same residential address, according to their IRS paperwork.”

After all, Omar has said that she would prioritize Somalia’s interests and her father is reportedly one of the Somali officers responsible for the Isaaq genocide.

Read more …

The Islam doesn’t belong in the US. Or in Europe, but it may be too late there.

• Corporate Islamification (Stefan Padfield)

So, what is Islamification?


A recent documentary by former Virginia congressman Nick Freitas titled “The Immigration Crisis That Will Destroy the West” warns viewers about the risks created by the Islamification of Western civilization. The film focuses primarily on the negative impacts of cultural norms related to the treatment of women and girls, with a reviewer noting allegations of “a significant problem of organized, industrial-scale rapes being conducted by mostly Muslim men” in the UK.

Relatedly, another recent column noted that “seven of the top 10 countries with the highest prevalence of child marriage have a Muslim-majority,” and went on to ask: “Why does Islam appear so frequently in discussions surrounding religious persecution, terrorism, and certain forms of sexual violence?” Similar concerns have also been raised about the cultural roots of rampant fraud we’ve seen in places like Minneapolis.

And even more recent fiery riots in France have left some “pointing to second and third-generation immigrant youths–many from Muslim North African and sub-Saharan backgrounds–as the core of the violence.” Perhaps pulling all the foregoing together, Douglas Murray argues that “the West remain[s] at war with Islamic radicals.”Importantly, while conservatives cherish individual liberty and religious freedom, those commitments are perverted when it is claimed that only a nihilistic multiculturalism properly embodies those values.

To the contrary, in addition to individual liberty and religious freedom, conservatives also value truth and free speech in pursuit thereof, both of which demand acknowledgement of the fact that not all cultures or branches thereof are equal, that some cultures are better than others at the very least vis-a-vis a specific people in a specific place at a specific time, and that certain cultures can pose a threat to Western civilization if they are imported en masse without any expectations of assimilation.

Accordingly, the liberty and freedom of individuals to practice their religion should be respected and protected, and members of all religions who strive to assimilate should be embraced. However, the people who support terrorism in the name of Islam, or who promote cultural norms directly antithetical to Western civilization, such as undermining property rights or the rights of women and children, should not be ignored or empowered. Nor should asserted connections between those issues and Islam be handwaved away as exaggerating a “few bad apples” problem.

This brings us to the role corporations play in the Islamification of Western civilization, and what applicable fiduciary duties and expectations of good corporate governance have to say about that. Consider how the following corporate actions might increase the risk of immigration-related harms to the United States, including Islamification–which will be explained in more detail below.

First, corporations fighting restrictions on welfare benefits could be supporting incentives for problematic immigration. Second, corporations seeking to import cheap labor could be similarly promoting mass immigration with costs outweighing benefits. Third, corporations opposing ICE operations could be making it easier for illegal aliens who harm the United States to stay in the country.

Finally, H-1B visa abuse can exacerbate immigration-related strains on U.S. citizens. This applies both generally and specifically to risks related to Islamification because while discussion of demographic issues related to H-1B visa abuse can focus on beneficiaries from India, which is apparently 80% Hindu, it is highly unlikely that the H-1B beneficiary population excludes Muslims. For example, 14% of India’s population apparently identifies as Muslim.

Of course, the reputational and financial risks associated with a corporation creating the perception that it directly or indirectly supports the Islamification of the U.S. are not the only factors to be considered by corporate leaders in making related business decisions. But it is also arguably true that failing to become fully informed about these risks could constitute a breach of duty, including being found guilty of bad faith in relevant cases of willful blindness.

An argument could certainly be made that no corporate fiduciaries dealing with this issue can claim to be fully informed if the word “Islamification” never once appears on the board agenda.

Read more …

I’m not sure I understand this.

• The Midterm Polling Is Absolutely, Positively, 100% Wrong. (Maybe.) (Pinsker)

Our world runs on incentive structures: Your values and goals drive your decision-making. It’s a fundamental tenet of free market capitalism. Trouble is, our incentive structures can also lead us astray. Low-hanging fruit, socioeconomic pressures, and instant gratification cloud our judgment. Instead of striving for long-term accuracy, we’ll settle for short-term accolades.


Which takes us to the “science” of polling. Because it IS a real, legitimate science. And pollsters are real, legitimate scientists. Y’know, just like TV weathermen. It’s fascinating: When we crack the veneer of scientific-sounding stats, numbers, and probabilities, both weather forecasters and pollsters use the same exact language. It’s kind of eerie.

“Forecasting is both a science and an art,” wrote famed meteorologist Jeff Haby. “To be a great forecaster, the meteorologist needs to have skills in weather pattern recognition… [including] intuition (the 6th sense).” Because the numbers alone aren’t reliable. Nobel laureate Kenneth Arrow, who served as a weather officer in World War II, quipped, “One thing I learned from meteorology is that being an actual science was no guarantee of exactness.” Which is why weathermen interject their own biases, experiences, and assumptions into weather forecasts. It’s where the “art” — and “intuition” — come in.

Wait: art and intuition? What the hell kind of “science” relies on artwork and ESP?! Actually, polling does, too.“Polls are the worst form of prediction ever, except for all the other kinds,” said pollster Nate Silver. “In some ways… it’s amazing that polls are as accurate as they are.” Because, when it comes to quantifying key factors, including an accurate, representative sample of likely voters, as fellow pollster John Zogby freely admitted, “This is where polling is an art.”

It’s subjective. There’s a near-infinite galaxy of competing, contradictory statistical projections, and each pollster is free to accentuate — or deemphasize — absolutely anything he or she wants. Just like TV weathermen. bPredicting the weather and predicting the midterms are both science-based without being scientific. Science is just the starting point: Yes, pollsters and weathermen use real numbers and real math to paint a picture, but their “art” is guided by their intuition.

And pleasing the paying customer. This is where the incentive structure comes in — and where TV weathermen and pollsters differ. TV weathermen, after all, are almost always employees of a TV station. It’s analogous to a tenured professor: The station has a vested interest in promoting ‘em, so unless they screw up spectacularly (or sink in the ratings), a likeable, “accurate enough” weatherman has a job for life.

It’s why TV weathermen are incentivized to play it safe, avoid major screwups, and make semi-reliable predictions. But pollsters (usually) aren’t employed by a TV station. They’re either contracted for a short time, or they work for an independent company and need the media to trumpet their results — or nobody will hear it.

Either way, the incentive structure is the same: When you’re on a contract, you’re incentivized to do whatever you can to earn a renewal. This means keeping your customer happy. And if you need media outlets to trumpet your results, you’re incentivized to tell them a story that they’re likely to run.

Weather forecasts and political polling projections aren’t science. They’re science-based — the same way pro wrestling is sports-based. There’s real athleticism, and the wrestlers are working hard, but c’mon, methinks someone has his thumb on the scales: Fun fact: Over the past eight years, about 70% of August polls have overestimated support for Democrats.

It seems someone has put his thumb on the pollsters’ scales, too. So it’s not remarkable that the 2026 polls point to a Democratic victory. The opposite is true: This is exactly what we’d expect the incentive structure to produce! And whattaya know, 70% of the time in the month of August, that’s what we get.

Which is an institutional problem: Left-wing reporters, at left-wing media outlets, favor left-wing news stories. That’s not a secret. It’s why Republican trust in the media has nosedived. And since most major media outlets are left-wing, most political polls lean to the left — because that’s the incentive structure of the media marketplace.

So yes, the midterm polling has been utterly abysmal for Republicans. And yes, we’ve heard the super-scary stats: One expert gives the Democrats an 84.5% chance of winning the House. Another expert gives the Democrats a 74.8% chance of winning the Senate. Those are VERY scientific-sounding numbers. Why, these scientists are so precise, they even used a decimal point!

But these numbers don’t mean anything. They’re not real. It’s science-inspired artwork. (Or science fiction.) They were guided by “intuition.” Y’know — ESP. Which means that the 2026 midterms aren’t anywhere close to over and Republicans shouldn’t be demoralized.

Because the God’s honest truth is, nobody knows nothin’. We don’t know which demos will show up and vote on Election Day, which ones won’t, and which ones were underrepresented in the polls. Nor do we know which issues will be top-of-mind on November 3, 2026. The election is still three weeks away. And that, dear reader, is the final caveat: If nobody knows nothin’, then, alas, we can’t disprove the media polls either. All we can do is note the systemic bias and the sky-high error rate.

So get out and vote like the midterms are still up for grabs — because they absolutely are.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 13 2026

Oct 132026
 
 October 13, 2026  Posted by at 7:56 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  55 Responses »


Mark Rothko Slow Swirl at the Edge of the Sea 1944


• Trump Hits His Campaign Stride in Youngstown, Ohio (Tim O’Brien)
• Federal Agents Raid Ilhan Omar’s D.C. Home (Matt Margolis)
• Genocide Hypocrites (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Sen. Chuck Grassley, 93, Files for Reelection (Margolis)
• Jack Smith: A Former Special Counsel Joins the “No Kings” Movement (Turley)
• Elon Musk Becomes Largest Donor, To Rescue Senate Republican Majority (JTN)
• Judge Orders White House to Stop Airing Taxpayer-Funded Ads (ET)
• So, Where Was Waldo? (James Howard Kunstler)
• UK PM Consoles Zelensky After Trump Calls For His Ouster (RT)
• Trump ‘Really Mad’ With Zelensky – Media (RT)
• Ukraine’s Worst Diplomatic Nightmare Just Got Closer (Poletaev)
• Montana AG Asks Supreme Court to Revive Case Against DEI Training (O’Neil)

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2109460381999505609?s=20

 

 


“Big Rally Energy Is Picking Up..”

• Trump Hits His Campaign Stride in Youngstown, Ohio (Tim O’Brien)

President Donald Trump continued his barnstorming tour around the country on Columbus Day by rallying the base in Youngstown, Ohio, leading the charge to get U.S. Sen. John Husted (R-Ohio) reelected and Vivek Ramaswamy (R) elected as governor. Husted is in a tight race against former U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D), while Ramaswamy is trailing in the polls behind Amy Acton, one of the more radical leftist gubernatorial candidates in the country this election cycle.


In Trump’s remarks, he praised the local candidates and paid homage to Christopher Columbus on his namesake holiday. Then he launched into the Democrats, pointing out that when they were in charge of the federal government, they gave America the worst inflation in its history, the worst trade deficit in history, and they allowed violent illegal aliens to flood across the southern border into the country.

He tied all of this to Brown and his role in the Senate during the decline of American standing under Democrat “leadership.” Trump said that Brown wants to allow men in women’s sports. He repeatedly reminded the crowd that Brown supports the transgender movement in full, and more specifically the mutilation of children.

In a nod to the day’s holiday, Trump said, “To be a Democrat like Sherrod Brown, you have to believe Christopher Columbus should not be in Columbus, Ohio.” Using Minnesota as a cautionary case study, Trump pointed to the way in which the Somali-American community has taken over that state’s political and governing infrastructure, characterized by massive amounts of fraud and corruption.

He specifically mentioned Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose house was raided by the feds earlier in the day as part of a federal criminal investigation. He said that Omar “comes from one of the worst countries on the planet.”


He pointed out that Somali corruption in Minnesota was responsible for the theft of tens of millions of dollars from Minnesota welfare programs. He mentioned the arrest of Sheikhdoon Abdullahi Mohamud, 18, of Richfield, Minn., who was charged with receiving a firearm and ammo as part of a terrorist plot.

And he mentioned the October 2 Eden Prairie shooting at a high school football game, a shooting in which the suspect is Adam Abdihakeem Adam, a Somali who allegedly fired a gun at what police are calling a rival gang. Four others were arrested on rioting charges. After all of this, Trump said, “They come here and tell us how to run our country.” He then added, “They cheat on everything… We’re not going to stand for it.”

He then turned his attention to Abdul El-Sayed, who is running for the Senate in Michigan. “Look at the guy running in Michigan,” Trump said. “He’s a jihadist. And the media gives him so much publicity.” After riffing on El-Sayed for a few minutes, Trump turned his attention to Springfield, Ohio, where he said 32,000 people had lived peacefully in small town America. That was before, Trump said, Democrat administrations “dumped” 35,000 Haitian illegal aliens on the town, some of them with criminal backgrounds.

Trump reported that his administration is working to keep his 2024 campaign promise to correct that situation. “They’re getting their town back,” Trump said. While the president ticked off a long list of accomplishments on the part of his administration in this second term, he highlighted that poverty in the black, Hispanic, and American Indian communities has dropped significantly, along with crime rates nationwide.=nHe dropped a now familiar statistic, but an impressive one, that “zero illegal aliens have been admitted into the U.S. through our southern border” over the past 17 months.

His administration has eliminated critical race theory curricula from schools, along with increasing success against the movement that promotes gender mutilation in kids. In addition, he highlighted the White House’s progress towards banning men from competing against women in women’s sports. Because the president repeated these themes throughout his speech, it’s clear that their research is indicating that Democrats remain very vulnerable on social issues.

Can you imagine 15 years ago saying, ‘We will not allow men to play in women’s sports?’ They’d have thought you were crazy,” Trump said. He reminded the crowd that Republicans are defending women — that they are the only ones defending women in these cases. “What they’re doing to women is demeaning,” he commented.

Trump spent a little time talking about Ramaswamy’s opponent, Acton, who, the president said, wants to restore the inheritance tax, the estate tax, taxes on tips, and taxes on overtime, and who wants the elimination of tax cuts the Republicans already passed. He said she wants to “double your state income tax.” He added that Acton wants to “take away your guns,” and that she’s against the Second Amendment.

He warned that if the Democrats win majorities in the midterms, they will work to add Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia as states, increasing the number of Democratic senators by four and the number of Democratic representatives by 10, and expand the Supreme Court to 13 justices (possibly up to 23). He painted a grim picture of Democrats if they get the chance to rig the system so badly that he may well be America’s last Republican president.

Read more …

She’s an opportunist.

• Federal Agents Raid Ilhan Omar’s D.C. Home (Matt Margolis)

Federal agents executed a search warrant at Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-Minn.) Washington, D.C., home early Monday morning as part of a criminal fraud investigation into her immigration paperwork, according to an exclusive report from Fox News Digital.


The search began at around 6 a.m. Two sources close to the investigation told the outlet that the probe focuses on immigration documents the Somali-born congresswoman’s late father filled out on her behalf when she was a child. Homeland Security Investigations and the Department of Homeland Security are leading the operation, and the Justice Department is also involved. Multiple agents wearing HSI jackets were seen outside the residence.

“Today in the Washington, D.C., area, Homeland Security Investigations executed a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice,” a DOJ spokesperson told Fox News Digital. “This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal investigation.”HSI serves as DHS’s primary investigative arm, handling cases involving cross-border crime, human trafficking, child exploitation, drug smuggling, cybercrime, and counterterrorism.

The search follows months of public signals from senior administration officials. In May, Vice President JD Vance said the Justice Department was examining whether Omar had committed immigration fraud. “It certainly seems like something fishy is there, but everybody’s entitled to equal justice under the law,” Vance said.

Omar has faced allegations for years that she married her brother as part of an immigration scheme. She has repeatedly denied the claim. DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin addressed the matter last month. “Something’s going to happen. … We know that she married her brother to try to bring him to the United States. We know he now lives in London,” Mullin said.

He suggested the investigation could reach further back. “There may be more to this, the whole family migration and possibly some illegal activity for them to come to the United States to begin with,” the secretary continued. “… If we can prove it, that you shouldn’t have been here in the first place, we will deport you.”

In mid-September, White House border czar Tom Homan confirmed on Fox News’ The Sunday Briefing that federal immigration authorities were conducting an “ongoing criminal investigation” connected to Omar. Asked whether the government had evidence that she committed immigration or naturalization fraud, he declined to say. “I know things are going on, but I can’t give specifics of what’s happening,” Homan said.

Pressed on whether he was confirming an investigation, Homan answered directly. “I’m confirming that ICE is, yeah — look, I said months ago that there’s something that’s been reported and needs to be looked at,” he said. Homan added that he would allow HSI to continue its work. “If someone committed an immigration violation, if someone committed marriage fraud or anything like that, regardless if they’re a congressman or not, no one’s above the law,” the border czar noted.

He also described denaturalization in proven fraud cases as “very serious.” “If someone lies through that process to becoming a citizen, and we can prove they, in fact, lied or misrepresented themselves, we can absolutely denaturalize them,” Homan said. “We’ve done it before many times over the last 40 years I’ve been around.”

Read more …

“Omar is the daughter of a well-known colonel in the truly genocidal army of Somali dictator Siad Barre.”

• Genocide Hypocrites (Victor Davis Hanson)

On Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas killers slaughtered 1,200 people, more than two-thirds of them civilians, inside Israel. For the ensuing three weeks, they refused Israel’s demands to turn over the 251 hostages and to surrender the architects of the massacre. No matter—within a day of the attacks, when Hamas gunmen were still fighting Israeli troops on Israeli soil, the American Left was already screaming “genocide!”


They did not mean Hamas’s intended genocide of Jews, a foretaste of which was seen when it launched a surprise invasion force of more than 4,000 terrorists some 15 miles into Israel. The killers were accompanied by some 2,000 “innocent” Gazan “civilians.” All were bent on looting, murder, rape, torture, and hostage-taking of the defenseless.

Nor did the “genocide” chorus refer to the more than 13,000 rockets, missiles, and drones launched from Gaza after Oct. 7 that predominantly targeted Israeli civilian neighborhoods.

What was most surreal about the charges of “genocide” against Israel—along with all the other slurs of “settler-colonialism,” “apartheid,” “occupation,” “war crimes”—was that they so often came from elite first- and second-generation Middle Eastern immigrants to America. Yet these prominent American accusers have remained silent about whether their lurid accusations might far better reflect the sordid histories of their own homelands.

Take the Turkish-American anchor baby Hasan Piker, the millionaire podcaster who has dual citizenship and grew up in Turkey. Piker has gained celebrity as the socialist heartthrob who is the brain of the new Democratic/Socialist/Islamist alliance. Besides his antisemitic rants, he has declared that “America deserved 9/11” and “Oh God, I f-ing hate America so much.”

Yet the outspoken Piker has only once in passing mentioned Turkey’s 1974 invasion and the half-century-long occupation of nearly 40 percent of Cyprus. Nor did Piker, who damns the creation of Israel in 1948, ever say a word about the Turkish torching of the historic Greek-majority Ionian city of Smyrna in 1922, in which tens of thousands of civilians were incinerated.

Given Piker’s supposedly vast historical recall and outspoken human rights advocacy, one would at least expect him to be sensitive to the horror of Turkey’s Armenian genocide, in which Turkish troops slaughtered more than one million civilians, and for which the Turkish government still denies any culpability. But when once challenged by Armenian-Americans, he dismissed them, saying flippantly, “It’s more fun to enrage you.”

And the pattern goes beyond mere podcasters.

Rep. Ilhan Omar, a first-generation immigrant from Somalia, also brays loudly about supposed Israeli war crimes. Omar spouts “genocide” and “apartheid” in her frequently antisemitic rants. She has also labeled her adopted nation as “one of the worst countries” in the world.

But Omar is the daughter of a well-known colonel in the truly genocidal army of Somali dictator Siad Barre. The latter waged a decade-long war of extermination against the rival Isaaq clan that opposed Barre’s 21-year-long dictatorship. Estimates of the Barre regime’s murderous toll range from 50,000 to 200,000 killed, mostly civilians. Few in Omar’s politically active Somali immigrant community ever concede that many fled Somalia to America only when Barre’s two-decade reign of terror was finally overthrown, and they feared retaliation from his victims.

Of course, the nation’s biggest elected leftist rising star has also joined in.

Zohran Mamdani, mayor of New York City, employs the same tired anti-Israeli and anti-American verbiage. Yet he went further than other antisemites when he launched grandstanding threats to jail Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu any time the latter visited New York to address the United Nations.

For America’s 250th birthday, Mamdani’s July 3 “commemorative” address blasted American “monopolies that dominate every industry,” federal agents supposedly “terrorizing our streets,” and a country where we “sell our elections to the highest bidder.” The calumny was odd coming from a dual citizen of the police state of Uganda, where there are no real elections but lots of Indian “monopolies.”

Indeed, Mamdani himself better fits his own charges of “settler-colonist” and “apartheid.” His Indian community in Uganda comprises less than 0.1% of the population. But somehow it still accounts for over 60% of Uganda’s GDP. It was implanted there by 19th-century British imperialists as a “settler-colonial” community to help control the indigenous black population.

In short, we should remind these privileged ingrates—regardless of what corner of the world they hail from–to look inward before they blast their adopted country and not to project the sins of their own homelands upon either Israel or America.

Read more …

“His eighth term runs through Jan. 3, 2029, and if he were to win a ninth, he’d be in office until he’s 101.”

• Sen. Chuck Grassley, 93, Files for Reelection (Margolis)

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is 93 and has filed to run for another six-year term in 2028.


Grassley has held elected office since 1959 and has sat in the Senate since 1981. He’s the longest-serving Republican in the history of Congress and one of the longest-serving senators of all time. As Senate president pro tempore, he’s also third in line for the presidency. His eighth term runs through Jan. 3, 2029, and if he were to win a ninth, he’d be in office until he’s 101.

I’m honestly not sure whether this means he’s definitely going to run again or is just filing paperwork. But if he does run, it’s a bad idea. A really, really bad idea. Grassley made that case himself just last month. Speaking at an Iowa GOP event in West Des Moines on September 25, he urged Republicans to turn out for the party’s nominee for governor in November, and explained what was weighing on him.

“At 93 years of age, I don’t know how many more groups of Republicans like this I’m going to have a chance to talk to, but one of the reasons I’m worried about who’s going to be elected governor — I don’t plan on dying in office, but if I did, I don’t want a Democratic governor choosing my successor,” Grassley said. His concern has a legal basis.

Under Iowa law, the governor picks a temporary replacement when a Senate seat opens up, and that appointee serves until voters choose a permanent successor at the next general election. Currently, polls suggest that Democrat Rob Sand is favored over Republican Zach Lahn, as Sand has a +8.4 lead in the RealClearPolitics average.

Grassley issued a similar warning in October 2018, when he was 85 and Gov. Kim Reynolds (R-Iowa) was fighting for a full term in a close race. Reynolds survived and cruised to reelection in 2022. No Iowa governor has had to fill a Senate vacancy since 1936, after Sen. Richard Murphy of Dubuque died in a car accident.

In fairness, Grassley, to the best that I can tell, is healthy, though I haven’t seen a recent clip of him. But who cares if he is? His advanced age makes seeking reelection problematic, and his comments last month make it clear that even he acknowledges that. At the time, he hadn’t said whether he’d run again. That question appears to have been answered, and the answer is the wrong one.

Republicans already know how this goes. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) disappeared from the Senate over the summer, and the lack of transparency around it was troubling. His staff dodged basic questions about his condition. Considering McConnell’s other well-documented health problems, their silence was entirely unacceptable.

Grassley needs to let it go and retire.Let’s be honest here. Throughout Joe Biden’s so-called presidency, Republicans demanded transparency about his health, and for good reason. Democrats and the White House were obviously lying to us. McConnell’s office spent the summer doing the same thing.

And McConnell’s absence had consequences. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman (R-Ark.) needed McConnell’s vote to move his farm bill out of committee. Without it, and with every Democrat on the panel opposed, the bill stalled. When McConnell returned, he still didn’t look healthy enough to serve. At least he’s leaving office in January.

Democrats have their own cautionary tale — and I’m not talking about Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) clung to her seat when she clearly couldn’t perform her duties anymore, and it became a huge problem for her party.

So if Grassley does follow through and ultimately seeks reelection, I hope a Republican challenges him in a primary. Make no mistake about it, a Senate seat is a job, and the people who hold one owe voters the ability to do it for the full term. Conservatives spent years calling out a party that put pride and ambition ahead of the country’s interests and lied about it to everyone’s face. After what Democrats did with Joe Biden, Republicans should be better than this.

Read more …

Totally non-partial.

• Jack Smith: A Former Special Counsel Joins the “No Kings” Movement (Turley)

After his recent congressional testimony, former Special Counsel Jack Smith appeared at a “Power to the People Fest” sporting a “No Kings” T-shirt. Aside from a midlife crisis, the most likely explanation is that Smih( wanted to send a message, reaffirming his bona fides as an anti-Trump warrior. It was a Comey moment, but without the seashells.


The Power to the People Fest featured many whom Smith has long cultivated in the “Democracy-is-Ending” crowd. The organizers billed the event as “working to restore and strengthen democracy” and featured some of Trump’s loudest critics. The top billing went to Bruce Springsteen, who has lately turned his concerts into anti-Trump rave sessions, including comparing Trump officials to “Gestapo” and calling the administration “treasonous.” He continued those attacks at the concert with Smith, denouncing Trump as “lawless” and his administration as murderers.

For his part, Tom Morello, the chief organizer of the rally, has called Trump and his administration “fascists” and leading crowds in chants of “F— Trump.” And there was Smith in his own “No Kings” tee shirt. b It was a particularly inopportune time, as new evidence on Capitol Hill showed how Smith not only seized phone records of Republican members of Congress, but tracked communications with Trump’s attorney.

Smith has always been undone by his excessive appetite and his habitual failure to respect the limits on his authority. He has a history of losing major cases by advancing excessive and abusive legal claims. This included his stinging defeat in a unanimous Supreme Court decision dismantling his case against former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R).

During the Trump investigation, Smith showed that he had learned nothing from his losses. Indeed, former Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith with full knowledge of his past disregard for constitutional limits. Smith richly deserves to be criticized for his unrelenting attack on free speech protections as well as his decision to file a second case focusing on the 2020 election.

And the unfolding details of how Smith seized the telephone records of Republican members of Congress, including those investigating his own conduct, only confirm suspicions that Smith wanted to bag Trump at any cost. That included seeking to curtail appeals and rush prosecutions before the 2024 election. Smith failed when Trump chose to run despite the lawfare, and he failed again when Trump handily won the election. But Smith’s obsession was so consuming that he was willing to try Trump right up to Inauguration Day.

The new details of Smith’s investigation should outrage members of both parties. The use of pen registers (to identify the destination of outbound calls and messages) and of trap and trace orders (for incoming) entirely disregarded longstanding rules protecting the legislative branch from such encroachments. And what is particularly alarming is that these searches were obvious fishing expeditions — these were not focused searches on specific wrongdoing, like the searches involving the corruption case against Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) 20 years ago.

In addition to members of Congress, Smith and his team monitored the activities of Trump’s legal defense team, journalists and campaign advisers. That includes now-White House chief of staff Susie Wiles’ phone. At the same time, Smith secured a non-disclosure order from the court that prevented mobile carriers from notifying the affected lawmakers that they were being spied on. Thus, as members were looking into Smith’s excesses, they were not told that he was receiving and poring over their telephone records.

The White House Government Transparency Task Force released material this week showing that Smith’s team used an investigation codenamed “Plasmic Echo” to engage in an untethered fishing expedition. Notably, Attorney General Merrick Garland and Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco signed off on the sweeping seizure with no apparent effort to address obvious constitutional concerns over the right to counsel and Article I powers. Once again, Garland was entirely passive and simply endorsed the recommendations of those around him.

FBI Director Christopher Wray sent a March 2022 memo to Garland and Monaco seeking the attorney general’s approval to launch Plasmic Echo. Monaco added her endorsement before Garland signed off.FBI investigators traced “Wiles’ phone calls and text messages with at least 21 lawyers affiliated with Trump, numerous campaign staff, political advisors, and at least five journalists from at least February to May 2023.”

This investigation also involved gathering intelligence on Trump’s political action committee, including its donors and campaign expenses. Smith and the FBI continued the aggressive posture even as agents were balking at some of these means, including those who felt that the raid on Mar-a-Lago was unnecessary to resolve the concerns over the classified material.

Smith has continued to portray himself as unbiased and not motivated in any way by the election: “Anybody who has worked with me and knows me during the course of my career knows that I would not let politics play a role,” he has said. But shortly afterward, he appeared in his No Kings tee shirt at the Power to the People fest. It was vintage Smith — an almost mocking arrogance in the face of growing criticism over his methods and partisanship.

The irony is that Smith was a better fit as a member of this profanity-spewing anti-Trump crowd than he ever was as special counsel. The pretense was gone, and he was finally in his element. In that sense, he might view this as his coming-out party, but Smith actually came out years ago.

Read more …

$276 million.

• Elon Musk Becomes Largest Donor, Aims To Rescue Senate GOP Majority (JTN)

Tech mogul Elon Musk has emerged as the Republican Party’s most important midterm donor, funneling more than $276 million into Republican campaigns and political action committees since July. The enormous sum makes Musk the largest known midterm donor, according to campaign finance records Musk’s team shared with The New York Times on Monday.


Musk has poured $158 million, nearly 60% of his contributions this summer, into the Senate Leadership Fund, the super PAC backing the Republican Party’s Senate candidates across the country. Musk has also donated over $76 million to his own America PAC, which he founded in 2024. The group is operating in seven key Senate battleground states.

Musk’s spending has given the Republican Party a boost across the country, further cementing the party’s financial advantage over the Democrats, who continue to face money issues heading into the midterm elections.

Musk, who oversees a technology empire composed of companies like X and SpaceX, is the world’s richest man. At the beginning of the Trump administration, Musk led efforts to streamline the federal government and cut waste as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE.

Musk departed the administration after a public spat with President Trump, a dramatic about-face from his strong backing of the candidate in the 2024 election. However, the pair have since reconciled, though Musk’s support of Republicans has remained quieter since he departed the government.

Read more …

Trump fooling around.

• Judge Orders White House to Stop Airing Taxpayer-Funded Ads (ET)

A federal judge on Oct. 11 issued a temporary restraining order barring the White House from airing the remaining slots of taxpayer-funded television ads featuring President Donald Trump and his administration’s policies and achievements. U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Rochon said the motion filed by watchdog group Common Cause, candidate for the Alabama state House Robert Hunter, and Service Employees International Union 32BJ and its political action committee had the legal standing to challenge the White House ads.


In a four-page ruling, Rochon said the plaintiffs have shown that they were likely to succeed on the merits of their arguments and that issuing a block would serve the public interest. The judge also found that the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm if the restraining order was not granted.Rochon barred the administration from “using, disbursing, or transferring funds appropriated to the Department of Homeland Security to develop, create, disseminate, place, distribute, publish, or air the challenged advertisements.”

The judge also ordered the administration to cancel ads scheduled for broadcast on Oct. 11. The order named the Department of Homeland Security and its chief, Markwayne Mullin, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles as defendants.

In a statement, the plaintiffs praised the judge’s decision, saying it would help to prevent the use of taxpayer money on what it called “unlawful political propaganda.” “There is no legal justification—and no precedent—for the president to use the machinery of the government and funds set aside by Congress for other uses to influence electoral outcomes that further his own agenda,” they said.

The Epoch Times reached out to the White House and the Department of Homeland Security for comment but did not receive a response by publication time. The White House has previously stated that the ads were not campaign ads, noting that Trump is not on the ballot in the November election.

“These public service announcements are unapologetically American, clearly disclosed, and aimed at the country—not a line on the ballot,” it said in a Sept. 25 statement.The White House also cited examples of past administrations from both parties using such ads to explain their policies and promote their visions for the nation.

In an Oct. 7 lawsuit, the plaintiffs alleged that the Department of Homeland Security had signed a $20 million contract for the national broadcast of the ads. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) filed a separate suit on Oct. 7, accusing the White House of violating federal budget rules by using taxpayer money to fund the ads.

Trump defended the ads on Oct. 5, saying that it was “a rather standard thing to do” for an elected president and their administration. “The Radical Left is upset with the fact that I am taking Ads, which I consider to be a positive promotion for our Great U.S.A., and paying for them with U.S.A. money,” he said in a Truth Social post.

Trump said he would pay for the ads using his own money and the funds he raised for his MAGA Inc. political action committee.

Read more …

“Wait a second. I assumed Democrats were getting ALL their candidates from mental institutions.” —Margot Cleveland

• So, Where Was Waldo? (James Howard Kunstler)

Let’s just say you were running for a US Senate seat in one of our country’s biggest states. . . and it was roughly one month to election day. . . and, goshdarnit, you caught the flu. According to the CDC, a normal course of the illness in an otherwise healthy, non-elderly adult goes like this: days 1-3, abrupt onset of chills, fever, body aches, sore throat; days 4-7, symptoms fade; afterward, symptoms go away, reduced energy may linger another week.


Senate candidate James Talarico in Texas came down with the flu around September 26, vanished from the campaign scene altogether Sept. 30, and reappeared ten days later at an Austin City Limits music fair. Ten days is a long time to be off the campaign circuit in a supposedly super-tight race in the climactic month of the contest, don’tcha think?

And wouldn’t you suppose that by day 4 or 5 the candidate could bestir himself to pick up a phone and record something like, “Hi voters. JT here. I’ve been down with an awful case of the flu. Please bear with me. Will return ASAP.” Could have done it in a bathrobe, dignified enough, propped up in bed or in a comfortable chair, maybe not looking his best, but. . . .

But, no, he did no such thing. By day 7 or 8, feeling better, he might have been doing Zoom calls from his home office with news media, donors, reminding voters why it was important to vote for him. No, that didn’t happen, either. During the period of his illness, his Twitter feed put up a few posts that could have been written by anyone, and probably were, taunting his opponent, AG Ken Paxton. He did not post anything about being sick or returning to the public arena, and then on Friday, October 9, he popped up at the ACL Fest with no prior notice, “meeting with voters,” his campaign said — 75,000 attendees in 95-degree heat — for about fifteen minutes before he left. Okay. . . .

On Saturday, Oct. 10, the candidate held a meeting with his campaign workers by day and that evening he was seen at a Kacey Musgraves concert at the American Airlines Center in Dallas, just kicking back, enjoying himself. On Sunday, Oct. 11, he did a brief interview with NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth and MS NOW to dismiss “conspiracy theories” about his absence from the scene (more on that anon). That evening, he was supposed to show up at a Dallas fundraiser, but there is no record in the news media that he actually appeared.

Let’s step back to late September and recap. James Talarico’s last public event in Texas that month was at the Texas State Fair in Dallas, Sept. 26. He did not mention feeling ill then. On Monday, Sept. 28, he flew to New York for a joint fundraiser for himself and for Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, hosted by actor Robert DeNiro. It was held at Capitale, an event venue at 130 Bowery, in a magnificent old bank building. Tickets ranged from $500 to $27,000 a seat. Earlier, he’d stopped at a much smaller fundraiser thrown by former DNC finance director Maureen White.

The following evening, Tue, Sept. 29, he attended a fundraiser in Greenwich Village put on by the Human Rights Campaign. Sometime after that, he flew back to Texas. On Wednesday, Sept. 30, Talarico did a “virtual appearance” with the US Hispanic Business Council in which he was coughing and blowing his nose, and told the group, “I was starting to feel kind of under the weather a few days ago [that is, while he was in New York], and last night it got so bad that I went to the urgent care here in Dallas, and I was diagnosed with the flu.” Yet after he reappeared in public, on Sunday, Oct 11, he told NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth reporter Phil Prazan, “I just went to my primary care physician.” There was no mention of his drop-in at an urgent care facility.

The reason we entertain all these details is because a rumor erupted over the weekend that candidate James Talarico actually spent a week or so at a mental health clinic called the Lindner Center of Hope in Mason, Ohio, recovering from some sort of “stress” event — the “conspiracy theory” he averred to with News-5 and MSNOW. Independent Reporter Nick Sorter posted a phone call supposedly with an employee of the Lindner Center who said that James Talarico had been “discharged” the previous evening.


The Lindner Center later issued a flat denial that Talarico had ever been a patient there, and Talarico himself issued a denial on his “X” account, saying, “I’ve never even been to Ohio.” We’ll see if he files any libel suit against Nick Sorter and others who reported on the mystery of his whereabouts. Or, if he files a case against the Lindner Center for violation of his HIPAA rights for disclosing information about his discharge.

Anyway, there is a registry for private jets and we’ll know soon enough whether James Talarico was on a Cessna Citation X (Serial No. 750-0271) owned by the Austin Aviation Group out of Wimberly, Texas, that departed from Butler County Regional Airport near Cincinnati on Oct 9 at 9:19 a.m. landing in Austin, TX, at 10:24 a.m.

It’s beginning to look like maybe James Talarico was not the best candidate the party could come up with. But then, look at who he beat in the primary election: Jasmine Crockett.

Read more …

War with Russia is the no. 1 thing they want.

• UK PM Consoles Zelensky After Trump Calls For His Ouster (RT)

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham has rushed to reassure Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky after US President Donald Trump publicly called for his replacement. The American leader accused Zelensky of refusing to reach a peace deal with Moscow and worsening the global fuel crisis through continued Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy infrastructure.


Burnham called Zelensky on Saturday, the same day Trump suggested that the Ukrainian leader should be replaced for refusing to reach a settlement with Moscow. The British prime minister described the previous 24 hours as having been “difficult for Ukraine” and “reiterated his complete solidarity,” according to Downing Street.

Burnham and Zelensky also discussed “the importance of maintaining pressure on Russia,” with London vowing to slap Moscow with additional sanctions. Earlier on Saturday, Trump accused Zelensky of seeking to “make problems for the world” through the continued attacks on the Russian energy infrastructure, including refineries. “I suggest they get a new leader who can make a deal,” he said.

Trump’s remarks “shocked” Kiev, according to German reporter Paul Ronzheimer. “We never expected this,” a close adviser to Zelensky told the journalist, adding that Kiev feared Washington could suspend intelligence-sharing with it.

On Friday, Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin reached an agreement aimed at reining in skyrocketing global fuel prices. Washington temporarily waived sanctions on Russian diesel, while Moscow agreed to release 300,000 metric tons of diesel immediately and another 500,000 in November. Zelensky blasted Trump’s decision as “weak.” Kiev’s European backers have repeatedly rushed to Zelensky’s defense following public criticism from Trump.

In February 2025, after Trump branded Zelensky a “dictator without elections” and slammed him for unwillingness to reach a deal with Moscow, then-British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and several European leaders, including German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and French President Emmanuel Macron, publicly defended the Ukrainian leader and criticized Trump’s choice of words.

Later that month, a White House meeting between Trump and Zelensky descended into a scandal, with the US president accusing his guest of gambling with millions of lives and risking World War III. European leaders, including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, Macron and Starmer, quickly rallied behind Zelensky, reaffirming their support for Kiev.

Despite the repeated vows of solidarity, the bloc is increasingly struggling to satisfy Kiev’s continued demands for financial assistance. In late September, the EU rejected Kiev’s request for a €220 million ($250 million) farmer subsidy to offset the fallout from the Ukrainian Black Sea maritime trade disruptions linked to Russian strikes on the Ukrainian logistics in response to Zelensky’s 40-day PR pressure campaign of strikes on Russian territory.

In early October, the bloc similarly rejected Ukraine’s plea to accelerate financial support needed to cover an unexpected $27 billion defense gap, prompting Zelensky to lash out at Kiev’s backers by accusing them of not doing enough for Ukraine.

Russia has previously repeatedly named the position of Kiev’s European backers as one of the main obstacles to settling the conflict. The EU is still clinging to the idea of “strategically defeating Russia,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said last month.

Commenting on the situation last week, Peskov also said that neither Ukraine nor its European backers had moved any closer towards talks, with European nations still “obstructing” the peace process.

Read more …

Zelensky’s in the way.

• Trump ‘Really Mad’ With Zelensky – Media (RT)

US President Donald Trump is furious with Vladimir Zelensky over Kiev’s continued attacks on Russian oil refineries, with Washington reportedly threatening to cut off weapons supplies and intelligence sharing unless Ukraine stops the strikes, according to Axios and the Financial Times.


The confrontation comes after Trump struck a diesel deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin to ease a global fuel shortage that has sent American energy prices soaring. Kiev has continued targeting Russian refining facilities despite repeated warnings from Washington, with Trump accusing Zelensky of deliberately hurting American consumers and farmers while refusing opportunities to end the conflict.

“Trump is really mad. He feels Zelensky is taking the US for granted,” a White House official told Axios on Sunday. The source argued that Kiev’s attacks on Russian refineries were doing more damage to its relationship with Washington than to Moscow.

American officials contacted Kiev and several European capitals over the weekend, threatening to suspend intelligence sharing and the NATO-backed Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) mechanism, through which European countries purchase American weapons for Ukraine, according to the Financial Times, which cited officials familiar with the discussions.

Trump’s envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner also allegedly warned Ukrainian representatives during talks in Miami on Friday that Washington could stop sharing intelligence if Kiev continued to ignore the president’s demands, according to a Ukrainian official cited by Axios.

A US official, however, denied making direct threats, saying the negotiators had instead reminded Kiev of Washington’s extensive military and intelligence support and urged it to stop taking actions that hurt American consumers.

The confrontation has threatened to derail broader negotiations aimed at ending the Ukraine conflict. Witkoff and Kushner have reportedly put their planned trip to Moscow on hold until Kiev and its leading European backers clarify whether they are prepared to support a unified peace proposal.

Trump reached a diesel deal with Putin on Friday after Zelensky ignored at least half a dozen requests from Washington to stop striking Russian refineries, according to earlier Axios reporting. The US Treasury subsequently eased sanctions on Russian diesel exports until April 2027, while Moscow pledged substantial fuel deliveries to help alleviate global shortages.

Zelensky condemned the move as a “weak decision,” arguing that the agreement would provide Russia with additional revenue. Trump hit back by accusing the Ukrainian leader of creating problems for the world and suggesting it was time for Ukraine to elect a new leader capable of reaching a deal.

On Sunday, Trump unexpectedly announced that Moscow and Kiev had agreed to an immediate ceasefire covering attacks on energy infrastructure. “Effective immediately, there is an ENERGY CEASEFIRE in the War between Russia and Ukraine. Both parties have agreed. Do not break it!” he wrote on Truth Social.

The announcement caught Kiev by surprise, with Zelensky saying it “was news for me.” Moscow has also yet to confirm any agreement.

A White House official described the proposed agreement as a “refinery for refinery” arrangement, under which both sides would stop attacking oil refineries, but not necessarily other energy infrastructure, according to Axios. Kiev has objected that such a deal would disproportionately benefit Moscow, since Ukraine has only one largely nonfunctional refinery and relies heavily on imported fuel.

Read more …

The fuel deal’s real significance lies in diplomacy: Trump and Putin found a way to work together without making Ukraine part of the bargain

• Ukraine’s Worst Diplomatic Nightmare Just Got Closer (Poletaev)

On the evening of October 9, the presidents of the United States and Russia spoke by phone. The announcement that followed was straightforward: Russia would sell the US 1.8 million metric tons of diesel over the next three months, followed by a million tons a month, and the US would issue temporary licenses authorizing the shipments.


The news drew a furious, bordering on hysterical, response from Kiev and stunned silence from Europe. Let’s look at why this deal matters, what it has to do with Ukraine, and what might come next.

The tug-of-war championship
Ever since US President Donald Trump returned to office, the central aim of Russian diplomacy has been to separate relations with the US from the Ukraine issue. The White House is open to the idea, too: The US needs Russia as a counterweight to China, and there are substantial economic opportunities. But as we explored in an earlier piece, until recently, neither side managed to pull it off.

Ukraine and its supporters in Europe and the US, meanwhile, have pursued the opposite goal: keeping US-Russia relations tied to the Ukraine conflict.

In February and March 2025, Trump relieved America of responsibility for Ukraine’s fate and handed the job of financing it squarely to Europe. The US retained just three commitments: the relatively modest military supply programs already approved under former President Joe Biden, intelligence sharing, and weapons sales for cash, with Ukraine waiting in line like any other customer.

This maneuver cemented a status quo that neither Europe and Ukraine on one side nor Russia on the other would allow to change, with their respective allies in the US also weighing in. Everyone tried to bring Trump over to their side on Ukraine. Nobody succeeded. This is why the understandings reached in Anchorage went nowhere: Ukraine’s supporters torpedoed them. It is also why those supporters failed to use Trump to escalate the conflict. Russia prevented deliveries of Tomahawk missiles, the expansion of Starlink coverage over Russian territory, and so on.

Despite the apparent stalemate, Russian officials kept talking to Witkoff and Kushner. The aim was to maintain a channel to Trump and deny Ukraine’s supporters an opening to drag the US back into the war on their side or steer him back onto Biden’s course. This is why Russian officials at every level distinguish between US and European actions, often explicitly contrasting the two.

A few numbers on oil
Russia is one of the world’s largest diesel exporters, supplying just under 40 million metric tons to the global market in 2025. On July 8, 2026, Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries prompted a temporary ban on diesel and gasoline exports. Since then, Russia’s refining situation has improved considerably. Gasoline remains in short supply, but a domestic diesel surplus has emerged, and the export ban has begun to loosen in practice. According to Reuters, diesel deliveries to Central Asian countries were already up 19% in September.

Rising diesel production was only part of the story. The end of the harvest season also reduced demand. And as the seasons change, Russia switches to winter-grade fuel, traditionally selling off its remaining summer-grade stocks to countries with warmer climates. One way or another, seaborne diesel exports were heading toward a restart. Trump had also raised that possibility, publicly linking it to Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries.

The Krivoy Rog school of diplomacy
Back to geopolitics. Until yesterday, Russia had been unable to separate its relationship with the US from the Ukraine issue. Even the war with Iran failed to do the trick, despite keeping oil and petroleum product shipments from the Persian Gulf blocked for more than six months. Help came from an unexpected quarter. Hoping to bring US diesel prices down at least a little before the congressional elections, Trump asked Zelensky to stop attacking Russian refineries.

Zelensky responded by demanding a sweeping energy truce. We’ll stop hitting refineries, he effectively said, if Russia stops attacking our energy infrastructure and blockading our ports. And you, Trump, have to supply us with missiles for our Patriot systems, and so on. Getting nowhere with Zelensky, Trump struck a deal directly with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who offered to supply diesel in exchange for a suspension of sanctions, without any preconditions.

The transaction itself is not particularly consequential. Yes, it could cool speculative trading ahead of the elections and push prices down somewhat. But the 1.8 million metric tons due to arrive over three months will cover just three or four days of American consumption.

For Russia, the US is an ordinary customer in purely commercial terms. Moscow will make some money selling to America, but it could just as easily have sold these volumes elsewhere. Petroleum products are in short supply worldwide, while Russia has a diesel surplus.

Yet the deal gave both sides what they had been seeking since February 2025: a bilateral relationship detached from Ukraine. So far, that applies to just one specific issue, but getting started is the hard part. Zelensky tried to twist Trump’s arm, pushing him to make Putin stop bombing Kiev, and overplayed his hand. Now Kiev can be bombed relentlessly, and Trump has no reason to care. He got what he wanted.

This does not mean sanctions are finished or that the two powers are entering an era of warm friendship. Oil sanctions are probably here to stay, and as soon as global market conditions change, Washington will turn them back up to full blast. But the sanctions wall can now be taken apart brick by brick, restoring ties wherever both sides stand to gain: launching new energy projects in the Arctic, for example, jointly taking over the surviving Nord Stream 2 pipeline, or resolving the sale of Lukoil’s overseas assets. Ukraine no longer has anything to do with that process or any influence over it.

The art of the backroom deal
Cynics insist that the Trump administration is a complete mess, with the right hand oblivious to what the left is doing. The way this agreement came together suggests otherwise. After the campaign of long-range strikes against Russia went badly off script, Zelensky once again tried to secure a ceasefire through Trump. He has been trying since early 2025, with no success, but he still held out hope.

Trump could have publicly given Zelensky the boot again. But on Ukraine, he faces opposition not only from Congress but also from parts of his own administration. And an election is just around the corner.

Instead of staging a public showdown, Trump’s team spent more than two months visibly engaged in intensive talks with Ukraine about an energy truce. His envoys, Witkoff and Kushner, traveled to Kiev, and Trump himself showered Zelensky with compliments. In reality, all of it proved to be a screen for a quiet, swift, informal deal with Moscow.

It has since emerged that the first tanker carrying diesel to the US left St. Petersburg on September 22 and is expected to reach the US any day now. In other words, the deal was already well advanced three weeks ago, and both sides were confident it would go through. That takes some skill. This episode shows that Trump keeps a firm grip on his team and can prevent leaks when he needs to. Even Rubio, prone to breaking ranks, played his part exactly as the boss wanted.

And once the deal was done, there was no longer any need to smile at Zelensky in public. The masks came off. For the first time, Trump publicly declared that Ukraine needs a new president and must hold elections. The liberal media will inevitably say that Trump is repeating Russian propaganda narratives. In fact, he was saying what he thinks.

***

The diesel deal does not mean Moscow and Washington will now live in perfect harmony. The differences between them are deep and fundamental, and the recently enacted ‘Graham law’ makes lifting any sanctions impossible for at least the next five years.

But this Friday, Putin and Trump finally managed to get past Ukraine and leave it behind. US-Russia relations now depend on Russia and the US alone.

Read more …

“.. That Allegedly Declared ‘All Caucasians’ Racist..”

“DEI training actively undermines workplace harmony, and it causes hostility, distrust, and division,”

• Montana AG Asks Supreme Court to Revive Case Against DEI Training (O’Neil)


Montana AG Austin Knudsen on stage with South Carolina Senator Tim Scott

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen is leading 20 states in urging the Supreme Court to take up the case of Joshua Young, a former Colorado prison guard who sued the Department of Corrections over a diversity, equity, and inclusion training.


“DEI training actively undermines workplace harmony, and it causes hostility, distrust, and division,” the amicus brief, exclusively obtained by the Daily Signal, states. Young’s “complaint identifies myriad examples of how the [Department of Corrections’] training program endorsed treating and viewing Caucasians worse than other races,” the amicus brief notes.

According to Young’s lawsuit, “the training insisted, among other things, that all Caucasians are racist, that they perpetuate white supremacy, that the very notion of race was invented by white people to justify the oppression of people of color, that white supremacy is an ever-present feature of daily life in the United States, and that Caucasians who deny their own racism are merely ‘fragile’ racists who cannot accept their own prejudice.”

However, Young claimed the training’s effects reverberated afterward, shaping how the prison operated and leading him to conclude that he could not advance in the department. Young’s supervisors told him they would evaluate whether he incorporated its principles into his work. According to his filings, the training increased distrust within the prison, discouraged him from seeking a promotion, and caused him to second-guess otherwise justified use-of-force decisions due to potential race-based implications.

“Given CDOC’s instruction that employees analyze workplace decisions through a racial-equity framework, Young understood that his superiors would be more likely to credit accusations of racism against him—making his assigned job significantly harder,” the filing states.Lower courts rejected Young’s lawsuit, ruling that his allegations did not establish a sufficiently severe or pervasive hostile work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit found the training “troubling on many levels” and said its race-based rhetoric was “well on the way to arriving at objectively and subjectively harassing messaging,” but concluded that Young fell short of proving a violation, because the training happened only once and was not followed by additional harassment.

Young’s petition argues that the 10th Circuit’s approach conflicts with rulings from other federal appeals courts that have recognized a single sufficiently severe incident may create a hostile work environment. Title VII forbids employers from fostering a hostile work environment through “severe or pervasive” workplace harassment. Knudsen’s brief accuses the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit of only evaluating the case “under a pervasiveness standard” in noting that the training occurred only once.

“This sort of top-down discrimination is worlds away from most hostile work environment claims, which usually involve employees harassing other employees,” Knudsen’s brief argues. “A training program that instructs employees to treat others differently based solely on race creates a work environment ‘permeated with abuse.’” “The answer to racism is not more racism,” Knudsen declares.

Young filed an internal discrimination complaint with the Colorado department, but the inspector general declined to investigate because it found insufficient cause. Colorado has argued that the department did not require employees to change their personal beliefs.

Knudsen’s brief asks the Supreme Court to grant Young’s petition, reverse the dismissal of his case, and allow his hostile-work-environment claim to proceed. The justices would not be deciding whether Young ultimately proved discrimination. The brief goes further than simply urging Supreme Court review. It condemns this form of DEI training in general, suggesting that employers may engage in discrimination by requiring it.

“Employer training sets the tone for the entire workplace,” Knudsen warns. “When an employer officially sanctions racial scapegoating and treating individuals differently depending on their race in the workplace, that employer per se creates a hostile work environment. Even infrequent training can create a pervasive race-based hostility for the races singled out for negativity.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/DanCook26214426/status/2109325625748033940?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 12 2026

Oct 122026
 
 October 12, 2026  Posted by at 7:47 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  50 Responses »


Jackson Pollock The Deep 1943


• The Anti-Trump Media and ‘Economic Pessimism’ (Larry Elder)
• US Could Join Saudi Strikes On Yemen – Trump (RT)
• Zelensky Has Gone Too Far – Musk (RT)
• Trump Mocks Hochul, and It’s a Riot (Robert Spencer)
• How Israel Was Demonized After Oct. 7: ‘Didn’t Happen Overnight’ (JTN)
• Hamas Is Thrilled With Nobel Peace Prize Winner (Catherine Salgado)
• Dershowitz Blasts Jack Smith, Urges DOJ To Rein In Spying On Phones (Solomon)
• Did Biden’s DOJ Reclassify Documents to Build a Case Against Trump? (Salgado)
• Trump Brought Columbus Day Back After the Left Tried to Erase It (Stepman)
• Lawsuits Begin for CV19 Vaccine Criminals – Nic Hulscher (USAW)

 

 

 

 

 

 


The Fourth Estate requires a Fifth.

• The Anti-Trump Media and ‘Economic Pessimism’ (Larry Elder)

In a college psychology course, my class studied an experiment.


This is an oversimplification, but [the] experiment went as follows. A group of college students were shown a paper on which a 6-inch line was drawn. The paper was passed to the students sitting around table. They were asked to estimate the length of the line. Now, this experiment was rigged. The instructor, and all but one of the students, were told to say, “About 3 inches.” Again, the line was clearly longer than 3 inches.

The point was to determine whether these obviously wrong guesses would cause the unsuspecting student — the one not in on the scheme and the last one at the table to offer a guess—to also say, “About 3 inches.” In the overwhelming majority of cases, the unsuspecting students also said, “About 3 inches.”

Now there are a few ways to look at this. But one explanation is that the consensus, though clearly wrong, altered the way the final student viewed the length of the line, as in, “If everybody sees it that way, I must be wrong.” How much of current pessimism about the economy is driven by what the media tells us about the economy and how we should feel about it?

For example, the standard common definition of a recession is back-to-back quarters of negative economic growth. In 2025, the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term, every quarter after revisions had positive economic growth. So far, this year, each quarter has seen positive economic growth.

But a July 2026 Economist/YouGov found that 41% of adult Americans believed the country was in a recession, with Democrats three times more likely than Republicans to feel this way. A Napolitan News Service/Rasmussen poll conducted at the end of September 2026 found that 39% of registered voters believe the country is currently in a recession.

Consider the media coverage of the economy the month before the presidential election of 1992, when President George H.W. Bush ran against Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton. There had been 19 months of positive economic growth leading up to October 1992. A Gallup poll, however, found that a majority of Americans thought the economy was in a recession.

Investor’s Business Daily noted that in October 1992, 90% of the economic news in newspapers was negative. The election was held on Nov. 3. Clinton won, and that month only 14% of the economic news in newspapers was negative. As to the ABC, NBC and CBS nightly news, about 90% of the news about the economy was negative. After the election, for the remaining two months of the year, 60% of the economic news in the same newscasts was positive.

Yes, gas prices since the start of the Iran War have gone up. But at 2.5% of income, the amount Americans spend less on gas is less than during the gas spikes of the 1970s. And Americans drive twice as far on a gallon of gas compared to the 1970s. The average income is at an all-time high. The percentage of those living in poverty is at an all-time low. The stock market indices have hit record highs, and 401(k)s have seen large increases.

Consumers are spending. People who fear an economic downturn, and who fear the loss of their jobs, typically do not spend the way consumers have been doing in recent months. The Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model estimates a third quarter 2026 growth of 3.7%. The Media Research Center found the Big 3 nightly news coverage of Trump was negative in both terms.

“News aggregators” like Microsoft, Apple, Google, Yahoo, TikTok and YouTube are where Americans now primarily get their news. In 2025, Google curated 73% of articles from outlets with a bias to the left—and just 1% of articles from outlets biased to the right. For all the aggregators, less than 10% of their curated articles came from outlets on the right.

In “Lessons from the Recession: A Management and Communication Perspective,” published in 1997, the authors write: “… the highly negative view of the economy in 1992 was due in large part to widespread misperceptions about its performance and prospects, and that unduly negative coverage on network television played some major role informing those misperceptions.” The anti-Trump media clearly influences how people think and feel about the economy. The only question is to what degree.

Read more …

“Washington could intervene in the escalating conflict after a Houthi attack on Riyadh airport killed 12 people, including an American citizen..”

• US Could Join Saudi Strikes On Yemen – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said Washington may join Saudi Arabia’s military campaign against Yemen’s Houthis, signaling a possible reversal of his previous reluctance to intervene directly in the escalating conflict.


Speaking to reporters at the White House on Saturday, Trump was asked whether American forces could join Saudi strikes against the Yemeni group, also known as Ansar Allah, following another deadly attack on Riyadh’s international airport.”We may. We’re going to look at it,” Trump replied. “We just found out about the recent attack. So we’ll make a decision. We move very quickly.”

The remarks came after a Houthi strike on King Khalid International Airport in the Saudi capital killed 12 people and injured another 309, according to updated figures released Sunday by Saudi Arabia’s General Authority of Civil Aviation (GACA). The dead included four Saudi citizens and eight foreign nationals, among them an American. Some of the injured are in critical condition.

The Houthis have claimed responsibility for the attack, one of several targeting Saudi airports in recent days. Speaking exclusively to RT, senior Ansar Allah official Mohammed al-Bukhaiti said the strikes were intended to force Riyadh to accept a “comprehensive and permanent peace” and end the war and mutual blockade.

The renewed fighting comes as Saudi-backed Yemeni forces have launched a major offensive to retake territory seized by the Houthis, including strategic areas near the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. The Saudi-led coalition said Friday that it had launched “large-scale operations” against the group, destroying 136 military targets, according to its spokesman.

Trump’s latest remarks mark a potential shift in Washington’s position. In September, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman repeatedly sought US military assistance against the Houthis, but Trump ultimately backed away from authorizing strikes despite preparations for an operation, according to the New York Times.Washington has reportedly continued providing Riyadh with intelligence and other non-combat support, but direct US strikes against the Houthis would open another front in the regional conflict.

In March 2025, Trump ordered weeks of US air and naval strikes against Houthi positions, targeting missile launchers, radar installations and other military infrastructure in an attempt to halt attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. However, the campaign ended abruptly in May under an Oman-brokered ceasefire after the Houthis agreed to stop targeting American vessels.

In September, Trump also claimed that the Houthis had contacted Washington seeking to avoid another confrontation with US forces, saying the group “would much prefer not having us involved.” Ansar Allah denied making such contact.

The latest escalation comes amid the broader regional conflict triggered by the US-Israeli war on Iran in February. The Houthis have expanded their control along Yemen’s Red Sea coast, threatening a crucial shipping route that Saudi Arabia increasingly relies on for oil exports amid disruptions to traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

Read more …

“Musk’s criticism carries particular weight given Ukraine’s heavy dependence on Starlink ..”

• Zelensky Has Gone Too Far – Musk (RT)

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has lashed out at Vladimir Zelensky, siding with President Donald Trump, who has warned that Kiev’s continued attacks on Russian oil refineries are worsening a global fuel crisis and hurting American farmers.Trump also called for a change of leadership in Kiev, accusing Zelensky of repeatedly rejecting opportunities to end the conflict and deliberately ignoring Washington’s requests.


“We told him, do whatever you want, but don’t hit the diesel fuel, because there’s a big problem, a big shortage. And what does he do? He goes and hits the diesel fuel,” Trump told reporters outside the White House on Saturday. “He wants to make problems for the world… for our farmers, our ranchers, with diesel fuel.”

“Zelensky has gone too far,” Musk wrote on X on Sunday, directly responding to a White House video of the remarks, which were part of Trump’s broader criticism of Zelensky, including his suggestion that “it’s time for Ukraine to get a new president.”

The latest spat erupted after Washington agreed to temporarily lift sanctions on Russian diesel exports following a phone call between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, a move intended to ease a global fuel shortage that has pushed up prices in the US and elsewhere.

Trump reached a diesel deal with Putin after Zelensky ignored at least half a dozen requests from Washington to stop striking Russian refineries, according to Axios. Zelensky denounced Trump’s move as a “weak decision,” while Ukrainian negotiators left the talks in Miami a day early.

Musk’s criticism carries particular weight given Ukraine’s heavy dependence on Starlink, the satellite internet network operated by his company, SpaceX. Since 2022, tens of thousands of Starlink terminals have been central to Kiev’s battlefield communications, drone operations, and coordination between military units. A complete loss of Starlink access could severely disrupt these capabilities and potentially trigger a major battlefield crisis.

Musk has repeatedly called for a negotiated settlement between Moscow and Kiev, and resisted Kiev’s attempts to expand its use of Starlink for attacks on Russian territory. In 2022, Musk refused to activate the network near Crimea to support a Ukrainian strike on Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, warning that doing so would make SpaceX complicit in a major escalation. Recently, Zelensky appealed to Trump to persuade Musk to authorize Starlink-guided drone strikes deep inside Russia.

He also sought a face-to-face meeting with the billionaire during a visit to Washington in July, but Musk refused, The Atlantic reported, citing a source familiar with the discussions. “Elon keeps saying it’s time to make a deal,” an associate of former Ukrainian Defense Minister Mikhail Fedorov told the magazine. In an apparent effort to court the billionaire’s favor, Zelensky awarded Musk the Order of Freedom, one of Ukraine’s highest state honors, in August, praising his contributions to protecting lives and strengthening Ukrainian-American relations.

Read more …

“Hi, Gestating”

• Trump Mocks Hochul, and It’s a Riot (Robert Spencer)

What the left wants to force us all to believe is ridiculous, but leftists generally take themselves very, very seriously. One of the principal reasons why they hate President Donald Trump with such burning intensity is that he refuses to play along. Not only will he not burn incense to the left’s god of treating delusion and fantasy regarding one’s gender identity as if it were something noble and heroic, but he dares to mock those who pander to this madness.


And for those who are tired of being bullied into accepting this nonsense, it’s wonderful fun. The New York Post reported Friday that during a rally in Syracuse, Trump “ridiculed Albany Dems for passing legislation to remove ‘mother’ and ‘father’ from some state laws and replace with ‘gestating parent.’”

Good. There is no better antidote to this insanity than mockery, and that’s all it deserves. There is no need to engage in logical discussion or debate, because the left’s position on this is inherently illogical. Men do not bear children. Women bear children. This is a conversation that one would, in saner times, have with no one over the age of three, and there is no reason to indulge the Democrats in this as if they were actually staking out a position that warranted a rational response.

According to the Post, Trump “blasted ‘radical left lunatic’ Gov. Kathy Hochul and state legislators passing a bill to change laws around surrogacy to refer to a ‘gestating’ or ‘non-gestating’ parent, as well as calling them ‘parentage’ hearings instead of ‘paternity.’”

This was done, of course, because it is the left’s cause du jour to appease the insane men who think they can become women, and the likewise deluded women who think they can become men, as well as to strike a blow at one of the left’s favorite targets, “the patriarchy.” There are growing numbers of these people who are caught in a web of fantasy, wishful thinking, and self-loathing, and instead of getting them the help they need, the left panders to their madness and uses them as political props.

Trump, on the other hand, was having none of it. “Kathy Hochul,” he said, “supports transgender mutilation of your children. She supports men in women’s sports and a bill that would change the terms of mother and father to gestating and non-gestating parents.”

Then the president went into full satirical mode, saying: “You can no longer say ‘Mother, hi, Mom!’ it’s ‘Hi, Gestating. Hi, Gestating, I love you so much, Gestating.’” The crowd loved it, and then Trump got right to the point: “New York needs to throw out this radical left lunatic and elect Bruce Blakeman,” Hochul’s Republican opponent.

Despite, or perhaps because of, the insanity of the Democrats, Blakeman “trails Hochul by 11 points in the most recent Marist poll released Wednesday, but a Siena University survey had him within single digits last month.” If there is any place where gender lunacy gets a sympathetic hearing, it’s New York, and that could be why Hochul may have such a big lead.

Like Trump, Blakeman has been unequivocal about the absurdity of the “gestating and non-gestating parents” legislation. “This is insane,” he observed correctly, and added: “You see, they want to take control away from parents. They’re denigrating moms and dads. They’re letting Albany make the decisions that should be up to parents.”

In response, a Hochul spokesperson insisted that the incumbent governor “believes mothers are mothers and fathers are fathers, and no legislation changes that.” She probably does. But she is pandering to the left’s current fad, and that’s gender confusion. If she didn’t, leftist charges of “transphobia” would likely result in her being hounded from office.

Among leftists, you see, one must toe the ideological line — or else. The Hochul spokesperson went on, seeking refuge in vacuous technocratic verbiage: “The legislation, which we will review, appears to address technical legal issues related to surrogacy and parentage. Anyone making bad-faith arguments is deliberately misleading New Yorkers for political gain.”

The only one here who is making bad-faith arguments and deliberately misleading New Yorkers for political gain is Hochul, with her nonsense about gestating and non-gestating parents. The entire transgender movement is based on bad-faith arguments. One day we will look back on the spread of this society-wide mind virus the way our forbears looked back on the Salem witch trials.

Read more …

The left thinks freedom of speech is on their side?

“I come from that left side. I’m a big believer in freedom of speech.”

“Documentary was inspired by Warren Kinsella’s book, “The Hidden Hand: The Information War and the Rise of Antisemitic Propaganda.”

• How Israel Was Demonized After Oct. 7: ‘Didn’t Happen Overnight’ (JTN)

Movie producer Kari Hollend didn’t immediately notice what she now calls a coordinated effort to demonize Israel following the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks. But Warren Kinsella did. “He understood very quickly on October 8,” Hollend says of Kinsella, a political strategist and cultural observer. “’I [now] know what a campaign looks like. No way you have a movement that big, organizing the people the next day.’”


Kinsella wrote “The Hidden Hand: The Information War and the Rise of Antisemitic Propaganda.” The book reveals what has come to be believed as an expansive plan to turn that horrible day into a weapon against the Jewish people. In many ways, that disinformation effort proved alarmingly effective, Hollend argues in her new documentary inspired by Kinsella’s book.

“The Campaign,” which prominently features the author, explores why the world in many cases turned against Israel and Jewish people after Oct. 7, 2023 – when Hamas and several other Palestinian militant groups launched a series of coordinated armed attacks from Gaza into southern Israel, killing at least 1,195 people.

In some ways, the titular “Campaign” began long before the latest Hamas atrocities. “It didn’t happen overnight. it has been a longstanding strategy for 40 years,” says Hollend, a co-director on the film. She noted how the anti-Israel messaging worked its way through the educational system over the years. “This was a foundation laid a long time ago.”

Subtitled “Disinformation in a Time of War,” “The Campaign” even includes a copywriting guru to break down some of the sophisticated messaging shared by antisemitic forces. “The Campaign” shares select footage captured by Hamas terrorists on Oct. 7, making some sequences not for the squeamish. “It was definitely a choice and a difficult one,” Hollend says. “We went back and forth. How far do we go?” Including the footage, her team eventually decided, mattered in the big picture.

“I do wonder what would have happened if some of these images were shown to the world early on,” she continues, while arguing that many people have already forgotten the atrocities or never connected the news reports to the horrors on the ground. “They never really saw or understood what happened on Oct. 7,” Hollend also said. “That was by design … so many people still to this day have no idea what happened and how brutal it was. Some still refer to [Hamas] as freedom fighters, people who I’ve known for years. They never saw those images, of bodies beaten and burned and mutilated.”

“The Campaign” touches on content moderation, a practice that can start with good intentions but too often bleeds into viewpoint discrimination. “I was the most left-leaning progressive,” Hollend said. I’ve worked in the arts for 25 years. I come from that left side. I’m a big believer in freedom of speech.” That said, she argues some filtering is appropriate and necessary.

“My kids can’t drive until they’re 16. … Why are my children allowed to open their phones without any barriers or guardrails to some of the most violent images and hate?” she asks.The film acknowledges the corrosive role social media can play, but it also skewers mainstream media malfeasance. Consider how some news outlets, like The New York Times, erroneously blamed a 2023 hospital bombing on IDF forces, not Hamas.

“Once these things get out, you don’t have the ability to pull them back in,” Hollend says. Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Muslim, swiftly weaponized the false report to attack Israel, and she wasn’t alone. The filmmaker also called out the Old Gray Lady for a columnist’s claim that Israeli forces trained dogs to rape Palestinians.

“Most younger people get their information from social media, but there’s still a huge generation, Gen X and up, that look to the mainstream media,” Hollend says. “None of these organizations have held any journalistic integrity … That’s a huge problem. Where do you go to find any semblance of truth?” She also blasts The Associated Press for honoring an image of Shani Louk’s desecrated body from the Oct. 7 attacks, saying, “That is so sick to me.”

“The Campaign” will screen in select Laemmle theaters in Los Angeles from Oct. 9-15. Hollend and co-director Cristina Bishai will participate in Q&A moderated by investigative journalist and writer Jay Solomon following the Oct. 12 screening at the Town Center. More U.S. dates will follow. The film is getting an unorthodox rollout. Hollend and co. are sharing the film not just in theaters but on college campuses, in embassies and law firms.

The former is designed to reach “young students entering into that phase of peak indoctrination,” she says. “It’s not a film about a side,” Hollend continues. “It’s about the harm of what digital warfare and misinformation is doing to your city,” she says. “It’s getting worse by the day, and it’s the oldest play in the world – divide and conquer.”

Read more …

Nice going.

• Hamas Is Thrilled With Nobel Peace Prize Winner (Catherine Salgado)

When a genocidal terrorist group responsible for some of the worst atrocities in modern history celebrates the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, you know that the committee made the wrong choice.


Navi Pillay became most famous for her egregious report accusing Israel of genocide, since debunked many times over and obviously an incredibly partisan document aimed at legitimizing heinous terrorism. My colleague Scott Pinsker wrote about the many other times Pillay also displayed vile antisemitism. No wonder Hamas loves her.


Despite her infamous campaigning to legitimize jihad talking points and smear Israel, thus helping fuel one of the longest ongoing wars in the world right now, Navanethem “Navi” Pillay won the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize this year. The Nobel Committee lauds Pillay because she “has significantly enlarged the scope and impact of international law. She has served as a judge on the High Court in South Africa, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Criminal Court.

She was the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and, until recently, she chaired the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Today Navi Pillay is a judge on the International Court of Justice in the case where Myanmar stands accused of genocide.”

In case you don’t already know how incredibly corrupt both the neo-Nazi United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are, let’s just say the above résumé is that of a biased activist whose bosses and colleagues only complain about alleged genocide and war crimes when they don’t have to criticize globalists’ favorite Islamic or Communist dictatorships. But Pillay has, of course, made it her business to accuse Israel of all kinds of crimes on behalf of the Palestinian terrorists, as I noted.


And like many an antisemite, her hatred of Jews extends beyond Israel to defense of a conspiracy theory about a shadow “Jewish lobby” controlling social media. By the way, the ICC is so incredibly biased and corrupt that the Trump administration just sanctioned it.

Pillay has not promoted peace; she has promoted a globalist bureaucracy that favors the terrorists and tyrants who start and prolong wars.

Read more …

Jack Smith holds himself untouchable.

• Dershowitz Blasts Jack Smith, Urges DOJ To Rein In Spying On Phones (Solomon)

Famed Harvard University Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz says he believes ex-prosecutor Jack Smith trampled civil liberties during his pursuit of President Donald Trump by tracking the calls of Congress, defense lawyers and campaign aides, and he urged the Justice Department to impose new rules to rein in such phone surveillance.


“What we need are Justice Department rules that are enforceable, that indicate when you can do what investigative tasks,” Dershowitz told Just the News. “You can’t leave it only up to the Constitution and the courts because something can be constitutional and still very very dangerous for civil liberties, like tracking people’s phone calls, like tracking the children’s phone calls, the wife’s phone calls. All of that’s extremely dangerous.

“This is a grave danger, and I would hope there’d be some congressional hearings … about what the Justice Department rules should be for when you can do this kind of surveillance of people’s phone calls. Right now, it’s just up to the Jack Smiths of the world, and we know from experience now that’s not a good enough protection,” he added.

Dershowitz was reacting to recently released documents showing that Smith’s team obtained the long-distance phone records and text messages of members of Congress and tracked at least 21 defense lawyers’ calls to and from the phone of Trump‘s top advisor, Susie Wiles, while Smith was pursuing two separate criminal cases against the president.

Republicans and some legal experts described the taxes as excessive and intrusive, but Smith defended his conduct during a recent Senate hearing and said he would do it all over again if given the chance. Dershowitz said the use of a pen register device to track the phone calls between defense lawyers and Wiles was deeply concerning and “a clear violation of expectations of privacy.”

“When you make a phone call, and you’re a lawyer, you do not expect the fact that you made that phone call to say a wiretap expert or a lie detector expert, or a witness. You don’t expect that the government will get access to that,” he said. “And yet the government has access to who the defense attorneys called, and that would give them a tremendous advantage in any case. It could give them the names of potential witnesses.”

Dershowitz said Smith could face civil lawsuits or actions against his bar license for the aggressive tactics he used to pursue Trump. “In retrospect, it’s clear that he had it in for Trump, and he was part of the Get Trump crowd along with Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York, (Manhattan District Attorney) Alvin Bragg, and others. They were out to get Trump, but they used mechanisms and techniques that can be used against anybody,” the famed legal scholar said.

“So if he’s allowed to get away with this, then he is a dime a dozen, and then none of our civil liberties are protected,” he added. A lifelong Democrat, Dershowitz also said he is now rooting for Republicans to win the 2026 election after leaving his old party, saying Democrats have become too extreme by indulging in antisemitism and anti-Americanism.

“The Democrat Party has become an extremist, radical, anti-American, anti-Semitic, anti-Jewish party and anti-Israel party,” he said. “And I think a lot of Americans, regardless of their religious faith, say this is not the party for me. This is not our grandfather’s Democratic Party. This is not our grandmother’s Democratic Party. This is El Sayed’s Democratic Party. This is Mamdani’s political party, and we don’t identify with those radical anti-American extremists.”

Read more …

One president declassifies docs. The next president reclassifies them, and has his people accuse No. 1 of breaking the rules. I think.

• Did Biden’s DOJ Reclassify Documents to Build a Case Against Trump? (Salgado)

Barack Obama’s Russiagate attack dog, Lisa Monaco, was involved in fabricating the case against Donald Trump during the Biden administration ahead of the infamous Mar-a-Lago raid. One writer claims Obama holdouts reclassified documents Trump had declassified in order to accuse him under false pretenses.


Earlier this month, my colleague Robert Spencer wrote about how top officials at the FBI and Department of Justice under Joe Biden were signing off on the orders for the witch hunt against Trump. One of the most ridiculous aspects of the case was the fact that Jack Smith et al. accused Trump of mishandling classified documents, even though he had declassified the ones he took with him to Florida. An extra shade of irony came from the fact that Joe Biden actually did mishandle classified documents and store them in multiple places, including his garage, for which he never faced consequences.

But a recent report indicates that the DOJ was secretively claiming certain documents that Trump had taken were now reclassified specifically so that they could justify the charges against him. To reclassify the documents after Trump had already taken them to Florida was an obviously partisan and desperate move, but that was pretty much the modus operandi of the Biden DOJ.

Svetlana Lokhova, British historian and victim of the Russiagate campaign of lies, posted last week:

Lokhova pointed out that Smith accused Trump under the Espionage Act of feloniously mishandling the reclassified documents. FBI agents dug through drawers and closets in Mar-a-Lago with authorization to shoot anyone who resisted. John Brennan accused Trump of being a national security threat. Haines and Monaco and company “retroactively reclassified the Russiagate documents until 2091.” It was all a fraud, a witch hunt that unscrupulous Democrats and Deep State stooges invented.

Read more …

Why not? Celebrate your origin.

• Trump Brought Columbus Day Back After the Left Tried to Erase It (Stepman)

Christopher Columbus is having a revival thanks to President Donald Trump and the good sense of the American people.


This is a remarkable change from just a few years ago, when it seemed likely that the country was ready to purge Columbus, the Founding Fathers, and pretty much any notable figure from our past. It was so over for Columbus Day that even some Republicans were looking to sweep it into the dustbin of history. But we’ve come a long way since 2020.

More Americans now understand that the attack on Columbus is an attack on the idea of America itself, and that caving to the Left’s demands to strike his holiday from the calendar as his statues came tumbling down was tantamount to civilizational suicide. Trump’s re-election ushered in a major vibe shift that was already under way. Columbus Day came back stronger than ever as part of the larger counterrevolution against the madness of the Great Awokening.

In March, a Columbus statue—a replica of one tossed by protesters into Baltimore Harbor during the post-George Floyd riots, no less—was placed in front of the White House. And on Wednesday, Trump issued a proclamation announcing that Columbus Day would be celebrated on Oct. 12.


“Today, we reaffirm that Christopher Columbus is a legend whose vision, fortitude, and perseverance unleashed a dynamic of history that led to the creation of the greatest, freest, and most just Nation in history,” Trump’s proclamation read. “We are forever indebted to his courageous voyage, and we will never allow his legacy to be erased by radical extremists.”

That is an accurate and appropriate tribute for a man for whom we owe so much, even if Columbus never saw, considered, or had any notion of the future United States. We certainly are indebted to his incredible voyage that changed the tide of history. But that last line from Trump about never allowing his legacy to be erased is key here, because the battle over Columbus is so important for our own day, even apart from the particulars of his life and momentous voyage.

Leftist writers like Howard Zinn and the generations of acolytes he spawned begin from the premise that the West, Christendom, is inherently broken and perhaps even the source of evil and “inequality” in our world. The far-Left has long condemned Columbus and those who followed him into the New World as genocidal monsters, virtually boogeymen who were not only flawed as all men are but as uniquely terrible.

This is in many ways a perversion of history. The same folks who lament and often overstate the violence and malice of European arrivals in the Americas hardly seem to care about the violence and terror that preceded them. That’s irrelevant and even annoyingly inconvenient to their narrative.

What they want is a future in which Western societies—especially the people of the United States—fundamentally reject their own past, culture, traditions, and certainly their religion. That is the only way to ensure that a new, secular ideology—these days some variant of identitarian socialism or Marxism—can rush to fill the vacuum of what brings life meaning and order. By this method of indoctrination and reprogramming, traditional Western rational skepticism was transformed into a malignant, irrational self-loathing.

The gloved, flipping off of a Columbus statue by the now-mayor of New York, Zohran Mamdani, is the perfect expression of this kind of deranged, knee-jerk anti-Americanism so common among the spoiled children of the global elites and the campus activist class that follows them. Columbus set set into the unknown with three small ships and a compass to guide him. These twerps cast vulgarities behind soft gloves and think they are edgy.

Columbus was once a figure whom all Americans, immigrant and native-born, could love and admire, just like our flag and our Constitution. If it was up to the Left, he would remain only as a symbol for all who live in America, immigrant and native-born, to loathe and condemn. Again, don’t be fooled, this battle isn’t really about a 15th-century Italian navigator, it’s about us, the here and the now, the nation that ultimately emerged from splinters of his tiny ships.

The Left thought they had finally won this battle. It wasn’t just a few radical extremists on the fringes of college campuses who were trying to obliterate Columbus Day while putting Indigenous Peoples’ Day atop the figurative empty pedestal where he once stood. It was “mainstream” institutions and political leaders carrying out the purge too.

President Joe Biden—or perhaps a facsimile wielding an autopen—essentially declared the far-Left’s triumph in 2021. He put out a “commemoration” for Columbus Day that spent more time apologizing for the famed explorer and lamenting the “shameful” history of America than saying anything nice about him. An Italian and some Spaniards got on a boat and did something. That was about the only positive thing he could say amid the condemnations.

This is what the Left had been building up to for a long time. This was the final blow. It was over for Columbus Day. The wheels of history had turned. The old explorer and the America he once represented were finally gone and buried for good.

We know now that the battle wasn’t over. There are still many, many Americans who aren’t so eager to jettison our past and darken our future. The battle for our future is ongoing. Columbus stands again in front of the White House, and hopefully in more communities across the United States.

This Columbus Day we should remember how far we had fallen; how close we came to the final chapter of our incredible history. Let us boldly go forward, like Columbus, with pride in our past and confidence in our future.

Read more …

“Florida’s Attorney General Sues Pfizer and CEO Albert Bourla for Hiding Covid Shot Deaths, Heart Damage, Miscarriages and Strokes.”

• Lawsuits Begin for CV19 Vaccine Criminals – Nic Hulscher (USAW)

The last time Epidemiologist Nic Hulscher from the McCullough Foundation was on USAW, he said the “CV19 Vax Awakening Has Begun.” Hulscher is responsible for researching and publishing much of the heart stopping news waking up the public to what has been done to them. Now, lawsuits are beginning to further wake up the public to the deaths, disabilities and diseases the CV19 bioweapon shots have caused and keep causing. This headline says it all: “Florida’s Attorney General Sues Pfizer and CEO Albert Bourla for Hiding Covid Shot Deaths, Heart Damage, Miscarriages and Strokes.” Hulscher explains, “This should be front page news absolutely everywhere.


This is the very first government to at least try to hold Pfizer and Albert Bourla accountable for what they have done. This is something like a 50-page lawsuit. The complaint starts off with a quote saying, ‘These people are criminals,’ which is what Albert Bourla said about American citizens that were skeptical about his gene therapy injections. He called Americans criminals while he made millions and millions of dollars, while making false claims about transmission, and while hiding large numbers of deaths, injuries, disabilities, heart damage, miscarriages and other horrible things. Pfizer had all of this, and they went out and told the public it was ‘safe and effective’ and it would stop transmission, and that was also a lie.

This lawsuit in Florida seeks to erase all of the profits that Pfizer made from these lies. We would have liked to have seen criminal prosecution of these serious and disastrous decisions of hiding safety data, but this is what we have so far, and I’ll take it.” Yet, another bad effect from the CV19 bioweapon vax is something called “Turbo Cancer,” which is a fast-spreading cancer. The message that is not getting out is cheap treatments like Ivermectin and Mebendazole can significantly help fight cancer along with cancer treatments. They are being ignored and hidden from the public. There is peer-reviewed science to show the effectiveness of Ivermectin and Mebendazole, and they will not prescribe them.

Why? Hulscher says, “The cancer cartel, or chemo therapy cartel, has captured most major institutions and many cancer centers. They don’t allow the doctors to prescribe these compounds because they are cheap, non-patented, and there are really no profits to be made. . .. It does not make anything more dangerous. mIn fact, it appears to reduce chemo side effects. They are not going to want to cut away the $111,000 a year they get from chemo therapy from one single patient. . .. If your oncologist does to want to try something like this (Ivermectin and Mebendazole), I would suggest you find another oncologist that is not ideologically compromised. . .. Again, there are over 100 studies that show there is anti-cancer activity with Ivermectin and Mebendazole. It’s not snake oil.”

Hulscher says very few are doing the research on the CV19 vax and the potential ways to mitigate the damage caused by them. One new way to treat people with vaccine injury and detox them is Nattokinase. Hulscher says, “This is critical. Spike proteins that the Covid shots tell your body to make can last in your body for years. Spike proteins can last in humans at least three and a half years. We just published a paper on that. The spike protein is a very toxic and dangerous protein. It causes tissue damage . . . and all sorts of havoc inside the human body. So, you want to get rid of it. The body can’t get rid of it easily because it was devised in a Chinese biosecurity lab.

It does not exist in nature. The body lacks the enzymes to clear it, but there is a compound a natural compound called Nattokinase . . . this is a very safe compound . . . there is almost zero adverse events reported. . .. Nattokinase has been shown to degrade the spike proteins, degrade amyloid micro clots, which spike proteins cause. It degrades normal blood clots, too, lowers blood pressure and it shrinks arterial plaque by 36%.”

Hulscher points out Ivermectin can also dramatically reduce the deadly and debilitating effects of spike proteins caused by the CV19 bioweapon injections. There is much more in the 39-minute interview.


Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 11 2026

Oct 112026
 
 October 11, 2026  Posted by at 8:32 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  32 Responses »


Jackson Pollock Reflection of the Big Dipper 1947


• In First, Putin Conveys High Level Message To Trump On Ending Iran War (ZH)
• Putin and Trump Hold ‘Successful’ Talks (RT)
• Zelenskyy Urgently Attacks Russian Oil/Fuel Export Terminal (CTH)
• Trump Says “Time For Ukraine To Get A New Leader” (ZH)
• Europe and Russia Flirt with Nuclear War (J.B. Shurk)
• The Last Revolution of Barack Obama (Scott Pinsker)
• House Dems’ Dire Donor Warning Hints at Trouble Before Midterms (Margolis)
• Trump Picks New Press Secretary (Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell)
• Germany: 87% of Suspects With An Arrest Warrant Are Foreigners (RMX)
• Tulsi Gabbard Warns About Modern Surveillance State and Islamic Extremism (CTH)
• Are Democrats Trying to Steal the Election for El-Sayed? (Matt Margolis)
• Trump Petitions Supreme Court to Reinstate Lawsuit Against Clinton, DNC (ET)
• The Nobel Peace Prize: An Exercise In Moral Depravity (A.J. Christopher)
• Chris Rock Makes an Excellent Point About Wokeness (Anderson)

 

 

https://twitter.com/MarioBojic/status/2108668510083711186?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2108633908556574836?s=20

 

 

This could break open the whole case.

When it started 6 months or so ago, I said they (Iran and US) needed to find the right words to save each other’s face.

But that can also be a “third face”. Back then, I never thought of it.

And you know, Iran might listen. Everybody listens when Putin speaks.

But we still don’t know who’s listening for Iran.

• In First, Putin Conveys High Level Message To Trump On Ending Iran War (ZH)

In a significant first of the seven-month long Iran war, Russian President Vladimir Putin has relayed to US President ` Donald Trump Tehran’s position on a possible resolution to the US-Iran war, according to the Kremlin. So far it is only the Kremlin readout of the two leaders’ Friday call which mentions the Iran proposal was conveyed, however it didn’t specify what they discussed in particular.


“During the October 9 telephone conversation with U.S. President Donald Trump, considerable focus was on prospects for settling the Ukraine crisis, while the situation surrounding Iran and various aspects of bilateral relations were touched upon as well,” Putin said in the statement. While the big news of the weekend is the major Trump-Putin diesel deal, if it is confirmed that Putin has begun directly mediating on behalf of Tehran, this marks a huge precedent and possible turning point in the Iran conflict.

According to more on the call as it pertains to the Iran situation: Russia’s Interfax news agency quoted Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov as saying Putin sent the message to Trump “in agreement with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian,” according to a Google translation. Other Russian media reports said Putin spoke to Trump by phone after the Russian leader met Pezeshkian on the sidelines of a summit in Turkmenistan.

Interfax didn’t elaborate on the specifics of how Iran sees the war — which began on Feb. 28 with U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on Iranian targets — coming to an end. There were reports early after Trump launching Operation Epic Fury that Moscow was willing to help negotiate peace between Moscow and Tehran; however, Moscow has largely been on the sidelines – and Qatar and Pakistan in particular have been the lead mediators.

Given Trump just did the controversial Russian diesel deal, this could be a real opening to finally bring the Hormuz Strait crisis to an end. Iran’s military has been flexing, even as the US Navy has boasted of record numbers of tankers having gotten through Hormuz. In just October alone, the Iranians have attacked eleven ships trying to traverse the strait.

President Trump continues to act as if all is well, writing in his latest Truth Social: “I settled 8 WARS, am close to ending or settling 2 more, got all of the Israeli hostages back, including the final 28, both living and dead, had hundreds of hostages, from countries all over the World, released and sent back home, won a war in Venezuela, and captured the violent dictator who so viciously ran that country, and stopped the number one state sponsor of terror, the Islamic Republic of Iran, from obtaining a Nuclear Weapon — AND MUCH MORE!”


“Yet, with all of that I, or the United States of America, did not get the Noble Peace Prize. WOW!” he added. But the Iran war, which the White House in the opening days kept promising would be swift and decisive, has devolved into a quagmire and Trump needs an acceptable exit before it limps on indefinitely, threatening to become his own Mideast ‘forever war’ legacy.

Read more …

“The leaders discussed a major diesel deal, Ukraine peace negotiations, Iran diplomacy, and closer bilateral contacts during a 90-minute phone call ..”

• Putin and Trump Hold ‘Successful’ Talks (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump held a 90-minute phone conversation on Friday, discussing the Ukraine conflict, a major agreement on Russian diesel supplies, the crisis surrounding Iran, and prospects for broader cooperation between Moscow and Washington.


Trump described the exchange as “highly successful,” announcing that Russia had agreed to supply millions of tons of diesel fuel to American and global markets in an effort to ease soaring energy prices. Kremlin foreign policy aide Yury Ushakov said the conversation was friendly and substantive, revealing that Trump had rearranged his schedule to speak with Putin following the Russian leader’s 74th birthday. Here are the key takeaways from the conversation, according to statements by both leaders and the Kremlin’s detailed readout.

Millions of tons of Russian diesel for the US
The most immediate result of the talks was a major energy agreement under which Russia will increase diesel exports to the US and global markets, potentially helping alleviate an international fuel shortage. Trump announced that Russia would immediately supply more than 300,000 tons of diesel, followed by another 500,000 tons in November and 1 million tons shortly thereafter. He also suggested that Russia could deliver an additional 3 million tons, depending on the condition of its refineries.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak subsequently confirmed that Moscow would begin lifting its diesel export restrictions ahead of schedule, reiterating the announced volumes and clarifying that exports could eventually reach 3 million tons per month, while assuring that Russia’s domestic market would remain fully supplied. The US Treasury also issued a temporary sanctions waiver covering Russian diesel shipments until April 7, 2027.

Trump predicted that the agreement, together with Washington’s claimed control of the Strait of Hormuz, would bring diesel prices down rapidly, particularly benefiting American farmers, truckers and consumers.

Kiev ‘derailed’ peace talks
The Ukraine conflict dominated much of the discussion, with Putin briefing Trump on the situation along the front line and Moscow’s response to Ukrainian “terrorist strikes” on infrastructure and civilian targets deep inside Russian territory. The Russian leader stressed that Moscow retained the initiative and remained committed to its objectives, while expressing readiness for a lasting diplomatic settlement.

However, Putin said that Kiev had effectively sabotaged plans for the immediate resumption of trilateral negotiations involving Russia, Ukraine and the United States. During their previous conversation, the two leaders had discussed restarting the talks shortly after Russia’s State Duma elections. Ushakov said that Ukrainian drone attacks, including strikes targeting polling stations and election-related personnel, had fundamentally changed the situation.

Moscow would now reconsider when negotiations could resume, according to the Kremlin aide. Trump reportedly promised to convey Russia’s position to Ukrainian representatives meeting with US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner in Miami.

Iran diplomacy ‘not exhausted’
Putin stressed that a negotiated settlement with Tehran remained possible, citing his October 8 meeting with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian in Turkmenistan.According to Ushakov, Putin noted that Washington and Tehran continued indirect contacts through Qatar despite their confrontational rhetoric. Moscow also reiterated its offer to accept highly enriched Iranian uranium as a potential way out of the nuclear deadlock. Trump welcomed Russia’s involvement in diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis, Ushakov added.

Melania’s humanitarian mission
Putin personally thanked First Lady Melania Trump for her efforts to reunite children separated from their families during the Ukraine conflict. The leaders also discussed the humanitarian situation in the town of Aleshki in Russia’s Kherson Region, agreeing that Russian human rights official Yana Lantratova would maintain direct contact with Melania’s office.

Closer ties – and another summit?
The leaders expressed satisfaction with existing communication channels between their administrations, intelligence services and other government agencies, agreeing to maintain cooperation. Putin emphasized that Moscow appreciated the attention Trump and his team continued to devote to relations with Russia despite Washington’s domestic and Middle Eastern priorities.

Asked whether the two presidents had agreed to meet in person, Ushakov said no specific summit had been discussed. However, he suggested that the upcoming APEC summit in China could provide an opportunity for another encounter if both leaders attended. The Kremlin aide also declined to disclose whether Washington had offered any concessions in exchange for Russia’s agreement to supply diesel, suggesting that American officials might provide further clarification.

Birthday wishes and hockey diplomacy
The conversation was initially proposed by the American side as an opportunity for Trump to personally congratulate Putin on his October 7 birthday. According to Ushakov, Witkoff contacted the Kremlin that day to convey greetings from Trump, as well as personal wishes from himself and Kushner, who expressed hope of meeting the Russian leader again soon.

Officials subsequently arranged the call around Putin’s trip to Turkmenistan and the time difference between Moscow and Washington, with Trump postponing some previously scheduled engagements.The US president opened the conversation with birthday wishes and greetings from Melania. The leaders also found time to discuss sports, with Trump praising Russian hockey star Alexander Ovechkin’s contribution to the game.

Read more …

Wrong move.

• Zelenskyy Urgently Attacks Russian Oil/Fuel Export Terminal (CTH)

Immediately after President Trump announced a strategic energy supply deal with Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, Ukraine President Zelenskyy ordered drone strikes against the Russian oil/fuel export terminal NZNP. The targeted terminal is located in the Zheleznodorozhny district of Rostov-on-Don, and it is used to transship petroleum products including diesel fuel for exports toward the west.


The intention of Zelenskyy’s targeting is obvious to anyone who has followed the conflict between Russia-Ukraine and the involvement of EU-NATO countries in keeping maximum conflict at the forefront. They do not want a strategic agreement between Putin and Trump. Hours before the Ukraine targeting of the NZNP export terminal, President Trump announced a strategic agreement with President Putin for refined diesel exports over the next six months.

This Trump-Putin agreement was against the interests of Zelenskyy and specifically against the interests of his benefactors in London, because Putin and Trump are working outside the “western market pricing system”. To fully understand what is happening, I strongly suggest you spend the time to read my previous articles on the dynamic as outlined below in sequence.

• First, start with understanding why Europe’s financial system is in conflict with Russia. In his own words Vladimir Putin explains why EU-NATO must have an expanded war with Russia. It has nothing to do with political ideology, and everything to do with control of money.

• Second, understand how the western control of the “market price” of commodities is used to manipulate political outcomes. This ties directly into the first article about why London must control the money and combat Russia. In this second article three weeks ago, CTH outlined a very predictable path that was most likely. The Trump-Putin strategic alliance is EXACTLY what we expected to happen.

• Third, you can actually move beyond the current moment into the future by looking at the Lukoil story. When you combine what Putin has said with the strategic agreement with Trump now in place you can clearly see how Lukoil is going to end up being a wedge to drive out London financial influence and free the USA from this corrupt market control system.

Once you understand those three previous outlines, then you understand exactly why the U.K. needs Zelenskyy to stop this agreement between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. London’s entire market control system is at risk. It’s all connected.

º Discounted potash from Belarus, sold to the U.S. at discount (non-market) prices. [Canada smacked.]

º Discounted diesel fuel from Russia, sold to the U.S. at discount (non-market) prices. [London smacked.]

These are two recent examples of Trump working around the traditional western system of financial control within the “market system”. These are also two transactions that cut out the middlemen completely. In essence, stand back and look at what Trump is doing here, it’s the same reason BRICS exists; it’s the BRICS argument against western financial control.

Trump is aligned ideologically with the BRICS position on energy exploitation. However, it’s actually more consequential than just an alignment of interests. The biggest economy in the world, the economy that establishes the currency used in most global trade, is now aligning in common purpose against the financial schemes of London, while RETAINING the dollar as the central trade currency.

Trump is telling BRICS there’s no reason to replace the dollar, we can just replace the manipulation.

London must be going bananas, and Zelenskyy is their tool to stop Trump.

Read more …

“After Zelensky Ignored Six Pleas To Stop Refinery Strikes..”

• Trump Says “Time For Ukraine To Get A New Leader” (ZH)

As he was boarding Air Force One on the way to Tennessee this morning, President Trump made his feelings clear over how he feels about Ukrainian President Zelensky. President Trump stated that “it’s time for Ukraine to get a new president”, criticizing Zelensky for bombing Russian oil refineries and accusing him of failing to end the war. “I suggest they get a new leader who can make a deal.”


One day after announcing plans to buy more than a million tonnes of diesel from Russia, Trump said the Ukrainian strikes were driving up global fuel prices and creating “problems for the world”. “He wants to make problems for our farmers, our ranchers with diesel fuel because Russia supplies a large portion of the diesel fuel throughout the world. And we told them ‘Do whatever you want, but don’t hit the diesel fuel, because this is a big problem, a big shortage’.”

“And what does he do? He goes and hits the diesel fuel.” Asked about the strikes, he said of Zelensky: “He’d better damn well stop.”


* * *

Friday’s diesel deal between Trump and Putin wasn’t only about diesel. It was also about Kyiv.

Hours after Zelensky accused Washington of using Ukraine’s negotiators as a “smokescreen” for a backroom deal with Moscow, Axios reported that Trump decided to let Russia sell diesel after Zelensky ignored half a dozen US requests to stop attacking Russian oil refineries. The alleged source was a US official with direct knowledge, who did not hold back:

“Zelensky is misreading the room. By continuing to hit refineries, he is eroding the good will that he has built with Trump over the last six months.” In other words, the sanctions waiver was as much a message to Kyiv as a gift to Moscow. So how did we get to this latest geopolitical twist, what is Trump actually got for lifting sanctions (spoiler: less than nine days of fuel), and why is the deal is on a collision course with the one Ukrainian policy Kyiv says it won’t give up. Let’s dig in.

“Half A Dozen” Requests The backstory is familiar to regular readers. One month ago, Trump – freaking out about soaring diesel prices – told reporters that Zelensky “has to stop knocking out diesel fuel in Russia,” and a day later he announced a truce that never really happened:

A few hours later, Kyiv kept hitting refineries anyway. Just last weekend Zelensky vowed to hammer more of them, and on Thursday Ukrainian drones set Russia’s largest refinery at Omsk ablaze, more than 1,500 miles from the border. Axios notes the strikes were “highly effective and caused an energy crisis in Russia,” prompting Moscow’s diesel export ban, which then “added more pressure to global diesel markets under strain from the war in Iran.”

The core disagreement is about symmetry. Zelensky told Trump, Witkoff and Kushner that he would stop hitting Russian refineries if Russia stopped hitting Ukrainian power plants. Trump wanted Ukraine to stop unilaterally, according to the official, and “didn’t see the attacks on refineries as equivalent to Russian strikes on Ukraine’s power grid.” Or, as the official put it: “The attacks on the refineries cause pain in Russia, but it causes pain for the U.S., too.”

Then there is what happened in Miami. During eight hours of talks on Friday, Witkoff and Kushner told the Ukrainian delegation that Trump was expected to call Putin and lift sanctions on Russian diesel, because Kyiv had ignored repeated requests on strikes “which were directly affecting U.S. consumers.” A Ukrainian official claimed the envoys also threatened that Trump could cut Ukraine off from US intelligence if it kept ignoring him. The US official denied that, saying the envoys merely reminded Kyiv that the US provides munitions and intelligence, so Ukraine “shouldn’t take actions that hurt American consumers.” That is a fine distinction, and Kyiv is unlikely to see the difference.

Read more …

“There is no shame in armistice when the alternative is Armageddon.”

• Europe and Russia Flirt with Nuclear War (J.B. Shurk)

War is ugly and awful. People who experience it generally detest it. In movies, soaring soundtracks make falling buildings and gunfights seem exciting. In real life, people feel excruciating physical and emotional pains that never really fade. It’s Hell on Earth.


After WWI, nations around the world celebrated Armistice Day on November 11, which later became known as Remembrance Day in many countries. Remembering the dead was only half of the holiday’s purpose; it was equally important for the survivors of the Great War to remember the costs of total war, so that mankind would never unleash such cataclysm again.

We did not sufficiently remember the costs of global war, and twenty years later, humanity endured a Second World War far more deadly than the First. After WWII, there was a movement in the United States to honor all veterans — both living and dead — on Armistice Day. President Eisenhower signed into law a bill renaming Armistice Day as Veterans Day, and we Americans have observed the holiday ever since.

We should honor our military veterans every day. By forgetting about Armistice Day, though, we stopped remembering the horrors of war. November 11 was once a day for survivors to say, “Never again.” It transformed into a holiday that celebrates heroes and sacrifice, while often burying the most important warning from past generations to the present: Do not repeat our folly.

War is tragedy, not entertainment. Although I wish that we humans had longer memories when it comes to the psychological toll of mass killing, we barely know peace for half-a-generation before descending into Hell once again. Wars between belligerents who see no alternative to either victory or death are cruel, bloody affairs.

Despite historical revisionism that often casts the use of nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as indefensible, the enormous loss of American marines, sailors, and soldiers on scattered Pacific islands proved that the Japanese would continue fighting to the last man before entertaining any notion of surrender. Both the Balkan Wars before WWI and the Yugoslav Wars following the Cold War were marked by ethnic cleansing, rape, and mass murder. Every Islamic war against Israel seeks the Jewish state’s eradication; therefore, every war Israel fights is life or death for the nation.

The war in Ukraine has taken on a similar zero-sum seriousness. Ukraine’s wartime president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has repeatedly insisted that there can be no peace until all formerly Ukrainian territory now claimed by the Russian Federation — including Crimea, which Russia has controlled since 2014 — is returned to Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said this demand is an impossibility.

Ukraine desires membership in the European Union and the U.S.-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization; Russia went to war in Ukraine, in part, to keep NATO’s thirty-year encroachment from reaching the entirety of its western borders. Ukraine and European members of NATO have described the war as an existential threat to all of Europe. Russian politicians, academics, and pundits similarly describe the war as an existential threat to Russia’s future survival.

Both sides seek what the other refuses to give. A dangerous stalemate now exists. Although accurate numbers are difficult to obtain, both Russia and Ukraine claim to have inflicted hundreds of thousands of casualties upon the other. Millions of Ukrainians have been displaced, and Russia’s border regions have endured sustained attacks.

Ukrainian authorities continue to press-gang young men into military service. European Union countries that welcomed hundreds of thousands of fleeing Ukrainians back in 2022 are beginning to insist that young Ukrainian men be sent back home to fight. European and American politicians have suggested that Ukraine’s legal age for conscription should be lowered and that Ukrainian women should be forced into combat, too. Martial-law-President Zelenskyy has admitted that his country is struggling to replenish lost troops.

In Russia, there is less concern about fielding troops for what the government calls its “special military operation” in Ukraine. There is widespread concern, however, that the military will have considerable difficulty defending the country effectively should E.U.-NATO expand the conflict beyond Ukraine — especially if Russia is forced to defend its Kaliningrad exclave situated between Lithuania and Poland.

European politicians and military personnel have argued that taking Kaliningrad would effectively cut Russia off from the Baltic Sea and tighten the noose of a cordon sanitaire formed around Russia’s European flank. Although the largest country in the world by territory, Russia’s moderate population of one-hundred-fifty-million puts it at a disadvantage against a European population three times its size.

With real troop losses and the threat of future troop losses weighing heavily on the minds of decision-makers in Europe and Russia, what once was unthinkable has become more openly discussed: the use of nuclear weapons on the continent. For eighty years, the taboo against atomic warfare has been so great that the United States and the Soviet Union fought a half-century Cold War in the shadows in an effort to avoid direct confrontation. However, as Russia, Ukraine, and E.U.-NATO struggle for leverage and deterrence, the likelihood of nuclear conflict is growing.

Despite the fact that Ukraine is not a part of NATO, military representatives from all of NATO’s thirty-two members gathered in Kyiv this week. Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone, the chair of the NATO Military Committee, announced, “We are here in full strength with a clear message: The bond between NATO and Ukraine is stronger and stronger.”

Read more …

“His policy cupboard is bare, his legacy shredded. Nothing “miraculous” happened! Younger worshippers are (gasp) doubting his divinity!”

• The Last Revolution of Barack Obama (Scott Pinsker)

Well, of course he has a gargantuan ego. All presidents have gargantuan egos. But even by presidential standards, his loomed like the Goodyear blimp. Nor was it a secret. Politico wrote about it. So did the LA Times. Outlets from Germany to South Korea wrote about it, too. His messianic aspirations — and unshakeable faith in his own divinity — gained him millions of converts.


For a while, at least. At the height of their zealotry, his worshipers expected the literal moon and stars. Because he was their Lightworker — a Christ-like figure who’d correct the crooked, heal the sick, and fundamentally transform America. So yeah, their expectations were pretty frickin’ high. How high? This painting was proposed to hang in New York City’s Union Square to celebrate the 100th day of his blessed presidency:


In the beginning, his worshipers groveled in homage before him. “This is bigger than Kennedy. [Obama] comes along, and he seems to have the answers. This is the New Testament,” gushed Chris Matthews. “He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh,” wrote Ezra Klein. “The event itself is so extraordinary that another chapter could be added to the Bible to chronicle its significance,” fawned Jesse Jackson, Jr.

And to be fair, the Lightworker wasn’t exactly understated when it came to setting expectations. Remember what he predicted for his glorious reign: “I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless. This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

Yet today, Barack Obama’s prophecies remain unfulfilled. Our planet didn’t heal — it’s worse than ever! Even his signature legislation, Obamacare, is teetering on the brink of insolvency, and our healthcare system is still an ungodly mess. Why do you think handsome left-wing activists are murdering healthcare execs in the streets? It’s certainly not because Saint Obama solved the problem.

He promised us the Land of Milk and Honey — and led us to the land of cow feces and bee stings. Curiously, the one social problem he seemed ideally equipped to help, America’s lingering racial discord, got a whole lot worse. Instead of bridging our racial divide, Obama pushed us farther apart. From The New York Times:

“Seven years ago, in the gauzy afterglow of a stirring election night in Chicago, commentators dared ask whether the United States had finally begun to heal its divisions over race and atone for the original sin of slavery by electing its first black president. It has not. Not even close.

“A New York Times/CBS News poll conducted last week reveals that nearly six in 10 Americans, including heavy majorities of both whites and blacks, think race relations are generally bad, and that nearly four in 10 think the situation is getting worse. By comparison, two-thirds of Americans surveyed shortly after President Obama took office said they believed that race relations were generally good.

“The swings in attitude have been particularly striking among African-Americans. During Mr. Obama’s 2008 campaign, nearly 60 percent of blacks said race relations were generally bad, but that number was cut in half shortly after he won. It has now soared to 68 percent, the highest level of discontent among blacks during the Obama years and close to the numbers recorded in the aftermath of the riots that followed the 1992 acquittal of Los Angeles police officers charged in the beating of Rodney King. ”

Donald Trump is now a two-term president. All of Obama’s executive orders have been undone. His Iran deal was scrapped, his Green Energy policies vacated. His vice president, Joe Biden, was humiliated and exiled from politics. Every promise he made — all of his hallowed prophecies — has collapsed like the walls of Jericho. He has a nice, shiny Nobel Peace Prize to look at — and not much else.

His policy cupboard is bare, his legacy shredded. Nothing “miraculous” happened! Younger worshippers are (gasp) doubting his divinity! So what’s a would-be messiah to do when his prophecies fail? He finds a new prophecy to fulfill. Welcome to the last revolution of Barack Obama.

The ex-president’s decision to campaign with Abdul El-Sayed, the DSA-aligned Senate candidate in Michigan, raised plenty of eyebrows. Why El-Sayed? Why spend your political capital on the most controversial, polarizing candidate of the 2026 midterms? Why not someone else? Why not Troy Jackson in Maine? Why not tour the other must-win states? Those candidates would love to schedule rallies and fundraisers with the ex-president, too.

What’s so special about Abdul El-Sayed? He can do what the others cannot: El-Sayed represents the fulfillment of the Lightbringer’s legacy. Obama is, was, and will forever be a left-wing revolutionary — but he’s a realistic revolutionary. Everything he does is calculated; every move is deliberate.

Earlier this week, we outlined how shrewdly Obama triangulated on gay marriage — opposing it for religious reasons in 2008, then supporting it for religious reasons in 2012. He proceeds with caution, is mindful of political minefields, and is deathly afraid of blowback.

Take what’s given. Don’t overreach. Strike when the iron is hot. Because “The arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice.” Which means time is always on Obama’s side. Call it destiny, call it fate, but as long as the Democrats don’t self-destruct, the future is theirs. Obama believes in the eventual superiority of his beliefs just as much as he believes in himself.

As a realist, Obama knew his presidency wouldn’t take us to the Promised Land — and so, he didn’t really try. Instead, he used his presidential platform to mainstream racial grievances. He had to, because America is a flawed, racist, evil country — and a reckoning was long overdue. Before, these racial ideas were on the periphery; post-Obama, they were Democratic Party orthodoxy. Today, even the moderates believe it.

It’s too bad.

Read more …

“If Democrats have everything going for them this cycle, they should be rolling in cash, not begging for it. This doesn’t jibe with the polling that shows them ahead.”

• House Dems’ Dire Donor Warning Hints at Trouble Before Midterms (Margolis)

With less than a month to go before the midterms, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is begging donors for money. That’s a strange place to be for a party that supposedly has everything going its way. If the polls are right, and Democrats have all the energy and momentum heading into November, the checks should be writing themselves. So why is the party struggling to raise money?


According to a Politico report, DCCC Executive Director Julie Merz sent a memo to donors on Friday, setting a hard deadline for them to cough up $17 million. The committee wants the cash in hand by October 22 so it can compete in a handful of districts that Republicans carried easily in 2024. Merz told donors the money is needed “to take advantage of the opportunities we have” outside of the core battlefield. And if the donors don’t deliver? Merz warned that the party “could be leaving winnable races on the table.”

Democrats have admitted all cycle that Republicans are outraising them, but until now they’ve refused to attach a dollar figure to the hole they’re in. That makes Friday’s memo a surprising outlier, and a revealing one. Merz assured donors that committee members “remain confident that we will win back the majority in 25 days,” and then promptly explained why they should be nervous. “Here’s the tough reality though: the Republican ecosystem has amassed a massive war chest that is significantly greater than ours and is spending it,” Merz wrote.

Confident parties don’t usually send out memos like that. Merz spent significant portions of hers on four districts where the committee is desperate for more money, and President Donald Trump won every one of them by double digits in 2024. He carried Florida’s 27th District by 14.6 points, Nevada’s 2nd District by 13.9, and South Carolina’s 1st District by 13. In New York’s 21st District, he won by 20.7.

The DCCC insists its internal polling shows all four races within reach. It also concedes that the GOP’s cash advantage, especially the money sitting in the Trump-aligned super PAC MAGA Inc., will make it harder to win those seats and other long shots. Merz even name-dropped a few more deep-red districts she called “worthy of additional investment in this environment,” including the seats held by Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) and Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), who happens to chair the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Meanwhile, the money gap has created headaches for both House and Senate Democrats, who can’t agree on where to spend the limited resources they do have. A party riding a wave doesn’t have that problem. The NRCC wasted no time mocking the memo.”No amount of money fixes candidates voters don’t want,” NRCC spokesperson Mike Marinella said in a statement. “These seats are staying red, and Republicans are on offense across the map.”

Still, something doesn’t make sense to me. If Democrats have everything going for them this cycle, they should be rolling in cash, not begging for it. This doesn’t jibe with the polling that shows them ahead. On top of that, the GOP is registering more new voters in swing states. Something isn’t adding up.

Read more …

Blond woman. Modeled after Leavitt.

• Trump Picks New Press Secretary (Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell)

The job of White House press secretary has been offered to Katie Zacharia, a White House official confirmed to the Daily Signal Friday. Zacharia will replace Karoline Leavitt, who left the position in August to spend more time with her two children. Trump confirmed that Zacharia would fill the post Friday afternoon.


“It is my Great Honor to have just appointed, as Press Secretary, Katie Zacharia,” he said. “Katie currently serves as Senior Communications Advisor to Truth Social (Trump Media & Technology Group), where she has been outstanding! A native of California, Katie previously served as Spokesperson and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at the Department of Homeland Security.”


“Katie is a distinguished Graduate of Pepperdine University, and the Pepperdine Caruso School of Law, an attorney, and a frequent Commentator on outlets, including Fox News and Newsmax,” he continued. “She was previously involved in my Campaigns, assisting in key Swing States, where we won 7 out of 7.” Trump praised her “unblemished record of support.”

“She is, likewise, a devoted fan and member of MAGA!” he said. “I am confident that Katie will deliver strong results for our Country as the next White House Press Secretary, as she has the respect of, and will work fantastically with, the Media, the American People, and my Administration. Katie is replacing the fabulous Karoline Leavitt, who did a fantastic job as Press Secretary.” Zacharia will play an important role in speaking for the administration in the weeks leading up to midterm elections. Zacharia briefly served as spokeswoman at the Department of Homeland Security in early 2026.

“I joined DHS with a genuine passion for supporting POTUS in his decisive and effective policies to secure our homeland, be a voice for the precious Angel Families, and an advocate for the men and women of ICE,” she said on X at the time of her departure. “I look forward to continuing that work in other capacities. God bless America, God Bless President Trump, and I am grateful to be alive during the presidencies of @realDonaldTrump!”


She is general counsel at Fix California, an organization founded by Richard Grenell to promote conservatism in the state. She regularly appears on Fox News. Zacharia also serves as senior communications advisor at Trump Media and Technology Group and Truth Social. She is a graduate of Pepperdine University and Pepperdine Caruso Law School. She is a mother of four.Zacharia interned for the White House and the Republican National Committee in 2006.

Read more …

Not their society.

• Germany: 87% of Suspects With An Arrest Warrant Are Foreigners (RMX)

“The figures speak for themselves: The overwhelming majority of criminals wanted on arrest warrants do not have a German passport.” More than 148,000 people remain subject to outstanding arrest warrants in Germany, and only 11.2 percent of them hold exclusively German citizenship, and overall, 87 percent of arrest warrant suspects are foreigners, according to figures the Federal Ministry of the Interior provided in response to a parliamentary inquiry.


Foreign nationals account for 87.3 percent of the total of suspects wanted for arrests, while another 1.5 percent are German citizens who also hold a second nationality. The data is already adding to the debate about mass immigration and criminality, especially in a country where the amount of violence, rape, and serious offenses are disproportionately committed by its foreign population. Welt newspaper obtained the ministry’s reply to a question from Alternative for Germany (AfD) lawmaker Sebastian Münzenmaier.

Münzenmaier told Welt am Sonntag: “The figures speak for themselves: The overwhelming majority of criminals wanted on arrest warrants do not have a German passport.” He called for a “rigorous change of course” that would include permanent and complete border controls, the immediate termination of the stay of foreign criminals, and the enforcement of prison sentences in the country of origin.

While German citizens form the single largest group, at 16,671, Germany also features a population where 81 percent of people hold exclusively German citizenship. Romanian nationals follow closely with 16,123, then Polish nationals with 12,721, Georgian nationals with 6,869 and Turkish nationals with 6,696.

Alexander Throm, the domestic-policy spokesman for the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) parliamentary group, said: “Every open arrest warrant poses a security risk.” He added that “the high proportion of foreign offenders, including many from other EU countries, shows that action must be taken.”

Throm also noted that border controls introduced in September 2024 have done more than limit illegal migration: “They have not only curbed illegal migration. Since their start in September 2024, over 17,500 people have also been apprehended at our borders with outstanding arrest warrants.”

Heiko Teggatz, chairman of the German Police Union, called the total worrying and said it “of course, represents a security policy problem.” State police forces, he told the paper, rarely have the staffing to mount dedicated searches; most arrests occur as a “chance hit or bycatch.” The union has long cited personnel shortages as a central obstacle to improved public safety.

Marcel Emmerich, the Greens’ domestic-policy spokesman, agreed that the volume of open warrants constitutes a serious problem, “especially when it comes to dangerous persons, extremists, violent or sex offenders.” However, Emmerich rejected broader border checks, noting: “Instead of hoping for random hits at border controls, targeted searches are needed, especially for dangerous perpetrators of violence, threats and people from the field of politically motivated crime.”

Sebastian Fiedler, the Social Democratic Party’s domestic-policy spokesman in the Bundestag, cautioned against reading the aggregate figure as evidence of 148,000 undetected dangerous offenders still inside the country. “A significant portion of this is due to substitute prison sentences for unpaid fines. In North Rhine-Westphalia, more than half of all outstanding arrest warrants in total were such cases, he said. Warrants can also remain active against people who have already left Germany or been deported, so that any remaining sentence can be enforced if they return.

“For example, they will continue to be put out to tender for a search so that if they re-enter the country, a remaining prison sentence can be enforced,” Fiedler said. While the crimes may include many petty offenses, the totals are stark. German nationals represent a minuscule share of the open arrest warrants in a country where 81 percent of the country is made up of German nationals.

Read more …

“Tulsi explains why Islamic theology is antithetical to freedom and completely against American values.”

• Tulsi Gabbard Warns About Modern Surveillance State and Islamic Extremism (CTH)

Former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard delivered a very strong speech to the audience of the Texas Youth Summit about the growing surveillance state. As DNI Tulsi Gabbard has direct personal knowledge of this issue. It is very well worth listening to this speech in full.


The second half of the speech touches upon the second concern noted by Gabbard, the spread of Islamist ideology and how it is against the core foundation of our constitutional republic. Tulsi explains why Islamic theology is antithetical to freedom and completely against American values. Again, exceptionally strong remarks from the former head of the entire U.S. intelligence apparatus about the threat of Islamic extremism. WATCH:

Read more …

“Make no mistake about it, this is what a party does when it knows its candidate can’t win on the merits.”

• Are Democrats Trying to Steal the Election for El-Sayed? (Matt Margolis)

Michigan is a prime flip opportunity for the GOP, and it looks as if the Democrats are engaging in shenanigans to try to steal it.


Start with the motive. Republican Mike Rogers and Democrat Abdul El-Sayed are fighting to replace retiring two-term Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), and recent polling shows the contest in a dead heat. The last two surveys that RealClearPolitics tracked put El-Sayed ahead by a single point, well inside the margin of error. Cook Political Report rates Michigan as the only Democrat-held seat in the toss-up column, in a state President Donald Trump carried in two of his three runs.


Democrats did this to themselves, frankly. The seat became a pickup opportunity the moment Michigan Democrats passed over the more electable candidate, Haley Stevens, and nominated a socialist radical instead. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) obviously doubted his party could hold Michigan with El-Sayed on the ticket. Then came Thursday night’s debate, and it did not go well for El-Sayed.

Rogers dominated, exposing his opponent’s hypocrisy and dishonesty on Israel, terror ties, his foreign property, and health care. El-Sayed faced questions about his ties to terrorist groups, about supporters who cheer Hamas, Hezbollah, and al-Qaeda, and about his mother’s role in wiring money to Osama bin Laden. Social media reaction overwhelmingly scored it for Rogers, and the verdict wasn’t limited to Republicans.

“Rogers showed up tonight and exceeded expectations,” wrote Michael LaRosa, a former spokesman for Jill Biden. “He spoke with absolute moral clarity about who Abdul El-Sayed actually is, he hit the right notes clearly and forcefully, and he didn’t flinch when going in on the attack.”

There’s more evidence of a campaign in trouble. El-Sayed plans to campaign with Barack Obama later this month, a sign of desperation and an acknowledgment that black voters aren’t sold on him. A candidate cruising to victory in a state Democrats have held for years doesn’t need that kind of rescue mission four weeks out.

Naturally, Democrats are panicking and resorting to rigging. On Friday, the Republican National Committee sued Lansing election officials, accusing them of illegally packing poll worker positions with Democrats, shutting Republicans out, and hiding election records from the public.

The law here leaves no room for creative interpretation. Under subsection (2) of MCL 168.674, “The board of election commissioners shall appoint at least 1 election inspector from each major political party and shall appoint an equal number, as nearly as possible, of election inspectors in each election precinct from each major political party.” Now look at what Lansing did.

The city appointed 140 Democrats and just 71 Republicans to Election Day poll worker slots, handing Democrats a nearly two-to-one edge. Officials can’t claim they had nobody to pick from, because Republicans gave the city a list of qualified candidates. When Republicans asked to review the poll worker records, which should be open to the public, Lansing officials refused. The GOP tried repeatedly to resolve the problem with the city before going to court, and got nowhere.

“Democrats stacked the deck, pushed Republicans aside, and then tried to hide the paper trail,” RNC Chairman Joe Gruters said. “That’s exactly why voters are losing confidence in our elections. Michigan has become ground zero for election integrity violations, and the RNC is watching this state like a hawk. When left-wing officials break the rules, we’ll take them to court and stop them.” The RNC says it wants transparency restored, bipartisan oversight guaranteed, and Michigan election officials held to the statute as written.

Beyond the poll workers scheme, Democrat Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is fighting to uphold a rule requiring electronic poll-book files to be deleted within seven days after an election is canvassed and certified — a policy Republicans argue could erase evidence needed to investigate suspected voter fraud. Republicans joining the court challenge contend that federal law requires covered election records to be preserved for 22 months, raising questions about whether Michigan’s deletion rule would undermine scrutiny of disputed elections.

“Why is Jocelyn Benson fighting to delete election records after just seven days when federal law requires them to be preserved for 22 months?” asked Gruters. “The RNC has been fighting this election record purge from the start, and now we’re taking that fight directly into court. Michigan voters deserve transparency and accountability, not secrecy and less oversight.”

Make no mistake about it, this is what a party does when it knows its candidate can’t win on the merits. It stops trying to persuade voters and starts managing the process instead. Republicans are right to fight this in court now, because once the election is over, the damage is done and the evidence is gone.

Read more …

“The lower courts held that Trump waited too long to file it under the RICO Act’s time limit.”

• Trump Petitions Supreme Court to Reinstate Lawsuit Against Clinton, DNC (ET)

President Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court on Oct. 9 to revive his dismissed civil lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and others. The president alleges they conspired to create and spread a false story that his 2016 campaign colluded with Russia.


Lower courts rejected the case and ordered Trump and one of his attorneys, Alina Habba, to pay almost $1 million in sanctions. The trial judge and the appeals court called the lawsuit “frivolous,” saying it had no legal merit and appeared aimed at political grievance rather than a valid claim. Trump is now asking the nation’s highest court to review the appeals court’s decision upholding both the dismissal and the sanctions.

While he was out of office after losing the 2020 election, Trump initiated the lawsuit in federal court in Florida in March 2022, under a federal racketeering law known as civil RICO. That law allows private individuals to seek damages when they claim someone engaged in a pattern of illegal activities, such as fraud or conspiracy.

The lawsuit targeted Clinton, the DNC, former British spy Christopher Steele, former FBI Director James Comey, and more than two dozen other people. It centered on the so-called Steele dossier, which was opposition research funded by Clinton’s campaign that alleged the Russian government had compromising material on Trump.

Trump’s lawsuit touches on topics covered by two earlier government investigations. Former special counsel Robert Mueller’s 2019 report found no criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. Former special counsel John Durham’s 2023 report criticized the FBI’s handling of its 2016 counterintelligence investigation—codenamed Crossfire Hurricane—into possible Trump campaign contacts with Russia. Durham said the FBI relied too much on uncorroborated tips, including material connected to the Clinton campaign.

Those government reports dealt with criminal and counterintelligence questions. By contrast, Trump’s civil lawsuit is a private damages case governed by different rules. The lower courts held that Trump waited too long to file it under the RICO Act’s time limit.

Dossier Source Scrutiny
Steele’s dossier included claims that the Russian government possessed a salacious video of Trump at a hotel in Moscow. His main source was later revealed to be Igor Danchenko, who was based in the United States and has been investigated by federal agents over possible ties to Russian intelligence.

Attorneys for Trump and Habba wrote in the new petition that Supreme Court review of the case is necessary to protect the institution of the presidency. They said that the decisions by the lower courts reflect “a deeply troubling trend of federal courts using sanctions and disciplinary threats to punish the president and his lawyers for legitimate legal positions that those courts (erroneously) reject.” “Treating contested advocacy as misconduct corrodes our legal culture, deters representation of controversial clients, and makes constitutional adjudication depend on counsel’s willingness to risk personal liability,” they said.

They alleged in the lawsuit that in the months leading up to the 2016 election, Clinton conspired with allies to discredit him with a “false narrative” that he and his campaign engaged in collusion with Russia, according to the petition. The suit alleged several claims, including racketeering and a “conspiracy to commit injurious falsehood.”

Read more …

“Instead, the Nobel Committee gave the award to a soapbox preaching nepo baby who made a fifth grade-level PowerPoint presentation about how the world was going to melt if we didn’t purchase the indulgences (i.e. carbon credits) he was peddling ..”

• The Nobel Peace Prize: An Exercise In Moral Depravity (A.J. Christopher)

Who was Irena Sendler? If you don’t know, don’t worry. Most people don’t know who she was. And that’s a problem. I myself didn’t know who she was until very recently, and when I found out why I didn’t know, the reasons made me angry. Because my ignorance was a result of what we value as a society. Irena Sendler was a Polish nurse who lived in Warsaw during the German occupation. Unlike almost all Muslims, most contemporary Europeans, and half of contemporary Americans, Sendler witnessed the antisemitic genocide occurring all around her and knew that it was wrong.


As a nurse whom the Department of Social Welfare and Public Health employed, she had special access to the Jewish ghetto that most people didn’t. She used that access to smuggle food and medicine in, and to smuggle people out. She conspired with the Polish Underground to forge identity documents for Jews, and to help find them hiding places outside of the ghetto.

She found homes for Jewish children and orphans with Polish families, Catholic parishes, and nuns’ convents. The children were given Christian names and taught Christian prayers, in case the Germans questioned them. Though a practicing Catholic herself, Sendler didn’t want the children’s Jewish identities erased. She kept meticulous records of each child and orphan who was given a new identity and hidden with a new family, to include the children’s original names and family origins. She kept these documents in jars, buried in the ground, so that after the war, there was a possibility of reunification.

Whenever she was working in the ghetto, she would wear a yellow Star of David to show solidarity with the people she was trying to help.Giving assistance to Jews in the Warsaw ghetto was a crime punishable by death, not only to the perpetrator but to their entire family. Sendler and her friends risked this on a daily basis. In October 1943, the Gestapo arrested her on suspicion of insurrectionary activity. Despite being brutally and repeatedly beaten and tortured, Sendler betrayed not a single Polish comrade or Jewish refugee. She was scheduled to be executed, but managed to escape after the Polish Underground bribed one of her German guards.

A month later, she was back to helping smuggle Jewish children out of the ghetto. By the end of the war, it is estimated she saved over 2500 Jewish children from extermination. Sendler survived the war, and continued to help children. She dug up the jars with the children’s information and gave it to the Jewish Committee, which did what it could to reunite the shattered families. During her life, she never once asked for recognition or compensation of any kind. People like her never do. Sadly, the world doesn’t know about Irena Sendler.

The world almost knew about Irena Sendler. Almost two decades ago, the Israeli and Polish governments nominated Sendler for the Nobel Peace Prize. It would seem like a no-brainer that a young, unarmed nurse who saved thousands of children from Nazi extermination, and who endured torture and imprisonment for her efforts, would be a shoo-in.

Instead, the Nobel Committee gave the award to a soapbox preaching nepo baby who made a fifth grade-level PowerPoint presentation about how the world was going to melt if we didn’t purchase the indulgences (i.e. carbon credits) he was peddling, which made him richer than he already was.

He owns a 400-acre farm and a 10000 square foot mansion, along with additional coastal property. His homes consume 20 times more electricity than the average American home. But he thinks you and I consume too much. As a result of green policies he advocated for, tens of millions of people in places such as South Africa and Indonesia were pushed back into absolute poverty. None of his apocalyptic prophecies ever came to fruition, and he has never apologized for them. That grinning snake oil salesman accepted his Nobel Prize in December 2007.

Irena Sendler died five months later.

Nearly twenty years on, nothing has changed. The Nobel Committee just awarded this year’s prize to former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, an antisemitic, anti-American globalist and terrorist apologist. She has supported butchers such as Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe, so long as his victims were the right color, and would have been only too happy to have seen people such as Irena Sendler fail in their efforts.

What a sick, sick society we live in.

Read more …

“But the problem is we’re in the Old Testament right now, and the Old Testament has no forgiveness..”

• Chris Rock Makes an Excellent Point About Wokeness (Anderson)

I have to confess that I have a huge crush on Chris Rock.


That said, I really wasn’t even a fan of his until I saw his Selective Outrage Netflix special a few years ago. It came about at a time in my life when I needed some laughs, and I felt it delivered. I’ve since gone back and watched most of his body of work from over the decades, including his Saturday Night Live appearances, most of his movies, his old talk show, his older stand-up specials, and even a lot of past interviews.

For what it’s worth, he’s matured beautifully through the years, and I love how he isn’t trying to impress anyone these days, or so it seems. He calls things as he sees them. And while I doubt he and I would see eye-to-eye on all things politics, he’s the kind of Democrat I don’t mind having a conversation with because he comes across as fairly honest and isn’t afraid of criticizing his own side of the aisle or admitting when it’s defeated. He also sees people as people… not elephants and donkeys.

That’s exactly what he did last week in an interview with David Marchese of The New York Times. Rock has a new movie, which actually comes out today — Friday, October 9 — called Misty Green. He wrote, directed, and starred in it, and the previews look excellent. He’s also been making the media rounds, promoting it. During this particular interview, he described exactly what’s wrong with wokeness today.

“The problem with quote, unquote, wokeness — and don’t get me wrong, it is great that marginalized people have a voice; it is great to advocate for anybody that feels marginalized,” Rock began, admitting that he’s not against the concept in general. “But the problem is we’re in the Old Testament right now, and the Old Testament has no forgiveness. The Old Testament didn’t work, so they had to write a remix called the New Testament.”

I didn’t quite understand the biblical analogy — either that or he’s not getting the relationship between the Old and New Testaments wrong — but I fully understood what he said next: “The problem is when you institutionalize it.” He used the Salem Witch Trials as an example.

“The Salem witch hunts. I’m sure the first three witches they caught were actually f***ing witches,” he said. “But then you open up a witch office and now you’ve got to start lying. Now you’ve gotta f***ing make s*** up because you’ve got overhead. You’ve got to justify the witch hunters’ f***ing pensions.” His point is that this country didn’t just go woke in recent years. We went woke and then turned it into bureaucracy. And now we have to create more targets to keep those offices open and fully staffed.

Again, Rock said he’s glad some of it happened because some deserving people did get some good things out of it, but he basically suggested that this should have happened from ordinary accountability, not permanent enforcement. He likened it to faith and friendship. The comedian said he has a friend who he wasn’t going to name who “might have gotten canceled.” He said people ask him all the time why he’s still friends with that person. His response to that? “If you’re only friends with your friends when they’re good, they’re not your friends.” He also reminded us that God forgives.

Again, Rock is a liberal Democrat who doesn’t like Donald Trump and does see some value in efforts we, on this side of the aisle, might consider woke. But he’s not afraid to admit that his side took it, institutionalized it, and made it so that it runs on outrage. If we must share the country with leftists, I’ll take more like him.

I’ll leave you with the trailer for Misty Green. I hope to check it out soon.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/AsFoundX/status/2108579237011571162?s=20s

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 10 2026

Oct 102026
 
 October 10, 2026  Posted by at 9:10 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  35 Responses »


Canaletto View of the Churches of the Redentore 1750


• Trump Cut Putin Diesel Deal After Zelensky Ignored Pleas To Stop Refineries (ZH)
• Iran Claims Control of Hormuz, But Oil Export Data Show Otherwise (JTN)
• It’s Not Just South America: The Worldwide Move to the Right (Eric Florack)
• Migrants Join Forces With Antifa, EU Riots Spread From France To Belgium (ZH)
• Barack Obama and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News Cycle (Green)
• The Ripening (James Howard Kunstler)
• Zelensky ‘Doesn’t Give A Damn’ About Ukrainians – Russian Envoy (RT)
• Nord Stream Pipelines Will Be Relaunched’: Right-Wing Polish MEP (RMX)
• Bandera’s Dirty Secrets Buried To Build A Ukrainian ‘Hero’, Blame The KGB (RT)
• Merz Turned Into ‘Ukrainian Chancellor’ – Moscow (RT)
• Trump Envoys Pitching ‘New Ideas’ To Settle Ukraine Conflict (RT)
• Trump Told Big Tech to Put American Workers First (David Manney)
• RFK Jr. Announces New Clinic for People Injured by Vaccines (ET)
• German Police Advise Women To Vomit To Stop Rape Attacks (RMX)
• Roseanne Barr Is Coming Back (Matt Margolis)

 

 

 

 


It’s not Russia vs Ukraine, it’s Russia vs the West. And Trump has now shown whose side he’s not on.

• Trump Cut Putin Diesel Deal After Zelensky Ignored Pleas To Stop Refineries (ZH)

Friday’s diesel deal between Trump and Putin wasn’t only about diesel. It was also about Kyiv. Hours after Zelensky accused Washington of using Ukraine’s negotiators as a “smokescreen” for a backroom deal with Moscow, Axios reported that Trump decided to let Russia sell diesel after Zelensky ignored half a dozen US requests to stop attacking Russian oil refineries. The alleged source was a US official with direct knowledge, who did not hold back:


“Zelensky is misreading the room. By continuing to hit refineries, he is eroding the good will that he has built with Trump over the last six months.” In other words, the sanctions waiver was as much a message to Kyiv as a gift to Moscow. So how did we get to this latest geopolitical twist, what is Trump actually got for lifting sanctions (spoiler: less than nine days of fuel), and why is the deal is on a collision course with the one Ukrainian policy Kyiv says it won’t give up. Let’s dig in.

“Half A Dozen” Requests
The backstory is familiar to regular readers. One month ago, Trump – freaking out about soaring diesel prices – told reporters that Zelensky “has to stop knocking out diesel fuel in Russia,” and a day later he announced a truce that never really happened:


A few hours later, Kyiv kept hitting refineries anyway. Just last weekend Zelensky vowed to hammer more of them, and on Thursday Ukrainian drones set Russia’s largest refinery at Omsk ablaze, more than 1,500 miles from the border. Axios notes the strikes were “highly effective and caused an energy crisis in Russia,” prompting Moscow’s diesel export ban, which then “added more pressure to global diesel markets under strain from the war in Iran.”

The core disagreement is about symmetry. Zelensky told Trump, Witkoff and Kushner that he would stop hitting Russian refineries if Russia stopped hitting Ukrainian power plants. Trump wanted Ukraine to stop unilaterally, according to the official, and “didn’t see the attacks on refineries as equivalent to Russian strikes on Ukraine’s power grid.” Or, as the official put it: “The attacks on the refineries cause pain in Russia, but it causes pain for the U.S., too.”

Then there is what happened in Miami. During eight hours of talks on Friday, Witkoff and Kushner told the Ukrainian delegation that Trump was expected to call Putin and lift sanctions on Russian diesel, because Kyiv had ignored repeated requests on strikes “which were directly affecting U.S. consumers.” A Ukrainian official claimed the envoys also threatened that Trump could cut Ukraine off from US intelligence if it kept ignoring him. The US official denied that, saying the envoys merely reminded Kyiv that the US provides munitions and intelligence, so Ukraine “shouldn’t take actions that hurt American consumers.” That is a fine distinction, and Kyiv is unlikely to see the difference.

So was Ukraine’s team a “smokescreen,” as Zelensky charged? Not quite: the US delegation told them what was coming. But the decision was clearly made before they sat down. Zelensky’s reaction, in a statement reported by Politico:

“At this very moment, while our team is talking with the American team in Florida, at this very moment, the President of the United States is talking with the leader of the Kremlin… and has an agreement under which America is allowing Russia to export diesel fuel. That means more money for this war… I believe our team is simply being used as a smokescreen, and that is certainly not fair.”

He went further in an interview with Axios, calling it “not fair and not honest” and “a happy birthday present for Putin” (who turned 74 on Wednesday), and told reporters it was “a weak decision by strong partners.”

And the payoff from Putin? So far, none on peace. During the 90-minute call he declined to commit to resuming talks with Ukraine. Kremlin adviser Yuri Ushakov said Ukrainian strikes on Moscow and other cities during Russia’s parliamentary elections had “thwarted the possibility of an immediate resumption of the negotiation process,” adding: “The president said, we will think about when these negotiations can be resumed.” That is the kind of non-answer that tends to precede more non-answers. The US official still thinks Putin “is open to a discussion on ending the war,” and says Washington wants a “new proposal that will be good enough for him.” Witkoff and Kushner may visit Moscow and Kyiv next week, though Axios notes it’s unclear how Friday’s blowup will affect those plans.

What Trump Got: 4.8 Million Tons, Mostly “Thereafter”
Here’s what Trump posted on Truth Social shortly before Friday’s close:

“I have just concluded a highly successful discussion with President Vladimir Putin, of Russia, wherein it was agreed that Russia will immediately supply over 300,000 Tons of Diesel Fuel to the American and Global Marketplace, another 500,000 Tons during the month of November, and 1,000,000 Tons immediately thereafter.”

Another 3 million tons would follow “within a short period of time,” depending on “the condition of their Diesel Refineries.” That condition is the whole point, as we explain below. Then came the usual all-caps flourish: between “our TOTAL CONTROL of the Strait of Hormuz, and this great announcement on Russian Energy, Diesel Prices for Americans and, indeed, the World, will be COMING DOWN, IN RECORD NUMBERS, AND FAST!”

Minutes later, Treasury said OFAC was “immediately issuing a temporary general license to allow the supply of Russian diesel to the global market.” General License 135 authorizes the sale, delivery and import (including into the US) of Russian-origin diesel until April 7, 2027. That is six months, and according to Fortune it is the first diesel waiver since the war began to run longer than the standard 30 days. The EU and UK sanctions are unchanged, so Europe, the region that actually imports diesel, can’t legally buy a drop of it.

Moscow confirmed the terms. Deputy PM Alexander Novak said Russia was ready to supply 300,000 tons in October, 500,000 in November and 1 million in December, and that “in the long run, this volume could reach three million tons per month.” The Kremlin’s readout said “the Russian side reaffirmed its readiness to supply oil and oil products to the American and world markets,” with no dates attached. Something to look forward to in 2027, perhaps.

The algos loved it. As Goldman’s US rates desk wrote in its Friday wrap (available to pro subs), “Before the close, headlines hit the tape that Russia would release diesel supply into the market, driving down diesel prices and leading to a modest rally in the front end.” Both US and European diesel futures slid, with NY Harbor diesel down about 4.5% to $4.67/gallon per the FT, and WTI fell about a buck to $91.

Do The Math: Less Than Nine Days Of Fuel
Now for the arithmetic. At roughly 7.45 barrels per ton, the “immediate” 300,000 tons is about 2.2 million barrels. The US burns roughly 4 million barrels of distillate a day, so October’s tranche covers about half a day of American demand. Add November and December and the first 1.8 million tons cover about 3.4 days. Even if the 3 million tons conditional on refinery health actually arrive, the full 4.8 million tons (about 36 million barrels) cover less than nine days of US consumption.

That is the best case. Trump’s own post says the fuel is going to the “American and Global Marketplace”, so the US share will be smaller.

Read more …

“Despite Tehran’s insistence that it controls the vital waterway, Middle East energy flows have largely returned to pre-war levels. This comes after Iran’s failed attempt at creating economic disaster for the West by attacking oil-laden ships, and instead, at least 16.5 million barrels a day of crude oil left the Middle East last month.”

“They’ll burn the country down before they’ll give a win to Trump,”

Just like, in the US, the Dems. And CNN.

• Iran Claims Control of Hormuz, But Oil Export Data Show Otherwise (JTN)

The Iranian regime is remaining publicly defiant in the face of the U.S. blockade of its economy, claiming that it controls the Strait of Hormuz and will not agree to limits on its nuclear program. However, the facts belie Tehran’s claims. In fact, Middle East oil exports have largely returned to pre-war levels in recent months, showing the regime’s ongoing attacks in the Strait of Hormuz aimed at pressuring its neighbors and the United States are no longer working.


Mohammadreza Naqdi, an advisor to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — the powerful paramilitary organization tasked with safeguarding the regime — said on Wednesday that the Strait of Hormuz remains “closed” and the “armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran have full control over it.” He vowed that conditions would remain as such “until Iran’s legitimate demands are met.”

Iran has “lost complete control” of the waterway: Rubio Last week, Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf presented to the United Nations the conditions under which Iran would “reopen” the strait. The conditions echo the Iranian demands contained in the Memorandum of Understanding that the United States and Iran signed this summer, but which broke down after negotiations ended at an impasse and intermittent fighting resumed between the opposing sides.

The Trump administration countered, saying that Iran is losing its grip amid the escalating economic pressure the United States has heaped on Tehran. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Wednesday that Iran has “lost complete control” of the strait.

“The Straits of Hormuz are open. There is almost as much oil flowing out now as there was before this conflict began,” Rubio told reporters. “So they’ve lost complete control of the straits and their economy. And […] not only are they in free fall, now the Iranian economy is about to reach a place that few countries in the world have been in terms of how bad it’s going to get.” President Donald Trump said on Thursday that the United States and Iran “are having productive discussions” and highlighted the tough economic conditions in Iran developing from the U.S. blockade.

“I want to make it clear to everybody that, while Iran is in very bad condition, both economically and militarily, and while the Blockade will remain in full force and effect, with oil flowing in Record Numbers of Barrels through the Hormuz Strait (22 Million Barrels, last night alone, with not one barrel coming from, or going to, Iran!), we will not be attacking Iran at any time prior to the Midterm Elections to be held in the United States on November 3rd,” the president posted to Truth Social.

“They’ll burn the country down before they’ll give a win to Trump,” says national security expert
Fred Fleitz, the chief of staff of the National Security Council during Trump’s first term, told the Just the News that Iran does not actually want a deal, but is seeking relief from the crushing economic blockade.

“They’re not planning on making any significant deal there. They want concessions from Trump up front. He’s never going to agree to that. If they really wanted to make a sincere deal right now, I think Trump and his people would listen, but they don’t. And I think these radicals in this government, the IRGC, they’ll burn the country down before they’ll give a win to Trump,” Fleitz told the John Solomon Reports podcast.

“I think we have to carry out this economic strangulation strategy, which is more than sanctions. We’re not just saying you can’t trade with Iran, you can’t do banking with Iran. We’ve stopped them from exporting oil. It’s an extraordinary amount of economic pressure,” he added.

Max Meizlish, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and former Treasury Department sanctions official, told Just the News that Iran’s claims to control the strait are “laughable,” but that the regime’s military has still retained the capability to attack commercial vessels transiting the vital waterway. “

The reality is that Iran neither maintains full control over the Strait of Hormuz, nor is its control entirely gone,” Meizlish told Just the News. “What it controls is its ability to target ships that transit either by way of U.S. escort or otherwise. But even if we discount the fact that oil flows have at least partially returned to pre-war levels, the idea that Iran controls the strait is laughable.”

Iran’s wartime bet failed, oil is shipping at pre-war levels
Meizlish said, however, that the Iranian regime’s own oil exports have not been revived alongside its neighbors due to the crushing U.S. blockade. “The regime hasn’t been able to export any crude by sea since the blockade was reinstated. If Iran controls the strait, why have its oil exports plummeted?”

Last month, at least 16.5 million barrels a day of crude oil left the Middle East Gulf region, matching the pre-war average for the region’s producers other than Iran, according to tanker-tracking and satellite analysis by global trade data firm Kpler. That is 10.5 million barrels a day more than the region averaged in March, the first full month after the war shut down the strait, the firm found.

While its neighbors have seen the revival of their oil exports, Iran is missing out on the recovery, Just the News previously reported. The country’s oil exports have hovered near zero since the U.S. imposed a naval blockade of Iranian ports in July after the ceasefire broke down.

The blockade has undercut Iran’s central wartime bet: that choking off the world’s most important energy corridor — the Strait of Hormuz — would inflict enough pain on global markets to force Washington and the Gulf states to deal on Iran’s terms.

Read more …

The left is destroying whatever they can.

• It’s Not Just South America: The Worldwide Move to the Right (Eric Florack)

[..] the timeline is the story there. Remember, causing something is not the same as accelerating it’s happening. I’m not sure I think so, but I suppose the argument could be made for the demise of USAID accelerating that process. But it’s not the cause.


Sarah also lists why the shift is happening, what the real causes are: Crime and personal security, backlash against mass migration, economic frustration, cultural pushback, and what she (rightly, I think) calls socialism fatigue. Notice that nothing on that list requires a USAID line item. If shuttering a foreign aid agency were enough to swing elections, it would rank as the most cost-effective campaign operation in history. Thankfully, it wasn’t all that influential. If it had been so, Obama would have had socialist governments in every country in the hemisphere. I’ll give him credit for trying, but he wasn’t altogether successful at it.

The people who study this for a living agree. The Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung’s International Reports counted nine of 15 Latin American democracies changing direction since 2022, mostly from left to right. Steven Levitsky noted that at least 19 incumbents in a row had lost reelection in the region since 2018. Even New Lines Magazine, hardly a house organ of the right, says the causes run deeper than Trump. Voters didn’t need a memo from Washington to notice the cartels, the inflation, and the Venezuelan refugees.

But now, let’s widen the lens to include Europe, because there’s the real tell.

What’s happening there confirms the thought Sarah puts forward. Populist-right parties have topped the polls in Britain, France, and Germany at the same time for the first time. In late 2025, one aggregate had Reform UK at 27%, headed for a narrow majority. The Conservatives were at 20%, and Labour, the party actually running the country, was stuck in third at 18.5%. An RTL poll put the AfD at 26% to the ruling CDU’s 24%. France’s Jordan Bardella, filling in for Marine Le Pen after a court barred her, polls around 35% for the first round of the April 2027 election. And Spain votes Nov. 29, after Pedro Sánchez called a snap election when his housing reform collapsed. Polls point to a possible PP-Vox majority.

The causes sound familiar: immigration, stagnant economies, housing costs, and energy prices. Britain’s net migration peaked at 924,000 in early 2023, on a Conservative government’s watch. France’s debt has climbed to 119% of GDP, and its 2026 budget became law without a vote. The EU’s own business lobby says the bloc has sat at about 70% of U.S. GDP per capita for three decades and blames regulation and energy costs. Mario Draghi wrote the diagnosis in 2024, and a year later even Draghi wasn’t impressed with the progress. Brussels’ answer to stagnation has been, as always, another committee, generating yet another report followed by no changes to actual policy.

Now consider the USAID angle in that frame. Sarah notes that the agency’s biggest regional budget went to Europe and Eurasia, $17.2 billion in 2023, much of it for Ukraine, against $1.8 billion for Latin America and the Caribbean. None of it went to London, Paris, Berlin, or Madrid. Nor did USAID’s demise cause Brexit in 2016, create Germany’s AfD in 2013, or manufacture Marine Le Pen. It certainly didn’t cause the migration crisis, the housing shortages, or the energy bills. If someone can show me the line item for “Brexit, causing of,” I’ll reconsider. Until then, I’ll take the timeline and place the blame on the shoulders of Europe’s socialists and that little conclave of big government over in Brussels.

A side note about Britain’s “Conservatives.” I give conservative leader Kemi Badenoch a lot of credit, but let’s face it: they governed for 14 years, and they managed Brexit, if badly, but Reform rose on their watch for a reason. The reason is simple enough: They’re not what even liberal/leftist Americans would consider “conservative.” I mean, spare me. A party that governs from the left under a blue banner still governs from the left, and voters aren’t required to give it credit for the label. And as I’ve repeatedly predicted, they haven’t. This led to the rise of Reform, Nigel Farage, and more radical, more grassroots, Tommy Robinson.

I’ve said often in these spaces that the biggest force pushing voters away from the left is the left in power and the results of their policies. It has always been so.

Here it is, gang: I would call what we’re seeing a worldwide gag reflex. A gag reflex is triggered by whatever you’re choking on, and gagging is nature’s way of solving the problem. It isn’t a philosophy. It’s an immune response. Trump and the end of USAID didn’t cause this one. Voters are reacting to what the worldwide Left has tried to force down their throats.

In fact, I would suggest that Trump is a part of that response, a symptom, not the cause. That’s why I’ve been saying that MAGA will not end with Trump. It’s just getting started. What South America, Europe, and, if I read things correctly, a good part of this country have been choking on is socialism. All of this is playing large in the American Midterm elections.

Read more …

Le Pen, AfD vs Antifa.

• Migrants Join Forces With Antifa, EU Riots Spread From France To Belgium (ZH)

Europe is demonstrating that the globalist progressive experiment is crashing and burning, as far-left riots, which we pointed out at the start of the week, were “spreading like cancer” from France to Belgium, continue on Friday. What’s to say the social unrest will stop there?


The chaos and social unrest mimic the US Marxist BLM riots in 2020, when left-wing NGOs and politicians allowed these radicals to mobilize and burn down city blocks. What’s happening in Europe could’ve happened in the US this year if the State Department, Treasury, and other agencies hadn’t cracked down on these far-left NGOs, big family foundations, and foreign subversion networks. Social media user Visegrád 24 has pointed out that riots in Europe are taking a disastrous turn: “Young second and third-generation migrants have joined forces with Antifa for today’s riots in Brussels.”


That’s the second issue: far-left groups weaponize migrants to fulfill their sinister goal of overthrowing capitalism and the West, similar to what far-left radicals in the US, such as the Democratic Socialists of America, have in mind when they say, in their own words, that they want to “bring down America from within.”


You’re starting to get the picture, if readers don’t already understand: the West has a radical-left problem. It’s being showcased on a grand stage in Europe, where radicalization is infecting not just migrants but youth at younger and younger ages. This is an embarrassing dilemma for European liberals, as it only supercharges right-wing candidates to gain power, as Nomura analysts expect the EU “lurches” right in the 18-month election cycle already underway.

This was the problem high-level State Department officials discussed with their European counterparts this past summer: the troubling far-left radicalization impacting younger and younger people. More footage from Belgium:

https://twitter.com/Breaking2003/status/2108490509304143982?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2108490509304143982%7Ctwgr%5Efc5cf45e1ea21dc41f76fac40a95553b47b9f98a%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fmigrants-join-forces-antifa-eu-riots-spread-france-belgium


If it weren’t for DOGE cutting USAID funding by 85% and the US multi-agency task force cracking down on billionaire-funded lefty NGOs and subversion networks, who’s to say these riots wouldn’t be spreading to the US by now? But massive foundations, such as possibly the Gates Foundation, and many other lefty billionaires are too scared about the potential loss of their prized nonprofit status. That is likely one reason riots in America didn’t materialize this past summer.

Read more …

“This leader has perpetuated war, violated our civil liberties, deported more people from our shores than any other president before him, and the list of his failures goes on,” is what SAYED! had to say about Obama in a 2012 HuffPo column just dredged up by CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski.”

• Barack Obama and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News Cycle (Green)

Few things bring me more workday pleasure than an opportunity to mock The Lightbringer, the man whose very nomination caused the oceans to stop rising (or maybe stop receding), healed our racial divisions (except for those tricksy Jews and also white guys), and ushered in “a new way of being on the planet.”


Of course, it’s even more pleasurable when I don’t have to think about Barack Obama at all, but he was never one of those “absence makes the heart grow fonder” people, so I have to leap on those mocking opportunities whenever they present themselves. Today, for example, when I do believe I’ll celebrate filing this column by shaking myself a martini. Shall we begin?

The setup began Monday with a news item you’re probably already well aware of. Despite polls showing Michigan Islamo-Commie Democrat Abdul El-Sayed with an insurmountable 417-point lead over his rival, that Republican dude that nobody is 100% certain is actually running. Campaigns comfortably in the lead don’t interrupt Obama from doing whatever it is he does these days — occasionally scold black men and count his Netflix money, I think — for a joint campaign stop on the first day of early voting.

That planned October 24 joint campaign appearance might get a little awkward, given what we just learned SAYED! really thought about the Lightbringer’s performance as president.

And Another Thing: My editor assures me that there is a Republican nominee, that his name is Mike Rogers, and that he’s been both on the campaign trail and occasionally (but only very occasionally) in the news. My editor also says that Al-Sayed now just uses “SAYED!” in his campaign materials. So, kind of like Madonna, but instead of getting you out on the dance floor, Madonna wanted to force you onto a prayer mat and confiscate your wealth.

“This leader has perpetuated war, violated our civil liberties, deported more people from our shores than any other president before him, and the list of his failures goes on,” is what SAYED! had to say about Obama in a 2012 HuffPo column just dredged up by CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski. “So let’s be clear,” he added, “for progressives who care about peace, prosperity, civil liberties, and the future of our country, Obama’s reelection last night was no victory.”

There’s more — a lot more — along those lines from SAYED! in Kaczynski’s column. Bravo, sir. I didn’t think much of Obama’s performance, either.But it’s today’s second item giving me that four-hour schadenboner: “Obama Foundation and Presidential Center workers to unionize: ‘We don’t even have a seat at the table.’”

“When I’m president, I will make the minimum wage a living wage by indexing it to inflation so even more families have the economic stability they need,” Obama promised in 2008. In 2026, his attitude is more like, “I have to pay these people how much?”Which is why, the Daily Mail reported today, “Workers at his ‘death star’ presidential center are already so fed up they’re leaving in droves.”

Thanks for getting in the Death Star dig so I didn’t have to. But get a load of how Obama treats workers at the Lorem Ipsum factory: Issues with workloads and benefits have led to a ‘high turnover rate’ among employees, with many more ‘continuing to leave (and) taking with them their institutional knowledge and expertise,’ the letter claimed.

Workers say they were recently told that their healthcare costs would increase, promotions were suspended, and paid time off was reduced, despite also learning they would get no pay increases this winter. “What we’re hoping for, and really the reason why we’re forming our union, is just because we believe we should have a say in the decisions that are being made that impact all of our lives,” Luke Gilday, an Obama Foundation employee and member of the union organizing committee, told the Sun-Times.

Ha-ha, no. Welcome to democratic socialism, Comrade Gilday — you’ll get what your betters deign to give you, and pretend to like it. As for me, I’m loving every minute of it.But I’d love it even more if The Lightbringer would just go sit in the dark and stay there.

Read more …

“Everybody’s restless and they got no place to go / Someone’s always trying to tell them something they already know / So their anger and resentment flow.” —Warren Zevon, Mohammed’s Radio

• The Ripening (James Howard Kunstler)

In the stark October light, events and personalities skulk in the shadows like scavengers in an orchard of poison fruit. The dread builds as the dooryards get populated with the motorized effigies of blood-beasts, werewolves, phantoms, and ghouls. Halloween and Election Day have become the conflated celebration of a national death trip. How has it come down to our country, in a crucial election, seriously entertaining the antics of jihadis and Jacobin riffraff?


Some somebodies are orchestrating this frightful show from the sinister shadowland behind our politics. My guess would be Barack Obama and John Brennan, with a whole lot of help from a supporting cast of entrenched Deep State racketeers enlisted in their service, with their status and livelihoods at stake. Mr. Obama acts as if he is untouchable, probably due to being the personification of Liberalism’s “Best Camper” trophy it gave itself to validate the Civil Rights struggle session of the century gone by. We are good people, we really are, and President Obama is proof positive of our goodness!

The truth is, we know next to nothing about his real origins and his journey to power. His family on his mother’s side was pure CIA-connected, and his actual father is rumored to be Frank Marshall Davis (1905–1987), a Black American poet, journalist, and labor activist who was a member of the Communist Party USA — not the Kenyan Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. He went from nonentity to myth with no intervening storyline that makes any sense, just a set of rapid promotions with missing events between them: Occidental College in LA to Columbia U to Harvard Law to Chicago politics to Illinois State Senate, straight to the US Senate, and then, bang, into the White House only four years into his first Senate term.


The Gold Dust Twins, Barack Obama with John Brennan


At every stage along the way he was somebody’s chore boy. But whose? My guess would be US Central Intelligence. . . that he was groomed to be the untouchable front man looking out for the agency’s interests in dicey times. His quick political rise coincided with the rise of John Brennan through the ranks of the CIA. Early on, Brennan was drawn to Arabic culture, sojourned in Egypt as a student, and later served as the CIA’s station chief in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He speaks Arabic fluently and is rumored to have converted to Islam (from Catholicism), though it has never been proven. At a 2010 New York University forum, he praised “the goodness and beauty of Islam.”

The CIA, I would suppose, is composed of two great clans: one is made of the employees actually carrying out real intel-gathering and analysis. The other is of employees (current and former) looking out for the CIA’s own black op activities and the immense fortunes connected with it — with plenty of overlap between the two clans. I’d guess that John Brennan, who was CIA Director between 2013 and 2017 (under President Obama), still runs a large rogue contingent of the CIA clan that does the black ops, sits on a large fortune, and acts like a sovereign organism outside the control of the elected US government.

That would explain why no one has been held accountable for the ten-year-long coup against Donald Trump. Brennan, and the forces he represents, appear to be outside the control of the regular government, including the DOJ and FBI, and to some extent able to control people throughout government by subterfuge, intimidation, and blackmail. All that nearly came apart during Donald Trump’s first term with the bungled RussiaGate caper followed by the bungled Impeachment No. 1 operation. But Brennan’s dark CIA clan triumphed with the 2020 election “victory” of non compos mentis “Joe Biden,” followed by the successful Jan 6, 2021, fake “insurrection” at the US Capitol.

They stumbled badly again with the patently ridiculous court cases against former President Trump in 2023 and 2024. And now here we are in the middle of Mr. Trump’s second term, with a titanic struggle going on, largely out of public view, for the soul of the nation. John Brennan is still at large, but a month ago he was served with a subpoena to appear before a federal grand jury in the Southern District of Florida. It looks like he will finally have to do some ‘splainin’ about events he’s been involved with. You can be sure that President Trump means to see that it happens — whatever was signified by the departure of Joe diGenova last month.

It’s also my guess that former President Obama has become John Brennan’s hostage. He was probably assigned to run “Joe Biden’s” fake presidency using Susan Rice and other party functionaries to carry out orders. Brennan surely has a dossier on Barack Obama that fills in the blanks in his sketchy biography, including Mr. Obama’s secret sexual activities on the Chicago scene back in the day. Meanwhile, the former president has his electioneering duties to attend to, to try to flip the House and Senate so as to have one last go at defenestrating the man in the White House who threatens to put Brennan, Obama & Company out of business.

So, there’s a war on backstage. The war itself has been mythologized by those actually paying attention to it, sometimes as the contest between “Globalists” and “Sovereigntists” or “Black Hats” versus “White Hats” or the Legions of Satan versus the God-loving followers of Jesus. . . Jihad v. Western Civ. However you characterize it, everyone feels the tension as though the current phase of this Fourth Turning is an unbearable space between the life and death of the nation. Hence, all the ghouls in the dooryards, reminding us to stay. . . very. . . scared.

Read more …

“Ukraine is facing energy and transport collapse, but its leader continues to siphon money into his corruption system, says Dmitry Polyansky, Moscow’s envoy to the OSCE..”

• Zelensky ‘Doesn’t Give A Damn’ About Ukrainians – Russian Envoy (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s continued attempts to target Moscow despite harsh retaliation against Ukraine’s military-related infrastructure prove that he doesn’t care about the well-being of his country’s people, Russia’s ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Dmitry Polyansky, has said.


Moscow Region came under a major aerial attack on Tuesday night, with Ukraine firing 650 drones towards the Russian capital, Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin said. Despite most of the UAVs being shot down by air defenses, the raid resulted in the death of two people. Another civilian was killed in a Ukrainian drone attack in the region on Thursday, according to Governor Andrey Vorobyev.

During his speech at an OSCE session in the Austrian capital, Vienna, on Thursday, Polyansky said that Zelensky “still harbors hopes of inflicting at least some noticeable damage on Moscow” in order to present this to the West as “proof that Ukraine is still capable of carrying out military operations that are painful” for Russia.

“At the same time, the head of the Kiev regime never tires of threatening Russia with escalation – something he is incapable of actually delivering – only to then complain about large-scale strikes by Russia,” he said, as cited by TASS. Zelensky should remember the proverb that “people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones,” the envoy noted.

According to Polyansky, Russian retaliatory strikes on facilities supporting Kiev’s war machine are “many times more powerful” than those attempted by Ukrainian forces. Because of those attacks, Ukraine is “losing the last remnants of its industry and infrastructure,” while also teetering on the brink of a “total energy and transport collapse” ahead of winter, he added. Zelensky, however, “doesn’t give a damn about his citizens. His only concern is siphoning more money out of the country into the corruption system of his creation,” Polyansky said.

Ukraine has been rocked by a series of high-profile corruption scandals since last year, with the largest centering on a $100 million kickback scheme at state nuclear operator Energoatom, which was reportedly led by Timur Mindich, a former business partner of Zelensky. Other recent graft probes have targeted former Ukrainian ministers, prosecutors, diplomats, and senior officials.

In an interview with Reuters last week, Zelensky said he had ordered the Ukrainian military to double the number of attacks deep inside Russia, particularly against the country’s oil refining facilities. The Russian Defense Ministry responded by announcing that “following Zelensky’s statement, the strikes… on military and military-industrial facilities… in Kiev and other regions of Ukraine will be intensified.” The ministry maintains that it never targets civilians.

Read more …

“Nord Stream 1, and probably Nord Stream 2 as well, will be relaunched. Russian gas will flow to the West,” said Grzegorz Braun after a meeting with the AfD party.

• Nord Stream Pipelines Will Be Relaunched’: Right-Wing Polish MEP (RMX)


Grzegorz Braun (first from the left) spoke together with AfD politicians in Lubmin, where the Nord Stream infrastructure is located.


Grzegorz Braun, leader of the Confederation of the Polish Crown, spoke in favor of restarting the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines during a meeting Wednesday with politicians from the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party in Lubmin. He said Poland should be a shareholder in the German-Russian project.“Nord Stream 1, and probably Nord Stream 2 as well, will be relaunched. Russian gas will flow to the West,” Braun said. He said Europe needs Russian raw materials and that their absence could have serious consequences for the economy.


Braun argued that Poland should not be excluded from future energy projects concerning Russian gas supplies. “Poland should participate, not boycott. Poland should be the initiator,” he said. He also proposed that Warsaw become a shareholder in Nord Stream. He also said that if Russian gas returns to Europe, Poland could lose economically if the supplies bypass its territory. In his view, Warsaw should seek participation in such energy projects rather than remain outside them.

Braun also spoke of the need to “normalize” and “de-escalate” relations and economic cooperation among Poland, Germany and Russia. He advocated a return to wider use of coal and the ability to buy oil and gas from suppliers offering favorable terms. The speech took place in Lubmin, the site of the German terminal and infrastructure linked to the Nord Stream pipelines. Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 were damaged in September 2022 by explosions on the Baltic Sea floor. Nord Stream 1 had been the main route for Russian gas to Germany. Nord Stream 2, though completed, was never launched because of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly urged the German government to start supplies through the sole Nord Stream 2 line that survived the blasts. He has said that if the line operates, 27.5 billion cubic meters of gas “will immediately reach Europe.” “Why don’t they do it? I just can’t understand it. They can receive gas through Ukrainian territory, through TurkStream, but they cannot through the pipeline running along the bottom of the Baltic Sea,” Putin said.

“In my opinion, it’s crazy, just nonsense. Why? But if they don’t want to, fine,” Putin said in 2024 at the Vladivostok Economic Forum. According to U.S. media reports, a group of Ukrainian officers conceived the operation to blow up Nord Stream in May 2022. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky initially approved the plan before he allegedly unsuccessfully tried to cancel it at the CIA’s request. Polish connections also appear in press accounts of the Baltic Sea sabotage.

U.S. President Donald Trump said last May that “many people know” who blew up Nord Stream. He added that he was the first to thwart the project. Trump imposed sanctions on Nord Stream 2 in his first term, significantly slowing construction. President Joe Biden repealed them in 2021 and reimposed them after Russia invaded Ukraine. Germany withheld permission to start the pipeline because of the war.

Read more …

“A CIA investigation explored whether marital turmoil drove the Ukrainian nationalist to suicide – and whether his followers concealed the truth

• Bandera’s Dirty Secrets Buried To Build A Ukrainian ‘Hero’, Blame The KGB (RT)

October 15th marks the anniversary of Ukrainian ultranationalist Stepan Bandera’s alleged 1959 murder by a Soviet KGB agent, in Munich, Germany. As the Kiev regime has idolized Bandera and his fellow ultranationalist killers without shame since NATO’s war with Russia began, mass celebrations could be planned. Ukrainian officials were forced in May to publicly deny they had any intention of moving Bandera’s remains from Munich to rebury them. On top of avoiding significant public controversy, Kiev may have had a darker motive – preventing anyone from trying to investigate whether Bandera in fact committed suicide. The popular tale of his KGB assassination seems like a completely false Ukrainian ultranationalist hero myth.


For decades reviled by many Ukrainians and not much known outside the region, adoration of Bandera by Kiev’s assorted Neo-Nazi terrorist and paramilitary units, like Azov Battalion, forced the Western media to admit the man’s criminal legacy, and his personal involvement – and that of his Organization Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) – in committing the Holocaust. Even critical biographies of Bandera ignore his secret post-war relationship with the CIA and MI6. Tugging this thread could reveal how an independent secret investigation conducted by an influential and well-connected Ukrainian fascist CIA agent leading away from Bandera having been murdered, and to difficulties in his marriage, due to spending “much time in the company of other women.”

The CIA’s secret investigation Michael Korzhan was a Ukrainian fascist, Orthodox priest, and CIA spy. Known under the cryptonym “AEDOGMA,” from 1947 he monitored Ukrainian ultranationalists, Soviet emigres and associated groups throughout Europe, including Paris. Korzhan also kept a close eye on the continent for the CIA, not only as a “spotter” for potential agents who could be inserted into or recruited in the Soviet Union, but potential KGB infiltration of Orthodox churches. A declassified January 1960 CIA file records how Korzhan was sent to Munich after Bandera’s death and spent several months investigating what happened. AEDOGMA was able to retrace many sensitive particulars of Bandera’s life that never surfaced publicly.

Korzhan “became convinced, as the result of his investigations, that Bandera committed suicide.” Him being tasked with investigating Bandera’s death reflects the value the CIA attached to AEDOGMA. After World War II, Bandera became a prize asset of the CIA and MI6 for many years. While the CIA eventually turned on the godfather of Ukrainian ultranationalism, the CIA considered it very important he was not martyred by the KGB for his post-war anti-Communist activities in Ukraine and the Soviet Union. The CIA was working on getting Bandera a US visa at the time he died. Understanding the facts of what happened was of huge importance for the CIA, and Korzhan was the agent for the job.

“AEDOGMA has unusual skills in interpersonal relationships. His particular social talents are best expressed when he is able to operate independently in a relatively unstructured, “wheeling and dealing” environment… He can usually achieve the operational objective on his own… AEDOGMA starts any task with only the loosest initial plan for attack. From then on he feels his way, ‘following his nose’, while making sensitive adaptations to his strategy as the situation changes. Working in this fashion he enjoys his operational tasks immensely and becomes totally involved. He is deft at provoking others to reveal their hand while tipping off very little of his own.”

So said a declassified April 1960 CIA memo. Korzhan demonstrated his superhuman spying skills at the end of the previous year by interviewing “about 100 Banderites and other Ukrainian emigres” about Bandera’s death. He conducted significant on-the-ground research, identifying five separate “versions” of what happened to Bandera. They ranged from the Nazi-composed Gehlen Organization that the CIA built in Germany after World War II taking Bandera’s life, to suicide. Having chased every lead attempting to prove or disprove each “version”, AEDOGMA concluded that suicide was overwhelmingly the most likely. En route to reaching this explosive conclusion, never reported anywhere before, Korzhan disproved the accepted story that the KGB was responsible.

The assassination story under scrutiny
KGB defector Bohdan Stashynsky took responsibility for killing Bandera, on November 17 1961. He served four years in prison, before being released to start a new life in Germany. This telling of events has not been challenged at any time since. The ‘fact’ of the KGB’s responsibility is completely unquestioned in Ukrainian, and Western, accounts of what happened to Bandera. Korzhan identified a number of factors ruling homicide out entirely. He recorded that the alleged murder weapon potassium cyanide was not a substance the KGB had previously used during its entire post-war war on political opponents, and it would represent “the first time they have used this means” if the KGB was responsible.

Korzhan also believed it was highly illogical “in view of the present political situation” for the “Communists to do away with Bandera at this time.” He wondered, “wouldn’t the KGB have considered the fact that the death of Bandera would instigate the Ukrainian emigres to mobilize their fight against the Communists in the whole world?” He spoke to many knowledgeable sources who pointed directly to people and factors in Bandera’s private life that were much more likely culprits. Korzhan shared his findings with West German detective Adrian Fuchs, who also concluded Bandera’s death was a suicide. Both men understood also that powerful ultranationalist figures around Bandera had a huge interest in blaming the KGB.

Behind Bandera’s closed doors
Fuchs and his investigators spoke to at least 50 people about Bandera’s death, including people who knew him intimately, and many were unanimous in blaming his marital situation. Bandera’s life “was unpleasant,” due to how his wife, Yaroslava Bandera, treated him. She made his life a living hell because of his “association with other women,” so he killed himself. Particularly, Bandera plotted to take his own life “in such a way that suicide would never be suspected but that, on the contrary, would lead to various interpretations and suspicions that he was liquidated by the communists, thus permitting him to remain a hero.” Korzhan tracked how Bandera had been avoiding his bodyguards in preparation in the weeks before he died.

“It is a fact that Bandera had a violent quarrel with his wife that very morning. He threatened suicide and left home to go to the office before 8 a.m. Bandera employed the use of potassium cyanide which he always carried on his person and which, after his death, could not be found either on his person or in his home. Considering the above, I concluded that it was suicide by use of potassium cyanide. Motive: His unbearable marital situation.”

Korzhan had uncovered many facts supporting this “version.” He learned Bandera’s “home life had lately become so unbearable that his only escape could have been suicide.” The biggest issue was that Bandera’s wife “as a result from some very difficult experience in her life, and the fear of constant surveillance… had practically lost all of her senses.” Were she not Bandera’s wife, “she would have been in an insane asylum a year ago.” Korzhan learned about “Bandera’s unsatisfactory sex life, his seeking such diversions outside his base” – a euphemism for having many affairs – “and the resultant uncontrollable jealousy of his wife which led to fights between them.”

AEDOGMA heard story after story of Bandera trying to spend time away from his wife to have affairs with other women, and his wife viewing “everyone as a threat to herself.” Female friends were forbidden from visiting, even when accompanied by their husbands. Male friends were also barred because Bandera “would use the excuse of driving them home as an opportunity to get out for some fun.” Over the two years before he died, Bandera “lived through such hell that it was difficult for anyone to imagine.” He was phoned dozens of times whenever away from the house by his wife to check his whereabouts, and she made “all sorts of accusations against him even in front of the children.”

“During these quarrels he always threatened suicide. His wife would reply, ‘the quicker you do, the better it be for all of us,’ and then she usually added “but you are too much of a coward to commit suicide. Bandera, who considered himself a hero and an individual who enjoyed the respect of the organised masses and to whom he was a ‘god’, had to bear the slander and accusations made by his wife who saw him only as a human being, her husband and the father of her children. This was more than he could stand. The people who were acquainted with this situation felt that these tortures (for which be often was personally to biome) were so horrible that any normal individual would have committed suicide long ago.”

Read more …

“The German leader has pledged more aid to Kiev despite falling popularity at home, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said..”

• Merz Turned Into ‘Ukrainian Chancellor’ – Moscow (RT)

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has effectively become a “Ukrainian chancellor,” showering Kiev with more taxpayer-funded aid despite mounting discontent at home, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. Speaking at a press conference on Thursday, Zakharova criticized Merz’s visit to Kiev on Sunday, during which he pledged billions in additional assistance, including funding for long-range weapons production. The announcement came amid plunging support for his governing coalition and a series of electoral setbacks for his Christian Democratic Union (CDU).


Zakharova suggested that Merz was so eager to escape his domestic troubles that he “practically fled from the festivities in Bremen” marking the 36th anniversary of German reunification. “The new face in Ukrainian politics, [or] a ‘Ukrainian chancellor’ as Merz has been dubbed in German political circles, didn’t come empty-handed – he announced yet another generous gift to his ‘friend’, Zelensky,” she said sarcastically.

German taxpayers will foot the bill, Zakharova argued, suggesting that Merz was deliberately adding to their burden despite growing public dissatisfaction with his policies. She also questioned whether the chancellor could genuinely be unaware of Ukraine’s rampant corruption, pointing to a series of high-profile scandals involving Vladimir Zelensky’s inner circle and senior officials.

Zakharova cited a September survey by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), in which 50% of respondents identified corruption as the country’s most pressing problem. Some 72% said graft had worsened since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022, while the same proportion blamed Zelensky and his associates. Given what she described as Kiev’s efforts to suppress dissent, Zakharova argued that the findings were particularly revealing.

“Ukraine is so mired in corruption that it has become impossible to cover up its real scale by any means,” she said. Merz has faced similar criticism from German opposition politicians. In July, Alternative for Germany (AfD) lawmaker Markus Frohnmaier told RT’s Rick Sanchez that Merz “is the chancellor of Ukraine and not the chancellor of Germany.” Veteran left-wing politician Sarah Wagenknecht, founder of the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW), has likewise accused Merz of turning “his own citizens into cash cows for Ukraine.”

Meanwhile, an INSA poll published earlier this month put support for Merz’s CDU/CSU alliance at a record low of 18%, compared with 30% for the AfD, which remains Germany’s most popular party. The chancellor’s Christian Democrats also suffered successive electoral defeats last month in the eastern states of Saxony-Anhalt and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. The CDU finished a distant second in Saxony-Anhalt with 17.5% of the vote and failed to clear the electoral threshold in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, securing just 4.9%.

Despite the setbacks, Merz, who has previously criticized Germans for not working enough hours, has refused to change course.

Read more …

“Kiev’s European backers ‘nervous’ about winter..”

• Trump Envoys Pitching ‘New Ideas’ To Settle Ukraine Conflict (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s top negotiators are preparing to pitch “new ideas and proposals” aimed at breaking the deadlock in the Ukraine conflict, with talks involving representatives of Kiev and its European backers scheduled to begin in Miami on Friday, according to Reuters and Axios. Special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner are expected to hold a two-day working session with the Ukrainian delegation in an effort to develop a unified proposal that could later be presented to Moscow.


The pair could then travel to the Russian capital later this month for another round of talks with President Vladimir Putin, Axios reported, citing a source familiar with the discussions. According to Reuters, the ideas were developed during and after Witkoff and Kushner’s diplomatic tour of Moscow and Kiev in early September. The pair have since remained in contact with both Russian and Ukrainian officials while working on an updated peace initiative.

One proposal reportedly under consideration is a partial ceasefire covering attacks on energy infrastructure and Black Sea shipping. The talks are also expected to address possible security guarantees for Ukraine, a post-conflict economic plan and other elements of a potential settlement. Witkoff and Kushner met Trump on Thursday to present the latest proposals and receive his input ahead of the Miami talks, according to Axios. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Deputy National Security Adviser Mike Needham also attended the meeting.

Kiev’s European backers ‘nervous’ about winter
Kiev will reportedly be represented by Vladimir Zelensky’s chief of staff, Kirill Budanov, intelligence chief Rustem Umerov, diplomatic adviser Sergey Kislitsa and top lawmaker David Arakhamia.

National security advisers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as representatives of NATO and the EU, have also reportedly been invited. A US source told AFP that European governments have privately complained about soaring energy prices and other economic costs stemming from the conflict, adding that there is growing concern about another winter of hostilities.

“They are all nervous about the winter. It will be a tough winter if the war does not stop,” the source said. Trump has also repeatedly pressed Zelensky to stop “hurting the world” and halt Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil refineries, arguing that the attacks are worsening a global diesel shortage and driving up fuel costs in the US.

Kremlin agrees with Rubio on ‘stalemate’
The new diplomatic push comes as US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the conflict as a “dangerous stalemate,” warning that further escalation could spill beyond Ukraine and trigger a broader confrontation. “This war needs to end in a negotiated settlement. The sooner, the better,” Rubio told reporters in Lisbon on Thursday, while cautioning that Washington would not invest indefinitely in “pointless processes” that produce no progress.

The Kremlin said it shared Rubio’s assessment of the current diplomatic impasse, with spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying he “agreed” that no clear prospect of a negotiated settlement was currently visible. He nevertheless reiterated Moscow’s position that Russia remains open to negotiations, while accusing Kiev of showing no willingness to accept reality and pursue a long-term settlement.

Despite the lack of progress on Ukraine, contacts between Washington and Moscow have continued on other tracks, Peskov added, noting that the two countries are discussing “a whole range” of potentially mutually beneficial economic projects, including possible cooperation in the energy sector.

Read more …

“The Labor Department won’t accept new applicants or process pending applications involving the eight companies while the administration pursues its concerns about possible immigration fraud.”

• Trump Told Big Tech to Put American Workers First (David Manney)

A Microsoft employee who lost a job in 2025 might have a few questions for the company’s executives today. The technology giant eliminated thousands of American jobs while continuing to sponsor foreign workers. Now President Donald Trump’s administration wants answers, and the consequences have arrived.

On Thursday, Vice President JD Vance and Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling announced that Microsoft, Adobe, and six major technology outsourcing companies were being suspended from the federal Permanent Labor Certification Program, known as PERM. The Labor Department won’t accept new applicants or process pending applications involving the eight companies while the administration pursues its concerns about possible immigration fraud.

For Americans who supported Trump’s 2024 campaign because of his America First employment promises, the announcement is a direct expression of what they expected from his presidency. The policy puts a familiar question before some of the world’s wealthiest corporations: What responsibility do American employers owe American workers?

Vance singled out Microsoft, pointing to approximately 6,000 layoffs in 2025 and thousands of H-1B visa applications. He accused the company of abusing a system intended to address genuine labor shortages. Microsoft disputes that characterization, saying roughly 80% of its H-1B applications involving existing employees and that new visa hires represented only about 1% of its American workforce.

From the Associated Press: Microsoft, which is based in Redmond, Washington, said of the approximately 6,000 H-1B visa applications it submitted in the last fiscal year, 80% were “to extend or change the status of existing Microsoft employees.” “These were not to hire new people,” Microsoft said in a statement. “The remaining filings for new employees were for individuals already legally in the United States who decided to come work for us, and they equal only 1% of our U.S. workforce. They are not new arrivals to our country.”

The company added that it only files H-1B petitions for “those who meet the rigorous standards of this visa category.”nWe need to take a good peek at those numbers because layoffs and foreign worker sponsorship don’t automatically establish that Americans were displaced. They do, however, raise questions that can be looked at through hiring records, recruitment procedures, and the specific positions involved.

PERM isn’t simply another foreign worker visa. Before sponsoring someone for permanent residency through this process, an employer must establish that sufficient qualified American workers aren’t available for the position and that hiring the foreign worker won’t undermine comparable American wages and working conditions. Those protections have long been part of federal law.

The administration’s action reaches well beyond Microsoft. Cognizant, Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro, HCL Technologies, Capgemini, and Adobe are also affected. Sonderling said these companies collectively requested nearly three million foreign workers since 2009, received more than 230,000 H-1B approvals, and obtained over 100,000 permanent labor certifications.

Those figures describe different categories of immigration activity, not a confirmed count of Americans replaced. The Labor Department hasn’t publicly demonstrated that every certification was improper. Its investigations will need to distinguish legitimate recruitment from false claims that qualified American applicants weren’t available.

The larger dispute involves more than immigration enforcement. Technology executives argue that access to international talent helps American companies compete, innovate, and retain highly skilled workers. Critics of the visa programs argue that employers can exploit immigration rules to reduce labor costs, weaken domestic bargaining power, or avoid investing in American employees.

Trump’s supporters have long regarded those concerns as central to the America First agenda. The administration is now testing whether existing federal safeguards can be enforced against companies with enormous economic influence. There’s an especially interesting detail from Thursday. While Vance publicly challenged Microsoft’s employment practices, Trump honored Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella with the National Medal of Technology and Innovation.

The same administration recognized the company’s achievements and questioned its immigration practices within hours. The investigations could ultimately establish wrongdoing, identify compliance failures, or find that some accusations went too far. The suspensions also affect foreign workers already pursuing permanent residency, creating questions about fairness, legal authority, and how long their applications will remain stalled.

Those outcomes will determine whether Thursday’s announcement produces lasting reform or another prolonged federal dispute. For the voters who backed Trump expecting stronger protection for American employment, the measure demonstrates the administration’s willingness to challenge Big Tech. Whether it actually delivers more opportunities for American workers remains the test that matters.

Read more …

The clinic is located on the campus of the National Institutes of Health in Maryland.

• RFK Jr. Announces New Clinic for People Injured by Vaccines (ET)

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other officials have opened a new clinic to treat patients with vaccine injuries and announced other new developments on Oct. 8 that they say will change how the government handles reports of health problems following vaccination.The new National Institutes of Health (NIH) clinic is located on the agency’s campus in Bethesda, Maryland. It was opened on Oct. 5, officials disclosed on Oct. 8. Reporters were not invited to the opening.


The Make America Healthy Again Commission, led by Kennedy, recommended in 2025 starting a new vaccine injury research program at the NIH as part of an effort to investigate vaccine injuries with better data collection and analysis. “[The clinic is] dedicated to developing the science of preventing vaccine injuries, making vaccines safer, and most important of all, listening to the voices of people who have suffered vaccine injury, so that we can learn from them and learn from their experience to make vaccines safer,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, NIH director, said in an Oct. 8 video statement.

NIH doctors and researchers will use the clinic to evaluate patients, identify potential causes of health problems, and try to figure out the best treatments, the Department of Health and Human Services, the NIH’s parent agency, which is led by Kennedy, said in a statement. Some NIH researchers studied patients with alleged or confirmed COVID-19 vaccine injuries during the COVID-19 pandemic, but they received pushback from NIH leadership. Patients said they were later abandoned by the researchers.

Kennedy, who attended the opening of the clinic, said in a video he posted on Oct. 8 that parents of children who suffered injuries from vaccines and other individuals with vaccine injuries “have been marginalized, vilified, demonized, and gaslighted, and they have not received the medical attention they need, and we have not done the studies that need to be done to understand who’s vulnerable to those kind of injuries.”

That’s changing with the Trump administration, he said. “I think it was the first time in years that the vaccine-injured have been heard by the health authorities,” Brianne Dressen, who was injured by the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, was treated at the NIH in 2021, and co-founded a group called React19 representing people hurt by vaccines, told The Epoch Times.

“It is definitely a step in the right direction.” Health officials also announced three other related developments on Oct. 8. Kennedy has said that vaccine surveillance systems that the government utilizes, including the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), don’t work well. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, another agency under Kennedy’s purview, in August solicited bids for a contract to overhaul VAERS. On Sept. 28, the agency awarded a new contract.

Another move, officials said, will be requiring electronic health records moving forward to include vaccine-related health issues, “so that this information can follow patients across the health care system” and inform healthcare professionals who are caring for the patients.Finally, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, another health agency division, is proposing reimbursing doctors for the time they spend submitting reports to VAERS.

Read more …

“Vomiting can also be an effective way to ward off a sexual offense.”

• German Police Advise Women To Vomit To Stop Rape Attacks (RMX)

It has been revealed that police in the northern German city of Bremen have for more than a decade advised participants in workplace safety seminars that deliberately inducing vomiting can be one way to interrupt an attempted sexual assault or rape. Franka Haedke, a spokeswoman for the Bremen police, said the guidance is part of broader self-defense instruction offered by the department’s Central Police Prevention unit.


“In an emergency, such as attempted rape, defend yourself with all available means,” Haedke told the Kreiszeitung newspaper. “Vomiting can also be an effective way to ward off a sexual offense.” Seminar instructors tell participants they can trigger a gag reflex by placing a finger down the throat. The resulting disgust, police say, is intended to disrupt an attacker’s actions. Haedke described the suggestion as one option among others rather than a prescribed response.

The sessions, which have run for more than 10 years, are held at companies, government offices and medical facilities. Employees of public transit agencies, the fire department, job centers, and social-service organizations are also eligible to attend. Topics include recognizing and avoiding danger, de-escalation, bystander intervention, and specific conduct during a sexual assault. Participants are invited to describe their own experiences so that advice can be tailored to situations they have encountered.

Haedke said the courses help people “recognize dangers early, manage conflicts, and act thoughtfully.” She added that the seminars “contribute to the prevention of crime and should be actively promoted and conducted on a recurring basis from the police’s point of view.”

Notably, the police appear powerless to address one of the key issues driving the increase in rapes and sexual assaults in Germany, and that is the incredible increase in foreigners. Since 2018, there has been a 72 percent increase in rapes in the country. In Bremen itself, where the police are advising women to vomit to stave off a rape, the city has been labeled the “most dangerous city in Germany.” It also happens to have the highest share of migrants of any German city. It is also a place where 49 percent of all rapes were committed by foreigners, even though the official foreign population is 23 percent.

The Bremen guidance is not the first unconventional self-protection tip from German police to draw public scrutiny. Remix News previously reported that in Berlin, officers previously listed singing as a way to irritate an attacker, advice that remained visible on the police force’s website even after internal materials had been revised. A screenshot of the recommendation went viral on social media in 2024 and was widely mocked.Berlin police later said the tip had been drawn from professional associations for psychiatry and did not match operational experience.

“A screenshot of our homepage has been circulating for a few days, according to which we recommend that in the event of an attack, you irritate the perpetrator through unexpected behavior, such as singing,” the Berlin police stated. “This is recommended by the professional associations for psychiatry, among others. However, this advice does not correspond to our police experience and has therefore no longer been part of our recommendations since 2023. The flyer was already updated, now our website is too.” The police stated that the suggestion was not meant for terrorist attacks, rampages or armed assaults, including those involving knives, where protecting life is the priority.

After the mass sexual assaults in Cologne on New Year’s Eve 2015–16, Mayor Henriette Reker — although not a police official — also gave advice that was widely condemned. Reker said women should keep “a certain distance of more than an arm’s length” from unknown men and avoid behavior that could be “misunderstood.” After thousands of German women were sexually assaulted and even some raped by North African migrants, the remarks were widely criticized, including by Germany’s justice minister.

Swedish police have also previously advised women to stop going out alone. Before mass immigration, Sweden was once one of the safest countries in the world for women. However, right around the same time as the mass sexual assaults in Colgone, Swedish police issued similar advice. In Östersund in 2016, after a series of assaults and an attempted rape, police chief Stephen Jerand advised women who wanted to move around at night to arrange a ride or walk in groups. He called the warning factual rather than a ban on going out alone.

German police have given similar pairing advice after attacks on joggers. Leipzig officers in 2017, after a woman was raped in Rosental park, said it would be better to run in pairs or make sure someone else was nearby, and to look back when passing people. The city’s mayor criticized the police for restricting women’s freedom.

After an attack in the English Garden in Munich in 2016, police in the city told runners to choose busy, lit routes after dark, jog at least in pairs at dusk, skip headphones, and carry a whistle or personal alarm. Although it was less controversial advice that what other authorities provided, critics note that women are increasingly unsafe in Europe while out exercising or enjoying public spaces.

Read more …

Treated very badly..

• Roseanne Barr Is Coming Back (Matt Margolis)

Roseanne Barr is back. Eight years after Disney fired her over a tweet, the comedy legend has finished shooting an eight-episode family comedy called Meemaw, and she promises it takes aim at the left and the right alike. According to the report, the new series was filmed secretly in Austin, Texas, in November 2025. Barr plays the matriarch of a “mixed-race family of preppers in Texas” who is on a quest to “throw her granddaughter the most fantastic bat mitzvah Texas has ever seen.”


She adds, “I thought now would be a great time for people to actually hear from a Jew.” Mo’Nique, the Oscar-winning “Precious” star who remains friends with Barr, discovered Indy Bugg, a tween Instagram sensation who plays Barr’s granddaughter. “Mo’Nique calls up, ‘Check this girl out. She not only looks like you, but she acts just like you, too,” Barr recalls. “She was only 12, and I about fell over that I was able to get her. She’s such a star. You’ll see it in the first episode, in her first scene.”

Hollywood didn’t pay for any of it. Private investors gave Barr enough money to mount a fully union production. Elon Musk, who once pledged to back X users fired over their posts, never called her back, according to Barr. She isn’t lacking confidence, either. “It’s every bit as revolutionary as The Roseanne Show, if not more, and my work has improved with time,” Barr told Page Six. “I want everybody who disagrees in a family to sit in the same room and just laugh and go, ‘Yeah, maybe I was an a—hole that time. Well, you were an a**hole this time. Oh, we’re all a—holes. Let’s get a beer.’”


She wants relatives who disagree to sit in one room, laugh, admit they’ve each been jerks at times, and go have a beer. I’m looking forward to checking it out.

It was ridiculous when Hollywood canceled her after the Roseanne revival had just wrapped its first season as the top scripted primetime show among viewers 18 to 49. Her longtime agents at ICM dropped her immediately, and ABC reworked the show without her as The Conners.

It always sickened me the way her co-stars didn’t stick up for her. Let’s be honest: Barr was an outspoken Trump supporter, and ABC was likely looking for any reason to get rid of her. I watched the Roseanne revival, and it was good, but I refused to watch The Conners after they railroaded Barr.

On top of that, Disney demonstrated double standards by firing her. Whoopi Goldberg still has her seat on The View after claiming in 2022 that the Holocaust wasn’t about “race.” It was a shocking moment, and even her fellow liberal co-hosts challenged her to explain what she meant. Goldberg’s answer was that it was about “man’s inhumanity to man” because it involved “two groups of white people.” And in 2009, she defended pedophile Roman Polanski’s 1977 rape of a 13-year-old girl.

“I know it wasn’t rape-rape,” Goldberg said. “It was something else, but I don’t believe it was rape-rape.” ABC/Disney didn’t care about that.

But Barr got no such grace, so she built her comeback with people who know the angry cancel culture mob firsthand. Tony Hinchcliffe faced cancellation calls in 2024 for joking that Puerto Rico was a floating island of garbage, and his reps refused to drop him. Omar Gooding took heat for joining the cast and answered his critics by saying comedy is king.

According to Barr, Meemaw is “for everyone.” “My daughters are super woke and of course I love them, so I put in jokes for them, too, like I did on Roseanne,” she said. “I make fun of everybody ’cause everybody deserves to be made fun of who’s in power. So, I’ve got some great jokes about Republicans that the lefties are gonna love. I’m an equal opportunity destroyer.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 9 2026

Oct 092026
 
 October 9, 2026  Posted by at 9:54 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  28 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Vineyards with a View of Auvers 1890


• Pentagon Prepares ‘Options’ For Trump To Strike Iran Before Midterms (ZH)
• Europe Is In Revolt – Its Leaders Are Preparing For War (RT)
• Le Pen Most Credible Presidential Candidate, French Bonds Suffer (ZH)
• Trump Talks About AG Merrick Garland and Jack Smith Targeting His Family (CTH)
• The Trump Manufacturing Resurgence Plan Currently Underway (CTH)
• US Folded To EU Pressure on Ukraine – Lavrov (RT)
• Take More of My Money, Elon! (Stephen Green)
• The Day Accountability Arrived (Paul Craig Roberts)
• They Survived October 7. Now They’re Divided Over Who Should Rule Israel (Blade)
• Mathematicians Declare War on AI — Taxpayers Foot the Bill (Scott Pinsker)
• ‘US and Greek Interests Overlap’: Marco Rubio (Kathimerini)

 

 

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2107927680343752781?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2107891220311683368?s=20 https://twitter.com/21WIRE/status/2108050765298172261?s=20

 

 


Trump doesn’t face elections. It’s nice if he does well in the midterms, but that’s all.

• Pentagon Prepares ‘Options’ For Trump To Strike Iran Before Midterms (ZH)

The Atlantic is reporting Wednesday afternoon that the Pentagon is preparing strike options for the Commander-in-Chief to consider, and that Trump may actually pull the trigger before the midterm elections – though the report emphasizes that the decision is still being debated:


After months of on-again, off-again fighting, the United States hasn’t struck Iran in several weeks. The stretch of relative tranquility is coinciding with the final phase of the midterm-election campaign, and the assumption has been that President Trump will want to keep it going through November 3 so as not to remind voters of an unpopular war that is dragging Republican candidates down nationwide.

But that may not be what happens. The White House has asked the Pentagon to develop strike options against Iranian targets that could be exercised ahead of the midterms, according to two administration officials. The planning underscores just how much the president wants to reduce gas prices and demonstrate progress in the conflict before the vote, administration officials told us.And yet a renewed outbreak of direct bombing would likely actually serve to do the opposite, given oil prices have tended to shoot up on headlines of major direct escalation.

Reports out of Iran confirmed earlier Wednesday that negotiations are ‘stalemated’ – also as the Iranians have ramped up targeting tankers with drones in the Strait of Hormuz over the last week.One peculiar and notable line from The Atlantic report is that Trump and the Republicans are looking for “some sort of victory” in a war that they promised would be swift and decisive, but instead has drifted into a seven-month quagmire:

The plans are being developed by U.S. Central Command, which is coordinating the war effort, a U.S. official told us. Even the plans’ advocates acknowledge that limited strikes would not, by themselves, bring Iran to the negotiating table, restore safe travel through the Strait of Hormuz, or lower gas prices before Election Day. But those in favor believe that further action after months of uneasy peace could allow Trump to demonstrate strength and potentially declare some sort of victory, giving Republicans much-needed momentum heading into the election.

Tehran has constantly signaled its military is at the ‘ready’ and that it is continuing to build up its ballistic missile arsenal, even as its exports have dropped dramatically due to the US naval blockade. Meanwhile…

Wednesay (10/7): A tanker was hit by “multiple projectiles” about 51 nautical miles north of Qatar.

https://twitter.com/MoloWarMonitor/status/2107925763764916730?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2107925763764916730%7Ctwgr%5Ea99809684c3f94411a0ef338d46f6a6c3daa4c68%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fpezeshkian-calls-iranians-ration-electricity-stand-us-negotiations-stalemated

Read more …

Le Pen and AfD can save Europe. Narrowly.

“Mounting problems with housing, schools, and jobs are driving people into the streets while their governments are gearing up for a conflict no one wants..”:

• Europe Is In Revolt – Its Leaders Are Preparing For War (RT)

Europe’s leaders have grand plans – spend more on weapons, prepare for war, and tighten citizens’ belts. The people have more immediate concerns however, like finding somewhere to live, keeping their jobs, and getting an education. Across France, Germany, Spain, and other EU states, the widening rift has started to spill into the streets.


Recent weeks have seen housing marches across Spain, student riots and public-sector strikes in France, and demonstrations against military recruitment and industrial job cuts in Germany. Immigration has added to the anger over housing and overstretched services, while the prospect of conscription has young Germans asking whose wars they are expected to fight.

The demands differ, but a recurring complaint unites them – aside from those simply looking for an excuse to wreak havoc: governments aren’t listening. Instead of putting domestic problems first, European leaders are telling their constituents to accept less and sacrifice more, while committing billions to preparations for a suicidal war with Russia. That’s despite Moscow and even Europe’s own intelligence services repeatedly saying there is no imminent threat.

Spain: Priced out and fed up
Spain’s housing crisis has pushed tens of thousands into the streets. After years of soaring rents, the eviction of an 87-year-old woman from her home of 70 years in Madrid last month turned into a rallying point for those sick of being priced out of their homes and the government’s failure to tackle the housing affordability crisis.

The eviction sparked demonstrations across Spain, followed by mass marches and a continuing protest camp in central Madrid. Parliament’s subsequent rejection of emergency tenant protections added even more fuel to the fire, bringing tens of thousands into the streets in around 50 cities last weekend.

Rents in Spain have almost doubled over the past decade as immigration-driven population growth has continued to outstrip housing construction. The population, excluding migration, has meanwhile only continued to decline. The pressure is even more visible in Ceuta, Spain’s North African enclave, where around 72,000 people crossed from Morocco in late July into a territory with roughly 84,000 inhabitants. Although most returned, thousands remained, overwhelming accommodation and straining public services.

Residents have taken to the streets demanding stronger border controls and faster deportations, accusing Madrid of abandoning them. Protests have escalated into clashes with police, while angry locals have torn down makeshift migrant camps. Government promises to restore order have done little to quell the frustration of communities left to absorb the consequences.

France: School’s out
France has also been gripped by overlapping protests over wages, spending cuts, public services, and school conditions. Teachers, healthcare workers, firefighters and transport staff have joined numerous strikes in recent weeks, while a growing student movement has added school blockades to the disruption.

The school protests began in mid-September, with students demanding more teachers, smaller classes, repairs to neglected buildings, and lighter schedules. Thousands of teaching posts have been eliminated this year, with further cuts planned for next year.

Around 266,000 people joined demonstrations nationwide on Tuesday. More than 6,500 have been arrested over three weeks, while hundreds of students and police officers have been injured, including a 15-year-old who lost his hand to a police grenade and a 16-year-old who reportedly lost sight in one eye after being hit by a rubber bullet.

As the movement has grown, violent groups have joined the protests, torching buses, attacking emergency workers, and damaging schools. Across France, 24 schools have been burned or ransacked. Similar demonstrations have spread to neighboring Belgium, where students have opposed education reforms, higher transport costs, and rising tuition fees. In Liege, school blockades have been accompanied by vandalism, fires and arrests.

France: The cuts keep coming
The student demonstrations came on the heels of wider protests that have gripped France for weeks, with public-sector workers protesting a squeeze on wages and services, compounded by soaring fuel prices. Since 2017, public-sector pay has risen by 5%, while cumulative inflation has reached 24%. The government’s proposed €54 billion ($60.4 billion) budget package, which includes spending cuts and freezes affecting pensions and benefits, has only deepened the anger.

Other demonstrations have also challenged continued funding for Ukraine, with protesters arguing that the money should go toward hospitals, education, and lower fuel taxes. Separate rallies in more than 20 cities have also opposed a bill that could give police shootings the presumption of legality, which critics say would make officers harder to hold accountable.

In Germany, workers and students have taken to the streets as Berlin pursues a frenzied military buildup in the midst of a deepening industrial crisis with hundreds of thousands losing their livelihoods and young men facing the prospect of being drafted. Around 45,000 students joined protests in some 100 cities and towns in late September, carrying banners reading ‘We won’t fight in your wars’ and ‘Education instead of bombs’.

The government meanwhile is pressing ahead with plans to expand the armed forces to more than 260,000 active troops and 200,000 reservists by 2035 to align with Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s fixation on creating “Europe’s strongest conventional army.” Young men are already required to register for potential service, but politicians have been pushing for a return to conscription if voluntary recruitment fails to fill the ranks.

Aside from the thousands protesting such plans in the streets, resistance is also showing up in applications to avoid military service. More than 12,000 people sought conscientious objector status in the first eight months of this year – over three times the total for all of last year. Tens of thousands of automotive workers have also protested sweeping job cuts and threats to factories. Volkswagen, for example, plans to shed 100,000 jobs across its brands, while other manufacturers are cutting production or moving it abroad.

Germany’s industrial woes have been further compounded by the loss of cheap Russian energy, which helped make its manufacturers competitive. Higher energy costs, US tariffs, and Chinese competition are now squeezing businesses and threatening jobs across the sector. For arms manufacturers, however, Berlin’s priorities and its latest €108.2 billion defense budget have been good for business. While Volkswagen shares have fallen more than 75% from their 2021 peak, Rheinmetall’s have soared over 1,100% since early 2022. One Volkswagen factory is even set to shift toward producing military equipment for an Israeli arms company.

More guns and more fear
Even with streets burning and protesters demanding relief, European leaders have not let the turmoil distract them from their military ambitions. In France, Macron marked Tuesday’s mass demonstrations by publicizing a nuclear missile test, posting a photograph of himself watching the launch with his back to the camera. While his constituents marched for better living conditions, his message was that France “must be feared to remain free.”

In Germany, Merz and NATO chief Mark Rutte smiled and waved through boos and chants of “murderers” and “blood on your hands” after the military bloc received the Westphalian Peace Prize last week. Inside the ceremony, officials praised military strength as the foundation of peace. Those priorities are also taking shape in Brussels’ budget negotiations. Germany and five other EU states have demanded cuts to the bloc’s next budget, pushing to sacrifice funding for farmers and poorer regions in favor of ever-growing military spending.

The urgency is being justified by the supposed threat of a future Russian attack. However, Moscow has repeatedly denied any such plans, while even Finland’s president has admitted that his intelligence services see no imminent military threat. Nevertheless, for European leaders, preparations for that hypothetical conflict, which they appear to almost count on, continue to take precedence over the mounting problems already bringing people out onto the streets.

Read more …

“Le Pen’s 39% compared with just 27% for center-right rival Edouard Philippe and 18% for far-left candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon. ”

• Le Pen Most Credible Presidential Candidate, French Bonds Suffer (ZH)

France’s politicians seem to be getting a dire warning from the bond market: rein in reckless spending or risk a fiscal crisis as borrowing costs skyrocket.


UBS strategist Julien Conzano, head of European macro credit strategy in London, sees bond market pressure pushing both the crisis-stricken Macron government and Marine Le Pen’s National Rally toward greater fiscal discipline, reducing the risk of an expansionary 2027 budget.

Deutsche Bank strategists Jim Reid and Henry Allen wrote in a note that French 10-year government bonds have posted their worst rolling decade of nominal returns since 1803, dating back to the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution.


The French welfare state’s bill is finally coming due: France’s budget deficit is forecast to be 5.4% of GDP this year, well above the EU’s 3% ceiling. The country has not balanced its budget since 1974. On Tuesday, Le Pen unveiled her shadow budget for next year, should she win the presidential elections in mid-April. In it, she proposed steep deficit cuts.

Le Pen’s plan would shrink the deficit to 3.7% of economic output next year, well below the government’s 5% target, before bringing it to 2.2% by 2032. Savings would come largely from spending cuts, lower transfers to the EU and reduced migrant spending.

French 10-year bond yields rose sharply at the beginning of the week towards 5% before sliding to nearly 4.7% after Le Pen’s shadow budget reveal on Tuesday. But by the end of the week, the government debt yield rocketed back to nearly 4.96%.

To save France from the brink of what we described as a “triple crisis”, which consists of far-left riots, a ticking debt bomb and mass migration all colliding at once, a new Verian survey conducted for local outlet Le Figaro Magazine found that 39% of respondents believe Le Pen has a clear vision to contain the crisis.

Le Pen’s 39% compared with just 27% for center-right rival Edouard Philippe and 18% for far-left candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon.

The ongoing social unrest by the far-left, weaponizing young kids who have burned down schools and torched buses, has been the extra fuel to propel Le Pen, as her Polymarket odds of winning the “Next French Presidential Election” have skyrocketed over the last week to 43%.


A consensus appears to be forming that Le Pen’s proposed fiscal discipline to rescue France from the brink of what she describes as a looming default, if the current trajectory continues, is a welcome relief for the market and voters. Nomura analysts described this theme in late August (read report), and they see Europe “lurching” right over the next 18-month election cycle.


Principal Asset Management’s Howe Chung Wan noted that one accelerator of France’s bond rout was the unwinding of carry positions, which helped drive the selloff and amplified pressure that sent yields soaring. “

You can see this time around in France, it took France and Italy … but it did not take Spain,” Howe said, adding, “So it tells you it’s about positioning. It tells you about who is on the trades.”

[..] Le Pen has tailwinds here as the spending bill for the failed progressive experiment and unfettered spending comes due. Nomura is correct: the market no longer fears right-wing candidates; it fears left-wing candidates and unhinged socialists.

Read more …

Absolutely insane that this ever happened. And those that did it were never punished.

• Trump Talks About AG Merrick Garland and Jack Smith Targeting His Family (CTH)

During an oval office press availability today, President Trump is asked directly about Joe Biden, former AG Merrick Garland and former Special Prosecutor Jack Smith targeting himself and his family. WATCH:


Read more …

“..he argues that America’s greatest achievements may still lie ahead.”

• The Trump Manufacturing Resurgence Plan Currently Underway (CTH)

Many of us have watched each step in the process as President Trump executes a deliberate strategy to reindustrialize American manufacturing.


In this video Mike Steger examines plans for new shipyards, submarine production, and advanced manufacturing at Sparrows Point and across the country. He contrasts this rebuilding effort with the collapse of Bethlehem Steel and Baltimore’s industrial economy, arguing that restoring basic industry is essential to America’s future.

The discussion then turns to Henry Kaiser, whose World War II shipyards transformed American production through workforce training and new construction methods. Mike connects that history to today’s shipbuilding ambitions, steel investments, and the industrial foundation needed to support both naval strength and space exploration.

From American shipyards to SpaceX’s stainless steel rockets, Mike makes the case that industrial growth can renew the confidence and purpose of Western civilization. Drawing on Marco Rubio’s remarks in Athens, the symbolism of Prometheus, and John Paul Jones’s refusal to surrender, he argues that America’s greatest achievements may still lie ahead. WATCH:


Chapters 00:00 America’s Revival of the West
01:25 A New Era at Sparrows Point
03:10 Rebuilding America’s Shipyards
04:55 Bethlehem Steel and Baltimore’s Decline
07:10 Henry Kaiser and Freedom’s Forge
09:10 The Ship Built in Under Five Days
10:00 Rebuilding American Steel
11:10 From Shipyards to Starships
12:35 Prometheus and the Torch of Progress
13:35 John Paul Jones: “I Have Not Yet Begun to Fight”

Read more …

“Moscow has “fully accepted” the US peace proposal put forward at the Anchorage summit, yet Europe derailed the process, Russia’s top diplomat has said..”

• US Folded To EU Pressure on Ukraine – Lavrov (RT)

The US gave in to pressure from the EU, which has openly gloated about undermining the Anchorage understandings and declared them “buried,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. The top diplomat made the remarks on Wednesday while speaking at a press conference following a ministerial meeting of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).


Lavrov reiterated Moscow’s position that the Anchorage initiative was ultimately derailed by European nations. ”Our conscience is clear, not to mention the fact that we fully accepted the United States’ proposal last August, which was made during the summit… in Alaska,” he stated. It is not our fault that the Americans could not withstand the unprecedented and brazen pressure from Europe, which later proudly declared that it had buried Anchorage.

US President Donald Trump hosted his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, last year, with the two leaders reaching an understanding on how the Ukraine conflict could be settled. While Moscow has portrayed the outcome of the summit as an “agreement,” despite some “nuances” remaining, Washington has repeatedly disputed that characterization. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio previously said that there was “a proposal in Alaska, but there was no agreement.”

According to Lavrov, the Anchorage understandings were ultimately undermined over the following months by EU and British leaders. During the G7 summit in Evian in June, French President Emmanuel Macron openly declared that Anchorage had been “buried.”

While the US has displayed a declining commitment to the “understandings,” Trump has never explicitly declared the framework dead. Last month, Washington attempted to revive negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, but the process stalled once again amid continued long-range strikes by Moscow and Kiev. According to Lavrov, Russia agreed to a Washington-proposed trilateral meeting with Ukraine, which was expected to be held after the recent Russian parliamentary elections. Kiev, however, actively attempted to disrupt the polls and launched a massive attack while voting was underway.

”We made it clear that, under these circumstances, we want to know what proposals exactly [Vladimir] Zelensky’s negotiators would bring. This is very important to us, and the American side has taken our arguments with understanding,” the minister added.

Read more …

Make Starlink work.

• Take More of My Money, Elon! (Stephen Green)

Another day, another regulatory approval for Elon Musk to launch more satellites than he has up there already. It’s almost a “dog bites man” item at this point — but only almost. This one has all kinds of cool little angles. “In a regulatory win,” PCMag reported on Tuesday, “SpaceX has secured approval to launch and operate 15,000 next-gen satellites for Starlink Mobile, the company’s service to deliver satellite connectivity to phones.” Satellite smartphones, cool. When you’re outdoors.


The problem with satellite phone service is that the tiny, low-powered antenna in your phone can only barely keep a connection with a sat even in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Put a roof over your head and fuggedaboutit. PJ Media’s own Charlie Martin and I actually discussed this scenario a year or two ago, when Musk first talked about selling cellular service — and the answer was bolted to my roof.

I’m a Starlink customer, and there’s no reason SpaceX’s Starphone* service couldn’t glom onto my WiFi just like my AT&T-provided phone does every time I pull into my garage. *For now the name is Starlink Mobile, but isn’t Starphone both cooler and more in line with the company’s naming conventions? But what happens when I go to my corner bar for my traditional lunch of burger, fries, and martini, and the satellite signal dies the moment I walk in the door?

This is a (mostly) solved problem. Back when Xfinity was still my ISP, the company had courtesy WiFi service seemingly everywhere. It hardly mattered where I was; if I needed WiFi, there was an Xfinity router nearby that used the same login credentials any-and-everywhere. Bad cell service? Hitting your data cap? Just look for the Xfinity router in your phone’s WiFi settings.

The trick — and this is something Xfinity couldn’t do, since they were serving as a replacement for your cell provider — is making the handoff from satellite to WiFi (and back again) so seamless that the user never notices, anywhere in the world.

Here’s where it helps to do what Musk does and think big. Getting businesses to host a Starlink router is no big deal — Xfinity has been doing it for years. Making it portal-less for that seamless transition ought to be a no-brainer, too. It already works at home, and for out-and-about, SpaceX seems to have that problem solved, too. For airlines like United that offer Starlink to their passengers, SpaceX requires that the service be both free and without any login screen.

Installing stuff on airplanes is time-consuming and expensive. Locally, no big deal. Let’s say you own a small bar (a dream of mine since Cheers, honestly), and SpaceX comes along and offers to put a router in your place — at no cost to you — and a neon FREE STARLINK sign to hang in the window. That’s how the company builds out the indoors part of its cellular service in the business world. But residential? Aye, that’s still the rub, because I don’t want my phone to stop working when I go over to my neighbor’s house for drinks, and he isn’t a Starlink user.

And Another Thing: Delta’s real beef with Starlink might not have been due to a personal grudge between CEO Ed Bastian and Musk. Delta reportedly insisted on putting their branding on Musk’s service, along with a mandatory login portal that required fliers to sign up for Delta miles. SpaceX said no, that’s not how we do things, and Delta went off in a huff to Amazon’s rival Leo service — that won’t even be up and running for another two years.

One solution is to set up ground-based repeaters (cellular or WiFi) in dead zones. That’s hardly ideal, of course, but over time, I suspect SpaceX will be able to shrink the dead zones down to virtually nothing for reasons I’m about to reveal. The answer once again turns out to be as obvious as the Starlink transceiver on my roof: Don’t sell the phone; sell the bundle — and watch the dead zones disappear all on their own.

For one low monthly price, SpaceX might sell you high-speed internet service, works-anywhere satellite cellular, and (probably) a brand-new Apple iPhone or Samsung Galaxy (your choice!) every three years. Once SpaceX has Starmind (orbital AI service) up and running (or even before then), an extra $20 or $30 a month gets you all the Grok you can eat.

You get the convenience of one-stop shopping and a phone that works literally anywhere in the world, seamlessly and without friction. SpaceX — and this is where my SPCX shares start doing the happy dance — gets endless subscription revenue. Physically, is it possible?

Yes, and we saw why last week during Starship’s deployment of the first operational Version 3 (V3) Starlink satellites. Those 26 birds increased the throughput of Starlink’s existing constellation of 11,100 satellites by an estimated 2.3%. What that means is, a fully loaded Starship deploying 60 V3s will increase capacity by a little under 5%. Every 20 Starship launches will nearly double Starlink’s current ability to deliver.

That’s less than two months’ worth of Falcon 9 launches, and by one estimate, “Starlink will soon have more bandwidth than the entire terrestrial internet combined.” Who’s going to beat SpaceX on price, particularly with services and hardware sold in a convenient bundle? I’m not saying that a theoretical Starlink/Starmind/Starphone combo would be for everybody, but I am saying…

Read more …

“The American Experiment, as modified by the white liberals, had failed, and so had the country.”

• The Day Accountability Arrived (Paul Craig Roberts)

The multicultural tower of babel collapsed when the fictional narrative of the US Navy escorting millions of barrels of oil daily exiting the Strait of Hormuz could no longer be maintained. This orchestrated hoax in the Western media had kept the future price of oil below the current price at the pump and provided reassurance that things would soon be better.


When the narrative no longer could be maintained, energy prices shot up taking inflation with them forcing most Americans to make dramatic reductions in their standard of living. The demand for US Treasury debt by foreign central banks dried up, causing a hit to the US dollar’s value that further drove up US inflation, the dumbshit American policymakers having based the US economy on globalism. As so much is imported, the dollar’s decline sent prices sky-high.

The government was unable to fund its budget except by printing money, which further destroyed the exchange value of the US dollar and drove inflation higher in an economy that had so stupidly globalized itself for the benefit of corporate profits and not for the American people. Federal and state support for the underclass dried up. Social security payments became erratic. Looting and mayhem broke out as the black welfare class and 30 million immigrant-invaders fought for survival.

White communities became targets, although many were hand-to-mouth themselves. Being armed, except for the Northeast and California where “gun control” was the religion, white communities organized for defense to protect from the onslaught from The Camp of the Saints, anointed by the insouciant whites themselves as the inheritors of America. The many decades of the white liberals teaching blacks to hate whites, of teaching women to hate men, and of teaching children to mistrust their parents and all authority culminated in the complete collapse of society.

Sexual morality was dead from generations of internet porn teaching young women and men that threesomes and foursomes were the epitome of sexual pleasure and that no one needed a wife or husband when multiple sex partners were at hand. As a nation the United States ceased to exist. It existed as a territory in which various sections were at war with other sections in ongoing violent conflict. White survival was highest in the Southern states whose white populations had comprised the majority of the US military.

The American Experiment, as modified by the white liberals, had failed, and so had the country.

Read more …

“.. that shared experience has produced sharply different political conclusions among people living in the same region.”

• They Survived October 7. Now They’re Divided Over Who Should Rule Israel (Blade)

For residents of Israel’s Gaza Envelope, the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023, was not an abstract national trauma. Communities close to the Gaza border were among the first to come under assault, and residents spent hours locked in safe rooms, hiding from gunmen and rocket fire. Three years later, that shared experience has produced sharply different political conclusions among people living in the same region.


Michal Koren Kariv, a 50-year-old filmmaker from Kibbutz Mefalsim, remembers that morning all too well. As Hamas launched its deadly assault on communities across southern Israel, her family remained inside their home as armed militants reached the area. They spent hours in a protected room without electricity, unsure of what was happening outside.

When the family was finally able to leave, Koren Kariv says she saw devastation on a scale she had never witnessed before. The experience, she says, fundamentally changed her relationship with the state. “I no longer believe anything,” she said. “Simply nothing.”

Accountability is a must
For her, the coming election is largely about the demand for a state commission of inquiry into October 7, an investigation that would establish what went wrong, who knew what and when, and which decisions or institutional failures contributed to the disaster. She says she plans to vote for those who promise to get to the bottom of those failures.

“I believe that whoever was prime minister when the attack occurred must bear political responsibility. Netanyahu was the head back then, so he should have resigned. I am not saying I won’t be voting for a right-wing party. All I am saying is that Netanyahu should not be prime minister.”

Koren Kariv says she has never voted for Netanyahu’s Likud, but she has never been in the so-called “anti-Bibi camp,” simply because she acknowledges the positive things Netanyahu has done for the country. She also recognizes that the current government has invested heavily in rebuilding the southern communities.

Shortly after the attacks, the Israeli government established the Tkuma administration to oversee reconstruction and recovery in communities damaged or evacuated after the massacre. Government figures show a multibillion-shekel reconstruction program covering housing, infrastructure, education, community services, and economic recovery.

Koren Kariv acknowledges that the Gaza Envelope has received substantial investment since the attack, including new construction, educational funding and a stronger military presence. But she draws a distinction between rebuilding communities physically and addressing the political and institutional failures she believes preceded the attack.

“The question here is not simply whether houses have been rebuilt or money has been allocated. I want to know why the country was so unprepared, whether warnings were missed and who should have acted differently. So my conclusion is therefore not that the state has done nothing. Rather, that reconstruction cannot substitute for an investigation into the failures that preceded the attack.”

Tilting towards the right
A few kilometers away, Sami Danieli, a 65-year-old former security officer from the religious moshav of Shibolim near Sderot, drew a very different lesson from October 7.

Unlike many other communities in the Gaza Envelope that experienced direct infiltration by militants, his moshav was relatively protected. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad reached its outskirts but did not enter. Residents nevertheless sheltered as rockets fell, and Danieli says he lost close friends in neighboring communities that bore the brunt of the attack.

Even before October 7, Danieli had voted for National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who supports the expulsion of Palestinians and promotes settlement activity in the West Bank and Gaza. The events of October 7 did not weaken that support. They reinforced it.

“If I could vote for Ben Gvir twice, I would do so,” he said. “I don’t believe there can be peace with Hamas, and that’s why Israel needs to take a tougher approach in its security policy.”

Ben-Gvir has said he would pursue a tougher security policy if he were given the defense portfolio following the election. As national security minister, he has already pursued a series of hardline measures towards Palestinians. These include worsening conditions for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, backing legislation imposing the death penalty for people convicted of terrorism, and distributing thousands of firearms to Israelis living in areas considered vulnerable to Palestinian attacks.

Danieli says he supports those measures. He remains firmly behind the right-wing bloc headed by Netanyahu and rejects claims that the current government bears responsibility for Israel’s failure to prevent or decisively end the war.

Instead, he points to anti-government protests and other factors that he believes constrained Israel’s ability to defeat Hamas.

“The anti-government protesters were the ones who weakened the country with their demonstrations. Then, when the war happened, total victory was not achieved partially due to the restrictions imposed by the Americans [under the Biden administration – ed.] and partially because of ammunition shortages.

“Netanyahu’s performance during the war was excellent though. Not very good – it was excellent.” Danieli also gives the government credit for the reconstruction effort in the south.“Government assistance reached the region and funds were provided, but of course there will always be people who will say that this is not enough,” he said.

“I believe that much of the criticism is coming from residents who are politically motivated. Eighty percent of them have a political agenda and this anti-Bibi bias prevents them from seeing the truth. This is why I don’t want the left to come to power. The right-wing must stay and rule,” he added.

Uncertainty prevails
Polling, however, shows that the hopes of Danieli might not materialize.

Reuters’ polling tracker, updated in late September, showed the centrist Yashar party led by former military chief Gadi Eisenkot narrowly ahead of Likud in the polling average. The aggregate projected 66 seats for parties opposed to Netanyahu and 48 for parties supporting him, while also noting that the anti-Netanyahu camp did not have an obvious coalition path to the 61-seat threshold.

Individual polls by Israeli television channels and news outlets have produced different results. A Kan survey reported in late September put Yashar at 23 seats and Likud at 21, with the two main blocs each projected at 52 mandates.

A Times of Israel poll published on October 1 likewise found Netanyahu’s bloc ahead but still short of the 61 seats required to form a government on its own. Likud and Yashar were tied for first place among individual parties.Israel uses nationwide proportional representation. Parties must pass a 3.25% electoral threshold to enter the Knesset, and a governing coalition requires the support of at least 61 of the parliament’s 120 members.

For the residents of the Gaza Envelope, however, the numbers on a polling chart tell only part of the story. They lived through the same morning, heard the same rockets and waited behind the same locked doors for help to arrive. Yet, three years later, their memories of October 7 have taken them in opposite political directions.

Koren Kariv sees the election as a test of accountability, a chance to establish why the state failed and who should answer for it. Danieli sees it as a test of resolve, an argument for maintaining the political course he believes offers the strongest security.

Three years on, the communities closest to Gaza are no longer simply asking how they survived October 7. They are asking what the country should become because of it. And when they enter the voting booth, those two questions will lead them to very different answers.

Read more …

“..the Association of Human Mathematics..”

• Mathematicians Declare War on AI — Taxpayers Foot the Bill (Scott Pinsker)

The frontrunner for the most arrogant, tone-deaf remark of 2026 comes from the Association of Human Mathematics (AHM). Upon OpenAI’s announcement that its model had solved 90 of math’s 500 hardest open problems, AHM released a furious denunciation: “Mathematicians did not ask for this work to be done.” Yeah? So what? Who cares what they asked for? Mathematicians study math — they don’t own it.


Because the opposite is true: Most of them work for us. More than half of all U.S. mathematicians are directly employed by the federal government. Another 12% are paid by colleges. Just 18% are employed in aerospace, manufacturing, and professional services! To quote Gen X philosopher Alanis Morissette, “Isn’t it ironic?” By the numbers, mathematics is one of our country’s most heavily subsidized industries. Only a small sliver of its jobs are in the private sector. The discipline is utterly incapable of paying for itself.

So mathematicians survive by suckling the government teat.That isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Hey, government waste is an open secret, but some government investments pay off. (Really!) Perhaps mathematics will be one of them. The mathematicians certainly think so. Here’s a Reddit thread on the topic:

For decades, the case for funding math research was simple: it pays off for you, society, and everyone.
1984, the US “David Report” (the landmark math funding report): “the high technology so celebrated today is essentially a mathematical technology.” Federal math research funding rose 34%.
1992, International Mathematical Union (IMU): one of its official aims was “Mathematics, keys for Development.”
1997, NSF: “broader impacts,” meaning benefit to society, became a required criterion for every grant proposal.
2012, UK: a Deloitte study commissioned by the research council credited math research with about 16% of UK economic output and 2.8M jobs.
2018, UK Bond Review: math is “arguably the single most pervasive and powerful engine of innovation.” A £300M government pledge followed in 2020.
2021, IMU/UNESCO: the International Day of Mathematics theme was “Mathematics for a Better World.”

So maybe mathematics is worth the taxpayers’ investment. Maybe, as famed “mental calculator” Shakuntala Devi said, “Without mathematics, there’s nothing you can do. Everything around you is mathematics. Everything around you is numbers.” Maybe mathematics is key to maximizing not just human progress — but mastering all the mysteries of the universe!

If so, why are the mathematicians’ undies in a trefoil knot over OpenAI answering 90 unsolved math problems? Wouldn’t you assume they’d be excited — because progress is progress, and advancing knowledge is a good thing? Who cares if the answers came from an 11-year-old whiz kid, a tenured MIT professor, or ChatGPT? Would it matter if Einstein’s revelations came to him in a lab — or in a dream?

Because the point of the mission isn’t the journey. Professional mathematicians may crave a rollicking, number-crunching adventure — replete with debates, published papers, and dueling personalities — but that’s not why taxpayers are underwriting their profession. We’re in it for the destination: More knowledge. Superior insights. New data. Useful information. Faster breakthroughs. And a better, smarter, more prosperous tomorrow.

This is why AHM’s public statement on OpenAI was so eye-opening: Yesterday, on October 6th, 2026, OpenAI — which is currently defending lawsuits against accusations of illegal plagiarism, copyright infringement, and trademark dilution — released a repository of manuscripts purporting to contain solutions to a number of high-profile problems in mathematics.

Mathematicians did not ask for this work to be done. The Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, from whom OpenAI has claimed to derive its legitimacy, opened their initial advisory statement by saying that frontier AI corporations should not test advanced mathematical problems on internal models. In ignoring the central premise of the Advisory Group’s position, OpenAI has indicated total disregard for the norms of scientific research — norms that guarantee that mathematics remains trustworthy, ethically researched, and in the public interest.

Mathematicians have a particular vision of progress that is informed by history and field-specific considerations. We reject OpenAI’s assertion that this release advances our subject, and we urge mathematicians and the public to view the value of this publication model with due skepticism. Releasing over 700 files at once is not a demonstration of scholarship, but a demonstration of power. We urge mathematicians to discontinue their work with OpenAI and to return to a vision of science that centers human understanding.

AI is a tool. It produces data and information. What we do with the data and information is up to us. If mathematicians don’t want to use this tool, fine. That’s between them and their employer. (Seems pretty self-defeating to spurn a helpful tool, but whatevs. To each their own.) But if the mathematician is being bankrolled by American taxpayers, it’s perfectly legitimate for us to insist they use the best possible tools, because we have a vested interest in maximizing our investment.

Otherwise, we’re wasting money.

Read more …

Rubio’s tour took him to Athens yesterday.

“The United States is in favor of the Greek-Israeli defense relationship, Marco Rubio tells Kathimerini. ‘We view that as a positive – obviously for the region – and I think the challenge is not just maintaining a relationship with Israel, but how do you also maintain good relations with other countries in the Middle East, whose relationship with Israel may not be as positive. We face the same challenge, obviously, and we navigate it,’ the US secretary of state says.”

• ‘US and Greek Interests Overlap’: Marco Rubio (Kathimerini)

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking to Kathimerini in an exclusive interview during his visit to Athens on Wednesday, lays out the priorities shaping Washington’s approach to the most pressing issues in Greece’s neighborhood, from Greek-Turkish relations and Iran to defense, Ukraine, the Strait of Hormuz and energy.


Why are you in Greece now?

I don’t know if there is a reason for now. We should have been here as soon as we could. I don’t travel to a country unless the ambassadors are in place, so that was part of it, and I think it worked for our schedule. I do think this relationship is deep and enduring. We had opportunities to interact with the prime minister and the foreign minister at global gatherings in the past, and hosted them bilaterally and in the US. I hope we come back many times because US-Greek relations are something that I have been very involved in, going back to my time as a senator – though I didn’t get to visit as a senator – and one we continue to build on.

The US supports a new energy architecture in the area with the Vertical Corridor and the Great Sea Interconnector electricity cable. Is the US going to support the interconnector project in the Aegean, which faces a lot of irritants and obstacles?

If there is anything that has become obvious over the last few months, it is that we need to diversify the way the world gets its energy. I say that if the world has learned anything over the past five years, it is that we need to be able to do that. The Russia-Ukraine war reminds us of that, as is what is happening in Hormuz and potentially in the Red Sea with the Houthis. We need to diversify. Our supply chains are running to some of the most volatile areas of the planet. So this is a very important priority for us and one more example of how US and Greek interests overlap. So, we are very committed to it.

We understand there are some potential impediments, there are some things standing in the way, and we intend to use our diplomatic efforts to remind all parties how important this is to us and why this matters. And I hope to find resolutions. As I said in the press conference, some of these issues are obviously not best resolved through media or communiques; they are best done privately and quietly within the diplomatic realm, but this is very important as we need to prioritize engagements from multiple countries.

President Trump has a personal relationship with Turkish President Erdogan. You are very involved in the area. Are we going to see any mediation on your side on this?

Well, I always sort of avoid discussing sensitive topics in the media because it only makes them harder to solve. That said, we engage with Turkey all the time. They are a member of NATO, and they have obviously been engaged in a number of other issues. For example, they have hosted talks in the past with Russia and Ukraine. It’s a relationship we have invested in as well; maybe that investment will help us in regard to these conversations. On issues like these, if you want to put out statements, you can put out statements, but if you want to get a resolution, they are often best dealt with within the confines of direct private conversations. That’s how diplomacy often works best.

One of the big issues, another sensitive issue, is whether Turkey is going to get the F-35s. You introduced the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) bill as senator. What’s your assessment now?

‘To me, [a Greek-Turkish crisis] would be unimaginable. It wouldn’t be good for either Turkey or Greece, but it also wouldn’t be good for the United States. It is something we could never allow to happen’

Well, the status of that is the following: Number one, [Turkey] is a member of NATO. Number two, the president expressed the desire, if possible, to provide them, as they have paid for a few of them already. Obviously, these planes are many, many years away from delivery, but there are two that have already been paid for. But there is a law that was passed by the United States Congress. There’s a law, and there’s also a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act that places very strict conditions, so until those conditions are met, frankly, that sale can’t happen. \

And that’s been conveyed to the Turkish side. They’re aware of it; I think they’re trying to find answers for it. It revolves around the S-400 system. So, as of now, that issue hasn’t been resolved, and legally we can’t make that transfer until that is resolved. Perhaps it will be resolved – and there are various options – but as of right now, it hasn’t been resolved.

Greece has requested some specific weapons for its F-35s, some of the same ammunition that Israel is getting. Is there any response you can give on that now?

There is no formal response. It’s under strong consideration. Obviously, a country like Greece is an important ally of ours from a defense standpoint. We have a lot of interoperability already when it comes to defensive posture – and Greece adopted a very strong defensive posture when our presence in the region was being threatened. So, they’ll be given strong consideration in that regard. Obviously, that’s a decision that’s made through an interagency process in our own system. Ultimately, the decision is up to the president, but we obviously want to get input from the Department of War as well.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https:/twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2107883142266634261?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 8 2026

Oct 082026
 
 October 8, 2026  Posted by at 9:03 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  35 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Femme à la Montre 1932


• Trump Makes Major Move Toward Reestablishing U.S. Industrial Manufacturing (CTH)
• Cowardly Europe Fears Dissent (J.B. Shurk)
• Macron Goes Full Orwell, Makes One More Pitch for Censorship (Turley)
• Golden Naked Trump Statue Unveiled At European Parliament (ZH)
• Let’s Talk About Fuel Prices (Eric Florack)
• Lies Serving Israel Have Sent US to War with Iran (Paul Craig Roberts)
• We Remember (Rabbi Michael Barclay)
• USAID Didn’t Cause the Rightward Swing in Latin America (Sarah Anderson)
• Yes, the Public Education System Is Broken (Amy Denton)
• Democrats Are Taking Big Chunks Of GOP Voters In Key Senate Races:: Polls (CNN)

 

 

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2107584485755658537?s=20 https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/2106925958355701773?s=20

 

 


“This really is a major move to put money behind reindustrialization in one of the key areas where it was destroyed by leftism, globalism and corruption.”

• Trump Makes Major Move Toward Reestablishing U.S. Industrial Manufacturing (CTH)

President Trump announced a collective investment effort between defense tech firm Anduril and the U.S. Navy worth an estimated $6.6 billion. $3.7 billion comes from the private sector by defense technology firm Anduril in a new shipyard at Sparrows Point, Maryland, alongside $2.9 billion in Navy contract funding. The facility will build next-generation submarines including autonomous underwater vessels.


When you really think about this effort closely, putting this kind of investment into U.S. shipbuilding in Baltimore is a genuine swing for the fences to reestablish northeast industrial manufacturing. I give President Trump a lot of credit for taking this big a leap of faith in the Baltimore region.

The Trump administration has announced new or revitalized shipbuilding in Galveston TX, Houma LA, Brownsville TX and now Sparrows Point MD. While the southern regions will likely be capable of transferring a solid work ethic into a successful America-First business model, trying to reindustrialize Baltimore away from a dependency mindset (built on a foundation of corruption) to a skilled jobs work ethic, is a very bold move.

There will certainly be job opportunities for people outside the immediate Baltimore area who are willing to travel for high-paying good quality work. Anduril will also need some form of trade-school, apprenticeship or vocational training if the manufacturing hub is to be generationally changing. This really is a major move to put money behind reindustrialization in one of the key areas where it was destroyed by leftism, globalism and corruption. WATCH:

WASHINGTON — President Trump announced Tuesday that the federal government and Anduril Industries are investing a total of $6.6 billion to build critical components for Virginia-class submarines in Baltimore, a joint effort meant to boost US maritime dominance. The shipyard, known as Arsenal-2, will be supported by $3.7 billion in capital from California-based Anduril and another $2.9 billion from a contract between the company and the US Navy.

The facility will be constructed at Sparrows Point, site of a shipyard and a former Bethlehem Steel plant, to produce torpedo tubes and eventually ship sections — including bows and sterns, among other components, an industry official said. Trump said in a speech later near the project site at Tradepoint Atlantic that the effort will make the US both “feared” and “respected” on the world stage.

“We will build the future of America’s navy right here in Baltimore. And it will be a future of peace through strength,” the president added. “We have never been a stronger country than we are right now.” (read more)

Read more …

“Orwellian brutes now govern Europe.”

“I think mini-mouse Macron is just tired of people pointing out that he married his grandmother (or his grandfather, as the case might be)”.

• Cowardly Europe Fears Dissent (J.B. Shurk)

Former-banker-turned-tiny-French-President Emmanuel Macron blasted what he called “American free speech” while speaking to reporters last week. Defending the European Union’s robust censorship policies, le petit fromage insisted that Europe’s speech-policing Digital Services Act should censor information that governments consider false “much more extensively, much faster, and much more forcefully.”


Macron then did his Orwellian best to condemn free speech as oppression and praise censorship as liberation: “So-called American ‘free speech’—at least as it exists today and has been promoted by some people—is the opposite of free speech.” The terribly disliked French leader continued, “My freedom cannot mean that I am free to…insult you or vandalize the public square that belongs to everyone. Yet that is some people’s idea of ‘free speech.’”

Then the little mouse of a man roared, “Until we hold those who disseminate content on social media accountable, we will not be able to regulate it.” Furthermore, if “someone writes something” that is “false,” then that person should be “held accountable.” Tough talk from an insecure man afraid of words.

What is going on in Europe? Why is the whole continent so scared of public debate and dissent? If the political Establishment is unable to defend its ideas and policies without censoring the opposition, then its ideas and policies are absolute rubbish! The people who have willed their way to power across Europe apparently believe that they cannot win an argument unless they are the only ones permitted to speak! That’s a bit like a puny pugilist demanding that referees tie another boxer’s hands behind his back before declaring himself world heavyweight champion!

Personally, I think mini-mouse Macron is just tired of people pointing out that he married his grandmother (or his grandfather, as the case might be). We used to teach our children, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” Now Western leaders are so terrified of words that they’d rather imprison everyone with an opinion than learn to take a joke or hear a contrary point of view. Here’s the truth that Macron and his fellow Euro-weenie censors refuse to understand: Free speech is free only when a speaker can say something offensive or controversial without fear of the State’s wrath.

Although Macron wants to criminalize speech that he considers untrue, he spreads endless falsehoods of his own! While beseeching British Prime Minister Andy Burnham to betray the will of voters who chose to leave the European Union ten years ago, the Napoleon-complex-afflicted French president whined, “Brexit is the biggest lie of the last thirty years!” That boast is absurdly false (or what European censors call criminal “misinformation”). The British people did vote to separate themselves from Queen Ursula von der Leyen’s European empire.

Even though Brexit fearmongers predicted imminent economic collapse should the British people choose to rule themselves—and despite the best efforts of Brexit saboteurs at home and abroad—the United Kingdom is currently outperforming France and other major European economies, having led the G7 in growth during the first half of 2026. One reason Brexiters voted to leave the E.U. in 2016 was because British citizens did not want their military to be swallowed into a European Army beyond their control—a prospect, ironically enough, which pro-E.U. stalwarts once called “disinformation” but which has proved increasingly prescient.

Queen von der Leyen and her Brussels Eurocrats are working feverishly today to use the Russia-Ukraine War as an excuse to create increasingly centralized European defense structures. It’s also worth remembering that European expansionists originally promoted the Union as an intergovernmental body meant to boost European economic markets and promised that the supranational institution would never directly usurp national sovereignties. That was a clear case of “misinformation” and certainly one of the biggest lies of the last half-century!

Speaking of lies that European leaders have promoted as “truths,” the Russia Collusion Hoax against President Trump (which British and Ukrainian intelligence agencies helped to propagate), the “global warming” apocalypse (which was scheduled to kill us all fourteen years ago), and the “Reign of COVID Error” (during which “health experts” lied about the virus arising from nature instead of a Chinese laboratory and then lied about fake “vaccines” being “safe and effective”) are three of the biggest mass frauds and information warfare campaigns ever perpetrated by governments against the public.

Macron has never called for these lies to be censored from social media platforms. He just doesn’t like it when random Americans point out that the European Union is an undemocratic and totalitarian system of governance that should be burned to the ground. And he really doesn’t like it when commoners correctly point out that his old high school teacher—and abusive wife—sometimes slaps him around. Unfortunately, Macron’s inability to understand the importance of free speech is a European-wide learning disability.

In the U.K., a member of the public has filed a Prevent referral against eighty-six-year-old comedy legend John Cleese because he continues to make fun of Islam’s love for rape and murder. The complaint argues that Cleese should be considered a “moderate to high risk” for “radicalisation, communal tension, and hate incidents” for writing, among other things, “I personally prefer a culture that does not approve of FGM, Child Marriage and Killing Infidels.”

The complaint accuses Cleese of “anti-Muslim hate” and seeks further scrutiny of the cultural icon. In response to news of the referral, the Monty Python alum wrote, “The Islamic male ego becomes so bloated by its lack of restraint that it believes any criticism is blasphemy,” and, “I look forward to being arrested.” Later, he declared his targeting “One of the proudest moments of my life.”

Meanwhile, a retired police officer was recently fined more than £1,000 under the U.K.’s Communications Act for reposting a bacon joke ridiculing Islam. As one free speech advocate rightly observed, “No-one making a similar joke about Jesus would face prosecution.” At the same time that it targets retired cops for having a sense of humor, the British government continues to hand out “skilled worker sponsorship licenses” to Islamic bookstores that sell books on jihad!

An Islamic preacher in London encourages Muslim men to beat their wives if they refuse to obey. The same Islamic cleric describes “acceptable” execution methods for gay men, including throwing them off tall buildings and pummeling their bodies with rocks. These sermons are available on YouTube. Nevertheless, the mosque still enjoys charitable status in the U.K. Islamic jihadists preach violence and murder, and law enforcement agencies ignore their threats, just as they ignored—for decades—Islamic men raping tens of thousands of young girls across Britain.

However, when a comedian and a retired police officer mock Islam’s penchant for violence, the British government scrutinizes their speech as “threats.” That should be no surprise when U.K. police forces instruct officers that Nigel Farage’s immigration beliefs are “Islamophobic hate crimes” and encourage non-Muslim staff to fast during Ramadan in “solidarity” with their Islamic conquerors.

Two-tiered “free speech” is official government policy. Furthermore, a Home Office-linked unit has been recording social media criticism of the government’s Prevent program, including 77 observations concerning people and organizations criticizing Prevent on X and Reddit. Documents show that government-linked officials are monitoring and recording the speech of people who publicly challenge this controversial counter-extremism policy.

Orwellian brutes now govern Europe. Need further proof? The Green Party in the U.K. wants to replace “mother” and “father” with more “inclusive” terms. Meanwhile, the Germans just awarded the Westphalian Peace Prize to NATO’s military alliance.

Parents are strangers. War is peace. Free speech is violence. Censorship promotes liberty.

In truth, freedom in Europe is dead.

Read more …

He only likes the “free speech” that agrees with him.

• Macron Goes Full Orwell, Makes One More Pitch for Censorship (Turley)

French President Emmanuel Macron went full Orwell this week. While long the darling of Western media, Macron has been one of the most anti-free-speech leaders in the world. This week, he declared that “The so-called American ‘free speech’ today, which some people have promoted, is the opposite of free speech.” Having Emmanuel Macron holding forth on free speech is akin to Joey Chestnut proselytizing on veganism.


France has been in a headlong plunge into censorship and speech criminalization. These laws criminalize speech under vague standards referring to “inciting” or “intimidating” others based on race or religion. For example, fashion designer John Galliano has been found guilty in a French court on charges of making anti-Semitic comments in a Paris bar.

In another case, the father of French conservative presidential candidate Marine Le Pen was fined because he had called people from the Roma minority “smelly.” A French teenager was charged for criticizing Islam as a “religion of hate.” Many of us were disgusted recently when Macron celebrated Brigitte Bardot’s life as someone who “embodied a life of freedom.” As discussed on this blog, the French government repeatedly prosecuted Bardot for speaking about her views.

Macron’s praise for Bardot’s “life of freedom” is reminiscent of the reaction of French officials to the massacre of editors at Charlie Hebdo, a satirical magazine. After hounding the victims for years with criminal investigations, the French government organized a march for free speech. As predicted, it then used the killing by Islamic extremists to further crack down on free speech. In my book The Indispensable Right, I discuss how France has careened down the slippery slope of censorship for decades, and the desire to silence others has now become an insatiable appetite.

Macron has supported figures like his anti-free-speech ally Thierry Breton in globalizing the reach of the infamous Digital Services Act (DSA) to curtail speech, including Americans and American companies. In his latest pitch for censorship, Macron pulls out an old saw that if everyone can speak freely, no one can speak freely.

Macron declared that “There is no freedom if there is no limit to my freedom, which begins with the freedom of others and respect for a common framework. I know this when I walk down the street: my freedom cannot mean hitting you, insulting you or trashing the public space we all share.”That line is remarkably telling. It captures how even “insulting” language is treated as a crime in France.

Since then, France has been a leader in the rollback of free speech in the West, with ever-widening laws curtailing free speech. France regularly charges people for political and religious speech, including comedians and those criticizing the police. Macron’s visceral reaction to free speech is shared by many in the European Union.] I spoke in Berlin at the World Forum, which boasted the slogan, “A New World Order with European Values.” Bill and Hillary Clinton and other Americans cheered on the European efforts.

The Digital Services Act bars speech that is viewed as “disinformation” or “incitement.” When it was passed over the condemnations of many of us in the free speech community, European Commission Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager celebrated by declaring that it is “not a slogan anymore — that what is illegal offline should also be seen and dealt with as illegal online. Now it is a real thing. Democracy’s back.”

Despite his unpopularity in France, Macron remains a favorite of the establishment and the media in the United States. I was appalled years ago when he came to Congress to spread his anti-free speech gospel. Macron called for a joint war against “fake news” and declared, “Democracy is about true choices and rational decisions. The corruption of information is an attempt to corrode the very spirit of our democracies.”

Our representatives applauded like seals with little recognition that he was referencing censorship. Macron believes that he should be able to dictate which views are “corrosive” to the spirit of democracy. The claim that more speech means less speech is an oxymoronic talking point of the anti-free speech movement. As I discussed in my book, there has not been a single censorship system in history that has worked to kill a single idea or movement. Instead, it has given more power to politicians like Macron to silence critics and intimidate opponents.

In the end, the only true solution to bad speech is better speech. The public can sort out their own values and weigh opposing views without the strict guidance of the government. Free speech serves as its own disinfectant. Ultimately, allowing people not just free inquiry but free expression bends the arch of humanity toward truth. Hate and prejudice are inherently flawed values that tend to collapse when exposed to full, robust debate.

That does not mean that it will eliminate racism, sexism, or other forms of hate. Neither censorship nor free speech can make everyone better people. However, what Macron is peddling is the same tired, dishonest claim that free speech is harmful and the government must control what people see and say in public discourse.

This is a nation that still echoes the cry of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity (“liberté, égalité, fraternité”). However, in today’s France, “liberté” remains a declining value. Individual rights of religion and speech are routinely sacrificed in the name of “equity” and “fraternity.”

Read more …

Europe, led by such characters as Macron and Von Der Leyen, swings attention instead towards Trump. Europe has no hope left.

• Golden Naked Trump Statue Unveiled At European Parliament (ZH)

A golden statue of a naked Donald Trump is on display at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, at one of the busiest intersections connecting two of the Parliament’s buildings, and is scheduled to stay until Thursday. Named Orange Plague, the 8.5-foot sculpture shows the US president holding justice scales and a long golf club, its ball made to look like the world, while sitting on the shoulders of a smaller, clothed man. Text on the plinth reads: “I am sitting on the back of a man. He is sinking under my burden. I will do anything to help him. Except stepping down from his back.”


Jens Galschiot, the Danish artist who created the sculpture, said: “Trump represents one of the greatest threats to the rules-based world order, democratic values and our common effort to solving the climate crisis.” “We must address this issue and stand together against such destructive influence.” Galschiot said the statue, covered in 23-carat gold leaf, was inspired by the story of The Emperor’s New Clothes, in which a vain leader parades naked through the street, believing he is dressed in the finest clothes.

In the fairytale, no one tells him that he is naked out of fear and flattery until a child points out his nudity and the emperor becomes a figure of ridicule. Per Clausen, a Left-wing Danish European Parliament member, invited the artist to exhibit the statue in the building. He said that he was not worried about a potential reaction from Trump, adding: “If someone is so thin-skinned that they cannot tolerate this sculpture being exhibited in the European Parliament, then they have no place on the world stage.”

The statue was previously on display during the 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), which was held in Brazil last year. It also made an appearance in Germany during this year’s Munich Security Conference. Worth reading in full over at The Telegraph.

Read more …

“There was a time when California was an oil state in more than name. It pumped enormous quantities of crude, refined it at home, employed Californians doing both, and supplied its own gasoline and diesel.”

• Let’s Talk About Fuel Prices (Eric Florack)

Much has been made by some in this election cycle of fuel prices. A lot of finger-pointing is going on without a good deal of attention being paid to the attendant facts of the case.


OK, fine. Let’s talk about fuel prices, specifically in the People’s Republic of California. Seems a reasonable test case. Have another look at the photo at the top of this page before we dive in. Let that rest in your mind for a cycle or two.

There was a time when California was an oil state in more than name. It pumped enormous quantities of crude, refined it at home, employed Californians doing both, and supplied its own gasoline and diesel. That California is disappearing, and not because the oil ran out. It has been sacrificed in the name of global warming. No, Global cooling. Err… Climate Change. Yeah, that’s it. That’ll work. No matter which way it goes, we’re covered, right?

Anywho, production has fallen hard of late. Back in 1985, California pumped roughly 1.1 million barrels a day. By 2025, U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data put it at about 288,000, and this year it’s running near 245,000. Refining has shrunk even faster, from 38 operating refineries in 1982 to 12 operable this January, according to the EIA. Then two more went. Phillips 66 shut its Wilmington refinery in the Los Angeles area last October. Valero stopped making fuel at Benicia near San Francisco and fully idled it in April, citing the state’s regulatory climate and high costs.

Together, Argus reports, they cost California 17% of its refining capacity. All of it regulated out of existence, and all the jobs with it. Look, gang, a refinery isn’t just a building with some pipes in it. It’s jobs, tax revenue, and the ability to turn crude into the fuel people put in their cars. California has been steadily and voluntarily surrendering that ability.

So where does their crude come from, after all that green legislation? In 2025, only 22.9% came from California and 16% from Alaska. The other 61.1% came from foreign countries. Of the foreign share, Brazil supplied 17.99%, Iraq 17.53%, Guyana 13.70%, Canada 12.22%, Ecuador 11.94%, and Saudi Arabia 7.85%. California sits on oil, has oil wells and refineries, and burns enormous quantities of gasoline and diesel. Yet more than six of every 10 barrels going into its refineries arrived from abroad.

The Irony here only gets stronger, because California also imports finished fuel. No pipelines bring gasoline in from the Gulf Coast or other major refining centers, so it arrives by ship. The Energy Commission puts 2025 gasoline imports at about 167,000 barrels a day, roughly 19% of supply, and two-thirds come from India, South Korea, and Taiwan. Valero has even started bringing gasoline in from its refinery in Pembroke, Wales. Yikes!

The state imports crude from halfway around the world, refines some of it at home, and when that falls short, imports gasoline from across the Ocean. It’s an extraordinary system, and by extraordinary I mean extraordinarily expensive. Every added leg adds shipping, handling, insurance, storage, and exposure to disruptions. When trouble hits in the Middle East, in a shipping lane, or at a refinery, Californians live at the end of a supply chain, without the cushion most Americans have. And the thing is, that’s by design.

While Sacramento has talked about energy independence for decades, what it actually delivered isn’t even close. It has delivered energy dependence with a green label on it. It never eliminated the need for liquid fuels because trucks, tractors, aircraft, ships, and ambulances still run on them. It just made the supply chain longer and more fragile.

(Aside: Yes, it’s been pushing Electric vehicles, but it doesn’t have the infrastructure to power them, and the state already imports a good chunk of its electricity. That figure swings up and down based on hydro systems and the availability of water to turn them. That too is in trouble of late. Something of a pattern here, but that’s a topic for another day.)

Oil companies don’t pay those costs out of some magical offshore account. Californians do. Transportation, refining, compliance, scarcity, taxes, and fees all end up in the price, and the guy at the pump pays the bill. The Energy Commission itself lists the state’s isolated fuel market, special gasoline blend, environmental program costs, and taxes among the reasons prices run high. California averaged $6.09 a gallon in mid-September, against $4.44 nationally.

This stuff is all basic economics. If you make it harder to produce, harder to refine, harder to ship, and harder to build replacement infrastructure, you don’t get to act shocked when the price rises. That’s not an unintended consequence; that’s economics. California’s Democrat party would rather pay foreigners for petroleum the state once produced and processed at home than make it attractive to do more of that here.Call it environmental policy, energy transition, or climate leadership. When the trucker, the farmer, the commuter, and the family read the number on the pump, they know what to call it: expensive.

They’ve not arrived at this juncture in one move; they’ve done this with hundreds of small steps, all of them trying to be “green.” That mindset is strangling the economy there. What happens as a result is what happens every time the big government Democrat Party runs things: dependence and economic disaster.

Read more …

Lies?!

• Lies Serving Israel Have Sent US to War with Iran (Paul Craig Roberts)

Two days ago on October 5 both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times reported that the “Threat of Iranian Drone Attack Prompted U.S. to Pull Bombers From U.K. Base” The NYT headline reads “Potential Iranian Drone Attack Led to Exit of U.S. Aircraft From British Air Base”


According to the NY Times “the need to move the bombers from the base was deemed so urgent that some of the planes and their flight crews left while aerial refueling aircraft were still being deployed to support their flights to the United States.” The NY Times also reports “the frantic evacuation of 85 homes, a bomb-disposal robot searching vans for explosives and a national security meeting convened by Prime Minister. Burnham.”

Not only are US Air Force combat aircraft based in distant Britain unsafe from Iranian attack, but also the NY Times reports that “Israel warned Germany that American bases in Europe were at heightened risk of Iranian attack.” The Wall Street Journal says the planned attack was part of a broader Iranian plot to target the aircraft and kill American pilots at RAF Fairford.

For the NY Times the attack was “suspected” or a possible attack. US Vice President J.D. Vance downplayed the attack by saying that the Pentagon quickly moved the bombers “out of an abundance of caution trying to protect our guys.”

Nevertheless, Vance used the suspected attack for propaganda against Iran and accused Iran of “what the Iranian state has done for 49 years, which is engage in acts of terrorism against the United States and against a lot of other people as well.” Vance has it backward. It is the US that has attacked Iran both militarily and economically with sanctions for decades.

Washington first sanctioned Iran in 1979, 47 years ago, when Iranians overthrew the American puppet ruler and reestablished their self-rule lost on August 19, 1953, when the CIA and MI6 organized a coup that overthrew Iran’s democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddeg, replaced him with General Fazlollah Zahedi and restored Reza Pahlavi as the Shah.

Twenty-six years later Iranians again reclaimed their self-rule with the 1979 Iranian Revolution. On November 14, 1979 President Jimmy Carter responded to the Iranian Revolution by signing Executive Order 12170, which froze $12 billion in Iranian government assets and bank deposits held in the US. This sanction was followed by an import ban and trade embargo, which set the agenda for decades of subsequent sanctions against Iran.

Iran has not bombed a single US hospital or children’s school or civilian housing or assassinated any American political leaders, military leaders or scientists. Washington and Israel, being terrorists, have slaughtered Iranian women, children, medical personnel, scientists, and Iranian top leaders. Give us a few facts, Mr. Vance, about Iranian “acts of terrorism against the United States and against a lot of other people.” The fact that Washington’s aggression against Iran has to be justified with lies proves that the aggression is unwarranted. Washington is not protecting the US from “Iranian nukes.” Washington is serving with American blood and money the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel.

And, Mr. Vance, if US aircraft are unsafe in Britain from Iranian drone attacks, how is Washington in control of the Strait of Hormuz as US Central Command and Treasury Secretary claim? If US aircraft are not safe in distant Britain, how are they safe in the Persian Gulf?

UPDATE:

Simplicius reports that money payments to Iran determine whose oil gets out of the Strait of Hormuz

Simplicius reports that Iran has the ability to stop, or at least greatly curtail, oil transits at any time. “When the transits are successful, they appear to be so only on account of Iran’s implicit, but perhaps secret, permission. Why would Iran give such allowances? Rumors persist that Iran has cut special deals with certain countries that pay money ‘under the table’ to be allowed transits, even through the Omani route.”

Read more …

As the world turns against Israel.

• We Remember (Rabbi Michael Barclay)

President Donald Trump made a statement about the FlyDubai flight that he “thinks Iran is responsible for it.”


Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz threatened that if any IDF forces are attacked on October 7, “If, God forbid, our forces are harmed, those who will pay the heavy price are Hamas and the population of Gaza — beyond all proportions.” When you take Trump’s comments in combination with those of Katz, and add that Israel has enlarged its naval fleet, it would seem that both Israel and the U.S. are preparing to escalate military activity. Perhaps this is why Benjamin Netanyahu and Marco Rubio were on a long private call on Monday afternoon.

Various media outlets in Israel have reported that Israel has been given the go-ahead to attack Iran unilaterally. The Iranians have been noticeably quiet over the last 48 hours, but that also could be due to the reality that there is no unified leadership in that country. Additionally, more and more reports are saying that Iran is feeling tremendous economic pressure, which might make it succumb, or it might make it aggressive.

As we approach the third anniversary of that horrific day, may we all fully commit ourselves to the idea that “Never Again” is not a slogan, but a promise.

Chazak u’Baruch

Rabbi Michael Barclay

October 6, 2026

25th of Tishrei, 5787

Iran has been noticeably quiet as we have approached this day of mourning, the third anniversary of that horrible stain on human history that happened on Oct. 7, 2023.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Tuesday that “Iran has missed several opportunities to reach a deal with us regarding its nuclear program.” He added that Iran has “completely lost” control of the Strait of Hormuz. Whether it is true or not about control of Hormuz, it would seem that there is certainly chaos in the Iranian regime. Ayatollah Khamenei has not been seen for over seven months, which is clear evidence that the religious side of the regime is troubled, and that he is probably deeply injured or dead. It is not clear who is actually running the IRGC, but we need to remember something when dealing with Iran at this time: a wounded animal is often much more dangerous, and we know that Iran has been continuing to develop and build weapons, including possibly nuclear ones.

Domestically, JD Vance made some interesting statements on Tuesday to Reuters. “Iran must significantly reduce its nuclear enrichment to meet U.S. demands and end the seven-month war between the countries.” He added that while the U.S. remains open to an agreement, we also will demand clear concessions from Tehran on the nuclear issue. “We will not exchange words for actions.” More interestingly than those words (which we have repeatedly heard from the administration), is that he said for the first time that he has not yet decided whether he will run for president in 2028. “I’m a natural procrastinator,” he said. “I haven’t thought about it much.”

There is no doubt that this last sentence is a fallacy, and it has probably been the main thing on his mind for the last two years. But the statement may actually mean that Trump’s support for him is waning. Vance’s relationship with Tucker Carlson, as well as his inability to actually negotiate any sort of deal with anyone, may have decreased his opportunities and support within the Republican Party. In addition, Rubio has consistently succeeded at his job, and most polls find that he is the best option for the Republican Party to win the presidency.

Rubio has repeatedly said that he would not run against Vance. But many leaders, including independents and Democrats who are unhappy with the growing power of the socialist wing of the party, have said that they would support Rubio over a DSA candidate. Vance may also be hesitating given that Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) has now expressed that he is considering running for office as well.

But all of these political machinations are unimportant in comparison to today’s history.

Three years ago, Hamas, with the support of Iran, committed the most heinous crimes in the most horrific ways. And they committed them against civilians. They used and continue to use children as their shields; hospitals, schools, and mosques as their headquarters and weapons caches; killed over 1,200 innocents and kidnapped 251 hostages, and have become the embodiment and personification of evil. If you ever need a reminder of how horrible that day was, I encourage you to view the testimonies of these Zaka volunteers, the first ones to arrive at the sites of the horrors.

May we never allow ourselves to forget the crimes committed against those innocents, what they did at the Nova Festival, or the Bibas family and so many other families. May we always keep in our consciousness the commitment that the words Never Again must be a promise that not only every Jew, but every good person on this planet keeps.

And may the Holy One, blessed be He, and His presence bring healing and peace to everyone who has been so deeply affected by the tragedy of three years ago. May the souls of those who died on that day and subsequently be gathered together in the garden of souls and bring beauty to the universe.

Creator of the small and the large, help us to never forget. May You who make peace in the heavens, make peace upon us, America, Israel, and the world.

And may we all say, “Amen.”

Chazak u’Baruch

Be Strong and Be Blessed

Rabbi Michael Barclay

October 7, 2026

26th of Tishrei, 5787

Read more …

Bukele.

• USAID Didn’t Cause the Rightward Swing in Latin America (Sarah Anderson)

The moment Flávio Bolsonaro got more votes than Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Brazil on Sunday and voting down the ballot favored the right, I knew it would happen.


The conservative “It’s funny how ever since we shuttered USAID, Latin America has been electing right-wing leaders” line was repeated across social media as some sort of factual talking point. I even saw people whom I respect and admire posting it and agreeing. It’s a theory. It’s a meme. The problem is that it leaves out a lot of important nuance that makes it not quite the flex many think it is.

It’s the equivalent of me saying I stopped eating sugar this year, and my neighbor lost 70 pounds. The only way my diet maybe impacted my neighbor’s weight loss was that I stopped sending him cookies on Christmas. That’s not how he lost 70 pounds. He actually lost the weight through eating better and exercising.

The political change in Latin America is real. I’ve been covering it and predicting it for two years here at PJ Media. Ecuador, Bolivia, Chile, Honduras, Costa Rica, Peru, and Colombia have all elected conservative, U.S./Donald Trump-aligned leaders since USAID shut down in 2025.

The fact that USAID did political work is real. The Trump administration has opened our eyes to just how bad it was over the last year and a half. We know that “political competition and consensus building” was part of its portfolio. But when you dive a little deeper and look at the facts, you realize that while both things are true, they aren’t necessarily related.

The Timing
First, the timeline doesn’t match up. It’s the easiest fact to prove. This swing to the right was happening before Trump was re-elected and took office in January 2025.

Costa Rica, for example, already had a right-leaning president in Rodrigo Chaves, who was elected in 2022. When the country went to the polls in February 2026, it elected his hand-picked choice to succeed him, Laura Fernández. Chaves was an anti-establishment populist who was focused on security and often clashed with other branches of government and the media (sound familiar?). He was working with Nayib Bukele of El Salvador to curb crime in Costa Rica, including building a mega-prison, and he was moving his country’s diplomatic and economic ties away from China and toward the United States.

Then there’s Ecuador, a country that has become one of the United States’ greatest regional security partners in recent months. Some people like to include it on the list — Daniel Noboa was elected to a full term in a runoff in April 2025. But Noboa was an incumbent. He’d been the country’s president since 2023 when it held snap elections to replace the impeached president Guillermo Lasso. Bukele has governed El Salvador since 2019. Javier Milei was elected in Argentina in 2023. Luis Abinader was elected in the Dominican Republic in 2024.

Marco Rubio announced that 83% of USAID programs were cancelled on March 10, 2025. Then there’s Bolivia, a country that saw one of the biggest political turns when it elected Rodrigo Paz, who assumed office in November 2025. After two decades of Movement for Socialism (MAS) rule, it finally had a center-right leader.

People love to equate this one with USAID. The problem? In 2013, the country’s corrupt socialist president Evo Morales stopped the flow of all USAID money into Bolivia, accusing the agency of conspiring against his government and the Bolivian people. Latin America’s move to the right was already well underway before Trump and Rubio dismantled USAID.

How Much USAID Actually Went to Latin America
When you understand how much USAID money actually went to Latin America, the theory becomes even more difficult to prove. Let’s look at 2023. When you take some of the major regions of the world — Europe and Eurasia, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and North Africa, and Latin America and the Caribbean — the money flowing into the Western Hemisphere is chump change compared to what was going to the other regions.

Europe and Eurasia received $17.2 billion (much of it going to Ukraine). Sub-Saharan Africa received $12.1 billion. The Middle East and North Africa received $3.9 billion. Only $1.8 billion went to Latin America and the Caribbean.

Of that $1.8 billion that went to the Western Hemisphere, most of it ended up in one of three places. First is Colombia, where it was used in relation to the FARC peace accord, counternarcotics operations, and the Venezuelan migrant crisis — people trying to flee Nicolás Maduro. The next is Haiti, where it was used to promote stability and humanitarian need. The third was the Northern Central America corridor, where it was used to address root causes of mass migration.

These numbers are far from impressive. Taking that money away may have pissed off some NGOs, but it didn’t win or lose elections.

The Money That Actually Shaped Latin America’s Left
USAID may not have shaped elections, but there was some financial backing that did. It didn’t come from Washington, D.C., however. It came from Caracas. In 2005, Hugo Chávez launched Petrocaribe, a regional oil procurement agreement that allowed some Caribbean and Central American governments to buy Venezuelan oil cheaply with credit that could be paid over 25 years with something like 1% interest. Some even repaid the debt with goods and services.

At its peak, it was supplying these countries with up to 200,000 barrels of oil a day at those terms. Cuba also had its own deal with Venezuela, receiving 100,000 barrels a day at the peak, largely in exchange for doctors through its forced labor program and security and intelligence training. Many of these countries would take the cheap oil and resell it to other nations, pocketing huge profits.

Chávez’s goal was to expand his geopolitical influence and support left-wing, anti-imperialist allies in the region. He also funded ideological allies, political campaigns, and friendly media outlets across Latin America and the Caribbean through PDVSA (Venezuela’s state-owned oil company) contracts. Profits were, of course, supposed to go to the Venezuelan people, not to illegally fund other governments and help sway elections.

By the mid-2010s, the Venezuelan regime had gutted PDVSA. Prices collapsed. Output plummeted. In 2019, U.S. sanctions stopped the repayment of all of those loans. At that point, Maduro and his narco-thugs were relying mostly on drug trafficking and illegal mining to fund the Venezuelan state and line their own pockets, but the free money to fund the leftists in the region was no longer available.


As I reported last year, Hugo Carvajal, who ran Venezuelan military intelligence, told United States authorities that this ran for at least 15 years and reached the Kirchners in Argentina, Lula in Brazil, Morales in Bolivia, Fernando Lugo in Paraguay, Ollanta Humala in Peru, Manuel Zelaya in Honduras, Gustavo Petro in Colombia, and the far-left Podemos party in Spain. Other U.S. and former Venezuelan officials have supported some of this.

This is also one important reason why people want Trump and Rubio to remove “interim president” Delcy Rodríguez from Caracas as soon as possible. You can’t legitimize the country with the same regime still in charge. Eventually, Trump will not be president. U.S. foreign policy will change. Delcy waits him out, has oil flowing again, and suddenly, that money goes right back to the leftists.

As one of my favorite experts on the matter, Emmanuel Rincón, put it, “Our genuine concern is that the Chavista dictatorship will stabilize with access to money and funding, and that Venezuelans’ resources will once again be used to finance the far left on the continent.”

The Reasons Why Latin America Is Shifting to the Right
One reason why this whole “no more USAID changed Latin America” banter gets under my skin — aside from the fact that it’s incorrect — is that it takes away the agency of the people in these countries. They have legitimate reasons for voting the way they do. I’m pretty sure I’ve gone over this approximately 8,394 times in the last year, but let’s do it again, shall we?

…

The Leaders Who Led the Way
With all of that in mind, I want to point out the leaders in the region who helped others see what they can have. You can look to the picture at the top of this article to get an idea of who they are.

The first and, perhaps, the most important is Bukele of El Salvador. We all know what he has done for his country — turned it from the so-called “murder capital of the world” to one of the safest nations in the Western Hemisphere. He got rid of the gangs and organized crime, locked up the thugs, and started building programs that would help support a free, safe, and prosperous nation long into the future. I’m oversimplifying, but it’s been magnificent to watch.

Crime and security have driven people to the polls in all of these countries. They’ve seen what Bukele can do for El Salvador, and they want leaders who can do the same for them. I talk to Central and South American voters almost daily and have for the last three years, both in a personal and professional capacity. Every single one — and that is not an exaggeration — knows Bukele and mostly praises him because organized crime has become such a big problem. Someone even emailed me back during the Peruvian elections and said they saw more Bukele posters than posters for their own candidates.

Every one of these “right-wing” presidents that has won over the last two years has promised to be a hardliner on crime. Many have consulted with Bukele. They’re building their own mega-prisons. They’re partnering with the United States to fight the cartels.

Economically, Milei has led the way in Argentina. These new leaders also praise him, promising to follow his lead, slashing regulations, cutting spending, and implementing free-market and pro-business principles. Many also promise to move away from China and toward the U.S. when it comes to trade and investment.

Read more …

Pretty bad.

• Yes, the Public Education System Is Broken (Amy Denton)

I have been in education for a long time. My first teaching job came two weeks after my younger nephew was born. His birthday is next week, and he’ll be 29. Take out the five years when I was working in retail and going to graduate school, and I’ve been a teacher for 24 years. There is not enough money in the world to tempt me back into public education. I’d rather stay poor, thank you. I keep hearing about a teacher shortage. That’s incorrect. There’s not a teacher shortage; there’s a people willing to be treated like dirt shortage. Why? How did public education come to this sad state? Jonathan Turley’s opinion piece in The Hill speaks to the problem and nails it right to the wall.


His opinion piece titled “The Blue-State Model for Education has Failed, and the Public has Caught On” states early on that one of the reasons the public schools have gone down the drain is because of the teachers’ unions. Early in the article, Turley states, “New polling shows that K-12 education has now reached a record low in the number of people who are even “somewhat satisfied” with the state of education in the U.S.” He then talks about the “education cartel,” a self-sustaining, self-perpetuating alliance between unions and politicians. The cartel has rendered families and students irrelevant.

How is that possible? people ask. Without the students, there is no school system. It doesn’t matter to the cartel. As long as the money keeps coming, which it does through dues, the cartel continues to operate. Personally, I have very little experience with the teachers’ unions. I joined the American Federation of Teachers briefly so I could get some legal help regarding the principal at the high school where I taught. I was a second-year teacher, and he had determined that I needed to go. He was black, and I was white. The AFT pointed me to the union steward at my high school, a government teacher who was also one of the basketball coaches. He told me that there was nothing the principal could do to force me from the building. I had to leave on my own. I’m a stubborn soul, so I was determined that the principal was going to leave first. He did, two years later.

Was the advice I got worth the annual membership? Absolutely. But that was twenty years ago. I dropped my membership the next year. Today, I wouldn’t join any teachers’ union because at their very core, they are about representing the teachers, not the students. The unions protect every teacher, even the teachers who have no business being anywhere near a classroom. In the states where teachers are required to join a union, the power is tenfold over the states that give teachers a choice, the right-to-work states.

In states where union membership is required, even if the teacher is able to quit the union, the union will still take a deduction from the teacher’s paycheck unless the teacher stands up and says “No.” In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court in Janus vs. AFSCME (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees) said that taking dues from non-union members was a violation of the First Amendment. This had an effect on union membership, which dropped by 10% after the ruling. However, the unions are not letting the decision slow them down. One year after the Janus ruling, a full 52% of teachers surveyed did not know they could leave the union without paying a fee. We are now eight years after the Janus decision, and the deep blue Democrat states with powerful teachers’ unions are working to make it easy to join a union but very hard to leave.

Aren’t unions supposed to protect workers and allow them to negotiate on a level playing field with their bosses? During the time of the Robber Barons in the early 1900s, yes. Today, most unions serve no purpose other than to enrich their heads. Both the head of the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) make six figures. The head of the Chicago Teachers Union makes six figures. Their salaries come from dues. Fewer dues-paying members, lower salaries. If the unions actually promoted better teaching and better practices, I would have no problem with them, but they don’t. The problem? Money. As long as the money keeps flowing to the unions, they can do whatever they want.

While the NEA, the AFT, and state and city teachers’ unions rake in the money, the students suffer. Children do not learn basic math and reading skills when they should and are simply passed along, because holding a child back today makes the school and the school district look bad. As I stated in another article, public schools are all about making things look good without any actual work being done. It’s the Gilded Age all over again, but in public education.

Teachers are not allowed to give grades below 50 even if the student has never done any work. The teachers who question the policy are labeled as “difficult” or “troublemakers.” Anything that makes the schools and school districts look less than perfect is seen as a problem. Rather than correcting the problem, schools cover it up. The “troublemakers” are given poor evaluations, denied the renewal of their teaching contracts, or even fired from the school and the district because they dare to question the system.

Students who graduate from high school with barely the basics struggle in college. Faculty at Harvard have been reduced to teaching high school math to incoming freshmen because the freshmen have no knowledge base. They never received it. This past May, the University of California reported an alarming lack of math knowledge among incoming students. The University of California, San Diego, faculty report showed a 30-fold increase since 2020 of incoming students whose math abilities fell below the high school level. Guess which political party most of the college professors in California vote for? California also has a very strong teachers’ union. Ninety percent of teachers in California are union members. They are voting for their own destruction.

It’s not just math that high school students are doing poorly in. The Los Angeles Times reported in 2023 that most California students cannot read or do math on grade level. How is that possible? When the people running the system don’t care what the students can or can’t do, it makes it easy to ignore the problems. It’s not just California with poor test scores; the deep blue Democrat states have the biggest problems. It’s not like they care.

What is the solution? Is there a solution? Turley states that school vouchers appear to be the only way to take control from the education cartel, by introducing real competition based on academic performance. I agree with him. I am 100% pro-school choice. Like him, I believe in the public schools. My parents, I, my siblings, and their children went to public schools, but what’s going on today in the public school system is not acceptable.

School systems cannot simply keep churning out people who do not have the basic skills needed to survive in life. School vouchers, which allow parents to choose which school their children attend, take care of the biggest problem in public education: money. The less money the school systems get, the less there is to waste. When parents have a choice of schools to send their children to, very few choose to send their children to substandard schools.

Read more …

“President Donald Trump has never had worse poll numbers with his base ..”

CNN loves to claim Trump is falling apart.

• Democrats Are Taking Big Chunks Of GOP Voters In Key Senate Races:: Polls (CNN)


Democratic candidate Adam Hamilton speaks to supporters at Cafe Quetzal in Topeka, Kansas
President Donald Trump has never had worse poll numbers with his base than he does ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.And a growing volume of polls shows a significant portion of that base is preparing to cross over and vote for Democrats.

New York Times-“Siena College polls released over the weekend showed between 9% and 16% of Republican likely voters said they favored the Democratic nominee in five key states: Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Ohio and Texas. And these aren’t the only polls to show a sizable crossover effect – especially in the middle of the country. All told, Democratic candidates have led among GOP voters by double digits in four key Senate races, and they lead by an average of at least 9 points in seven of the top 10 races, according to a CNN review of polling in each state.

Democratic candidates also seem poised to take an especially large percentage of Republican voters who don t identify with Trump s MAGA movement often around one-quarter of them. This data comes with an important caveat: Polling in the/ last/ few/ presidential elections has underestimated GOP support. And there are some signs that those misses may have been driven by polls reaching the right number of Republicans overall, but not enough of the party’s, and by extension, Trump’s strongest supporters.

If that pattern holds this year, it’s possible that GOP-aligned voters may wind up more supportive of Republican candidates than the polls suggest now. But it is worth noting that polling in the last midterm election, in 2022, did not exhibit this pattern. Perhaps the most striking numbers in the new Times-Siena polls came in Kansas, which has recently emerged as a surprising battleground. The poll showed Democrat Adam Hamilton tied with GOP Sen. Roger Marshall at 45% among likely voters, with the Libertarian candidate at 5%.

So how has Hamilton made the race that close in red Kansas, a state that Trump carried by 16 points in 2024? The pastor has peeled off 16% of registered Republicans and 10% of self-identified Republicans. (By contrast, Marshall took just 2-3% of each category of Democrats, according to the survey.)

…

But Hamilton is not the only Democratic candidate pulling double digits among Republican voters. The Times-Siena poll showed Iowa Democratic nominee Josh Turek taking 12% of registered Republicans and 5% of self-identified Republicans. And the state representative also took double digits among self-identified Republicans in recent polls from Marist College (13%) and Fox News (10%).

In Alaska, Democratic former Rep. Mary Peltola took 13% of registered Republicans and 9% of self-identified Republicans in the Times-Siena poll.mAnd in Georgia, Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff was taking 10% of self-identified Republicans in the most recent high-quality poll, from Fox News in late June.

Other Democrats take slightly less but still significant numbers. The Democratic nominees in North Carolina (Roy Cooper), Ohio (Sherrod Brown) and Texas (James Talarico) have all averaged 9% of the GOP vote in recent high-quality polls, according to a CNN review. Among other Democrats: New Hampshire Rep. Chris Pappas was averaging 5%, former Maine state Senate President Troy Jackson was averaging 4%, and Michigan s Abdul El-Sayed was averaging 3%.

Thus far, the Democratic Party hasn t matched the larger advantages in national polling. The so-called generic ballot, which asks people to choose between an unnamed Republican and an unnamed Democrat, shows Democrats averaging about 4% of Republican voters in recent high-quality polls. But the numbers do recall some of Democrats results in the 2018 midterms, which was a strong year for Democrats overall.

Exit polls back then showed Democrats taking double digits worth of GOP voters in a number of states West Virginia (17%), Arizona (12%), Ohio (11%), Pennsylvania (11%) and Wisconsin (10%) and taking between 5% and 9% in the rest of the key races. (While Democrats took more than 40 House seats from the GOP and benefitted from a favorable environment in the first midterm election under Trump, they did lose two Senate seats because they were defending some very red states.)

This year, Fox News polling also breaks out Republicans between MAGA Republicans and non-MAGA Republicans. And four Democratic Senate candidates have taken at least 21% of the non-MAGA Republicans: Cooper in North Carolina (21%), Talarico in Texas (22%), Brown in Ohio (25%) and Turek in Iowa (28%).mEl-Sayed took 12% of non-MAGA Republicans in Michigan, while Democrats took 12% on the most recent national generic ballot. And given Trump s apparent base problems, if Democrats do have a historic night on November 3, that could be a group of voters we ll be talking a lot about in the aftermath.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/ACTBrigitte/status/2107500417504444627?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 7 2026

Oct 072026
 
 October 7, 2026  Posted by at 6:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  30 Responses »


Willem de Kooning Woman III 1953


• “Bring Your Own Power” Era Arrives (ZH)
• Why Might Putin Finally Decide To Bring Ukraine To Its Knees (Korybko)
• White House Declassifies DOJ and FBI Documents of Susie Wiles Targeting (CTH)
• Mamdani Tries to Hide His Jew-Hatred and Only Exposes It Further (Matt Margolis)
• Latin America’s Many Trumps (Daniel McCarthy)
• Brazil Votes: CIA Cultivated Evangelical Churches ‘For Decades’ – (Pepe Escobar)
• Assange Created The ‘Fifth Estate’ – Ex-CIA Analyst (RT)
• The Education Cartel and the Blue State School Scam (Turley)
• Many Germans Long for Merkel (Rainer Zitelmann)

 

 

https://twitter.com/storm1news/status/2107398520332526041?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2107240561761517677?s=20

 

 


This was clear years ago. Is politics blind on purpose?

“Google Plugs Into Constellation’s Nuclear Reactors As PJM’s “Bring Your Own Power” Era Arrives…”

• “Bring Your Own Power” Era Arrives (ZH)

For most of 2026, the bear case on the US power producers could be summed up in one sentence: nobody is signing data center PPAs in PJM. Last week Amazon did. This morning Google did, too, and this one is five times bigger.


Google parent Alphabet has contracted for 3,590 megawatts of power from Constellation Energy (CEG) inside PJM, the largest US grid, the companies said on Tuesday, according to Reuters, confirming an overnight report from Bloomberg. Roughly a quarter of it, 890 MW, is new nuclear capacity squeezed out of 11 existing reactors under a 20-year PPA backed by more than $4.3 billion of Constellation investment, expected to start delivering in 2028. The rest is a long-term supply agreement for another 2,700 MW. And in case anyone missed why this is happening now, the companies said it outright: the deal is a response to PJM’s “bring your own power” proposal.

Constellation shares jumped as much as 14% premarket (they were up 6.3% when Bloomberg first broke the story last night), trading above $300 for the first time in a month.

Zerohedge readers know this story didn’t start this morning. We have been tracking the AI-nuclear trade since Microsoft agreed to restart Three Mile Island in September 2024, when nuclear names surged across the board on what was then a shocking headline. (Five years earlier, we were writing about “America’s Chernobyl” finally closing its doors. Funny how the AI capex cycle changes things.) Two years later, Constellation has become Big Tech’s nuclear landlord.

Below we break down the deal, why PJM forced Google’s hand, what Goldman’s power desk and utilities team are saying, and why the cheapest nuclear megawatt is the one already built.

The Deal: 890 Nuclear Megawatts… Plus 2,700 More. The terms, per the companies’ statement and the Reuters and Bloomberg reports:
• 890 MW of new nuclear capacity under a 20-year PPA, coming from upgrades at 11 Constellation units in Illinois, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The first upgraded plant is expected to start delivering in 2028.
• $4.3 billion+ of new investment by Constellation in “new equipment and technology… increasing thermal and electric efficiency,” as Goldman’s industrials desk put it this morning.
• A separate long-term supply agreement for 2,700 MW in PJM that is “not tied to a specific generation source and serves as long-term revenue certainty for Constellation’s operating plants,” per Google.
Translation: the 890 MW is the headline-friendly “new clean firm power” part. The 2,700 MW is essentially Google locking in a long-dated price for a big chunk of Constellation’s existing output. Who needs a hedging desk when you have a hyperscaler?

Stack it next to Constellation’s other hyperscaler deals and Google’s is bigger than Microsoft, Meta and Amazon put together (2,646 MW combined), at least once the non-unit-specific supply is counted:

It also comes less than a week after Amazon’s 690 MW, 20-year PPA at Calvert Cliffs, which we covered on Thursday in “Amazon Secures 20 Years Of Nuclear Power From Constellation As Goldman Sees Industry-Wide Win”. And Google is hardly new to the game: it is already funding the restart of NextEra’s Duane Arnold reactor in Iowa (which just landed a $1.9BN DOE loan), and last month lined up new capacity from Southern Co. by paying for upgrades at two of its nuclear plants.

Read more …

Putin doesn’t kill Ukrainians, Zelensky does. The rest is filler.

• Why Might Putin Finally Decide To Bring Ukraine To Its Knees (Korybko)

Regardless of why Putin might have held off on this for so long, he’s now arguably motivated at least in part by the tantalizing possibility of reaching big-ticket resource deals with the US after the conflict ends, the details of which his and Trump’s envoys have been negotiating for over a year already.


The New York Times cited allegedly intercepted Russian communications to report that Russia plans to obliterate Ukraine’s power, heating, and water systems this winter. While their claim can’t be confirmed, it aligns with Putin mildly “escalating to de-escalate” over the summer in response to Zelensky’s strike campaign, which has taken the form of ramping up attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure. If the report is true, then Russia doesn’t just aim to sever Ukraine’s military logistics, but to bring Ukraine to its knees.

Putin has thus far eschewed this arguably due to his belief that Russians and Ukrainians are kindred people. Some have suggested that Russia might not have had the drone and/or missile capacity to do so earlier, however, whether due to low production till now and/or to hedge against the scenario of a hot war with NATO. In any case, Putin now seems to have made peace with the humanitarian consequences of ending the war on Russia’s terms sooner rather than later, or at least on as many of them as possible.

He might be motivated by more than just Ukraine’s “war of attrition” against Russia that began over the summer with American backing and interestingly enough France’s as well. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reportedly told his Russian counterpart over the summer that no business deals are possible so long as the conflict continues. Since then, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner met with Putin to discuss such deals among other topics, after which Kirill Dmitriev traveled to the US to follow up on that.

For background, Putin boasted in late February 2025 that American companies “will make a decent profit” from investments in Russia’s resource industry, and Trump’s Special Envoy to Belarus John Coale recently confirmed that he received approval to pitch a Belarusian-like deal to Putin. It would involve sanctions relief in exchange for the release of “political prisoners”. Putin’s ally Alexander Lukashenko already agreed to several such deals and is now negotiating a massive potash one with Trump.

Just last week, Lukashenko also proposed a trilateral Belarusian, Russian, and US fertilizer plant deal, but that requires the US lifting its sanctions on Gazprom. Russian officials from Putin on down have called for the West to lift its sanctions on Russia, and while the US might lift some if Putin agrees to a Belarusian-like quid pro quo, the Ukrainian Conflict will first have to end for this to happen at scale. Their resultant resource-centric strategic partnership could then revolutionize the global economic architecture.

The Russian economy has survived the West’s unprecedented sanctions onslaught, largely due to the combination of its natural resources and national payment system, but its Economic Development Ministry expects only 0.6% GDP growth this year. United Russia’s landslide victory during last month’s Duma elections, the first since the large-scale phase of the Ukrainian Conflict began, gives Putin the mandate to do whatever is needed to win the war and deliver more prosperity to his people afterwards.

It’s therefore within the realm of possibility, consistent with Russia’s policy of demanding the lifting of Western sanctions, that Putin is motivated at least in part to end the conflict on as many of Russia’s terms as possible sooner rather than later so as to then reach big-ticket resource deals with the US. This imperative, which could revolutionize the global economic architecture and deliver more prosperity to his people, contextualizes the New York Times’ report about him planning to bring Ukraine to its knees.

Read more …

How was this ever legal?

• White House Declassifies DOJ and FBI Documents of Susie Wiles Targeting (CTH)

The White House has declassified documents from within the executive branch, specifically from within the Dept of Justice and FBI highlighting that Jack Smith used the Washington Field Office of the FBI to target President Trump’s campaign advisor, campaign manager and current Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.


The activity took place while Joe Biden was President, Merrick Garland was Attorney General and Lisa Monaco was Deputy AG. The FBI targeting of Susie Wiles was authorized by Merrick Garland on March 28, 2022. Recommended by Monaco eight days prior on March 20th. The FBI opened an investigation on Wiles that encompassed tracking her phone and email records during President Trump’s pre-campaign under the auspices of a “Sensitive Investigative Matter” that would later become “Plasmic Echo.”

In 2016 the Obama FBI opened an investigation of Donald Trump to monitor his campaign activity. In 2022 the Biden FBI opened an investigation of Donald Trump to monitor his campaign activity. The intents and purposes of the investigations seem identical. This is quite a remarkable series of documents provided by John Solomon. If, like me, you are deep in the weeds on these issues, you might also ask the question: why are we only just now getting to see this information? The answer seems to be at the top of the documents released.

The declassification was done by newly installed White House counsel Will Scharf. On August 9th President Trump noted the departure of White House Counsel David Warrington {source}, who was then replaced by Will Scharf effective September 1st {source}. According to the documents released, Will Scharf declassified them on September 29th {source}.

When Warrington’s exit was announced, there was a curious lack of explanation. Those of you who follow the inside baseball will note my criticism of the White House counsel in both Term-1 and Term-2. Given the context of these releases, it looks like Warrington was an impediment to sunlight on the corruption within the DOJ and FBI. I’m left to wonder if these documents were sitting in the White House counsel’s office, for more than a while.

Why did the White House wait to release these documents showing how the FBI and DOJ were targeting Donald Trump, his advisors and his campaign team until now. You decide. To me, this is beyond frustrating. I am trying to remain gracious, but there is no excuse for keeping sunlight away from this level of corruption. Hopefully the South Florida legal team is reviewing these documents as evidence in the larger conspiracy investigation.

There were different legal justifications used by Main Justice to target Donald Trump. In 2016, ’17, ’18, ’19 it was the nonsense around Trump-Russia. In 2021, ’22, ’23 and ’24 it was the J6 insurrection. However, the outcome of both DOJ/FBI efforts is identical – keep Donald Trump under FBI surveillance.

Read more …

“We all know that Mamdani is an antisemite, and his efforts to pretend he isn’t don’t fool anyone.”

• Mamdani Tries to Hide His Jew-Hatred and Only Exposes It Further (Matt Margolis)

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is desperately trying to prove that he’s not antisemitic, yet his efforts to do so only keep proving that he is. Last week, Mamdani rolled out his long-awaited strategy for fighting antisemitism, complete with a new Interagency Task Force to Combat Antisemitism and a $30 million price tag. He needed it badly. The city’s first Muslim mayor has spent months fending off charges that he has no use for the Jewish community, and Jewish New Yorkers keep getting attacked at a growing rate on his watch.


NYPD data released in August showed hate crimes climbing 9.4% citywide this year, and more than half of those incidents targeted Jews. That happened while all seven major crime categories dropped across all five boroughs, with murders and shootings hitting historic lows. Crime is falling everywhere in New York except where the victims are Jewish. The department’s figures also showed antisemitic attacks up 8% through August, with anti-Jewish incidents accounting for an outsized majority of all reported hate crimes.

So what did he deliver? A plan to combat antisemitism that never defines antisemitism. Nothing in it explains what sets Jew-hatred apart from any other racial or religious bigotry. Mamdani also declined to formally recognize Israel’s existence while unveiling it. The document never uses the word Zionism and gives Israel a single passing mention. Think about that for a second. Mamdani produced an entire plan about hatred of Jews and scrubbed out the Jewish state, the one thing his political allies despise most.

And the $30 million? It’s proving itself to be a ruse. Most of the plan recycles measures former Mayor Eric Adams already put in place, so New Yorkers get little that’s new. What is new is classic Mamdani, because the plan boosts funding for a group tied to anti-Israel activist Linda Sarsour. Here’s what reporting on the plan’s partners turned up:

One of the top advocacy groups involved in P.A.T.H. — which works to prevent hate crimes across the city through community programs and grants — is the anti-Israel Arab American Association of New York. The Brooklyn-based group, which was run for over a decade by Mamdani’s mentor and pro-Palestinian firebrand Linda Sarsour, repeatedly cheered on the anti-Israel encampment at Columbia University and other protests following Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack.

The organization pocketed $3.3 million in city funding between 2017 and 2024, the Washington Examiner first reported, citing data analyzed by the transparency watchdog group OpenTheBooks.= P.A.T.H. partners also include the 67th Precinct Clergy Council, aka “the Godsquad,” the LGBT NYC Anti-Violence Project, the Asian American Federation and the Hispanic Federation.

Mamdani’s answer to surging attacks on Jews is to hand more public money to an outfit that applauded the mobs at Columbia. He is asking the people who helped make Jewish students feel hunted on their own campus to protect Jewish New Yorkers. It’s outrageous, and he expects the city to thank him for it.

None of this should surprise anyone who watched his rise. Mamdani supports the slogan “globalize the intifada.” He campaigned alongside Sarsour on arresting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. His wife celebrated the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks. Anyone who knows Mamdani’s record knew his plan to combat antisemitism was going to be phony, and he happily obliged.

Jewish leaders certainly noticed. More than two dozen of them denounced the report and demanded that the Mamdani administration reissue it with a version that deals with Zionism. They understand what the mayor refuses to admit, which is that the hatred driving attacks on Jews in his city so often arrives dressed up as hatred of Israel.

We all know that Mamdani is an antisemite, and his efforts to pretend he isn’t don’t fool anyone.

Read more …

No more Democrat playground. How can that be a bad thing?

• Latin America’s Many Trumps (Daniel McCarthy)

Latin America is turning right, and it’s a vindication for President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. In some ways, the Cold War never really ended in the Western hemisphere: Socialism has haunted the nations of Central and South America long after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the same Cuban regime the Soviet Union propped up for decades remains in power to this day.


The hard left thought it had cemented control over Venezuela, too, thanks to Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro — until American forces snatched Maduro right out of his bed back in January and took him to New York to stand trial. Yet most of our neighbors to the south are not ruled by dictators. Instead, elections in Latin America have swung back and forth between left and right. Only now they’re all swinging to the right, as the region’s biggest nation dramatically illustrated last weekend.

Brazil is now the scene of the greatest right-wing comeback since President Trump’s own reelection two years ago. Flavio Bolsonaro — whose father, former President Jair Bolsonaro, is under house arrest — defeated leftist incumbent Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in the first round of the country’s presidential contest on Sunday. Bolsonaro took 47% of the vote to Lula’s 45%, and with other right-leaning candidates garnering nearly 5%, Bolsonaro’s prospects in the runoff election on Oct. 25 look bright.

Yet that’s only half the story: The right, and the Bolsonaro family itself, also made huge advances in the nation’s legislative elections. “The Bolsonaro clan claimed victory in every race they contested,” the Buenos Aires Times noted. The ex-president’s wife, Michelle, won a federal senate seat, as did his second son — Flavio’s younger brother — Carlos, while third son Jair Renan Bolsonaro was elected as a federal deputy, as was the former president’s brother, Renato.

Their party, the Liberal Party, nearly doubled its number of senators, from 15 to 28, and won the largest number of seats in the Chamber of Deputies of any party since the nation’s current constitution came into effect in 1988. Smaller conservative parties also fared well on Sunday — the Brazilian people sent an unmistakable message that they are through with the leftism Lula represents. In this, the Brazilian electorate is moving in synchrony with voters throughout Latin America, who in election after election have tossed out left-wing regimes or reelected conservatives who were already in office.

It’s as if the whole region has been going through its own version of Trump’s 2024 reelection over the past two years. And more than one wit on social media has remarked leftists haven’t won a single national election in Central America or South America since USAID was dismantled. Chile, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Honduras and Costa Rica have all moved right, while Javier Milei’s party staved off left-wing challenges and won big in Argentina’s legislative elections last year.

No, this isn’t just because American taxpayer dollars are no longer being funneled by progressive non-government organizations — NGOs — into humanitarian efforts that get co-opted by left-wing foreign interests.But the ecosystem of international aid, which during the Cold War was seen by Washington as a way to blunt the appeal of Communism in the Third World, has for a long time helped rather than hindered the global left. That’s been true of Washington’s rhetoric as well:

Jeane Kirkpatrick, who became Ronald Reagan’s ambassador to the United Nations, argued in the late ’70s that Washington treated foreign friends on the right worse than most enemies on the left, as if the only way to beat Communism and socialism was to prove America could appeal to left-wing sensibilities, too. Trump and Rubio have taken the opposite approach: They encourage pro-American, right-leaning governments, especially close to home in the Western hemisphere.

This has given Central and South Americans a moral boost to free themselves from left-wing governments, much as the stark contrasts President Ronald Reagan drew between freedom and Communism helped inspire Eastern Europeans to tear down the Berlin Wall. The people of Eastern Europe knew better than anyone how evil Communism was, but they had reason to wonder whether the West was really willing to stand for an alternative, rather than offering endless moral accommodations and capitulations.

Until now, the State Department and Washington’s foreign-policy elite have habitually thought our country isn’t good enough and must prove itself equal to the professed — yet entirely fraudulent — ideals of left-wing regimes.

The Trump administration has a different attitude: It’s proud of America, and in the places around the world where hope and pride matter more than resentment and shame, that new attitude gets results.

Latin America knows it has a choice — and now that it’s clear, the people of South and Central America are choosing “Trumps” of their own.

Read more …

US funding and interference have played a role in the South American country’s presidential election, the independent journalist has told RT..

No, we are not surprised. Is there even one single person who is?

• Brazil Votes: CIA Cultivated Evangelical Churches ‘For Decades’ – (Pepe Escobar)

The US has sought to influence Brazilian politics for decades, including through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and has played a role in the country’s current presidential election, independent journalist and geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar has told RT.


He was speaking after Sunday’s first round of voting, in which right-wing Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, finished ahead of incumbent left-wing President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Both fell short of the 50% threshold needed to win outright. The two are set to face each other in a runoff on October 25.

Brazil’s government has previously accused Washington of interference in its internal affairs, while Trump has denounced the prosecution of the former president – who is serving 27 years for plotting a coup – as a “witch hunt.” Brazil’s Federal Police have since opened an investigation into alleged US interference in the election, following a request from the Attorney General’s Office over reported US funding of projects aimed at undermining the country’s Supreme Court.


“The Americans put a lot of money in this election,” Escobar said, calling for a federal investigation into possible foreign influence. He singled out Brazil’s influential evangelical churches, claiming that the CIA had spent “decades” funding efforts to cultivate them and that this was now “paying off.”

Escobar’s remarks come as US involvement in Brazilian politics has already become a point of contention between Brasilia and Washington. Flavio Bolsonaro met US President Donald Trump at the White House in May, while his brother Eduardo has lived in the US since 2025. Eduardo was sentenced by Brazil’s Supreme Court in June to four years and two months in prison for coercion after the court found that he had sought US pressure on Brazilian authorities in an effort to interfere with proceedings against his father.

Escobar also claimed that two days before the vote, the CIA already knew Bolsonaro was ahead, even as Brazilian opinion polls showed Lula leading. He attributed Bolsonaro’s strong showing in part to the influence of evangelical voters, who now comprise some 27% of the country’s populations, a historical high from the 15% in 2000.

The runoff is widely seen as a highly polarized contest over Brazil’s political direction. Lula has sought to strengthen the country’s role in BRICS and deepen ties with China and other Global South powers, while Bolsonaro has advocated closer relations with Washington.Lula previously served two terms as president from 2003 to 2010 before returning to office for a third term in 2023, following the annulment of corruption convictions that had prevented him from running in 2018.

A Bolsonaro victory could also have major implications for Brazil’s foreign policy, according to Escobar. He predicted a “complete reversal” toward closer alignment with Washington and the Trump administration. Such a shift could diminish Brazil’s role in BRICS, Escobar argued, saying the country could become a “bystander” within the group. Brazil is a founding member of BRICS alongside Russia, India, and China.

Read more …

“The WikiLeaks co-founder has played a key role in creating an alternative to mainstream media, which has been controlled by intelligence services for decades, Ray McGovern has said..”

• Assange Created The ‘Fifth Estate’ – Ex-CIA Analyst (RT)

Julian Assange has become a key figure in the creation of alternative media, former CIA analyst Ray McGovern has said, expressing hope that the Australian journalist and activist is preparing to get back to work. McGovern spoke to RT as WikiLeaks marks its 20th anniversary. The website, co-founded by Assange in 2006, has published some of the most explosive leaks of the past two decades, exposing CIA hacking tools, classified US war records, illegal mass surveillance, and other closely guarded secrets.


The platform became a global phenomenon, making Assange one of the most prominent contemporary publishers, while also embroiling him in more than a decade of conflict with the US and other governments. Ahead of the anniversary, Assange suggested that he was returning to public life two years after striking a deal for his freedom with the US and securing his release from British custody.

Assange has become a key figure in the creation of alternative media, the “fifth estate,” McGovern said, adding that traditional media have long since lost their intended purpose, becoming closely controlled instruments for many governments worldwide. “The media in our country, and I dare say in many countries, the UK, Germany, is very tightly controlled. And so that’s the fourth estate, as Edmund Burke said, more important than Parliament itself. The fourth estate is co-opted now, it has been for decades,” he said.

“It’s very clear that the intelligence services have a lot of influence over what goes out into the media. And so you need an alternative. That’s why we placed great hope in what we call the ‘fifth estate,’ namely WikiLeaks and outfits like it that would encourage people to blow the whistle in a secure way and not endanger themselves,” he added.

McGovern welcomed the prospect of Assange’s return to active work, calling it a “salvation” for people willing to blow the whistle on dirty government secrets. “He will find ways to make it possible for people like me and my colleagues, if we come upon information that needs to be spread out into the media or out into the public, to have a secure way of doing that. That was his success. He’s bright enough to do that again, I am convinced,” he added.

Read more …

I had no idea things were this bad.

• The Education Cartel and the Blue State School Scam (Turley)

“In the first place, God made idiots,” Mark Twain once wrote in an 1879 travel book. “That was for practice. Then he made school boards.” It appears that most Americans now agree with him. New polling shows that K-12 education has now reached a record low in the number of people who are even “somewhat satisfied” with the state of education in the U.S.


What is most troubling is that the near-total contempt for our school system does not make a bit of difference. Families and students have become largely irrelevant to an education cartel, a self-sustaining, self-perpetuating political alliance of unions and politicians. According to Gallup, only 32 percent of American adults say they are “completely” or “somewhat” satisfied with the quality of K-12 education. That is the lowest figure in Gallup’s 27 years of asking the question. Public satisfaction with the school system has dropped almost 20 points since just 2024.

The collapse comes at a time when universities are reporting that college students are entering higher education without basic math and other skills.We have also seen the dismal decline in standards at elite universities like Harvard, where faculty have been compelled to teach high school-level math classes to students. In May, faculty in the University of California system (which eliminated standardized testing to achieve greater equity in admissions) reported an alarming lack of math knowledge among new students.

Most recently, a University of California, San Diego, faculty report found a nearly 30-fold increase since 2020 in incoming students whose math skills fell below a high-school level.For many of us, neither the drop in skills nor public support is surprising. For generations, the public school system has failed students in major cities. Despite massive budget increases, actual test scores continue to fall or remain at subpar levels.

In a prior column, I was particularly moved by the frustration of a mother in Baltimore who complained that her son was in the top half of his class despite failing all but three of his classes. Her story led to my changing my view of school vouchers. Despite my long support for public schools, I believe vouchers may be the only way to wrest control away from the education cartel by introducing real competition based on academic performance.

Faced with low proficiency scores, teachers’ unions and school administrators have continued to lower proficiency requirements. They are simply pushing students out the door without basic skills, robbing these kids of any chance to break out of cycles of poverty and unemployment. When confronted with their poor performance, school board members have declared meritocracy to be a form of “white supremacy.” Gifted and talented programs are being eliminated in the name of so-called “equity.”

In any other field, such generational failure would be unthinkable. No business or enterprise could sustain itself. However, that is the point. There is little competition in this system. Blue states have largely blocked voucher systems while protecting teachers from performance-based standards.

Actual students have become irrelevant to budgets. In Chicago, there are schools that remain open despite 80 percent vacancy rates. One school, Frederick Douglass Academy High School has only 27 students, or 2 percent of its building’s capacity. The school system spends $55,000 for each student at Frederick Douglass Academy.

Overall, 35 percent of Chicago schools are half full or less. But that did not stop the schools from spending a couple million on transcendental meditation sessions or giving teachers and students days off to join May Day protests (with city-subsidized buses).

According to a recent study, in 2025, Chicago Teachers Union spent a record $4.2 million on politics and lobbying but less than 18 percent on representing teachers. This included massive contributions used to elect former teacher and union organizer Mayor Brandon Johnson, a former organizer for the union. Johnson, in turn, has effectively turned over his office to the far-left union.

In economics, there are few scourges older and more damaging than the cartel, which uses its power over an area to create “higher prices, lower quality, and stifled innovation.” There is a natural tendency for people to form such groups to stifle competition and feather their own nests. Adam Smith warned that “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.”

The Education Cartel is becoming one of the greatest and most insidious forms of such anti-competitive conduct. Teacher unions have used hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions to acquire unchallenged power in blue states where they can dictate ever-increasing salaries, pensions, and budgets. One estimate found that, since 2015, the nation’s two largest teachers unions — the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers — spent $669 million on federal campaigns and another $336 million on state and local campaigns.

Figures such as Randi Weingarten with the American Federation of Teachers effectively made their unions piggy banks for the Democratic Party and appear at far-left rallies to support Democratic causes. In return, Democratic leaders give this cartel most everything that it demands, including barring competition in the form of public vouchers or tying budgets to improving the education of actual students.

It is a closed circuit. Democratic leaders increase school budgets and salaries and the unions then send back hundreds of millions to fund Democratic campaigns. If you want to understand the priorities of the unions, just watch one of National Education Association head Becky Pringle’s unhinged speeches.

Her declarations that the union will “win all of the things” clearly did not include educational improvements for students.

A recent study found that blue states with strong teachers’ unions overwhelmingly have worse student literacy scores than red states. At least eight of the ten states with the worst literacy scores were liberal districts with politically powerful teachers’ unions, according to the Progressive Policy Institute.

Read more …

The most destructive housewife ever?!

She’s worse than Thatcher, right?

• Many Germans Long for Merkel (Rainer Zitelmann)

The polling institute YouGov recently asked: “Do you think Angela Merkel, as chancellor, would be better, worse, or just as well suited as the current chancellor, Friedrich Merz, to solving the problems and challenges Germany faces today?” The result: Forty-eight percent of Germans believe Merkel would be better suited than the incumbent Friedrich Merz to solving today’s problems. Twenty-nine percent thought Merkel would be just as well or as poorly suited as Merz. Only 8% thought Merkel would be worse. Fifteen percent gave no answer.


A Forsa poll published in early September produced an even more dramatic result: Only 7% considered Merz a better chancellor than Angela Merkel, while 71% considered him worse. Even among CDU and CSU supporters, 57% share this view.

Presumably, many Germans think this way because the economic data during the Merkel years was significantly better than under her successors. But that was not her achievement. Merkel, who took office in 2005, benefited from the reforms of her predecessor, Gerhard Schröder (SPD). He cut taxes and liberalized the labor market, leading to strong and sustained economic growth. As so often happens in politics, the successor benefits from free-market reforms, while the politician who actually implements them is punished.

Merkel herself carried out neither tax reform nor labor-market reform. Instead of cutting taxes, she raised them: In 2007, VAT went from 16 to 19%, while the so-called “rich tax” added three percentage points to the top income-tax rate for high earners. Social spending also went from 26.9% of GDP in 2007 to close to 32% in 2021.

During the same period, Merkel neglected investment in infrastructure, the negative consequences of which only became apparent much later. In 2020, the OECD noted that Germany had one of the lowest levels of public investment. During Merkel’s time in office, the backlog in municipal investment grew massively despite a strong economy and low interest rates: KfW estimated it at €132 billion as early as 2015 and at a then-record level of almost €159 billion in 2018. Germany’s crumbling bridges and dilapidated schools are part of the legacy of the Merkel era.

One of the main causes of Germany’s current problems is its high energy costs. This is a direct consequence of Merkel’s “Energiewende,” or energy transition, which has cost €500 billion to date. Merkel’s decision after the Fukushima accident to accelerate Germany’s nuclear phaseout was just as consequential as the fact that — despite warnings from the United States and Eastern European countries — she made Germany dependent on Russian gas. Germany is therefore now among the countries with the highest electricity prices in the world — a direct consequence of Merkel’s policies, which effectively transformed Germany’s energy sector into an ideologically driven planned economy.

Mass immigration is another problem, due to policies initiated by Merkel during the 2015 refugee crisis. And she was the midwife of the right-wing AfD, which, according to current polls, is by far the strongest party. It was founded in response to Merkel’s misguided “euro rescue” policies. As late as August 2015, the AfD stood at just three percent in the polls. By January 2016, it had risen to 11%, and in the 2017 federal election it ultimately won 12.6%, compared with 4.7% in 2013.

The problems caused by Merkel’s policies or left unresolved during her 16 years in office also include: Germany’s dramatic lag in digitalization and the erosion of Germany’s defense capabilities. When Merkel left office in 2021, the Bundeswehr lacked operational aircraft, helicopters, ships, ammunition, and personal equipment — Germany had allowed its ability to defend itself and its NATO allies to deteriorate for years.

Then there is the failure to reform the pension system despite demographic change that had been foreseeable for decades. Instead of using the economically strong years to carry out fundamental reform, Merkel’s government introduced additional benefits costing billions of euros, including retirement at 63.

Merz’s responsibility is that he has failed to initiate the urgently needed change of course after Merkel — a change he had promised. His defenders argue that this is impossible with the SPD. Exactly! But who forced Merz to enter into a coalition with the SPD? He voluntarily assumed the role of captain of a sinking ship.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/MIPAGUY/status/2107145592350626175?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries