Raúl Ilargi Meijer

Jul 082024
 


Jacques-Louis David Erasistratus Discovering the Cause of Antiochus’ Disease 1774

 

Democratic Party ‘Clans Clash’ in Wake of Biden’s Debate Performance (Sp.)
Get a Dog: The Political and Media Establishment Turns on Biden (Turley)
‘Blitz Primary’ Proposed as Democratic Insiders Dissatisfied With Biden (Sp.)
Biden Campaign Fed Questions For ‘I’m A Black Woman’ Interview (RT)
Biden Refuses To Believe Poll Numbers (RT)
President Biden Must Resign, or Be Impeached (Young)
Leftist Coalition Set For Shock Victory In French Election (ZH)
New French Governing Coalition Will Likely Be ‘Fragile’ (Sp.)
How ‘Putin Endorsed Le Pen’: Russiagate Comes To France (Amar)
A Nation In Pain: How Political Idealism Destroyed Ukraine (Glenn Diesen)
Orban’s Peace Mission Continues (Sp.)
Xi Jinping Welcomes Viktor Orban To Beijing (RT)
Israel Deliberately Killed Own Citizens on October 7 – Report (Sp.)
BRICS To Launch Independent Financial System – Moscow (RT)
Elon Musk Issues WhatsApp Safety Warning (RT)

 

 

 

 

Tuberville
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809957317779087373

 

 

Biden chip
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809601970140815397

 

 

Megyn

 

 

Obamagate

 

 

Pope

 

 

Biden ABC full interview

 

 

 

 

“..a lot of people don’t understand is that Barack Obama and the Clintons and Biden don’t have a great relationship..”

Democratic Party ‘Clans Clash’ in Wake of Biden’s Debate Performance (Sp.)

A Wall Street Journal poll conducted in the wake of Joe Biden’s debate against Trump – his first of the 2024 election cycle – showed that 80 percent of the nation’s voters think the Democrat is too old to run for a second term. Fissures are growing within the Democratic Party’s three leading clans as Joe Biden refuses to give in to demands to drop out of the 2024 race, the Financial Times has reported. An “already-fractured” Democratic Party is reportedly trying desperately to carry out damage control in the wake of the 81-year-old president’s debate against Trump. But the “historic crisis” that has led to increasing questions regarding his mental acuity has opened up “old wounds and rivalries,” noted the FT. The Democratic Party is described as witnessing a raging battle between “three leading clans,” while the Republican Party “has appeared ever more uniform” under Trump.

Some Democrats are ostensibly hoping Biden’s once boss, ex-president Barack Obama, could “usher Biden aside.” However, the outlet cites those from the inner Biden circle as warning that such a step would be “counterproductive.” The reason is that there is supposedly a lingering bitterness among the Bidens after Obama backed Hillary Clinton, and not vice-president Biden to be his successor in 2015. Clinton went on to lose that presidential bid to Trump in 2016. “I think the thing that a lot of people don’t understand is that Barack Obama and the Clintons and Biden don’t have a great relationship,” one Democratic lobbyist was cited as saying. As for Obama himself, during his debut stint as senator representing Illinois from 2005 to 2008 he inflamed the Clintons after he “had the audacity” to challenge Hillary Clinton for the party’s 2008 nomination, reminded the outlet. “There is no unity among Democrats because, basically, the Democratic coalition’s pieces do not share the same values,” party strategist Hank Sheinkopf was cited as saying.

The various degrees of resentment nursed overtly by the Bidens, Obamas and the Clintons come amid a flurry of Democratic politicians, donors, and other supporters calling for the removal of Biden as candidate. Biden – appearing to be confused and incoherent throughout his debate with the Republican frontrunner last Thursday – reinforced ongoing concerns about his cognitive abilities. The president has taken a defiant stance, claiming his debate performance was just a “bad episode.” But 80 percent of the nation’s voters insist that the Democrat is too old to run for a second term, according to a Wall Street Journal poll released on Wednesday. Amid a flurry of reports attempting to suggest possible replacements for Biden, a new campaign has been imploring him to “Pass the Torch.” Hours before Biden was interviewed by ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, where he insisted that he will stay in the race, Democratic activists launched a grassroots campaign begging the president to step aside.

They urged him to act on a 2020 pledge to be a “transition” president. “Democrats need the strongest possible ticket to maximize our chances of winning in November. It has become very clear, based on both long-term polling and the recent debate, that Democrats’ current ticket is not the strongest one we can put forward,” said the campaign.

Read more …

“In a blink, he has gone from “the best Biden ever” to a type of “comatose but comfortable” defense. It is the political version of going from blue chip to junk bond status in a week.”

Get a Dog: The Political and Media Establishment Turns on Biden (Turley)

Fox host Shannon Bream reported this morning that her staff tried for an entire week to get a single Democrat to go on the show to defend President Joe Biden as the party’s nominee. Not a single Democrat was willing to do so. In the meantime, the New York Times is reporting that a senior White House official is calling for Biden to step down as the nominee due to his declining physical and mental condition. The media, which has long attacked those questioning Biden’s fitness, is now on board with the Democratic establishment in pushing the President to withdraw. The one constant in this ever-changing city is that self-interest alone drives policies and alliances. If you endanger the meal ticket of members of Congress, you are immediately persona non grata. Biden is now threatening Democratic control of both the White House and the Congress. The word is out that Biden has to go so the media is suddenly noticing what it long refused to see.

That goes for staffers too. For years, the staff has engaged in a dishonest effort to shield Biden from questions and to carefully script and choreograph his appearances. Figures like Karine Jean-Pierre and close political allies knowingly misled the public as to the President’s deteriorating condition. Even after telling the public to watch the President in interviews, it was revealed this weekend that the White House was feeding pre-written questions to favorable hosts. Indeed, the media is actually blaming conservatives for failing to reveal the President’s condition due to their effort to frame the news. The truth is now unavoidable. The President has continued to struggle with clarity, as when he recently declared “by the way, I’m proud to be, as I said, the first vice president, first black woman… to serve with a black president.”

In the case of this high-level White House staffer, he or she also said nothing for months, even as the White House attacked Fox News and other outlets for showing the President’s confusion at public events. They were denounced as “cheap fakes.” This staffer reportedly worked with Biden during his presidency, vice presidency and 2020 campaign. As with the media, however, the staffer now seems to have the green light to kick the President to the curb to strengthen Democratic chances in the upcoming election. The staffer revealed that Biden has repeatedly become confused and weakened in the course of the day. Somehow this is being portrayed as courageous despite the fact that the staffer remained silent as others were attacked for raising these issues and the White House actively hid the President’s declining condition.

As is often the case, everyone in Washington is jumping ship as the rats run for the poop deck. No one will be held responsible for months and months of misleading the public about the condition of the man who holds the nuclear launch codes. Just weeks ago, the media was heralding the brilliance and sharpness of the President. On MSNBC, Joe Scarborough stated “start your tape right now because I’m about to tell you the truth. And F— you if you can’t handle the truth. This version of Biden intellectually, analytically, is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I have known him for years…If it weren’t the truth I wouldn’t say it.” Now, the best that Biden can muster is MSNBC’s Joy Reid who declared “If it’s Biden in a coma, I’m going to vote for Biden in a coma. I don’t even really, in particular, like the guy. A lot of his policies? Don’t like them, [but] he’s not Donald Trump, right?”

Now there’s a roaring endorsement. The comatose POTUS pitch. Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) threw in his own damning defense by saying that the public should just look at the people around the President, a type of figurehead rationale for keeping a possibly infirm president. As usual, it is the public that has been played as chumps by the establishment and the media. The public is expected to forget the years of shielding Biden and the many public testimonials of his wickedly sharp acumen. In a blink, he has gone from “the best Biden ever” to a type of “comatose but comfortable” defense. It is the political version of going from blue chip to junk bond status in a week.

Read more …

“..moderated by celebrities like Oprah Winfrey, Taylor Smith and Michelle Obama..”

“Democratic Party luminaries are likely to continue to stick with Biden, maintaining their influence within the organization even if it means defeat in November.”

‘Blitz Primary’ Proposed as Democratic Insiders Dissatisfied With Biden (Sp.)

Two Democratic insiders have proposed a novel idea to address the “malaise and crisis” within the party amid questions over US President Joe Biden’s age and mental acuity. Ted Dintersmith, a wealthy party donor, and Rosa Brooks, a law professor and veteran of former President Barack Obama’s Defense Department, have proposed a whirlwind “blitz primary” to rapidly choose a replacement for the elderly party leader. The plan suggests Democratic Party leaders could choose six candidates, who would run brief “positive-only” campaigns putting forward their case for why they should be the party’s nominee. Weekly events would be held where the candidates put forward their ideas and vision, moderated by celebrities like Oprah Winfrey, Taylor Smith and Michelle Obama in order to stir voter interest. After one month’s time the party leaders would vote to select a ticket from the group of contenders, making the decision before the start of the Democratic National Convention on August 19.

The insiders claim the ploy would reinvigorate interest in the party and revive its electoral chances, which suffered a steep decline after Biden’s widely-panned performance at June 27th’s televised debate. “We can limp to shameful, avoidable democracy-ending defeat,” Brooks and Dintersmith reason, “or Democrats can make this Our Finest Hour. While we hope for help from Lord Almighty, the Lord helps those who help themselves. We need to act. Now.” Observers suggest the idea is unlikely to gain traction as it would require the blessing of Biden, who has insisted he will continue his candidacy unless instructed otherwise by God himself. It would also require Kamala Harris to surrender her assumed right to top the ticket as the current Vice President. The appearance of the party passing over a Black and female presumptive nominee could cause lasting controversy among core Democratic Party constituencies, critics say.

What the plan has going for it, in the likely view of Democratic Party figures, is that it avoids the pesky issue of having to put the question to actual voters. Democratic Party delegates – the typically well-connected insiders chosen after state primaries or granted influence by virtue of their status in the party – would both choose the list of candidates and make the final decision once they are heard. Leaked emails published by Wikileaks after 2016’s contentious party primary revealed insiders intervened heavily to tilt the process in favor of former candidate Hillary Clinton and against Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. In 2020, when Sanders again appeared to be in a strong position to win the party’s nomination, former President Barack Obama reportedly intervened behind the scenes to encourage multiple candidates to drop out and throw their support behind Biden instead.

The sudden surge of publicity for Biden, and stern warnings over the consequences of choosing Sanders, convinced voters to turn towards the former Obama vice president after Sanders’ victories in the first three state primaries had made his victory appear inevitable. The heavy hand of insiders in the candidate selection process – and series of highly questionable excuses offered to supporters for Biden’s disastrous debate performance – suggest the Democratic Party hardly lives up to its name. If some DNC figures remain concerned over the electoral chances of Joe Biden, they are terrified of losing control of the party to its voters, who may choose to back a forbidden candidate. All of which suggests Democratic Party luminaries are likely to continue to stick with Biden, maintaining their influence within the organization even if it means defeat in November.

Read more …

“The US president’s team has claimed “it is not at all uncommon” for guests to share topics they would prefer to discuss with journalists..”

Biden Campaign Fed Questions For ‘I’m A Black Woman’ Interview (RT)

The first journalists to interview US president Joe Biden after his disastrous performance in the June 27 debate against Donald Trump have said that they were given lists of approved questions by his campaign staff. Biden made appearances on radio shows with largely black audiences in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania on Thursday, a week after his face-off with Trump, in which the 81-year-old president appeared frail and lost his train of thought on multiple occasions. The interviews were used to show Biden’s doubters, especially in his own Democratic Party, that he is mentally and physically able for a reelection campaign and capable of discussing his record and answering questions coherently. However, the radio appearances were marred with more gaffes, with the president, among other things, describing himself as a “black woman.” “By the way, I’m proud to be, as I said, the first vice president, first black woman… to serve with a black president. Proud to be involved of the first black woman on the Supreme Court.

There’s so much that we can do because… look, we’re the United States of America,” Biden said on The Earl Ingram Show on Wisconsin’s CivicMedia. Host Earl told AP on Saturday that the Biden campaign gave him five “exact questions to ask” ahead of the interview. “There was no back and forth,” he added. “I probably would never have accepted, it but this was an opportunity to talk to the president of the United States,” Ingram explained. A few hours earlier, Andrea Lawful-Sanders, the host of The Source, a program on WURD in Pennsylvania, told CNN that “the questions were sent to me for approval; I approved of them” ahead of the interview with Biden. The Biden campaign’s spokeswoman, Lauren Hitt, confirmed the radio hosts’ claims, saying in a statement that “it is not at all an uncommon practice for interviewees to share topics they would prefer. These questions were relevant to news of the day.”

“We do not condition interviews on acceptance of these questions, and hosts are always free to ask the questions they think will best inform their listeners,” Hitt stressed. A source within Biden’s team told CBS News that it “will refrain from offering suggested questions” to journalists in his future interviews. A poll by Reuters/Ipsos revealed that one in three Democrats believes that Biden should quit the race after his debate performance, while some key donors have reportedly demanded that the president be replaced on the party’s ticket. In his interview with ABC News on Friday, Biden rejected the possibility of stepping down, insisting that he was “the most qualified person” to defeat Trump.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1809619673748529338

Read more …

Everybody loves me!

Biden Refuses To Believe Poll Numbers (RT)

US President Joe Biden said he does not accept polling data showing a slump in support, speaking in a televised interview on Friday. During the sit-down, ABC host George Stephanopoulos said: Mr. President, I’ve never seen a president with 36% approval get reelected.” Biden replied: “Well, I don’t believe that’s my approval rating. That’s not what our polls show,” without specifying which polling data he was relying on. A New York Times/Siena College poll released on Monday found that 36% of likely voters approve of the way Biden is handling his job as president. On voter intentions, the same survey showed Trump leading Biden with 49% to 43%, widening the gap from a 3-point lead before the debate.

“Look, you know polling better than anybody. Do you think polling data is as accurate as it used to be?” the US leader parried when Stephanopoulos insisted that Biden was close but still behind Trump even before going into the debate. Biden insisted that there’s nobody “more qualified to be president or win this race than me” and said he would not drop out, even if top Democratic leaders asked him to, claiming that only “the Lord Almighty” could convince him to step aside. Biden is struggling to dispel concerns over whether he is mentally and physically capable of leading the country for another four years following his halting performance in a televised debate against Republican rival Donald Trump.

The oldest US president in history appeared so frail and confused throughout the encounter last week that a survey conducted by CBS News/YouGov shortly afterwards found that 72% of registered voters do not believe Biden has the “mental and cognitive health necessary to serve as president.” A Suffolk University/USA TODAY poll published on Tuesday found Trump beating Biden by 3 percentage points, while a survey conducted for CNN by SSRS put Trump 6 points in the lead. A separate Bloomberg News/Morning Consult tracking poll showed Biden narrowing the gap over the past week and now losing “by only 2 percentage points” in the critical swing states needed to win the November election. Overall, less than one in five respondents in those states thought the 81-year-old was the “more coherent, mentally fit or dominant participant” of the debate.

Read more …

“A president’s failure to use due care or be loyal is ground for impeachment..”

President Biden Must Resign, or Be Impeached (Young)

President Biden’s duty to the American people is to “faithfully execute” his office. As a public trustee, Biden took an oath to do what is right. He is a trustee of powers bestowed upon him by the Constitution in return for his promise to be dutiful. Like every agent and trustee, Biden owes fiduciary duties to those who are served by his decisions. He owes them two duties: the duty of always acting with due care; and the duty of giving them his absolute loyalty, always putting their interests above his own. A president’s failure to use due care or be loyal is ground for impeachment. Under our Constitution, impeachment for “high crimes and misdemeanors” is not a criminal proceeding. Rather, it is a civil proceeding to discharge from office one who has failed in his or her trusteeship.

John Locke put it this way: “Who shall be judge, whether the prince or legislative act contrary to their trust? … To this I reply, The people shall be judge; for who shall be judge whether his trustee or deputy acts well, and according to the trust reposed in him, but he who deputes him, and must, by having deputed him, have still a power to discard him, when he fails in his trust? If this be reasonable in particular cases of private men, why should it be otherwise in that of the greatest moment, where the welfare of millions is concerned, and also where the evil, if not prevented, is greater, and the redress very difficult, dear, and dangerous?”

More than 50 years ago, when the impeachment of Richard Nixon was under consideration in the House of Representatives, I researched the English parliamentary practice of impeaching high officers for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The lead special counsel in the impeachment proceeding, John Doar, incorporated my conclusions into the articles of impeachment of Richard Nixon in these words: In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

The same standard of abuse of fiduciary duties was later included in the articles of impeachment of Donald Trump: “In all of this, President Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.” As we saw last Thursday, President Biden is no longer capable of acting with due care as steward of the best interest of the American people. He appeared physically and cognitively inept. His answers to simple questions were nonsensical. Even Nancy Pelosi wondered aloud, “Is this an episode or is this a condition?”

For Biden to remain in office, he will not be faithfully executing it. Rather, he will be using the powers of the office for self-serving ends, depriving the American people of a vigorous defender of our rights and privileges. If Biden does not resign immediately, he has committed an impeachable offense by causing “manifest injury of the people of the United States.” Should Biden attempt to have his cake and eat it too, he might withdraw his candidacy for this year’s presidential election but not resign as president. If he affirms that he would not be qualified to execute the office of president in January 2025, then why is he qualified to serve in that office today? To withdraw from the presidential race but continue in office would be a violation of his duty of loyalty to the American people. Joe Biden made a choice when he took the oath of office to serve as our president. If he can no longer be loyal or serve with due care, then he must resign his office or be impeached.

Read more …

Very few saw that coming..

Leftist Coalition Set For Shock Victory In French Election (ZH)

Well, no one saw that coming… The last-minute-arranged broad left-wing coalition known as The New Popular Front (NFP), was leading a tight French legislative election Sunday, ahead of both President Emmanuel Macron’s centrists and Le Pen’s rightists, projections showed. Provisional estimates from four pollsters suggest the following seat projections: • Left Alliance Set for 170-215 Seats • Macron’s Group Set for 150-182 Seats • Le Pen’s Group Set for 110-158 Seats. It looks like the anti-National Rally front worked better than anyone expected, catching the polling companies by surprise. The projected results suggest that the co-ordinated anti-RN strategy, under which the left and center tactically withdrew their candidates from run-offs, had paid off. If confirmed in final voting tallies, the projections suggest that none of the three main blocs will be able easily to command a governing majority, potentially leaving France in a period of political gridlock.

There are some big barriers to that given that Macron himself has called France Unbowed – a big part of the left’s New Popular Front – an extremist party and some of his supports have called against voting for its candidates. AP reports that the French leftist leader,Jean-Luc Melenchon says elections are an “immense relief for a majority of people,” demands prime minister resign. Melenchon says the New Popular Front government would apply its program and nothing but the program as he refuses any negotiation with Macron’s party or any combination. As Bloomberg reports, that theoretically would mean some disruptive changes of economic policy, and by decree according to Melenchon: • Undoing the pension reform; • raising the minimum wage; • a 90% top marginal tax rate; • and freezing prices of some consumer staples. Not a pretty picture for French bonds either way.

Andrea Tueni, head of sales trading at Saxo Banque France: “This is a big surprise, it’s a real blow for the RN. That being said, it’s not necessarily good for markets: The Nouveau Front Populaire taking the lead could generate concerns due to their program which was the most poorly perceived by the markets.” French National Rally Leader Jordan Bardella warns this vote “has thrown France into the arms of the far-Left.” As @RUNews posted on X: “Macron now faces a total mess. He aimed to stop ‘Hitler’ party and mobilized Lenin (Mélenchon), but now he has both Lenin and Hitler, leaving him stuck in the middle.” Presumably all the globalist fear mongering over the so-called ‘Hitler-ite’ Le Pen pushed the French people back into the immigrant-loving arms of the Left? Or something else went down?

Read more …

If there is a coalition at all..

New French Governing Coalition Will Likely Be ‘Fragile’ (Sp.)

Assessing the results of the second round of the snap parliamentary elections in France, it can be assumed that the outcome will create a serious governance problem in the country. The future governing coalition will likely be fragile and society will be characterized by greater political polarization, chairman of Rome-based think tank Vision and Global Trends Tiberio Graziani told Sputnik. “Economic problems will worsen. It will be three years of political crisis,” he said. France is already going through a political crisis, both internally and within Europe. The elections show that the country is facing political, economic and social crises.

The same can be said about other European nations, like Germany, the expert added. Jean-Luc Melanchon’s left-wing New Popular Front coalition won the parliamentary elections, securing 182 seats (out of 577) in the French parliament. President Emmanuel Macron’s bloc gained 168 seats. Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardelle’s National Rally got 143 parliamentary seats.

Read more …

And then she loses…

How ‘Putin Endorsed Le Pen’: Russiagate Comes To France (Amar)

It is perfectly predictable and yet a sorry spectacle every time it happens: the great big bad Russia panic whenever, and that’s frequently nowadays, Western liberals and Centrists are losing their grip. This time it’s the turn of France. With the far-right/right-populist National Rally (RN) under Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella succeeding at the polls as never before, French and other Western mainstream media are serving up the same stale old dish of fearmongering and, most importantly, blame shifting.Russiagate, or really Russia Rage (as in Road Rage), and its many copies, have been with us since Hillary Clinton and her cult were incapable of facing the fact that she lost the 2016 US presidential election because she is a dreadful person with no redeeming graces – and unlike her naturally gifted if shifty and immoral husband, a catastrophically incompetent politician.

And like every good form of insanity, Russia Rage is absolutely immune to both falsification and its own record of failure, even as a piece of demagoguery. We know that the only real scandal about “Russiagate” was that it was a hoax, the result of massive exaggeration, outright lying, and all-round manipulation by Democratic party operatives and their media allies. We also know that it did not even work on its own dishonest terms. Russia Rage was, in American journalist Matt Taibbi’s words, an “epic disaster.” Indeed, if it had any political effect, then to ultimately help – not damage – its target, Donald Trump: Almost a decade after the inception of the “Russiagate” hoax, Trump is back, stronger than ever and set to capture the American presidency again. And this time, his organization and plans are much more elaborate and ambitious, and, just now, obliging conservative judges at the Supreme Court have also equipped him with almost perfect legal immunity.

The other thing that Russia Rage did accomplish is, of course, to massively damage the credibility of US mainstream media. Not that they ever deserved any (ask the Iraqis, for instance, owners of non-existent WMDs and victims of an absolutely illegal and devastating war of aggression based on a big fat lie eagerly supported by those media). But Russia Rage brought the lying home in a way that woke up many Americans. By 2022, US media credibility was the lowest “among 46 nations, according to a study by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.” One year before, “83 percent of Americans saw ‘fake news’ as a ‘problem,’ and 56 percent – mostly Republicans and independents – agreed that the media were “truly the enemy of the American people.”

And yet, here we go again. In best Russia Rage style, the Washington Post, relying unquestioningly on French intelligence services and, of course, anonymous “sources,” is mapping out a whole “ecosystem” of Russian influence campaigns targeting, it maintains, the French election as well as the Olympics. And not only now but for about a year already. One wonders how those wicked Russians foresaw Macron’s bizarre decision to cap his EU Parliament election failure with a snap legislative election at home to make the fiasco complete. Or, perhaps, must we now assume that Macron is working for Russia as well? Who knows? The French paper of record Le Monde has been keeping up a steady, ominous drumbeat for months already, keeping its readers on edge with tales of Russian subversion and, always, of course, the National Rally as its tool. Perish the thought that this could have anything to do with the RN being the most popular and most dangerous challenger to the Macronist regime of extreme Centrism.

Read more …

” Idealists who seek to transcend power politics and create a more benign world thus find themselves intensifying the security competition and instigating wars.”

A Nation In Pain: How Political Idealism Destroyed Ukraine (Glenn Diesen)

Political realism is commonly and mistakenly portrayed as immoral because its principal focus is on an inescapable security competition, and it thus rejects idealist efforts to transcend power politics. Because states canot break away from security competition, morality for the realist entails acting in accordance with the balance of power logic as the foundation for stability and peace. Idealist efforts to break with power politics can then be defined as immoral, as they undermine the management of the security competition as the foundation of peace. As Raymond Aron expressed in 1966: “The idealist, believing he has broken with power politics exaggerates its crimes.”The most appealing and dangerous idealist argument that destroyed Ukraine is that it has the right to join any military alliance it desires.

It is a very attractive statement that can easily win support from the public, as it affirms the freedom and sovereignty of Ukraine, and the alternative is seemingly that Russia should be allowed to dictate Ukraine’s policies. However, arguing that Ukraine should be allowed to join any military alliance is an idealist argument, as it appeals to how we would like the world to be, not how the world actually works. The principle that peace is derived from the expansion of military alliances without taking into account the security interests of other great powers has never existed. States such as Ukraine that border a great power have every reason to express legitimate security concerns, but inviting a rival great power such as the US into its territory intensifies the security competition. Is it moral to insist on how the world ought to be when war is the consequence of ignoring how the world actually works? The alternative to expanding NATO is not to accept a Russian sphere of influence, which denotes a zone of exclusive influence.

Peace is derived from recognizing a Russian sphere of interests, which is an area where Russian security interests must be recognized and incorporated rather than excluded. It did not use to be controversial to argue that Russian security interests must be taken into account when operating on its borders. This is why Europe had a belt of neutral states as a buffer between East and West during the Cold War to mitigate the security competition. Mexico has plenty of freedoms in the international system, but it does not have the freedom to join a Chinese-led military alliance or to host Chinese military bases. The idealist argument that Mexico can do as it pleases implies ignoring US security concerns, and the result would likely be the US destruction of Mexico. If Scotland secedes from the UK and then joins a Russian-led military alliance and hosts Russian missiles, would the English still champion the principle of consent?

When we live in a realist world and recognize that security competition must be mitigated for peace, then we accept a security system based on mutual constraints. When we live in the idealist world of good states versus evil states, then the force for good should not be constrained. Peace is then ensured when good defeats evil, and compromise is mere appeasement. Idealists who seek to transcend power politics and create a more benign world thus find themselves intensifying the security competition and instigating wars.

Read more …

“Hungarian FM Warns EU Politicians Will Have to ‘Buckle Up”

Orban’s Peace Mission Continues (Sp.)

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto on Sunday suggested that European politicians “buckle up” ahead of Hungary’s further actions aimed at promoting peace. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban visited Russia on Friday to hold talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Orban described his visit as a continuation of his “peace mission” after a visit to Kiev, which took place on Tuesday. He has also announced more surprising meetings next week. Orban’s activity, however, sparked criticism from the EU authorities. “We are not deterred or discouraged by these attacks [by the EU officials]. The peace mission continues and even intensifies, so I suggest that European pro-war politicians buckle up and follow closely next week as well,” Szijjarto said in a video address on his social media.

The criticism Hungary faced during this week showed that the crisis in the European Union is being fueled by politicians who are supplying Ukraine with weapons, mulling sending troops there, and talking about nuclear weapons, he added. Hungary’s six-month presidency of the EU Council, which started on July 1, will be dedicated to the country’s peace mission, the top Hungarian diplomat said. Budapest will do everything it can to put an end to the Ukrainian conflict and to get Europe out of its “suffocating military crisis,” he added.

Read more …

Orban behaves like a true EU leader.

Xi Jinping Welcomes Viktor Orban To Beijing (RT)

Chinese President Xi Jinping has held a meeting with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who is in Beijing on what he has dubbed a “peacekeeping mission,” Xinhua reported on Monday morning. “China is a key power in creating the conditions for peace in the Russia-Ukraine war. This is why I came to meet with President Xi in Beijing, just two months after his official visit to Budapest,” Orban wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter). Details of the meeting have yet to be revealed, but it follows Orban’s trips to Kiev and Moscow last week. The Hungarian prime minister called the Beijing trip a “peace mission 3.0” upon his arrival.

Orban embarked on an unannounced trip to Kiev last Tuesday, where he proposed a “quick ceasefire” to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. Orban then traveled to Moscow to discuss the “shortest way out” of the conflict with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Moscow’s and Kiev’s positions remain very “far apart,” according to the Hungarian leader, who noted that Zelensky “didn’t like” his proposals. Meanwhile, Putin reiterated Moscow’s readiness to resolve the hostilities through negotiations, but said the Ukrainian leadership appears committed to waging war “until the end.” Orban’s meeting with Putin angered some fellow EU leaders, while Kiev expressed fury that the Hungarian leader had traveled to Russia “without approval or coordination with Ukraine.”

Read more …

Hannibal.

Israel Deliberately Killed Own Citizens on October 7 – Report (Sp.)

A report in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz has claimed the IDF invoked the controversial Hannibal directive during Hamas’ October 7 attack last year, deliberately killing Israelis to prevent them from being taken hostage by Palestinian fighters. “Documents and testimonies obtained by Haaretz reveal the Hannibal operational order, which directs the use of force to prevent soldiers being taken into captivity, was employed at three army facilities infiltrated by Hamas, potentially endangering civilians as well,” read an article in the liberal paper’s Sunday edition. “‘Not a single vehicle can return to Gaza’ was the order,” writes journalist Yaniv Kubovich. “At this point, the IDF was not aware of the extent of kidnapping along the Gaza border, but it did know that many people were involved. Thus, it was entirely clear what that message meant, and what the fate of some of the kidnapped people would be.”

The newspaper notes the exact number of Israelis killed by IDF fire is unknown. The report cites testimony from servicemembers up and down the IDF chain of command, including soldiers and mid- and senior-level officers. Highly controversial within and outside of Israel, the so-called Hannibal directive was devised in response to the threat of armed groups gaining leverage over the Israeli state through the taking of hostages. Palestinian forces took several Israelis captive during the 1970s and 80s, successfully negotiating the release of Palestinian prisoners in return. The notion Israelis were “better dead than abducted” led to the creation of the protocol, which allowed the use of deadly force. Claims of the invocation of the Hannibal directive on October 7 were made months ago when it was revealed an IDF brigadier general instructed a tank to shell a house in Kibbutz Be’eri with a number of Israelis and Hamas fighters inside, killing 13 Israeli captives.

But Sunday’s report is the most complete accounting to date of accusations of friendly fire. The allegations add to claims Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has deliberately placed Israeli citizens in harm’s way in order to pursue the Likud party’s vision of territorial maximalism. The response to Hamas’ October 7 attack was reportedly delayed for hours because Netanyahu had redeployed soldiers to support Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank. Netanyahu’s government received urgent warnings from Egyptian authorities in the months leading up to Hamas’ attack that the Palestinian group was likely planning a significant armed operation, it has been revealed. Israeli reconnaissance of the Gaza Strip, broadly considered “one of the most heavily surveilled places in the world,” showed Palestinian fighters were training in the use of hang gliders that were used to breach the enclave’s border fence.

Read more …

And perhaps a currency.

BRICS To Launch Independent Financial System – Moscow (RT)

Countries of the BRICS economic bloc are currently working on the launch of a financial system that would be independent of the dominance of third parties, according to the Russian Ambassador to China Igor Morgulov. The volume of Russia’s transactions in national currencies with fellow BRICS nations is constantly growing, the envoy said on Saturday in Beijing, speaking at the 12th World Peace Forum (WPF). Morgulov highlighted that Russia-China trade turnover had reached $240 billion and that 92% of settlements were being conducted in rubles and yuans. “We are leaving the dollar-dominated space and developing the mechanism and tools for a truly independent financial system,” the ambassador said, as cited by RIA Novosti.

Morgulov also said that introducing a new single currency is still some way off but stressed that the group – which recently expanded and now comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Ethiopia, Iran and Egypt – is “moving in this direction.” Last month, Russia’s Deputy Finance Minister Ivan Chebeskov told media that Russia was working on creating a settlement-and-payment infrastructure together with BRICS member states’ central banks. The senior state official specified that the economic bloc was working on launching the BRICS Bridge platform for settlements in national currencies. In addition, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov told Russian daily Vedomosti that BRICS Bridge could provide member states an opportunity to make settlements using digital assets of central banks linked to national currencies

Russia has been promoting its own domestic payment system as a reliable alternative to SWIFT, after many of the country’s financial institutions were cut off from the Western financial network in 2022. The Russian SPFS interbank messaging system ensures the secure transfer of financial messages between banks both inside and outside the country. Moscow has also accelerated efforts to move away from SWIFT by trading with international partners using their respective national currencies. The trend has been increasingly supported by members of the BRICS group, which have shifted from using the dollar and euro for trade settlements. The share of national currencies in Russia’s settlements with BRICS countries jumped to 85% at the end of 2023, up from 26% two years ago.

Read more …

“WhatsApp exports your user data every night. Some people still think it is secure..”

Elon Musk Issues WhatsApp Safety Warning (RT)

Elon Musk, owner of X (formerly Twitter), has again attacked WhatsApp over its handling of personal data. On Saturday, Musk commented on a post on X; one of the users had asked: “If WhatsApp messages are end-to-end encrypted, why do we see ads related to the things we discussed in our chats?” The entrepreneur offered a short answer to the question, saying: “WhatsApp is not secure at all.” Musk had already engaged in an online spat with WhatsApp, which is owned by Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta conglomerate, this May. At the time, he responded to another post on X, which claimed that “WhatsApp exports user data nightly, which is analyzed and used for targeted advertising, making users the product, not the customer.” “WhatsApp exports your user data every night. Some people still think it is secure,” the Tesla and SpaceX CEO said, referring to longstanding concerns about data sharing between WhatsApp and Meta’s other platform, Facebook.

The exchange was noticed by WhatsApp’s head, Will Cathcart, who tried to defend his platform’s conduct. “Many have said this already, but worth repeating: this is not correct. We take security seriously and that’s why we end-to-end encrypt your messages. They don’t get sent to us every night or exported to us,” Cathcart said in his post on X. However, security researcher Tommy Mysk, who also joined the debate, clarified that while messages on WhatsApp might be end-to-end encrypted, “user data is not only about messages.” “The metadata such as user location, which contacts the user is communicating with, the patterns of when the user is online, etc. This metadata according to your privacy policy is indeed used for targeted ads across Meta services,” he said. “So, Elon Musk is right,” Mysk, who had previously uncovered data vulnerabilities in TikTok, Facebook and Apple’s products, wrote.

In 2022, when he was still in the process of purchasing Twitter, Musk argued that Zuckerberg had too much control over social media due to Meta owning Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. He called Meta’s CEO “Mark Zuckerberg XIV” in reference to France’s “Sun King” Louis XIV, who apocryphally claimed to be the state itself and was known for his wealth and authoritarian power. In 2023, the two tech billionaires were on the verge of holding a cage match against each other, but the bout never happened. Relations between Musk and Zuckerberg deteriorated even further after Meta launched Threads last summer, with the platform, which offers a space for real-time online conversations, being seen as a direct competitor to Twitter. Threads garnered 100 million users in the first days after launch, but the public’s interest in the app quickly subsided.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Woody
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809852748805902363

 

 

Guns

 

 

Rescue
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809326362399740310

 

 

Koala
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809886253971656800

 

 


Dick Van Duijn captured the exact moment a squirrel stopped to smell a flower

 

 

Dog angry
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810030529464476003

 

 

The best
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809886483957834082

 

 

Alpaca

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 072024
 


Roy Lichtenstein Hopeless 1963

 

Biden Says He’s ‘Running The World’ (RT)
America Doesn’t Have A President – Musk (RT)
‘Doing My Goodest Job’ To Beat Trump (ZH)
US Mainstream Media Await New Orders Now Big Lie About Biden is Rumbled (DS)
Parkinson’s Specialist Visited White House At Least 9 Times The Past Year (ZH)
Democratic Donors Urge Biden To Step Aside – WaPo (RT)
Western Elites Lose Grip on Power Amid Political Crisis in US, France (Sp.)
The West’s Mask Of Morality Burns To Dust (Carman)
The Grim Reaper: Biden Declares Two Justices Will Be Gone in Four Years (Turley)
“Think About it Very Carefully”: Author Don Winslow to Sen. Mark Warner (Turley)
War Has Become NATO’s Agenda – Orban (RT)
New British PM Assures Ukraine Of ‘Unshakable’ Support (RT)
Foreign Mercs in Ukraine Bragged About Murdering Russian PoWs (Sp.)

 

 

 

 

Biden ABC


https://twitter.com/i/status/1809384149465116695

 

 

RoganDuckDuckGo

 

 

 

 

“Biden insisted “no one” had told him he actually needed to undergo one.”

Biden Says He’s ‘Running The World’ (RT)

US President Joe Biden says he has been “running the world” and therefore does not actually need any cognitive tests to prove his fitness for office. The president made the remarks in an interview with ABC News on Friday, when the 81-year-old was repeatedly pressed by George Stephanopoulos about the growing concerns surrounding his mental and physical condition. Asked whether he has “had a full neurological and cognitive evaluation,” Biden provided a rather incoherent response. “I’ve had – I get a full neurological test everyday with me. And I’ve had a full physical. I had, you know, I mean, I – I’ve been at Walter Reed [national military medical center] for my physicals. I mean – uhm yes, the answer,” he stated. Pressed further whether he has actually had “specific cognitive tests” and an examination by a trained neurologist, rather than a broader practice doctor, Biden insisted “no one” had told him he actually needed to undergo one.

The president dodged the question on whether he would willingly pass such a test and release its results to the public, insisting his work alone proves he is fit enough for office. “Look. I have a cognitive test every single day. Every day I have that test. Everything I do. You know, not only am I campaigning, but I’m running the world. Not – and that’s not hi -sounds like hyperbole, but we are the essential nation of the world,” he asserted. During the interview, the president also blamed his subpar performance during last week’s debate against Donald Trump on suffering from a “bad cold,” dismissing it as a “bad episode” rather than part of a bigger problem.

The debate debacle has reinvigorated long-running concerns over Biden’s advanced age, as well as declining health. On Friday, a group of 168 high-profile Democratic Party supporters, including major donors and academics, sent a letter to the US president, urging him to drop out of the race, the Washington Post reported, citing anonymous sources. The signees have “respectfully” called on Biden to do so, arguing the move was needed “for the sake of our democracy and the future of our nation,” according to the report. However, Biden has repeatedly pledged to continue pursuing reelection, dismissing any prospects of dropping out amid the mounting criticism of the past few days.

Read more …

“Does America need a president?”

America Doesn’t Have A President – Musk (RT)

The US does not have an actual president and has not had one “for a while,” Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk has suggested. Musk took to his X (formerly Twitter) social media network to dip into the ongoing political debacle in the aftermath of the debates between US President Joe Biden and former leader Donald Trump. He reposted a message by another user, with a screenshot of an opinion piece run by the New York Times, titled “Does America need a president?” “Real question … since we obviously haven’t had one for a while lmao,” Musk wrote.

The piece itself, penned by social conservative columnist Ross Douthat, polemizes with other authors on the role of the president in American society, on whether a dysfunctional president can be fully substituted by others in the executive branch, the impact such a ‘leader’ has on decision-making and accountability, and other topics. Douthat himself has been arguing long before the disastrous debate that Biden “needs to be replaced because it would be incredibly dangerous to have a senescent president in the White House for the next four years – and not just because Democrats fear he might lose to Trump in November.”

Read more …

“We’re gonna protect our children from getting weapons of war off our streets!”

‘Doing My Goodest Job’ To Beat Trump (ZH)

On the heels of his flub-filled Fourth of July, President Biden’s Friday appearances did nothing to reverse his slow march to a seemingly inevitable exit from the 2024 presidential campaign. The day brought more head-scratching misstatements and garbled lines on the campaign trail, along with a much-anticipated primetime ABC interview that prominent Democrats called “sad” and “chilling.” Perhaps most significantly of all, however, more Democratic legislators called for Biden to leave the race — and Virginia Sen. Mark Warner is reportedly organizing a meeting with his peers with a goal of building a united plea for Biden to quit. According to anonymous sources cited by the Washington Post, Warner and allies are weighing various means of intervening, including a meeting at the White House with Biden. While the count of House Democrats who’ve urged Biden to quit climbed to four on Friday — as Illinois Rep. Mike Quiqley made his feelings known on MSNBC — no sitting senators have yet crossed that line. However, per the Washington Post:

“There’s a growing consensus among Senate Democrats that the situation with Biden at the top of the ticket is untenable, and senators are trying to determine the best way to relay that message to an insulated president. Some senators don’t think Biden has people around him who are giving him an accurate picture of the fallout.” Tellingly, a Warner spokeswoman refused to confirm or deny the reports about his machinations, instead saying, “Like many other people in Washington and across the country, Senator Warner believes these are critical days for the president’s campaign, and he has made that clear to the White House.” While Warner — the chair of the Senate intelligence committee — maneuvered on Capitol Hill, Biden spent the day in the battleground state of Wisconsin, which he officially won in the last election by only 20,682 votes. At a rally at a middle school gymnasium in Madison, Biden added to his ever-growing stack of gaffes, confidently predicting he’d beat Donald Trump “again in 2020”:

Proving again that not even a teleprompter can assure Biden’s reasonably error-free delivery of a speech, he also said, “We’re gonna protect our children from getting weapons of war off our streets!” Friday’s main event was Biden’s sit-down interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. Though it was pre-recorded after his middle-school-gym rally before airing in a primetime special, ABC said it showed the entire interview without edits. As we’d predicted, Stephanopoulos, who’s demonstrated all the worst tendencies of big-media leftists, played this interview relatively straight. He challenged Biden’s previous attempt to blame his debate performance on jet lag from travel that ended a dozen days before the event. He confronted Biden with pointed quotes from a New York Times report, where sources claimed his mental lapses have become more frequent. He also asked pointed follow-up questions when Biden was evasive.

At one point, however, Stephanopoulos sounded like an empathetic family member gently confronting an elderly person with the hard truth about their condition, telling Biden: “I’ve heard from dozens of your supporters over the last few days…They love you, and they will be forever grateful to you for defeating Donald Trump in 2020. They think you’ve done a great job as president, a lot of the successes you outlined. But they are worried about you and the country. And they don’t think you can win. They want you to go with grace, and they will cheer you if you do.” One of Biden’s worst moments of the interview came in response to what may have been the simplest question. Asked if he’d watched the debate afterwards, Biden said, “I don’t think I did, no.” Stephanopoulos’s follow-up question about when Biden realized the debate wasn’t going well triggered a particularly incoherent reply:

“The whole way I prepared, nobody’s fault mine. Nobody’s fault, mine. I, uh, prepared what I usually would do, sitting down as I did, come back with foreign leaders or National Security Council for explicit detail. And I realized about partway through that, you know, I quoted The New York Times had me down 10 points before the debate, 9 now or whatever the hell it is. The fact of the matter is that what I looked at is that he also lied 28 times. I couldn’t, I mean, the way the debate ran, not — my fault, no one else’s fault — no one else’s fault.”

Read more …

“The donors did not like seeing their investment go down the drain. Many wanted their money back..”

US Mainstream Media Await New Orders Now Big Lie About Biden is Rumbled (DS)

[..] since 2020 the MSM have been carrying more water for Biden than the Ganges in monsoon season. Biden’s deterioration has been evident for some years and it became an issue in the 2020 election. Brit Hume, one of journalism’s grey eminences, posed that Biden was senile based on his manner, behaviour and actions. MSM “fact-checkers” protected the precious candidate. But Biden and his handlers took notice that they had been rumbled and used the excuse of Covid from early 2020 on to hide Biden away campaigning from his basement. MSM ignored his concerning demeanor completely and supported him for President in words that would have embarrassed George Washington. After a most unusual election came a most unusual Presidency, where the hiding away of the most powerful man in the world continued. Appearances were controlled, press conferences limited and interviews permitted only in controlled scripted environments such as with celebrities or on late night talk shows.

Biden’s deteriorating physical condition, as well as his mental decline, were covered up by his handlers in a number of ways. This year, two events began to poke serious holes in the view that Biden is just old. Last year a Special Counsel, Robert Hur, was appointed to conduct an investigation into the finding of classified documents at Biden’s residences. He reported his findings in January. The report was not kind to Biden to say the least. He stated that Biden should not be prosecuted for the documents because a jury would not find him guilty as they would be sympathetic to the fact he was a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory”. NBC News dutifully provided covering fire for this by rolling out Democrat operatives to trash both Hur and the report. Then there were the recent international events such as D-Day and the G7 meetings, where Biden was caught on camera spacing out and wandering off.

The videos were shown on Fox News and went viral. The Associated Press stepped up for the covering fire and called them “cheap fakes”, following on from the White House reaction. A bemused Fox News said the videos “have not been cropped, they have not been sped up or slowed down or edited in any way”. And then came the debate. Biden had slipped in the polls against Trump due to the response from voters to seeing a candidate pursue the Kafka-esque strategy of putting an opponent on trial. And so Biden and his handlers came up with a cunning plan – to challenge Trump to a debate in an environment they believed they could control. They set the rules, selected the moderators (CNN, who had earlier supplied the questions in advance to Hillary Clinton in a 2016 debate), had no audience that would cause Biden to lose focus, and banned any cross-talk to limit Trump’s quick repartee.

Biden spent seven days at Camp David prepping for the debate as if there was nothing else going on that required his attention. It was a brilliant strategy and only one thing could ruin it – the senility of the candidate. It did. The reaction was immediate from folks believing in Biden. Democrats and Never-Trumpers were gob-smacked. But it is fascinating how their surprise was akin to reading the last few pages of an Agatha Christie novel. Massive surprise at the unveiling of the murderer is followed by an “oh yeah” as folks think back on the clues that were there all along. These reactions showed up in polls taken over the last few days. A CBS News poll two days after the debate showed 72% of folks now believe Biden’s cognitive issues prohibit him from being President, and this includes 42% of Democrat voters.

The immediate reactions of the MSM were different. At 10:30 that night the panicked howls of the MSNBC political pundits and “experts” mourned the death of their favoured campaign, while CNN threw ashes on the coffin. The New York Times suffered a dark night of the soul, and as the dawn broke published an editorial claiming Biden should step down. These are the guys who in March this year were taking a victory lap comparing Biden to Beethoven, Wagner and Martin Scorsese after Biden angrily shouted his way through a teleprompter speech to Congress.

The assorted Democrat Party apparatchiks and elected representatives were even more on fire. The donors did not like seeing their investment go down the drain. Many wanted their money back. Incumbent Democrats facing election in November were all over the place, with the mood varying from total support to calls to step down. In a Presidential election year Biden is at the top of the ticket and so has the capability of dragging these guys over the finish line, as party regulars tend to vote the entire line. Or not, as the case may be. The White House gamely tried damage control, saying Biden was ill with a cold or suffering from jet lag after two back-to-back trips to Europe two weeks before the debate. The usually obedient White House Press Corps did not buy it. No word as yet from White House doctor Dr. Kevin O’Connor, who gave Biden his annual physical this year and claimed he was “fit for duty“.

Read more …

“He is part of the Biden family..”

Parkinson’s Specialist Visited White House At Least 9 Times The Past Year (ZH)

A Parkinson’s disease specialist from Walter Reed Medical Center visited the White House at least nine times in the past year, according to journalist Alex Berenson of Unreported Truths, while the NY Post has reported that a cardiologist was present during one of the visits. Dr. Kevin R Cannard traveled to the White House’s medical clinic each time, meeting with either President Joe Biden’s personal physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor, or a naval nurse who coordinates care for the president and other senior officials. O’Connor notably gave Biden a clean bill of health after his February annual physical. The visits spanned July 28, 2023 with the latest being March 28 of this year. That said, Berenson notes that the most recent logs are from April 1, so it’s unknown if Cannard has visited more recently.

According to Cannard’s physician profile page, he is a “neurologist and movement disorders specialist at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center” who specializes in treatments for “early Parkinson’s disease.” Since 2012, he has served as the “neurology specialist supporting the White House Medical Unit,” per his LinkedIn page. His most recent paper was published in August 2023 in the journal Parkinsonism & Related Disorders, and focuses on the “early-stage” of the crippling disease. Since Biden’s health is O’Connor’s primary responsibility, it is highly probable the meeting was about the commander in chief, according to Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Tx), the doctor for both Presidents Obama and Trump. “It’s highly likely they were talking about Biden,” Jackson told The Post. -NY Post. “He should only be [regularly] treating the president and the first family,” Jackson continued.

Walter Reed cardiologist Dr. John. E. Atwood was also present during a Jan. 17 meeting, the NY Post reports. According to Jackson, who has never treated Biden, O’Connor and Biden’s family are trying to “cover up” Biden’s declining cognitive health. Ya think? “I believe he and Jill Biden have led the cover up. Kevin O’Connor is like a son to Jill Biden — she loves him. It’s crazy. Kevin O’Connor was in that job on day one of the Biden administration because they knew they could trust Kevin to say and do anything that needed to be said or done and cover up whatever needed to be covered up. He is part of the Biden family,” said Jackson, who has warned about Biden’s cognitive decline for years.

Read more …

“A group of 168 Democratic Party supporters..”

Democratic Donors Urge Biden To Step Aside – WaPo (RT)

A group of 168 Democratic Party supporters, including major donors and academics, sent a letter to US President Joe Biden on Friday, urging him to drop his bid for reelection, the Washington Post has reported, citing anonymous sources. Over the past week, several other media outlets have claimed that pressure on Biden is mounting from within the party, but the incumbent is digging in his heels. Doubts over whether the 81-year-old is mentally and physically capable of leading the country for another four years have grown since his halting performance in a televised debate against Republican rival Donald Trump last week. Biden appeared frail and confused throughout the encounter – something he and his campaign have put down to a cold and travel-related fatigue. In its article on Friday, the Post quoted the letter as “respectfully” calling on Biden to “withdraw from being a candidate for reelection for the sake of our democracy and the future of our nation.”

The plea cited “threats posed by a second term of Donald Trump” and advised Biden to “cement your legacy by passing the torch – just as George Washington did.” According to the paper, the 168 signatories include Christy Walton, the billionaire daughter-in-law of Walmart’s founder, as well as billionaire investor Mike Novogratz and Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig, among many other top-level business executives and academics. Speaking to the New York Times on Wednesday, Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings argued that “Biden needs to step aside to allow a vigorous Democratic leader to beat Trump and keep us safe and prosperous.” The article noted that while Hastings was one of the first major Democratic donors to publicly vent his frustration, many of his peers are privately expressing similar concerns.

On the same day, another major Democratic Party donor, Charles Myers, the chair of Signum Global Advisors, told Bloomberg Surveillance that Biden has “four to five days” to prove he is fit to continue the race for reelection. The president has, however, brushed off all suggestions he should step aside. “Let me say this as clearly as I possibly can, as simply and straightforward as I can: I am running… no one’s pushing me out. I’m not leaving,” the politician insisted during a call with campaign staffers on Wednesday.

Read more …

“So already you have people concerned about Trump, but at least Trump is a known quantity,” he added. “But now, well, what’s going to happen now?”

Western Elites Lose Grip on Power Amid Political Crisis in US, France (Sp.)

US President Joe Biden is considering dropping out of the 2024 US presidential race after last week’s disastrous debate performance, according to reporting from The New York Times. The news emerged early Monday after the president was said to be in discussions with members of his family over the weekend on whether to continue his candidacy amid widespread concern over his age. Last week’s televised debate with former President Donald Trump, where Biden frequently appeared to have trouble finishing thoughts and responding to questions, stoked public anxiety among many Democratic Party officials. Opinion surveys since Thursday night’s event appear to show the octogenarian head of state falling further behind in the polls. The renewed panic comes as observers in France are urging a center-left alliance ahead of elections this weekend to deny Marine Le Pen’s party a parliamentary majority.

Observers fear the controversial figure could prevail in the second round of voting Sunday, ushering in the country’s first right-wing government since World War II. Both incidents are drawing concern internationally as establishment political forces struggle to fend off increasingly potent challenges to their power, according to Dr. George Szamuely, a senior research fellow at London’s Global Policy Institute. The author joined Sputnik’s The Final Countdown program Wednesday to offer analysis on the twin developments and their implications for Western countries. “This makes the United States look weak because if Biden does step aside and they say ‘I’m not physically and mentally competent to run,’ then the next question will be, ‘well, are you physically and mentally competent to remain president?’” said Szamuely. “It’s going to be very hard for Biden to say, ‘yes, I can still function for another six months as president while there are two serious wars taking place in which America is actively involved. I think there will immediately be calls for Biden to resign forthwith and the result will be great anxiety.”

“So already you have people concerned about Trump, but at least Trump is a known quantity,” he added. “But now, well, what’s going to happen now? I mean, what happens during the next six months? What happens at the convention? Everything is up in the air. So internationally there’s just a great deal of concern of an America in turmoil.” “Yeah, it feels like a bit like a free fall for sure,” agreed host Angie Wong. European leaders are said to be worried over the potential of a second Trump term amid concerns the former president would pull the United States out of the NATO military alliance. The European Union has investigated ways to ensure continued funding for Ukraine’s proxy war against Russia in the event the former president ends US support for the conflict upon returning to the White House.

But Europe’s political establishment is also losing its grip on power as support surges for right-wing populist parties throughout the continent. Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party won the most support in the first round of recent French parliamentary elections, leading President Emmanuel Macron to seek alliances to prevent her triumph in the second round. Although Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s coalition bested Macron’s centrist party in the first round of voting, the French president is unlikely to include the leftwing in figure in any coalition, said Szamuely, noting that ”Macron seems to really hate him.” The analyst suggested the French leader would seek more moderate allies, forming a center-left alliance of establishment political figures to deny Le Pen power.

Read more …

“..empires pass through seven stages, and right now the West is in the stage of decline and collapse in which “the heroes are always the same—the athlete, the singer, or the actor.” Sound familiar?”

The West’s Mask Of Morality Burns To Dust (Carman)

“Knowledgeable people know that Frankenstein is not the monster, but only wise people see that Frankenstein is the monster.” This quote has been resonating recently when considering the monstrous atrocities occurring on the world stage. Knowledgeable people know now, thanks to eyewitness accounts and global communications, that what is happening in Gaza to civilians is monstrous, in spite of the media spin, but only critical thinkers are willing to go deeper and see that the governments purporting to fight “the monster,” that is, Hamas, are at least partially culpable for creating it and, at worst, the monster themselves. It’s still absolutely wild how quickly the West went from arming Nazis in Ukraine to supporting actual genocide, all the while domestically making issues about the dangers of the far right, inclusion, kindness, and right think.

Words are violence after all, according to AOC, just perhaps a tad less violent than air strikes, but who’s measuring? Western support should be of no surprise considering the death toll in the Middle East over the past several decades in the name of freeing the people from evil tyrants. Of course, it’s easy to overlook that 90% of US drone strikes killed civilians, but we’ve been indoctrinated to have a short memory and rewrite history. Luckily, we get a “masterclass” in painting from old favourite George W. Bush as a gift for our collective amnesia and ability to allow a relentless PR machine to dictate and reformulate our opinions. Of course history would remind us of Agent Orange, the Tuskegee experiments, and other immoral atrocities waged against humans, but there’s something even more flamboyant and bombastic about the West’s current posturing, like they’re no longer hiding the psychopathy from their citizens, with the mainstream media becoming more desperate and less impactful in maintaining these nonsense narratives.

Has the West always been narcissistically playing the good guy, or has it become more depraved over time? While we can look back over history to the banking cartels and war profiteers to see that evil has always lurked within, it must be acknowledged that during the earlier stages of empire, there was a stronger commitment from institutions, some members of government, and active citizens to uphold the values of the ideology. As Glubb asserts, empires pass through seven stages, and right now the West is in the stage of decline and collapse in which “the heroes are always the same—the athlete, the singer, or the actor.” Sound familiar? It’s therefore fair to assume, based on empirical evidence even amassed within our lifetimes, that the Western leadership and its institutions themselves have become even more overtly and intensely morally corrupt over time. It could be argued that there was moral justification for fighting the Nazis in World War II as well as economic and geopolitical aims.

It could also be argued to a lesser extent that the proxy wars fought against the backdrop of the Cold War had legitimacy considering the Western paranoia of the USSR and communist ideals of permanent revolution. It begins to get much harder to justify the more recent wars in the Middle East, but a US public shellshocked by 911 was willingly compliant, with antiwar voices ignored and drowned out by its European allies. However, the military industrial complex is increasingly clutching at straws despite the most intense propaganda scheme deployed since COVID, evoking ignorant but well-meaning support to arm Ukraine and prolong the death toll. The struggling public of the collapsing West has grown weary of taxes used to fund the war machine, and now, with Gaza, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the stories fed to us about freedom and democracy are nothing more than comforting fairytales to justify state sanctioned mass murder.

The weak rationalisations for the current genocide occurring are becoming more and more pitiful as the death toll of innocents surpasses the 10,000s and World War III looms on the horizon, promising many millions more. Yet the tired legacy media still attempts to twist the narrative, making traumatised Palestinians pulled from the rubble condemn Hamas before they are allowed a voice. Are Israeli citizens expected to condemn their government, which, to date, has been far more murderous before being platformed? The whitewashing of history, just as occurred with Ukraine, to downplay the neo-Nazi threat and murder of 14,000 civilians in the Donbass since the US-backed coup in 2014 is in full swing again. Hamas are the personification of evil and attacked Israel completely unprovoked, purely because they are evil. This smear is from the Putin playbook, Hussein before him, and frankly any leader that’s impending the savagery and theft of Western colonialism. It’s so infantile that it’s embarrassing.

Read more …

“>.the next president “is going to appoint at least two new appointees.”

The Grim Reaper: Biden Declares Two Justices Will Be Gone in Four Years (Turley)

One of the least discussed aspects of the interview with President Joe Biden last night was his declaration that two of the nine justices are not long for the Court. The question is which two are facing retirement or the reaper. In arguing for his remaining as the nominee despite record low polling, the President told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos with certainty that the next president “is going to appoint at least two new appointees.” That must be uneasy news for the relatively small court that almost of a third will soon pass . . . one way or another. Liberals have been pushing Sonia Sotomayor to retire, but she has clearly rejected those calls. On CNN, journalist Josh Barro bluntly wondered why Sotomayor remains on the bench when younger jurists could be brought on to guarantee a liberal vote for years to come. He indicated that many liberals are frustrated with her for not stepping down: “I find it a little bit surprising, given what Justice Sotomayor describes there about the stakes of what is happening before the Supreme Court, that she’s not retired. She’s 69 years old, she’s been on the court for 15 years.”

At 70, Sotomayor shows no signs of mental decline. She has been a highly effective justice, stepping into the vacuum created by the death in 2020 of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Of course, few ever questioned the “Notorious RBG” in her decision to stay on the Court, despite her much older age and longer tenure. While some of us noted that Ginsburg was taking a huge risk in not allowing then-President Barack Obama to pick a successor, she remained on the Court in spite of medical problems and ultimately was replaced by Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Ginsburg, however, was almost 20 years older than Sotomayor. There is no concern for deterioration or death on the bench in Sotomayor’s case. It is simply a matter of swapping out justices like light bulbs before they burn out.

All of the justices are younger than Ginsburg when she passed (and considerably younger than President Biden who is running for a second four-year term).
Justice Thomas, 76.
Justice Alito, 74.
Justice Sotomayor, 70.
Chief Justice Roberts, 69.
Justice Kagan, 64.
Justice Kavanaugh, 59.
Justice Gorsuch, 56.
Justice Jackson, 53.
Justice Barrett, 52.

Justice Clarence Thomas is the oldest, but has not indicated that he is ready to retire. He would likely want to wait for a Republican president. If history is a measure, he has time. Oliver Wendell Holmes retired at 90. A recent analysis of the court’s projected composition suggested the next time the majority of justices will be appointed by a Democrat is likely to be around 2065. I did not find that analysis particularly compelling. However, I also fail to see how Biden can be certain that 2 of the 9 justices will die or retire. After all, even Thomas is six years younger than Biden. If he is predicting the death or retirement of Thomas within four years, he would presumably predict his own passing or retirement years ago. Running on the pledge to replace two departing justices could prove awkward if the justices are reluctant to be replaced or dispatched.

Read more …

“The real issue for Democrats is how to address this looming issue without tearing the party apart..”

“Think About it Very Carefully”: Author Don Winslow to Sen. Mark Warner (Turley)

Last night, President Joe Biden refused to take a cognitive or neurological test despite widespread concerns over his physical and mental decline. ABC’s George Stephanopoulos pressed the President on his low polling and efforts of Democrats to get him to drop out of the race. He specifically mentioned the effort of Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.) to organize members to pressure him to end his campaign. Biden took a not-so-subtle dig at Warner. However, it was nothing compared to a curious posting by author and Democratic activist Don Winslow, who appeared to threaten Warner on X (formerly Twitter). When the story broke in the Washington Post, Winslow posted a curious and ominous response:

It is not clear what Winslow meant by Warner knowing what he was talking about when asking if he was “sure you want to go down this road?” The message has caused a bit of a stir on the Hill. For the denizens of the Beltway, it sounds extortive and threatening. The suggestion is that Winslow has something on Warner. While some have asked whether this could be viewed as a threat criminally, it is clearly not sufficient for a charge. Warner is a public figure and this comment could just be a reference to political backlash or the lack of an alternative. His asking Warner “Are you sure you want to go down this road?” could be a reference to the political implications of the resulting chaos, including making Kamala Harris the presidential candidate. Harris is even less popular than Biden according to some polls.

While some polls show her doing slightly better than Biden against Trump, other polling shows that she would do considerably worse. However, it is the follow up of “Think about it very carefully” that has got tongues wagging in D.C. Whatever the intended meaning, the posting shows the depth of the division on the issue. Those divisions are only likely to deepen further after the refusal to take a test to put these concerns to rest. Notably, Biden has insisted that the public can simply observe him. However, that position stands in contradiction to the frivolous privilege claims made by the Administration to withhold the audiotape from the interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur. That was an interview that the President was prepared for in advance and held in ideal conditions with staff.

It is an opportunity for the public to hear him under questioning to reach the very conclusions that Biden suggested in the interview. As for Winslow’s posting, it may just be an incautious, poorly worded message rather than extortion or blackmail. We have all made postings that we regretted. The real issue for Democrats is how to address this looming issue without tearing the party apart. I have tried to drill down on the legal implications of swapping out the top of the ticket or the entire ticket. It is uncharted territory when it comes to the federal election laws on the use of past contributions as well as some states with restrictive rules on ballot changes.

Read more …

“According to Orban’s Friday op-ed, unless NATO changes tack now, “it will be committing suicide.”

War Has Become NATO’s Agenda – Orban (RT)

NATO has effectively made warmongering its raison d’être by jettisoning its original “peaceful” and “defensive” nature, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has claimed. Hungary’s leader, a vocal critic of Western involvement in the Ukraine conflict, has repeatedly warned that ever more escalatory steps by the US-led military bloc could eventually lead to a direct military confrontation with Russia, yielding catastrophic consequences. On Friday, Orban paid a surprise visit to Moscow, where he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Hungarian prime minister’s office clarified that he was on a “peacekeeping mission.” The discussion between the two leaders centered on potential ways to peacefully resolve the Ukraine conflict. Wrapping up the talks, Orban acknowledged that Moscow’s and Kiev’s positions remain very “far apart.” He added, however, that “we’ve already taken the most important step – establishing contact,” vowing to continue the effort.

Earlier, on Tuesday, the Hungarian prime minister had arrived in Kiev, where he sat down with Vladimir Zelensky. Orban advocated for an immediate ceasefire and negotiations. On the same day as his trip to Moscow, an op-ed penned by Orban was published in Newsweek which addressed the latest tendencies involving NATO, of which Hungary has been a member since 1999. In it, the Hungarian prime minister stressed Budapest’s active participation in multiple NATO operations and initiatives over the years, as well as its compliance with the bloc’s 2% defense spending target. Orban noted that the NATO his country joined 25 years ago was a “peace project” and a “military alliance for defense.” However, “today, instead of peace, the agenda is the pursuit of war; instead of defense, it is offense,” Orban lamented.

The prime minister stated that “ever more voices within NATO are making the case for the necessity—or even inevitability—of military confrontation with the world’s other geopolitical power centers.” He warned that this attitude “functions like a self-fulfilling prophecy.” He noted that several member states have recently entertained the possibility of launching a NATO operation in Ukraine. In late February, French President Emmanuel Macron said he did not rule out the deployment of French troops to Ukraine. Even though his suggestion quickly drew criticism from Germany and other members, the French head of state has since doubled down on the controversial idea on multiple occasions. In May, Estonia and neighboring Lithuania signaled their readiness to send troops to Ukraine for logistical and other non-combat missions. According to Orban’s Friday op-ed, unless NATO changes tack now, “it will be committing suicide.”

Read more …

“One of Keir Starmer’s first phone calls after taking charge of the UK government was with Vladimir Zelensky..”

New British PM Assures Ukraine Of ‘Unshakable’ Support (RT)

London’s support for Kiev during the conflict with Moscow will remain at the same level under his leadership, the new Prime Minister of Britain Keir Starmer has told Vladimir Zelensky. Starmer replaced Rishi Sunak as the head of the UK government on Friday after the Labour Party he leads claimed a landslide victory in a general election, securing at least 412 of the 650 seats in parliament. One of his first phone calls in the new role was with Zelensky. The Ukrainian leader wrote on X (formerly Twitter) on Friday that during their conversation he congratulated Starmer on becoming prime minister and “wished him success in fulfilling the British people’s expectations of the new government.” “I am grateful to Prime Minister Starmer for reaffirming the UK’s principled and unwavering support for Ukraine,” he said.

According to Zelensky, he and the British premier had “coordinated positions” ahead of the NATO Summit in Washington on July 9-11 and discussed ways to further strengthen the “partnership” between Kiev and London. Starmer later shared Zelensky’s post on his page, claiming that “Ukraine’s ongoing fight against Russian aggression matters to all of us.” “The UK’s support [for Kiev] remains unshakable,” the PM wrote, adding that he is looking forward to meeting Zelensky in person. Britain has been one of the biggest backers of Ukraine during the conflict with Russia, pledging £12.5 billion (around $16 billion) in support for Kiev, including £7.6 billion (around $9.7 billion) in military aid, since February 2022.

Starmer becomes the UK’s fourth prime minister during this period, after Conservatives Boris Johnson, who resigned in September 2022, Liz Truss, who set a record by stepping down on her 15th day in office, and Sunak, who headed the government until Friday. However, London’s commitment to Kiev remained unchanged despite the changes at the helm. Earlier this year, Russia’s foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said that the role played by Britain during the conflict in Ukraine was “even more aggressive, more elaborate in its provocative assertiveness than of any other participant, including even the US.”

In May, London’s ambassador in Moscow, Nigel Casey, was summoned to the foreign ministry following remarks by the UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron that Ukraine has the “right” to use UK-provided weaponry to strike targets deep inside Russia, if it decides to do so. Casey was warned that “British military facilities and equipment on the territory of Ukraine and beyond” could be targeted if such attacks do happen. Moscow has repeatedly warned that deliveries of weapons and ammunition to Kiev by the US, UK and their allies will not prevent Russia from achieving its military goals, but will merely prolong the fighting and increase the risk of a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO. According to Russian officials, the provision of arms, sharing of intelligence, and training of Ukrainian troops effectively means that Western nations have become de-facto parties to the conflict.

Read more …

“..the so-called “Chosen company.”

Foreign Mercs in Ukraine Bragged About Murdering Russian PoWs (Sp.)

A US media outlet’s report has claimed to shed light on atrocities committed by foreign hirelings dubbed by the West as so-called “volunteer soldiers” fighting in the proxy war in Ukraine. Foreign mercenaries fighting on the side of the Kiev regime reveled in executing Russian prisoners, the New York Times has reported. The atrocious killings are believed to have been carried out by members of the so-called “Chosen company.” One incident in August 2023 was described to the outlet by a witness, the unit’s medic, a German called Caspar Grosse. Grosse explained that a wounded and unarmed Russian soldier seeking medical help from his foreign captors was shot in cold blood. First one mercenary shot the Russian in the torso, and then, as he slumped still breathing, another soldier “just shot him in the head,” Grosse recalled. According to several accounts, video footage and text messages exchanged by members of the unit and reviewed by the outlet, such “unwarranted killings” continued.

In another episode, a Chosen company fighter “threw a grenade at a surrendering Russian soldier who had raised his hands, killing him,” the outlet stated, referencing reviewed drone footage. It was added that the Ukrainian military published a video of this episode, but edited out the surrender moment. Militants from the company of foreign hirelings and thrill-seekers reportedly talked freely about the murders of prisoners of war in group chats. In a third episode, revealed by such messages, a soldier in command in October 2023 told the fighters he would take personal responsibility if “anything comes out” about the killings. At the center of all these three incidents was reportedly a Greek mercenary with the callsign Zeus. He shot a wounded Russian in the trench, tossed the grenade at a prisoner, and bragged “a thousand times” about killing the surrendering Russian, claimed Grosse.

Benjamin Reed, a former American member of the unit, claimed that he “heard, to such a large degree, innumerable conversations, about the executions of PoWs on various operations.” Furthermore, the unit’s recruiter told him that it “was OK to kill PoWs if they didn’t surrender in the strictest Geneva Convention standards.” Reed posted a video on TikTok, calling his former comrades “kill-crazy cowboys, nothing more.”In interviews, Grosse is said to have recounted details that other Chosen members corroborated. Ryan O’Leary, the American who claims to be the de facto commander of Chosen company, denied to the outlet that his fighters had committed war crimes. However, after being contacted by The Times, O’Leary reportedly vowed in a group chat to “cast a wide net” to “snare the rabbit” who had been speaking to journalists. Any footage showing the killing of a surrendering soldier should have triggered an investigation in the US, underscored the publication.

Read more …

 

 

 

 


When life gets you down and you feel unloved and worthless, just remember you’ll be dead one day. Have a great weekend.

 

 

Pet machine
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809504559963816060

 

 

Cattle swim

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 062024
 


Roy Lichtenstein Forget it! Forget me! 1962

 

Incoherence Day: Biden’s Fourth (ZH)
European Leaders ‘Stunned’ By Biden’s Accelerated Aging – WaPo (RT)
Biden Says Every Day Is A ‘Cognitive Test’ For Him (RT)
HuffPo Calls For Biden Campaign To Use AI To Make Him Appear Cogent (MN)
Trump Poses As Peacemaker For Ukraine After Stoking The War As President (SCF)
Republican Control In The States Could Give Trump Victory (Vasco)
Who Turned Off the Gaslight? (Kunstler)
Rep. Goldman Insists the Country is Safe in the Hands of Others (Turley)
Orban’s Surprise Visit To Moscow Sparks Fury In Brussels (RT)
I Don’t Need A Mandate To Promote Peace – Orban (RT)
Orban and Putin Discuss ‘Shortest Way Out’ Of Ukraine Conflict (RT)
NATO Members To Give Ukraine $43 Billion in Military Aid for 2025 (Antiwar)
Trusting the ‘Five Eyes’ Only (Michael Klare)
Why the SCO Summit in Kazakhstan Was a Game-Changer (Pepe Escobar)

 

 

 

 

Rogan Dore

 

 

Tucker

 

 

Vindman

 

 

 

 

Galloway Ritter

 

 

 

 

“..next week’s schedule: Biden will host a three-day NATO summit in Washington that starts on Tuesday. As part of that event, he will conduct a rare solo press conference..”

Incoherence Day: Biden’s Fourth (ZH)

Thursday’s dark comedy started with an appearance on Philadelphia’s WURD radio, which features a format categorized as “urban talk.” Having already boasted about appointing the first black woman to the Supreme Court and selecting the first black woman as vice president, Biden short-circuited and said, “I’m proud to be, as I said, the first vice president…the first black woman to serve with a black president.” In the same interview, Biden completely garbled his reminiscing about John F. Kennedy, Jr serving as a barrier-breaking inspiration to Biden’s younger self: “I remember, as a Catholic kid growing up up in an area where we didn’t like, Catholics didn’t get — I’m the first president to be elected statewide in the state of Delaware when I was a kid. Well, you know, I was, I looked at John Kennedy and said, ‘Well, he got elected. Why can’t I get elected?

Later, in remarks to military families at the White House, Biden twice showcased another of his chronic symptoms, as he started a train of thought, only to quickly abandon it. The first example came as he attempted to trot out the disputed allegation that then-President Trump called dead American soldiers in a French World War I cemetery “losers” and “suckers.” After his anecdote stalled, Biden tried recovering with one of his all-purpose rhetorical crutches, shouting, “We gotta just remember WHO IN THE HELL WE ARE…We’re the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!” Another dead-end sentence came as he seemed to be making an exaggerated claim about putting himself in danger alongside service members in foreign conflicts:

In another radio interview meant to reach black audiences, Biden appeared on the nationally syndicated Earl Ingram Show. “Despite the low-pressure nature of the interview, the president at times spoke haltingly as he delivered his rapid-fire answers,” the New York Times reported. “In the 17-minute interview, he sometimes stopped himself in the middle of an answer.” For example, in the middle of a sentence about Trump’s proposed tariffs, Biden abandoned the venture, saying, “…anyway, just, I don’t want to get too wrapped up in it, really.” With his flub-filled Fourth in the books, Biden’s next major opportunity to shore up voters’ perception of this mental soundness comes tonight, when appears in his first sit-down interview since last week’s debate disaster. The interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos will be recorded during the day amid Biden campaign stops in Wisconsin and then aired in an 8pm ET “primetime special.”

To counter suspicions that the network will edit the interview to Biden’s benefit, ABC has committed to releasing a transcript of the entire interview sometime today or this evening. As we noted yesterday: “Readers will naturally view the idea of a Stephanopoulos interview with justifiable wariness of soft-pitch questions and friendly editing. However, we’re in a different political world than last week… Given the debate-triggered earthquake that’s altered the leftist landscape, Stephanopoulos will likely feel significant pressure to act something like a real journalist, for once.” As Biden staggers from one risky public appearance to the next, a white-knuckled Team Biden is surely sweating next week’s schedule: Biden will host a three-day NATO summit in Washington that starts on Tuesday. As part of that event, he will conduct a rare solo press conference, which could well prove the most treacherous challenge he’s faced since last week’s debate — and perhaps even more so.

Read more …

“It’s very, very rare in a democracy that the person you run for an election is someone that you all know can’t lead the country for four more years..”

European Leaders ‘Stunned’ By Biden’s Accelerated Aging – WaPo (RT)

US President Joe Biden has been displaying worrying signs of “accelerated aging” in recent months and these changes shocked European leaders who met him at the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Italy last month, the Washington Post reported on Friday. The outlet cited 21 people who spoke on condition of anonymity. Longstanding concerns over Biden’s health came into focus following what was widely perceived as a disastrous performance in his first debate with Republican rival Donald Trump last week. While the Biden camp claimed the president had caught a cold, his performance reportedly panicked Democratic officials and donors, with some even suggesting he needed to be replaced as the party’s candidate for the November election. According to the Post, numerous aides, foreign officials, donors and members of Congress say the president has “slowed considerably.” They pointed to how he moves more slowly, speaks more softly and loses his train of thought more often.

During the G7 summit in Italy last month, “several” European leaders “came away stunned” by how much older Biden seemed since their last interactions with him, according to officials that spoke to the outlet. In some cases, they said it had been mere months since those people had previously seen the US leader.“People were worried about it,” one said. Another reported that leaders had come to the conclusion that Biden “cannot win in November.” Some officials admitted that, while they had brushed off concerns over Biden’s health before the debate with Trump, they are now questioning his abilities. Concerns were also raised after a recent immigration event in the White House, according to the report. Some pointed out Biden’s obvious frailty, with one describing his performance that day as “terrifying.” The Post said its sources “largely” did not question Biden’s mental acuity, with several White House officials insisting that he continues to be fully cognizant on complicated policy matters and can easily recall facts from previous meetings.

However, staffers said that most of Biden’s high-priority meetings and events were scheduled for midday, when he is at his best. On Thursday, the New York Times reported that Biden had admitted to Democratic donors that he needed more sleep and less work, preferring to avoid any events past 8pm. Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group, told the Post that even if he won, European leaders don’t expect Biden to be able to run the country for another term. “It’s very, very rare in a democracy that the person you run for an election is someone that you all know can’t lead the country for four more years,” Bremmer said. A CBS News-YouGov poll following the face-off with Trump found 72% of respondents said they believe Biden does not have the mental and cognitive health to serve as president, while 49% said the same about Trump.

Read more …

“Not only am I campaigning, but I’m running the world, and that’s not hyperbole.”

Biden Says Every Day Is A ‘Cognitive Test’ For Him (RT)

US President Joe Biden tried to dispel concerns over his age and cognitive abilities after his lackluster performance during last week’s debate against Donald Trump, in an interview with ABC News on Friday. In the highly anticipated sit-down with George Stephanopoulos, the 81-year-old leader explained the debate fiasco as entirely “my fault, no one else’s fault,” insisting that it was simply a “bad episode” because he was “exhausted” and “sick” with a “bad cold” – and in no way an indication of any serious condition. Biden said he has “medical doctors trailing me everywhere I go” and after the debate they told him he was “exhausted,” but nothing more serious. “I have an ongoing assessment of what I’m doing. They don’t hesitate to tell me if something is wrong.” When asked directly whether he was ready to take a neurological test to prove to Americans that he is up to the job, Biden dodged the question by claiming, “I have a cognitive test every single day.”

“Every day I have that test,” Biden reiterated when pressed again. “Not only am I campaigning, but I’m running the world, and that’s not hyperbole.” The entire interview went in circles, with Stephanopoulos repeatedly asking whether Biden believes he is in good enough shape to beat Trump, while Biden kept citing his past record and defiantly rejecting the notion that he could leave the race amid worsening poll numbers. Biden said he did not believe the poll numbers that showed him trailing Trump in the popular vote, claiming that the race is a “toss-up” and that he is the “most qualified person to beat him.” Biden refused to speculate whether he would leave the race if Democratic Party leaders asked him to, noting that he would withdraw only if God told him to do so.

Read more …

Cheap fakes.

HuffPo Calls For Biden Campaign To Use AI To Make Him Appear Cogent (MN)

Leftist Biden mouthpiece the Huffington Post published an article Wednesday which literally calls for the Biden campaign to use AI to make fake videos of him looking and sounding normal in an effort to salvage his candidacy. The piece, titled ‘It’s Time For The Biden Campaign To Embrace AI‘ states “After the president’s dismal debate performance, he noted that he ‘might not walk as easily or talk as smoothly as I used to.’ AI could help with this.” “Given the president’s concerning performance last week, it’s time for the Biden campaign to consider leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) to effectively reach the voting public,” it continues, with the author, one Kaivan Shroff, declaring that “the consequences of not taking this approach could be dire.” He goes on to state that Biden is old and can barely speak, suggesting that “AI augmentations and video renderings could serve to smooth out these bumps while allowing the Biden campaign to effectively disseminate true information.”

So, lets get this straight. Mr Shroff is suggesting the Biden team make fake videos where Biden speaks perfectly and looks more than half awake, and pass them off as real to encourage people to vote him in for a second term as President of the country, when in reality he cannot even form coherent thoughts or operate for 90 minutes per day. Incredible. “AI would be a cost-effective and efficient way to communicate his message personally and directly to voters,” Shroff continues, adding “How many times have we heard voters and pundits alike gripe that ‘Biden would be the perfect candidate if he were just 10 years younger?’ With modern technology, this exact deliverable is possible.” He goes on to argue that Biden’s campaign creating fake AI videos would be fine because the likes of The New York Post have shared “cheap fakes”of Biden wandering around looking lost and completely out of it “to make him appear confused or weak.”

The only issue here being, of course, that the so called ‘cheap fake’ videos in question were actually 100% real. No one needs to create fake videos to show Biden looking confused and weak, because he really is. You’ve just admitted that earlier in your extremely stupid article. Even more incredibly, the author then goes on to argue that if the Biden campaign created its own fake videos it would allow them “to respond rapidly to misinformation.” “In a world where misinformation and disinformation spreads virally, often through short-form video content, having the capability to produce polished, articulate responses in real-time could be a game-changer,” he ludicrously proclaims. To summarise, this guy thinks its totally acceptable that the Biden campaign knock up some cheap AI generated fake videos of him appearing fine in order to declare that any real videos of him looking and sounding old, tired and senile are ‘disinformation’. It doesn’t get any more backwards than this.

Incredibly, the article continues, “Until now, it has been almost taken as a given that using AI renderings of the president would violate some ethical baseline of campaigning. In an ideal world that may be so. Yet, what last week’s debate made clear is just how far from any such ideal our current reality is. The greatest moral and ethical imperative for those who care about American democracy should be keeping the man who tried to overthrow it as far away from the White House as possible.” So, your argument is that because Biden is mentally deficient and proved so during the debate, his campaign needs to forget about any remaining morals they have and create fake videos in order to keep Donald Trump from winning because it’ll be the end of democracy… or something. Hell, why not just go the whole hog and steal the election then? Use AI to fake some votes, rig some ballots, swing some states in Biden’s favour… in order to save democracy.

Read more …

“We can be sure that Trump did not personally initiate those provocative moves. He was obeying the deep state planners and their agenda of pushing confrontation with Russia..”

Trump Poses As Peacemaker For Ukraine After Stoking The War As President (SCF)

Asked about Trump’s peacemaking offer, President Putin responded politely this week, saying that he believed the American was sincere, but pointed out the lack of detail in Trump’s proposal. That’s the rub. Donald Trump is not known for coherent details. His style is bluster and braggadocio. Taken with a large pinch of salt. Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, Vassily Nebenzia, was not convinced by Trump’s peace musings. Nebenzia indicated that the Republican candidate lacked the necessary understanding to resolve the conflict. That would involve an intelligent appreciation of history: the relentless expansionism of NATO, the treacherous backsliding by Washington over past security agreements, and the inherent workings of U.S. imperialism as an insatiable aggressor going back to the foundation of NATO 75 years ago. There is more than a suspicion that “the Donald” is merely motivated by superficial electioneering. The former real estate magnate has acumen for tapping popular sentiment.

The two American presidential contenders are neck and neck in the polls with less than four months until election day. Even after Biden’s disastrous TV debate performance last week, Trump has not capitalized on a decisive lead – which reflects how poorly both candidates are perceived by American voters. Polls show that a clear majority of American citizens want the conflict in Ukraine settled by diplomacy. There is widespread misgiving over the enormous amounts of taxpayer money thrown at a regime notorious for its corruption, as well as the visceral fear that the conflict could spiral out of control into a nuclear World War Three. Trump’s talk about brokering a peace deal before he is inaugurated on January 20, 2025, seems to be nothing more than an expedient bet that such a position might be enough to garner a winning edge among undecided voters and get him back to the White House. Nothing wrong with that, one might say. After all, surely some attempt at peaceful diplomacy is better than none, no matter how cack-handed that attempt might be.

The trouble is Trump has no credibility. The last time he was in the White House (2016-20), he proved useless at standing up to the deep state despite his promises to normalize relations with Russia. Admittedly, his presidency was assailed by the baseless Russia-gate hysteria promoted by the U.S. establishment and its servile media to undermine him. Nevertheless, on key issues, Trump showed himself to be a willing instrument for U.S. imperialist interests. A major sign of weakness was Trump’s approval of sending lethal weapons to the Kiev regime. He broke a crucial taboo. Even his predecessor, the Democrat President Barack Obama, had refused to go that far. Obama and his then Vice President Joe Biden oversaw the CIA-backed coup in Kiev in 2014 ushering in a NeoNazi Russia-hating regime. But the sending of lethal U.S. weaponry to that regime was off the cards – so provocative was it deemed. Trump broke that taboo in 2019 when he ordered the supply of $47 million worth of Javelin anti-tank missiles to the NeoNazis.

That move emboldened the Kiev regime to ramp up its aggression against the ethnic Russian population in the Donbass region. That genocidal offensive eventually led to Russia intervening in February 2022 and safeguarding the region as a new part of the Russian Federation. Moreover, it was Trump who scrapped two key arms control measures with Russia, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) and the Open-Skies Treaty. We can be sure that Trump did not personally initiate those provocative moves. He was obeying the deep state planners and their agenda of pushing confrontation with Russia. By revoking the INF, the United States has found a legal way to supply medium-range ballistic missiles to Ukraine which are being used to strike Russia’s territory. In that way, arguably, Trump played a pivotal and baleful role in stoking the proxy war in Ukraine that was primed in 2014 under Obama and eventually erupted in 2022 under Biden.

Read more …

GOP 255 delegates for the electoral college, Dems 243.

Republican Control In The States Could Give Trump Victory (Vasco)

Among this year’s swing states, Republicans control the political machine in Georgia (government, legislature and history of two of the last three presidential elections), while Democrats control Nevada (with the exception of the government) and Michigan (where they did not win in only one of the last three presidential elections). The other three “swing states” are where control is much more balanced: Democrats hold the governorship and the House of Pennsylvania and have won two of the last three elections there, but Republicans have won one of the last three elections and control the Senate; Democrats govern Wisconsin and have won there in two of the last three presidential elections, but Republicans control both legislative houses and have won in one of the last three elections; and in Arizona, Democrats won one of three elections and hold the government, but Republicans won the other two elections and dominate the legislature.

All of this means that, taking into account control of the state political machine, Republicans are expected to win in all “red states” and in 17 other states, including the “swing state” of Georgia. They will thus be guaranteed 255 delegates for the electoral college, in addition to the total number of delegates that each of these states are entitled to. Democrats, on the other hand, tend to win in all the “blue states” and in 10 more states, including the “swing states” of Nevada and Michigan and the states of Minnesota and Maine, where, unlike all the others, the party that get the majority of popular votes in the state do not automatically elect all delegates, but have their own rules – our calculation takes into account that Democrats control the political machine in these two states, therefore they are able to manage the results of the elections. The Democrats will thus obtain 243 delegates to the electoral college.

For its candidate to be the winner of the presidential elections, a party must have at least 270 delegates in the electoral college. Hence the essential importance of “swing states” where political control is not defined (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Arizona). To be elected, it will be enough for Trump to win in just one of them (Pennsylvania), or, if he loses in Pennsylvania, if he wins in the other two. The Democratic candidate will be forced to win in Pennsylvania and in one of the other two key “swing states”. Considering, therefore, the control of the political machine in the states, added to the tendency of greater preference among voters in polls of voting intentions, Donald Trump has a greater chance of being elected president than the Democratic candidate.

Read more …

“..there’s still plenty of time left for them to destroy the country altogether. Just keep giving American missiles to Ukraine to fire into Russia and see what happens.”

Who Turned Off the Gaslight? (Kunstler)

Any reality-based thread that happened to leak into public view from independent alt-news reporters was branded by CNN, The New York Times, the WashPo, and many others as “misinformation” — a newish concept produced by a cadre of language Stasi skilled at inverting the meaning of anything to bamboozle the public. It appears that the news media became so invested psychologically in its own dishonest product that it began to believe its own bullshit. Or, at least, they wanted to pretend to believe it. One of the big problems was that absolutely everything they labeled “misinformation” or “conspiracy theory” turned out to be truthful, and that was becoming an inescapable embarrassment. And then the biggest blunder they made was going along with the Deep State’s selection of “Joe Biden” in the very sketchy Super Tuesday primary of 2020. The old grifter had next-to-zero support in all the preceding preliminaries and somehow (abracadabra !) he swept the field.

By then, the Democratic Party, and its public relations arm in the mainstream media, had descended into florid mental illness. Everything they stood for post-World War Two flipped to its opposite. Suddenly, they were against free speech. They weren’t coy about it. They just made-up some new bullshit about free speech being “hate speech.” Similarly, they were against a free press. They went along with all the misinfo / disinfo bullshit the government cooked up and supported its role in suppressing the news. They were no longer anti-war, the party-of-peace. They were now pro-segregation and pro-discrimination (white people need not apply) according to Critical Race Theory (a childishly sketchy doctrine). Most of all, they were no longer skeptical of anything that the leviathan establishment wanted to do, including abridging the liberties of American citizens.

Then there was the campaign to use the most powerful human instinct, sexuality, as a weapon to disorder the minds of American children, leading even to the mutilation of their bodies — a program that unmistakably tipped toward genuine evil, suggesting that actual psychosis lay behind the Cluster-B crypto-Marxism used to justify it. “Joe Biden” was fine with all of that, and the news media was fine with “Joe Biden” and whoever was using him as a front. Of course, it was evident during the 2020 campaign that “Joe Biden” was not up to a job as demanding as Chief Executive of the US government — and that was even apart from the dense criminal web of influence peddling discovered around him and his family, which the news media ignominiously ignored. But now the years have gone by and there’s no hiding “Joe Biden’s” rather gravely diminished mental abilities.

Last week’s debate gave away the game. It had the effect of finally turning off the gaslight that the news media has been shining over the republic lo these many years. They can no longer pretend that this president is anything close to okay in body and mind. They can’t annul the gaslighted public’s delayed realization that they’ve been subject to a concerted program of deliberate lying for a long long time. So now, inveterate pretenders and liars, such as Jake Tapper of CNN and Maggie Haberman of The New York Times — and many others — have to pretend that they were innocently duped into supporting all the turpitudes of the Democratic Party / Deep State axis-of-evil. It is really hard to imagine that they can successfully rehabilitate their reputations. They have done immense harm to our country. It’s hard to see how the Democratic Party might survive, too, no matter who they finally put up for election this year. Of course, there’s still plenty of time left for them to destroy the country altogether. Just keep giving American missiles to Ukraine to fire into Russia and see what happens.

Read more …

“The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Government..”

Rep. Goldman Insists the Country is Safe in the Hands of Others (Turley)

Douglas Adams, author of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, wrote “The President [of the Galaxy] in particular is very much a figurehead—he wields no real power whatsoever. […] His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.” This week, Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-NY) seemed to be taking the Hitchhiker’s Guide as a guide for government. When asked about the alarming physical and mental decline of President Joe Biden, Goldman suggested that it really does not matter. In responding to a call for Biden’s removal under the 25th Amendment, Goldman suggested that the Republic is safe because it is safely in the hands of people around Biden. It is an argument that flips the 25th Amendment on its head and embraces the idea of a figurehead president. After the Hur report was released noting the diminishment of the President’s faculties, Goldman was one of the most vocal in shouting the Special Counsel down. He went public declaring that the President is “sharper than anyone I’ve spoken to” on public policy issues.

He has continued brushed away the growing calls for President Biden to step aside as incapable of serving another four years. Indeed, some are calling for an investigation into whether he can carry out the duties of his office until January 2025. “So, let’s not just focus on Joe Biden here. Let’s focus on the people around him, the administration, the policies, and most importantly, the appreciation and protection for the rule of law and our democracy that Donald Trump, every single day, has vowed to take down.” He added that Biden is “vibrant” and that “the reality is that Joe Biden has surrounded himself with an incredibly capable team with almost no turnover.” Other Democrats have attempted to avoid the manifest confusion and infirmity of the president. This includes Democrats who repeatedly called for formal action to remove former President Donald Trump under the 25th Amendment, including Reps. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.; Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash.; Jamie Raskin, D-Md.; Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

However, it was Goldman who, as usual, came up with the most vertigo-triggering spin.The 25th Amendment was designed to specifically avoid a figurehead presidency where family or aides perform critical functions of the office. That was indeed the concern with presidents like Woodrow Wilson when a stroke left him incapable to function as president. His wife Edith hid the truth from the public and the Congress as she and others carried out his functions. He also had “an incredibly capable team” around him, but they were not elected president. In the meantime, the media is still struggling to explain to the public why they did not disclose the President’s condition earlier while promulgating the “cheap fake” narrative. For weeks heading into the debate, media outlets repeated the claim that videos showing Biden’s confusion were false and misleading. Some are now reportedly admitting that they did not want to confirm “right-wing media” accounts — an admission of shaping the news for political purposes.

The greatest threat to President Biden may ultimately be the political calculus. For most of these members, their loyalty to Biden ends at the point that he endangers their own hold on power. A couple dozen members are reportedly preparing a letter calling for possible removal in the hope that they can replace Biden with someone who has a better chance of beating Trump. It is no easy feat, but Democratic operatives are furiously working out the complications under federal election laws and state laws. In the meantime, the 25th Amendment process is looming. More citizens may become convinced by what Pelosi said about then President Donald Trump: “Congress has a constitutional duty to lay out the process by which a president’s incapacity and the president of any party is determined…A president’s fitness for office must be determined by science and facts.”

Read more …

Don’t you dare talk peace!

Orban’s Surprise Visit To Moscow Sparks Fury In Brussels (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban unexpectedly visited Russia on Friday and met with President Vladimir Putin to discuss ways to resolve the Ukraine conflict. The surprise trip caused major outrage among Orban’s fellow EU leaders, as it came only days after the Hungarian premier made a similar unannounced trip to Ukraine. Hungary holds the rotating EU presidency for the remainder of this year. Orban, however, has claimed that he doesn’t require any sort of mandate from Brussels in order to promote peace, noting that his discussions cannot be considered official negotiations. Orban said his trip had been the first step to restoring dialogue. A critic of Western military aid to Ukraine, the Hungarian premier said he recognized he had no EU mandate for the trips but that peace could not be achieved “from a comfortable armchair in Brussels.” “We cannot sit back and wait for the war to miraculously end,” he wrote on X (formerly Twitter) before meeting Putin.

Orban visited Kiev earlier in the week, where he urged Vladimir Zelensky to seek peace with Russia, arguing that a ceasefire could serve as a first step in the right direction. The Ukrainian leader didn’t take his proposal well, Orban said later. Kiev insists that only a military victory will result in a “just peace.” The Hungarian premier said he wanted to hear directly from Putin how Russia perceives various peace initiatives, calling it an important step, even though the frank discussion confirmed that there was a major rift between the conflicting sides. Putin and Orban discussed the “shortest way out” of the conflict, which the latter later revealed to journalists. Moscow’s and Kiev’s positions remain very “far apart,” the Hungarian admitted. “A lot of steps have to be taken to get closer to a resolution of the war. Still, we’ve already taken the most important step – establishing the contact, and I will continue to work on this in the future,” Orban stated. Putin has told Orban that he presented his vision of how the conflict can be resolved, in a keynote speech at the Foreign Ministry last month, and said he is prepared to discuss its nuances.

The proposal he was referring to was to suspend hostilities immediately after Kiev renounces its bid to join NATO and orders its troops to pull back from all territories claimed by Moscow. Then a comprehensive discussion of a new security architecture in Europe could be held, Putin suggested. The Ukrainian government has rejected the offer. The Russian president has reiterated Moscow’s readiness to resolve hostilities through negotiations. The Ukrainian leadership, however, appears to be still incapable of abandoning its idea of waging a war “until the end,” Putin noted. Moscow is seeking to reach lasting, sustainable peace rather than opting for a temporary ceasefire or a “frozen conflict” of any sort, the Russian president warned. There should not be a “ceasefire or some kind of pause that the Kiev regime could use to recover losses, regroup, and rearm. Russia is in favor of a complete and final end to the conflict,” Putin stressed.

Read more …

“But we can be a good tool in the hands of God, we can be a good tool in the hands of people who want peace..”

I Don’t Need A Mandate To Promote Peace – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has defended his peacemaking efforts after a senior EU official criticized his purported plans to travel to Russia. Orban, who visited Kiev earlier this week and urged Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky to consider an immediate ceasefire, will pay a visit to the Russian capital on Friday, media reports have speculated. European Council President Charles Michel condemned the purported trip, claiming in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Thursday that despite holding the rotating EU presidency, Hungary “has no mandate to engage with Russia on behalf of the EU.” “The European Council is clear: Russia is the aggressor, Ukraine is the victim. No discussions about Ukraine can take place without Ukraine,” the senior bureaucrat added.

During his weekly interview with Radio Kossuth on Friday morning, Orban rejected the notion that he should not vie for peace. “What I do looks like negotiations in format, because we sit at tables and discuss issues, but we don’t negotiate,” he explained. “That’s why I don’t even need a mandate, because I don’t represent any party.” Hungary is aware of its relatively limited political clout and expects larger powers to eventually hold peace talks to end the Ukraine conflict, he said. “But we can be a good tool in the hands of God, we can be a good tool in the hands of people who want peace,” the prime minister added.

The Hungarian leader said opinion polls showing support among EU citizens for continued backing of Kiev do not correctly reflect their attitudes. Everyday people are worried about the economic cost of the conflict because EU taxpayers’ money is being spent on Ukraine, he argued. Orban neither confirmed nor denied plans for a Moscow visit during the interview. Another pro-Kiev politician, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, previously expressed disbelief that the Hungarian leader could make the trip. “The rumours about your visit to Moscow cannot be true @PM_ViktorOrban, or can they?” he asked in an X post. Russian President Vladimir Putin has offered Kiev a ceasefire in exchange for Ukraine renouncing its bid for NATO membership and withdrawing its troops from Russian territory that it lays claim to. Kiev has insisted it will not accept any outcome in which it does not control all the land it considers Ukrainian.

Read more …

“Moscow is seeking to reach lasting, sustainable peace rather than opting for a temporary ceasefire or a “frozen conflict” of any sort..”

Orban and Putin Discuss ‘Shortest Way Out’ Of Ukraine Conflict (RT)

Talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban on Friday revolved around finding the “shortest way out” of the Ukraine conflict, the latter revealed during a joint press conference following the closed-doors negotiations. Moscow’s and Kiev’s positions remain very “far apart,” Hungary’s PM admitted, citing his recent trip to Kiev to meet the Ukrainian leadership. “A lot of steps have to be taken to get closer to a resolution of the war. Still, we’ve already taken the most important step—establishing the contact, and I will continue to work on this in the future,” Orban stated. The enduring conflict between Russia and Ukraine is affecting the broader European region, Orban noted, adding that the continent has enjoyed the most rapid and sustainable development only during peacetime.

“As I’ve already told Mr President, Europe needs peace. Yet this peace will not emerge by itself, we must work to reach it,” the visiting premier said. The Russian president has reiterated Moscow’s readiness to resolve the hostility through negotiations. The Ukrainian leadership, however, appears to be still incapable of abandoning its idea of waging a war “until the end,” Putin noted. Moscow is seeking to reach lasting, sustainable peace rather than opting for a temporary ceasefire or a “frozen conflict” of any sort, the Russian president warned. There should not be a “ceasefire or some kind of pause that the Kiev regime could use to recover losses, regroup, and rearm. Russia is in favor of a complete and final end to the conflict,” he stressed.

Read more …

While Orban talks peace…

NATO Members To Give Ukraine $43 Billion in Military Aid for 2025 (Antiwar)

NATO allies have agreed to pledge $43 billion in military aid for Ukraine, which will be provided next year, Reuters reported on Wednesday. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg was looking for the alliance to make a multi-year commitment to ensure long-term support for the proxy war, but the allies did not agree. Instead, they will re-evaluate military aid for Ukraine each year. The agreement says that NATO allies will “aim to meet this pledge through proportionate contributions.” If the $43 billion is funded based on how much each member contributes to NATO, most of the burden would be on the US since it pays for about two-thirds of the alliance’s budget. The $43 billion is part of a slew of measures NATO will announce at its summit next week in Washington. NATO is also expected to station a civilian official in Kyiv and establish a new command in Germany that will oversee military aid and training for Ukraine, taking over duties currently overseen by the US.

While planning to provide tens of billions in new military aid, NATO will also tell Ukraine that it’s too corrupt to join the alliance. The Telegraph reported this week that the alliance will release a communique calling on Ukraine to take more anti-corruption steps before talks on its NATO membership could progress. President Biden has frequently cited Ukraine’s corruption as a reason why the country couldn’t join NATO. But that hasn’t stopped him from providing over $100 billion in aid to Ukraine, which includes tens of billions in the form of direct budgetary aid that funds the government.

Read more …

“..the only countries the U.S. really trusts are the “Five Eyes.”

Trusting the ‘Five Eyes’ Only (Michael Klare)

Wherever he travels globally, President Biden has sought to project the United States as the rejuvenated leader of a broad coalition of democratic nations seeking to defend the “rules-based international order” against encroachments by hostile autocratic powers, especially China, Russia, and North Korea. “We established NATO, the greatest military alliance in the history of the world,” he told veterans of D-Day while at Normandy, France on June 6th. “Today… NATO is more united than ever and even more prepared to keep the peace, deter aggression, defend freedom all around the world.” In other venues, Biden has repeatedly highlighted Washington’s efforts to incorporate the “Global South” — the developing nations of Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East — into just such a broad-based U.S.-led coalition. At the recent G7 summit of leading Western powers in southern Italy, for example, he backed measures supposedly designed to engage those countries “in a spirit of equitable and strategic partnership.”

But all of his soaring rhetoric on the subject scarcely conceals an inescapable reality: the United States is more isolated internationally than at any time since the Cold War ended in 1991. It has also increasingly come to rely on a tight-knit group of allies, all of whom are primarily English-speaking and are part of the Anglo-Saxon colonial diaspora. Rarely mentioned in the Western media, the Anglo-Saxonization of American foreign and military policy has become a distinctive — and provocative — feature of the Biden presidency. To get some appreciation for Washington’s isolation in international affairs, just consider the wider world’s reaction to the administration’s stance on the wars in Ukraine and Gaza.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Joe Biden sought to portray the conflict there as a heroic struggle between the forces of democracy and the brutal fist of autocracy. But while he was generally successful in rallying the NATO powers behind Kyiv — persuading them to provide arms and training to the beleaguered Ukrainian forces, while reducing their economic links with Russia — he largely failed to win over the Global South or enlist its support in boycotting Russian oil and natural gas.

Despite what should have been a foreboding lesson, Biden returned to the same universalist rhetoric in 2023 (and this year as well) to rally global support for Israel in its drive to extinguish Hamas after that group’s devastating October 7th rampage. But for most non-European leaders, his attempt to portray support for Israel as a noble response proved wholly untenable once that country launched its full-scale invasion of Gaza and the slaughter of Palestinian civilians commenced. For many of them, Biden’s words seemed like sheer hypocrisy given Israel’s history of violating U.N. resolutions concerning the legal rights of Palestinians in the West Bank and its indiscriminate destruction of homes, hospitals, mosques, schools, and aid centers in Gaza. In response to Washington’s continued support for Israel, many leaders of the Global South have voted against the United States on Gaza-related measures at the U.N. or, in the case of South Africa, have brought suit against Israel at the World Court for perceived violations of the 1948 Genocide Convention.

In the face of such adversity, the White House has worked tirelessly to bolster its existing alliances, while trying to establish new ones wherever possible. Pity poor Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who has made seemingly endless trips to Asia, Africa, Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East trying to drum up support for Washington’s positions — with consistently meager results. Here, then, is the reality of this anything but all-American moment: as a global power, the United States possesses a diminishing number of close, reliable allies – most of which are members of NATO, or countries that rely on the United States for nuclear protection (Japan and South Korea), or are primarily English-speaking (Australia and New Zealand). And when you come right down to it, the only countries the U.S. really trusts are the “Five Eyes.”

Read more …

Next one to use the term Game-Changer will be drawn and quartered.

Why the SCO Summit in Kazakhstan Was a Game-Changer (Pepe Escobar)

It’s impossible to overstate the importance of the 2024 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) this week in Astana, Kazakhstan. It can certainly be interpreted as the antechamber to the crucial BRICS annual summit, under the Russian presidency, next October in Kazan. Let’s start with the final declaration. As much as SCO members state “tectonic shifts are underway” in geopolitics and geoeconomics, as “the use of power methods is increasing, with norms of international law being systematically violated”, they are fully engaged to “increase the SCO’s role in the creation of a new democratic, fair, political and economic international order.” Well, there could not be a sharper contrast with the unilaterally-imposed “rules-based international order”. The SCO 10 – with new member Belarus – are explicitly in favor of “a fair solution to the Palestinian issue”. They “oppose unilateral sanctions”.

They want to create a SCO investment fund (Iran, via acting President Mohammad Mokhber, supports the creation of a SCO common bank, just like the NDB in BRICS). Additionally, members that “are parties to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty stand for compliance with its provisions”. And crucially, they agree that “interaction within the SCO may become the basis for building a new security architecture in Eurasia.” The last point is actually the heart of the matter. That’s proof that Putin’s proposal last month in front of key Russian diplomats was fully debated in Astana – following Russia’s strategic deal with the DPRK de facto linking security in Asia as indivisible with security in Europe. That is something that remains – and will continue to remain – incomprehensible for the collective West. A new Eurasia-wide security architecture is an upgrade of the Russian concept of Greater Eurasia Partnership – involving a series of bilateral and multilateral guarantees and, in Putin’s own words, open to “all Eurasian countries that wish to participate”, including NATO members.

The SCO should become one of the key drivers of this new security arrangement – in total contrast with the “rules-based order” – alongside the CSTO, the CIS and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU). The road map ahead of course includes socio-economic integration and the development of international transportation corridors – from the INSTC (Russia-Iran-India) to the China-supported “Middle Corridor”. But the two crucial points are military and financial: “To gradually phase out the military presence of external powers” in Eurasia; and to establish alternatives to “Western-controlled economic mechanisms, expanding the use of national currencies in settlements, and establishing independent payment systems.” Translation: the meticulous process conducted by Russia to deliver a fatal blow to Pax Americana is essentially shared by all SCO members.

President Putin laid down the basic tenets further on down the road when he confirmed the “commitment of all member states to forming a fair world order based on the central role of the UN and commitment of sovereign states to mutually beneficial partnership.” He added, “the long-term goals for further expansion of cooperation in politics, economy, energy, agriculture, high technologies and innovation are stated in the project of development strategy of SCO till 2035.” That’s a quite Chinese approach to long-term strategic planning: China’s five-year plans are already mapped out all the way to 2035. President Xi doubled down when it comes to the leading Russia-China strategic partnership: both should “strengthen comprehensive strategic coordination, oppose external interference and jointly maintain peace and stability” in Eurasia. Once again, that’s Russia-China as leaders of Eurasia integration and the drive towards a multi-nodal world (italics mine; nodal with an “n”).

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Etna
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809013270512058804

 

 

Sea lion
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809293898147102793

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 052024
 


René Magritte The evening gown 1954

 

Biden Says He Is Proud To Be A ‘Black Woman’ (RT)
Michelle Obama Hears the Calls and Sees the Polls (Taft)
Trump Caught On Camera Insulting Biden (RT)
Trump Wants Biden To Stay In Race – WaPo (RT)
One Of Biggest Democratic Donors Says Biden Should Step Aside (TASS)
Biden Has Five Days To Prove Himself – Top Donor (RT)
Panicky White House Hits Post-Debate Damage Control Button (Sp.)
Biden Told Governors He Had Medical Checkup – Politico
MSM Blames Right For Failure To Disclose Biden’s Infirmity (Turley)
US Encouraging Ukraine To Commit New Crimes – Moscow (RT)
Transformation of Russian Economy Is Marathon With Barriers – Nabiullina (TASS)
Concern Over Reports Of Orban Planning Moscow Trip (BBC)
Labour Set For Crushing 170 Seat Majority In UK General Election (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Not a convicted felon
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808583120234631350

 

 

Vivek

 

 

Bannon
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808889208548835397

 

 

Tulsi Kamala
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808641698932699455

 

 

KJP

 

 

 

 

Yeah, debate night was a one-off. All’s fine now…

Biden Says He Is Proud To Be A ‘Black Woman’ (RT)

US President Joe Biden has made several radio interview appearances and delivered a brief Fourth of July speech in an apparent attempt to reassure Democrat supporters about his mental capacity to serve following a disastrous debate with his Republican rival Donald Trump. Biden openly admitted he “screwed up” the debate with Trump, but told The Earl Ingram Show on Thursday that he will “get back up,” rejecting any intention of dropping out of the presidential race. “I had a bad night…. And the fact of the matter is that, you know, I screwed up,” Biden said bluntly, after his aides spent a week offering various excuses from an alleged preparation overload, to a minor cold and a jet lag from a trip 12 days ahead of the debate. During a separate interview with Philadelphia’s WURD, the gaffe-prone US leader struggled to find the right phrase while apparently trying to refer to Vice President Kamala Harris and recall his time in Barack Obama’s administration.

“By the way, I’m proud to be, as I said, the first vice president, first black woman… to serve with a black president. Proud to be involved of the first black woman on the Supreme Court. There’s so much that we can do because, look… we’re the United States of America,” Biden said. The US president also delivered a four-minute speech at the White House, focusing his remarks on his visit last month to Normandy, to commemorate the 80th anniversary of D-Day, but seemingly veered off script and lost the train of thought several times, and at one point even called his rival Trump a “colleague.” “And by the way, you know I was in that WWI cemetery in France, and…. the one that one of our colleagues, the former president, did not wanna go and be up there… I shouldn’t probably have said it anyway,” Biden said before abruptly cutting the story short, and continuing his prepared remarks.

In another clip scrutinized and mocked by critics, Biden greeted the crowd with a lively “Ho! Ho! Ho! Happy Independence Day!”, after Harris almost accidentally introduced him as the vice president. Concerns over whether the 81-year-old veteran politician can successfully handle the presidential campaign and four more years in the Oval Office were reignited after Biden delivered a shaky performance in a televised debate with Trump last Thursday. The incumbent appeared frail and seemingly lost his train of thought on multiple occasions, allowing his rival to comfortably come out on top by most accounts. A post-debate Reuters/Ipsos poll found that one in three Democrats believe that Biden should quit, while some key donors have reportedly been looking at ways of replacing Biden with a stronger candidate on the 2024 ticket.

Read more …

Big Mike.

Michelle Obama Hears the Calls and Sees the Polls (Taft)

The latest stories are that Joe Biden has been given only a few more days to prove he should be the Democrat nominee for president after his disastrous debate performance. If he leaves the race, the thinking is that the only person who could swoop in at this late stage and defeat Donald Trump in November is Michelle Obama, not Kamala Harris. The speculation is not without merit according to a new poll. Kamala Harris is a better-known quantity. She’s held political office. She’s one of the least respected and worst vice presidents America has ever seen. After slipping into the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office under the, ah, tutelage of married Bay Area kingmaker Willie Brown, she won the race for California attorney general by highlighting her Indian background. She was awful. Eventually, when U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, herself not a MENSA member, announced her retirement, Harris jumped into the race and defeated a fellow Democrat on a ballot that featured recreational pot use.

Harris sent people to prison for pot use during her stints as DA and attorney general. She changed her position when she ran for president. Harris is incapable of speaking extemporaneously. When she speaks, it’s with a nasally tone that invariably settles into lecture mode. Michelle Obama has never run for political office. She and her husband have had a general antipathy for America, “For the first time in my adult life I’m proud of my country,” for example. Michelle Obama’s unpopular overhaul of the school lunch program and government-paid food mobiles to address “food deserts” showed her willingness to ignore process and indulge her leftist authoritarian streak. An Ipsos poll released this week shows that Michelle Obama is better liked than Joe Biden and other potential candidates in the Democrat race. The poll question asked, “Would you say you are generally favorable or unfavorable towards these public figures?”

Michelle Obama, who’s never held elected office and has never wanted to run a campaign for one, is at 55 percent favorability. Joe Biden is at 36 percent with a 60 percent unfavorable rating. Biden is one point behind Vice President Kamala Harris. Former President Trump is at 39 percent favorability. On the question of whom they would vote if the choice is between Trump and Biden, the two tied. Michelle Obama is surely thrilled that some would think she is of presidential timber, but few people know if she could do the job. As Matt pointed out in a piece earlier this year, Obama has said multiple times she has no interest in being president.

“There’s zero chance,” Michelle Obama said back in 2019. “There are so many ways to improve this country and build a better world, and I keep doing plenty of them, from working with young people to helping families lead healthier lives. But sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office will never be one of them. It’s just not for me.” Her spokeswoman, Crystal Carson, said earlier this year that she’s not into it. “As former First Lady Michelle Obama has expressed several times over the years, she will not be running for president,” said Crystal Carson, director of communications for her office. “Mrs. Obama supports President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris’ re-election campaign.” And there’s this comment from a Netflix special Obama was a part of in which she said being president wasn’t in her “soul.” “[T]he people who get into it [politics]… you’ve got to want it. It’s got to be in your soul, because it is so important. It is not in my soul.”

Read more …

That’s Barron in the cart with him?

Trump Caught On Camera Insulting Biden (RT)

US presidential hopeful Donald Trump has declared that he trounced his “old, broken down” rival Joe Biden during their election debate last week, in a video released on Wednesday by The Daily Beast. In the footage Trump is sitting in a golf cart hurling insults at that 81-year-old incumbent president. He also claimed that Biden would withdraw his candidacy. ”How did I do with the debate the other night? I kicked that old, broken down pile of crap. He’s quitting the race,” Trump says, referring to Biden. Trump then went on to deliver a dig at US Vice President Kamala Harris, who is seen as a possible replacement candidate amid mounting calls for Biden to step aside. ”I got him [Biden] out the race, and that means we have Kamala. I think she’s going to be better [as an opponent]. She’s so bad. She’s so pathetic,” the former president said, then appearing to add: “She’s so f**king bad.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1808879563075658060

He then switches back to Biden, asking, “Can you imagine that guy dealing with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin? And the president of China – who is a fierce person. He’s a fierce man, very tough guy.” “But they just announced he’s probably quitting. Just keep knocking him out, huh?” Trump reiterates, before driving off in the cart. It was not immediately clear where or when the footage was covertly filmed, The Daily Beast noted. The White House has stated that Biden is “absolutely not” considering ending his campaign. “He understands that it is fair for people to ask that question,” press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told journalists on Wednesday. The Daily Beast said it had reached the Trump campaign for comment, and spokesperson Stephen Cheung directed the outlet to an earlier statement declaring the “Total Collapse of the Democrat Party.” “Every Democrat who is calling on Crooked Joe Biden to quit was once a supporter of Biden and his failed policies that lead to extreme inflation, an open border, and chaos at home and abroad,” according to the statement by Trump campaign senior advisers Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles.

Read more …

“.. I got him out of there. And that means we have Kamala. I think she’s going to be better. She’s so bad. She’s so pathetic. She’s just so f*****g bad..”

Trump Wants Biden To Stay In Race – WaPo (RT)

Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump hopes that his rival, US President Joe Biden, will not withdraw his candidacy after his disastrous TV debate performance, the Washington Post has reported, citing anonymous sources According to the Post, Democrats have been “plunged into panic” over Biden’s “poor showing” at last week’s TV debate with Trump, questioning his ability “to execute the campaign or serve another four years,” and even seeking to replace him with someone else. While Trump and his campaign expect Biden to stay in the race they have begun preparing for the possibility of facing a different opponent, the Post reported on Thursday, citing “four people familiar with private discussions.” The Post has traditionally been hostile to Trump and close to the US Democrats. “It sure seems they want Biden to stay on the ticket,” David Axelrod, a long-time Democratic strategist, told the Post.

“They think he’s vulnerable, and they like where they’re at. You can see they are not excited at all about the prospect of him leaving the race.” Quotes from named Republicans don’t seem to support Axelrod’s claim, however. Taylor Budowich, head of the pro-Trump MAGA Inc. political action committee, told the Post that clips from last Thursday’s debate “would make for devastating campaign commercials” but that the possibility of Vice President Kamala Harris becoming the nominee “has the ad team cackling with excitement.” “We are confident no matter what that we will be victorious in tying any Democrat on the ballot to Biden and to the Democratic Party,” Trump campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told the outlet. Trump himself has said he would campaign “whether it’s him [Biden] or somebody else,” and that “nobody else is doing any better” in the polls, the Post noted, citing two of his radio interviews on Monday.

A video of Trump that made rounds on social media on Wednesday showed the former and possibly future US president declaring that he “kicked that old, broken down pile of crap” – meaning, Biden – in the debate.“He’s quitting the race. I got him out of there. And that means we have Kamala. I think she’s going to be better. She’s so bad. She’s so pathetic. She’s just so f*****g bad,” Trump says in the video, published by another traditionally hostile outlet, the Daily Beast. Meanwhile, the Post has reported that top Democrats have given Biden a “grim ultimatum” to either quickly prove he is fit to rule and run, or be replaced by someone else. Until last week, most US media outlets insisted that the 81-year-old Biden was “sharp as a tack” and perfectly fine. The debate hosted by CNN showed Americans otherwise. One senior Democrat told Politico that “no one expected this nosedive,” describing it as “bad on message, bad on substance, bad on counter-punching, bad on presentation, bad on non-verbals. There was no bright spot in this debate for him.”

Read more …

“..They fear that the 81-year-old incumbent’s continued candidacy would lead to a Republican sweep of Washington and an unchecked Donald Trump presidency..”

One Of Biggest Democratic Donors Says Biden Should Step Aside (TASS)

One of the Democratic Party’s biggest donors, Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, urged US President Joe Biden to withdraw from the presidential race. “Biden needs to step aside to allow a vigorous Democratic leader to beat Trump and keep us safe and prosperous,” he told The New York Times. According to the report, Hastings was among the first donors to publicly speak about Biden, although many of them said privately that Biden should stop his campaign. Bloomberg reported earlier that dozens of Democratic MPs are set to sign a letter, demanding that Biden withdrew from the presidential race. They fear that the 81-year-old incumbent’s continued candidacy would lead to a Republican sweep of Washington and an unchecked Donald Trump presidency, the news agency wrote.

The first televised debates before current and former presidents took place in Atlanta on Thursday. Biden and Trump were prohibited from having speech points during the debates. According to a CNN express poll, two thirds of the viewers said that Trump won the debate.Previously, The Wall Street Journal reported that a panic sparked among the US Congressional Democrats over what they consider Biden’s unsuccessful performance at the debates. Some Dems hope to find a new candidate for the upcoming elections. The presidential elections in the United States will take place on November 5. Trump has already secured enough delegates’ votes to be nominated as the Republican presidential candidate. Biden, who runs for re-election, has secured enough Democratic votes. Their candidacies will be officially approved by their parties later this summer.

Read more …

5 days to cure senility?

Biden Has Five Days To Prove Himself – Top Donor (RT)

US President Joe Biden and his campaign have just a few days to prove the 81-year-old politician’s fitness to run for another term, a major Democratic Party donor has said. Charles Myers, the chair of Signum Global Advisors, believes Biden’s disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump has changed the race “fundamentally” and caused “panic” – not only among Democratic Party donors but office holders as well. House and Senate Democrats in particular fear the president’s weak showing will drag down their campaigns, and prominent figures are expected to publicly call on Biden to step aside in favor of another candidate, Myers told Bloomberg Surveillance on Wednesday. “I’m hearing the most pressure and much more panic [from elected Democrats] actually than amongst the donors,” he said.

A separate report by Bloomberg suggested that dozens of Democrats in Congress are considering signing an open letter to Biden urging him to suspend his campaign. The report did not name those allegedly considering such a move, but attributed the information to an anonymous “senior party official.” The Biden campaign has just a few days to demonstrate the president is up to the job amid mounting concern over his physical and mental condition. “I think we’re going to find out in the next four to five days whether the president is still in this race. I don’t think he’s got three weeks,” Myers stated.

On Wednesday, Biden said he was ready to continue his reelection campaign “to the end,” dismissing any possibility of calling it off. “Let me say this as clearly as I possibly can, as simply and straightforward as I can: I am running… no one’s pushing me out. I’m not leaving. I’m in this race to the end, and we’re going to win,” Biden said during a call with his campaign staffers. The White House has also dismissed rumors of Biden’s potential withdrawal, with spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre saying the US president remains “clear-eyed, and he is staying in the race.”

Read more …

“As 80% of Voters Say Biden ‘Too Old'”

Panicky White House Hits Post-Debate Damage Control Button (Sp.)

The White House is scrambling to insist that Joe Biden has “absolutely” no intention of dropping out as the Democratic nominee for the November race. The veteran Democrat seemed to be “clear-eyed” and committed to staying in the race, despite Wednesday’s media reports that suggested Biden had conceded to an ally that he was eyeing exiting the race. President Biden and his allies have called all hands on deck to figure out a scheme to “rebuild confidence” in the 81-year-old leader’s mental acuity, but it may be too late. That said, 80 percent of the nation’s voters are insisting that the Democrat is simply too old to run for a second term, according to a Wall Street Journal poll released on Wednesday. Furthermore, this figure has risen 7 points as compared to the Journal’s survey in February. The WSJ poll was conducted in the wake of Biden’s disastrous debate against Trump – his first of the 2024 election cycle.

The June 27 face-off turned out to be a huge flop for the 81-year-old contender. Biden’s performance was punctuated with cringeworthy freeze-ups and slip-ups, which sent Democrats into panic mode. Discussions on when Biden might hit the exit ramp and bow out due to medical reasons exploded across all corners of the US media landscape. Reports were also rampant that allies of the US Vice President were privately discussing scenarios of a Kamala Harris candidacy. First, Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) urged Biden to drop out of the race on Tuesday, then Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), revealed in an MSNBC interview that he would back Harris if Biden stepped down. A Wednesday report in the New York Times added fuel to the fire by claiming that Biden told a close ally he is wondering whether or not to stay in the election race.

As part of the scramble to undo the damage in the last 48 hours, Biden has:
• Phoned top Democrats in Congress on Tuesday and Wednesday, including House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), and Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), according to Politico.
• Reportedly met in private with over 20 Democratic governors on Wednesday evening to tell them he underwent a medical checkup after the debate and is fine.
• Unexpectedly joined a Zoom call with campaign and Democratic National Committee staff on Wednesday. “Let me say this as clearly as I possibly can — as simply and straightforward as I can: I am running … no one’s pushing me out. I’m not leaving. I’m in this race to the end and we’re going to win,” Politico cited Biden as saying during the call.

Sen. Chris Coons (D., Del.), after speaking with Biden on Tuesday, said that the president was “determined to beat Donald Trump.” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre rushed to tell reporters on Wednesday that Joe Biden “is clear-eyed and he is staying in the race.” But pressure is growing exponentially, with dozens of Democratic lawmakers reportedly mulling signing a letter demanding that Biden withdraw from the race, according to an unnamed senior party official.

Read more …

“..a brief checkup by a White House physician in the days following the debate, which did not include any major tests..”

Biden Told Governors He Had Medical Checkup – Politico

US President Joe Biden has told a group of Democratic governors that he underwent a medical checkup following his poor performance in last week’s election debate against Donald Trump, Politico has reported, citing anonymous sources. During the CNN-hosted faceoff with his Republican rival last Thursday, the 81-year-old Biden appeared frail and seemingly lost his train of thought on multiple occasions. Most commentators, both Republican and Democrat, have concluded that Trump came out comfortably on top in the meeting, which was the first of two planned debates ahead of the November 5 presidential vote. One survey has also indicated that 72% of registered voters do not believe that Biden has the “mental and cognitive health necessary to serve as president.”

In the wake of Biden’s poor showing, multiple US media outlets have claimed there is growing pressure from within the Democratic Party and among major donors for him to drop out of the election race. Politico reported on Wednesday that the US president had held an hour-long private meeting with more than 20 Democratic governors earlier in the day, during which he mentioned a recent medical checkup after being asked about his physical condition. Politico quoted an unnamed person familiar with Biden’s schedule as clarifying that he was referring to a brief checkup by a White House physician in the days following the debate, which did not include any major tests. Biden is said to have told the governors that he was deemed to be in good health after the medical check. During the meeting with governors, the Democratic hopeful also reportedly reiterated that he would not be pushed out of the race, insisting that he was “in it to win it.”

Biden put his poor performance in the debate down to his failure to ease up with his schedule ahead of the faceoff with Trump, as quoted by Politico. Earlier, his campaign had attributed his underwhelming showing to a cold. Also on Wednesday, Bloomberg cited an anonymous “senior party official” as claiming that dozens of Democrats in the US Congress are considering a letter to demand that Biden suspend his reelection campaign. They are allegedly concerned that his weak candidacy could lead to a “Republican sweep of Washington and an unchecked Donald Trump presidency.” In the wake of last week’s debate, multiple liberal-leaning media outlets have openly called on Biden to step aside.

Read more …

“Journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.”

MSM Blames Right For Failure To Disclose Biden’s Infirmity (Turley)

On MSNBC, Joe Scarborough stated “start your tape right now because I’m about to tell you the truth. And F— you if you can’t handle the truth. This version of Biden intellectually, analytically, is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I have known him for years…If it weren’t the truth I wouldn’t say it.” Then the presidential debate happened and, after years of being protected by staff, tens of millions of people watched the president struggle to stay focused and responsive. So, as an embarrassed press struggled to explain the most recent belated disclosure, the reason is the “right-wing press” and the need to counter their narratives. While saying that reporters “are now expressing regret,” CNN explains that “some members of the White House press corps who have regular exposure to President Biden are now admitting they were “turned off” from exposing his mental decline before last week’s debate in part because of the attention it has got from ‘right-wing media.’”

It was just part of shaping the news, which is now the priority in journalism. A recent series of interviews with over 75 media leaders by Leonard Downie Jr., former Washington Post executive editor, and Andrew Heyward, former CBS News president, reaffirmed this shift. As Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Chronicle, stated: “Objectivity has got to go.” But that objectivity seems to depend heavily upon what ideology you are advocating. We have been discussing the rise of advocacy journalism and the rejection of objectivity in journalism schools. Writers, editors, commentators, and academics have embraced rising calls for censorship and speech controls, including President-elect Joe Biden and his key advisers. This movement includes academics rejecting the very concept of objectivity in journalism in favor of open advocacy. In an interview with The Stanford Daily, Stanford journalism professor, Ted Glasser, insisted that journalism needed to “free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice.”

He rejected the notion that journalism is based on objectivity and said that he views “journalists as activists because journalism at its best — and indeed history at its best — is all about morality.” Thus, “Journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.” Lauren Wolfe, the fired freelance editor for the New York Times, has not only gone public to defend her pro-Biden tweet but published a piece titled “I’m a Biased Journalist and I’m Okay With That.” Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones is a leading voice for advocacy journalism. Indeed, Hannah-Jones has declared “all journalism is activism.” The problem comes with these little embarrassing moments when the public suddenly sees that prior coverage was false.

Whether it is the Russian collusion story (for which reporters received Pulitzer Prizes) or the Hunter Biden laptop or the Lafayette Park photo shoot or the migrant whipping controversy, there is an inescapable pattern of omission and misdirection. This is why media outlets are collapsing as the public seeks other sources for information. As I previously wrote, the mantra “Let’s Go Brandon!” was embraced by millions as a criticism as much of the media as President Biden. It derives from an Oct. 2 interview with race-car driver Brandon Brown after he won his first NASCAR Xfinity Series race. During the interview, NBC reporter Kelli Stavast’s questions were drowned out by loud-and-clear chants of “F*** Joe Biden.” Stavast quickly and inexplicably declared, “You can hear the chants from the crowd, ‘Let’s go, Brandon!’” So, in expressing guilt for not pursuing the President’s mental and physical decline, the media is left with explaining that they are just doing what they are trained to do in the new J Schools. They were countering conservatives and framing the news.

This is why Washington Post publisher and CEO William Lewis is under attack for dropping a truth bomb on the staff of the Post when he told them: “We are going to turn this thing around, but let’s not sugarcoat it. It needs turning around,” Lewis said. “We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right. I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.” Staff is now trying to get him fired.

Read more …

“..the US leadership is blind to the true state of affairs, as it has become “entangled in its own networks of intrigue and sanctions..”

US Encouraging Ukraine To Commit New Crimes – Moscow (RT)

The US is nudging Ukraine towards committing new war crimes and helping to prolong the conflict by continuing to send military aid to the embattled country, Moscow’s ambassador to Washington, Anatoly Antonov, has said. On Wednesday, the administration of US President Joe Biden announced another military assistance package for Kiev totaling around $2.5 billion. It includes air defense munitions, HIMARS missiles, artillery rounds, anti-tank weapons and other equipment. Since the start of the conflict in February 2022, the Biden administration has committed more than $53 billion in military aid to Ukraine. In a statement on Telegram, Antonov denounced the latest American aid package, charging that Washington “continues its course towards war” and “harbors illusory dreams of a strategic victory over Russia.”

“Pumping up the agonizing Zelensky regime with deadly weapons is a futile project. In essence, this is encouraging Kiev terrorists to commit new crimes.” American weapons will not deter Russia from pushing on toward its end goal of “liberating Ukraine,” the envoy said. “They will only lead to new casualties among civilians, including women and children.” He also said that the Ukraine conflict mostly benefits the US defense industrial complex, while Washington “is balancing on the brink of conflict with Russia, the largest nuclear power.” The ambassador added that “it feels as if they are not thinking about the global consequences of the catastrophe that is approaching due to the short-sighted and dangerous policies of Washington.”

In addition, Antonov opined that by approving Ukraine aid, US policymakers intend to “demonstrate that they are steadfast in defending the crumbling world order based on American rules on the eve of the NATO summit in Washington.” Those politicians, however, are ignoring “the cost of such a Pyrrhic victory,” he stated. The ambassador said that the US leadership is blind to the true state of affairs, as it has become “entangled in its own networks of intrigue and sanctions” which have failed to deter Russia and other independent states, while becoming a burden for the West. The envoy also recalled that the West rejected Moscow’s peace overture that could put an end to the conflict. Last month, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Moscow was ready to immediately open peace talks with Ukraine once it withdraws troops from Donbass and two other former regions and agrees to commit to a neutral status.

Read more …

She delivers.

Transformation of Russian Economy Is Marathon With Barriers – Nabiullina (TASS)

Current transformation of the Russian economy is a marathon race with barriers and not a short distance, Governor of the Bank of Russia Elvira Nabiullina said. “We have recovered quickly, quicker than we expected ourselves, than expected by many. Growth rates are very high in 2023. Growth rates are high now and certainly, everybody wants to keep them. However, it seems to me that it is important for us to comprehend the current situation and understand that this is a long-distance run. This is not a short run but indeed a marathon distance, and furthermore, across the country and with barriers. We therefore need to estimate forces and understand how we work with constraints,” she said. It is important to think how to respond to long-term challenges, Nabiullina noted. “Mere crisis response measures and the use of reserves should not be the response to such permanent structural change of the economy. This is rethinking of priorities, from my point of view, and reallocation of resources,” she added.

Read more …

No peace!

Concern Over Reports Of Orban Planning Moscow Trip (BBC)

Other EU leaders have expressed concern over media reports that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban may be meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Friday. Mr Orban – whose country now holds the EU rotating presidency – is the bloc’s only head of national government to have kept close ties to the Kremlin following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. European Council President Charles Michel said Mr Orban had “no mandate to engage with Russia on behalf of the EU”, while Polish PM Donald Tusk asked for clarification. Several media outlets reported about Mr Orban’s apparent forthcoming visit, quoting their sources. The Financial Times said one Hungarian and two EU officials had confirmed media reports that Mr Orban would meet Russia’s president on Friday. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, a US-government funded media organisation, quoted a Hungarian government source. It also said that Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto would accompany Mr Orban.
.
On Monday, according to AFP news agency, Mr Orban promised “surprising news from surprising places”. In a post on X, Mr Michel wrote: “The EU rotating presidency has no mandate to engage with Russia on behalf of the EU. “The European Council is clear: Russia is the aggressor, Ukraine is the victim. No discussions about Ukraine can take place without Ukraine.” Mr Tusk asked: “The rumours about your visit to Moscow cannot be true@PM_ViktorOrban, or can they?” Earlier this week, Mr Orban visited Kyiv, saying a “a quick ceasefire could be used to speed up peace negotiations”. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky – who has had frosty relations with Mr Orban – did not publicly respond to the proposal. But many Ukrainians believe any ceasefire would simply cement Russia’s hold over territory it has seized from Ukraine and, if negotiations were to take place, they would prefer them to be conducted from a position of strength rather than on the back foot.

Media speculation about Mr Orban’s visit to Moscow came as President Putin said again that he was open to negotiating with Kyiv. The Kremlin leader recently publicly voiced a number of tough pre-conditions for such talks but Kyiv and its Western allies say these are tantamount to Ukraine’s capitulation. Mr Orban has been a vocal critic of Western support for Ukraine. He previously slowed agreement on a €50bn ($54bn; £42bn) EU aid package designed to support Ukraine in its defence against Russia. Tuesday’s visit to Kyiv was his first in 12 years, although he met Mr Putin repeatedly during that time. During Mr Orban’s joint appearance with Mr Zelensky the body language between them was not warm, and neither took questions from the media after they gave their statements. But for the next six months Mr Orban’s position as head of the European Council means he has an influential role as a figurehead for Europe. He came to Ukraine on his second day in that role for discussions, saying there was a need to solve previous disagreements and focus on the future.

Read more …

Labour: 410 seats. Tories: 131 seats. For a majority of about 170 seats. Not a typo.

Labour Set For Crushing 170 Seat Majority In UK General Election (ZH)

The year of record elections continues to serve up dramatic results, and on Thursday, a national exit poll in the UK general election indicated that Rishi Sunak’s Conservatives will crash out of office after 14 years after Keir Starmer’s Labour party was heading for a massive majority of about 170 seats. The poll on Thursday night suggested Starmer will become prime minister with 410 seats out of 650 in the House of Commons, while Sunak’s party is facing the worst result in its history, with just 131 seats. The result, according to the FT, is “momentous for Britain and will resonate around the world” because at a time when right-wing populists are advancing in many countries, political power in the UK has swung back to a liberal, internationalist, centre-left party. But Labour’s victory was projected to be delivered on a smaller share of the vote than the 40% secured by leftwing Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn in his 2017 general election defeat — suggesting the public remains sceptical.

Labour’s shadow foreign secretary David Lammy warned: “If we do not deliver for working people, we will be out and nationalists will be on our tails.” He added: “That’s the lesson we have seen around the world.” Meanwhile, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK was projected to do better than expected with 13 seats, a result that would be a big breakthrough for his right-wing populist party. The first two constituencies to report results on Thursday evening, both in the north of England, showed Labour wins with Reform in second place. Labour’s victory is a personal triumph for Starmer, who took over the party’s leadership in 2020 after the party’s worst election defeat in almost a century. His projected victory is similar in scale to Sir Tony Blair’s 1997 Labour landslide. That said, while the Ipsos exit poll is usually a reliable predictor of overall results, the final result may still differ. Vote counts from individual constituencies will trickle in through the night, with Labour, if the polls are correct, likely to have a clear majority by 5am.

According to the exit survey, the centrist Liberal Democrats was on course to win 61 seats, close to the 62-seat record set by the party in 2005. The Lib Dems are forecast to make big gains in the Tory “blue wall” of rich constituencies in the south of England. The Scottish National party was set to come behind Labour in Scotland with just 10 seats, according to the exit poll, putting a serious dent in the party’s dream of securing independence. The survey exposed the overwhelming sentiment reported by candidates from all parties that Britain wanted “change”, with many senior Tories admitting during the campaign that the party looked exhausted. The UK has been under Conservative rule for 14 years, during which time there have been five prime ministers, with a near catastrophic banking and bond market crisis erupting during the brief reign of Liz Truss. The period was marked by economic austerity, Brexit, the coronavirus pandemic and an energy price shock.

Former Tory minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg said it was “clearly a terrible night” and added that the Conservatives had taken votes for granted. Starmer is set to become only the seventh Labour prime minister in the party’s history, and his victory is the first since 2005 for the center-left party. Labour last ousted the Tories from power in 1997, when Tony Blair became prime minister in a crushing victory over John Major’s Tories. He will move into 10 Downing Street on Friday and immediately form his cabinet, with an instruction to ministers to quickly deliver policies to jolt Britain out of its low-growth torpor. The exit poll indicated that Starmer’s avowedly pro-growth, pro-business agenda has paid off, as Labour bucked international political trends. Far-right parties have performed strongly in recent elections for the European and French parliaments, while in the US, Donald Trump is leading in polls for the presidential race.

Labour’s chancellor-in-waiting Rachel Reeves has said she hopes investors will now see the UK as a “safe haven” although once the UK unleashes the next spending spree to fund all the various welfare projects, we fully expect another quick funding crisis and even more QE.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Kirsch

 

 

Bed making

 

 

 

 

Wolf
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808734618868461811

 

 

Jack

 

 

Barn cat
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808746085415813126

 

 

Foxes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808780625970606151

 

 

Penguins
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808739929469468689

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 042024
 


Félix Vallotton The balloon 1899

 

“No One Is Pushing Me Out” Biden Tells Staff (ZH)
Biden May Drop Out Of Presidential Race – NYT (RT)
Dozens of Democrat Lawmakers Want Biden Out – Bloomberg (RT)
Only Michelle Obama Can Beat Donald Trump – Poll (RT)
Jack Smith is Willing to Try Trump Up to Inauguration Day (Turley)
The Presidential Dilemma (Paul Craig Roberts)
Hillary Clinton Welcomes Ukraine ‘Attacking’ Trump (RT)
Will Putin Attack Poland & the Baltics? (Ray McGovern)
Western Talk of Ukraine Peace Just For Show – Zakharova (RT)
Orban Reveals Zelensky’s Reaction To Ceasefire Proposal (RT)
US Dissatisfied With Ukraine’s Mobilization Rate – Former PM (Sp.)
Tucker Carlson Announces Zelensky Interview (RT)
Ukraine To Be Warned It’s ‘Too Corrupt’ For NATO – Telegraph (RT)
‘Hamas Has Never Been Stronger’: Israel Is Stuck In A War It Can’t Win (Blade)
Houthis Vow USS Theodore Roosevelt Primary Target Once it Enters Red Sea (Sp.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kamala
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808504862386049227

 

 

Big Mike
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807996200966410600

 

 

 

 

 

 

Someone gave Hunter a security clearance? For real?

“No One Is Pushing Me Out” Biden Tells Staff (ZH)

Update (1355ET): According to AP, Biden told campaign staff “No one is pushing me out” during a Wednesday call. Would he even know though? Meanwhile, a new NYT/Siena poll reveals that Trump now leads Biden 49%-43% among likely voters.

* * *

Update (1055ET): With knives out and all eyes on Kamala, President Biden has reportedly ‘told a key ally that he knows he may not be able to salvage his candidacy’ if he can’t convince the public in the coming days that he’s up for the job, the NY Times reports. “He knows if he has two more events like that, we’re in a different place” by the end of the weekend said the ally, referring to last Thursday’s debacle of a debate. The conversation is the first indication to become public that the president is seriously considering whether he can recover after a devastating performance on the debate stage in Atlanta on Thursday. Concerns are mounting about his viability as a candidate and whether he could serve as president for another four years.

A top adviser to Mr. Biden, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the situation, said the president was “well aware of the political challenge he faces.” -NYT. We’re shocked Biden can ‘weigh’ anything given his condition, but the White House says the Times report is ‘absolutely false.’ As we noted earlier, odds of Kamala Harris facing off with Trump in November spiked overnight, and then accelerated even higher upon the NYT report, only to pull back shortly thereafter after the White House denied.

What a time to be alive!

* * *
While Former President Barack Obama has publicly supported sockpuppet president Joe Biden following last Thursday’s unprecedented debate, he has privately told allies that the path to victory ‘grew more challenging’ following an abject debacle for the Democrats. According to ‘several people familiar with his remarks,’ and perhaps most notably conveyed via the Washington Post, not only has Obama grown more concerned following the debate (and having to physically guide the 81-year-old off of a stage last month), the former president “has long harbored worries about his party defeating Donald Trump in November, repeatedly warning Biden in recent months about how challenging it will be to win reelection.” Not only that, “Just before the debate, Obama conveyed to allies his concerns about the state of the race.”

So Obama gets to save face, while adding to the growing chorus of Democrats who have expressed everything from quiet panic to public hints, to outright calls for Biden to drop out of the race. Meanwhile in the ivory tower, White House aides are reportedly freaked out that crack addict, China profiteer, Ukraine energy expert, convicted felon Hunter Biden is in the building helping to counsel his father in Jill’s time of crisis. According to NBC News’ Ken Deilanian, White House staff are asking “What the hell is happening,” after a report that Hunter has been sitting in on meetings.

Read more …

Comedy.

Biden May Drop Out Of Presidential Race – NYT (RT)

US President Joe Biden is seriously considering whether he can recover from his “disastrous” debate performance, the New York Times reported on Wednesday, citing a “key ally” who wished to remain anonymous. Biden struggled through last week’s exchange with challenger Donald Trump, hosted by CNN. The Times described his performance as “devastating,” even though Biden’s campaign had arranged the circumstances to be maximally favorable. “He knows if he has two more events like that, we’re in a different place” by the end of the Independence Day weekend, the unnamed ally told the newspaper. While the unnamed source insisted that Biden is “still deeply in the fight for re-election,” the 81-year-old is reportedly aware that the next several days must go well if he wishes to “salvage” his candidacy.

Biden is scheduled to record an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos – a Clinton White House veteran – on Friday and take part in campaign events in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. A meeting with Democratic governors is also on the schedule for Wednesday evening. White House spokesman Andrew Bates told the NYT that the anonymous ally’s claim was “absolutely false” and that he had not been given enough time to respond. According to the Times, Biden has told at least one person that he is open to the possibility that the plan to move on from the debate and shift the narrative to Trump “may not work.” The White House and the campaign have offered a range of excuses for what happened at the debate. Meanwhile, a CBS News poll on Wednesday showed Trump two points ahead of Biden nationally and three points in battleground states.

“Concerns are mounting about his viability as a candidate and whether he could serve as president for another four years,” the Times noted. Several other unnamed allies of Biden told the outlet that he was “clear-eyed” about the “uphill battle to convince voters, donors and the political class” that his debate performance was just a bad day. Media outlets that have been friendly to Biden for years, insisting just last month that he was “sharp as a tack” and that allegations of mental and physical infirmity were fake news, turned on the president practically overnight. Major party donors have reportedly done so as well, demanding a new candidate. Vice President Kamala Harris remains unpopular, however, and the Democrats did not allow a competitive primary, leaving them in a bind to name a possible replacement

Read more …

“..even among Democrats some 45% believe that he should withdraw from the race..”

Dozens of Democrat Lawmakers Want Biden Out – Bloomberg (RT)

Dozens of Democrats in the US Congress are considering signing a letter demanding that President Joe Biden suspend his reelection campaign, Bloomberg reported on Wednesday. Calls for Biden to withdraw from the race and resign from office have intensified since his disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump last week. Bloomberg did not name any of the lawmakers involved, and attributed the news to an anonymous “senior party official.” According to this official, Democrats fear association with the unpopular and apparently senile president will harm their own reelection chances in November, leading to “a Republican sweep of Washington and an unchecked Donald Trump presidency.” Calls for Biden’s withdrawal have snowballed since last Thursday’s CNN-hosted debate, during which Biden appeared confused and struggled to finish sentences.

Speaking to MSNBC on Tuesday, influential Democrat Representatives Nancy Pelosi and Jim Clyburn both discussed the possibility that Biden may suffer from a mental condition, while Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas became the first sitting Democrat lawmaker to urge Biden to suspend his campaign. Liberal pundits have gone further, with The Atlantic and The Hill both publishing op-eds on Wednesday calling on Biden to leave office immediately, after the New York Times, Washington Post, and Chicago Tribune all called on him to step aside so the party can choose a more lucid candidate to take on Trump this November. The White House, meanwhile, insists that Biden does not suffer from dementia or any other degenerative condition, and that his lackluster performance was the result of tiredness and a “bad cold.”

On Wednesday, White House spokesman Andrew Bates dismissed a report in the New York Times suggesting that the president was considering whether to pull out of the race, calling the claim “absolutely false.”According to Politico reporter Elena Schneider, Biden told campaign staffers on Wednesday that “no one’s pushing me out. I’m not leaving. I’m in this race to the end and we’re going to win.” Biden spoke to Clyburn and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer by phone on Wednesday, Bloomberg reported. The president has a packed schedule of appearances over the coming days, including a meeting with Democratic governors on Wednesday evening, an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Friday, and campaign events in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin over the weekend.

“We really want to turn the page on this,” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters on Tuesday, adding that Biden’s upcoming appearances will allow Americans to “see him for themselves.” According to multiple polls, however, Americans have already decided that Biden is not fit for office. A survey conducted by CBS News/YouGov in the wake of the debate found that 72% of registered voters do not believe that Biden has the “mental and cognitive health necessary to serve as president.” The poll indicated that even among Democrats some 45% believe that he should withdraw from the race.

Read more …

That poll is wrong. Because it will all be about Big Mike.

Only Michelle Obama Can Beat Donald Trump – Poll (RT)

Michelle Obama, the wife of former US President Barack Obama, is the only potential Democratic candidate who could beat Republican frontrunner Donald Trump in November’s election, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll. There is growing concern among Democratic voters over President Joe Biden’s ability to secure a second term in office this year, particularly after his debate with Trump, in which the 81-year-old incumbent appeared frail and confused, and struggled to finish his sentences. On July 1 and July 2, Ipsos market research company surveyed a representative sample of 1,070 US adults for Reuters, including 892 registered voters, 348 Democrats, 322 Republicans, and 303 independents.

According to the poll, if a vote were to be held now, Biden and Trump would both win an estimated 40% of the votes. However, around three in five voters, including nearly one-third of Democrats, believe Biden should drop out of the race altogether and that his party should put forward a new candidate, even at this late stage. Most of Biden’s potential replacements do not seem to have the public approval or recognition needed to beat Trump on November 5, according to the poll. In hypothetical matchups against Trump, Vice President Kamala Harris was one point behind the Republican candidate, while others, like California Governor Gavin Newsom and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, fared even worse. The only person who could beat Trump is Michelle Obama, the poll suggests. In her matchup against the former president, some 50% of registered voters said they would vote for her, compared to 39% who said they would vote for Trump.

The former first lady also appears to have a better public image than the other candidates. The survey showed that around 42% of voters have a favorable opinion of Trump, compared to the 38% who have a favorable opinion of Biden. But Obama had an approval rating of 55%, beating all other potential Democratic candidates. Meanwhile, Biden and his team have indicated that they have no plans to drop out of the race despite last week’s debate performance, which they have tried to play down as just a “bad night.” The Democratic Party has also publicly rallied behind the president. Privately, however, media reports suggest that many top Democratic donors want Biden gone from the November 5 ticket and even his public allies, including Barack Obama, have reportedly been “telling people Biden can’t win” in private.

Read more …

It’s called election interference. And SCOTUS should stop it.

“Smith’s appetite for a trial before the Inauguration may exceed his ability to force that expedited schedule…”

Jack Smith is Willing to Try Trump Up to Inauguration Day (Turley)

The Washington Post is reporting that Special Counsel Jack Smith may try to convict former president Donald Trump all the way through the election and up to 11:59 am on January 20th. After the oath, the Justice Department has long maintained that it will not prosecute a sitting president. There is also a long-standing policy of the Justice Department to abstain from criminal proceedings before an election to avoid the appearance of trying to influence the outcome. Smith has signaled that he will discard that policy and that he is prepared to try Trump not only up to the election but through the election. He is now reportedly willing to try Trump up to January 20th. Smith has made trying Trump before the election the overriding priority in his two cases against the former president. He failed repeatedly to force a shorter schedule on appeal before the Supreme Court.

His arguments were revealing. He suggested that the public should have a possible conviction before they cast their votes. It flipped the DOJ policy on its head in openly seeking to influence the election. The Supreme Court was not persuaded, though Smith did succeed in effectively cutting the appellate process a bit shorter. He then lost in spectacular fashion before the Court on presidential immunity. According to the Post, he is not giving up the ghost and is now committed to a trial running up to Inauguration Day: “Current officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, expressed … that if Trump wins the election, the clock on the two federal cases against him would keep ticking until Jan. 20, when he would be sworn in as the 47th president.” Even with Smith’s continued push to try Trump at all costs before the Inauguration, it could be a challenge. There is a 30-day period before the Supreme Court case is effectively returned to district court.

Judge Tanya Chutkan has been highly favorable for Smith and highly motivated in seeking a trial before the election. That led to problems highlighted in the recent opinion. Chutkan was so motivated that she failed to create an adequate record on these issues. That record will now have to be established. If Chutkan rules as she did earlier, she is expected to be hostile to Trump’s claims on his conduct falling within official functions. However, she will need to make the record and her decision could again be appealed. The Court left clear guidelines that will make it difficult for Chutkan to, again, dismiss such claims.

Moreover, the pre-trial motions were stopped with the latest appeal. They must now be addressed. Finally, she pledged to give the Trump team over 80 days for preparation after the appeal, which will be added to the 30 days, the period for the remand record, and the pre-trial motions. There is also the need for the court and Smith to deal with the Fischer decision limiting the use of the obstruction charges — impacting two of the four counts against Trump. As I have previously written, Smith has various options but could trigger a new reversal on appeal if he follows his signature inclination to resist legal limits. In other words, Smith’s appetite for a trial before the Inauguration may exceed his ability to force that expedited schedule.

Read more …

“All the people can do is to cast votes that might or might not be properly counted..”

The Presidential Dilemma (Paul Craig Roberts)

The dilemma is not limited to Trump and Biden. All of us face it. Biden cannot win despite all of the theft mechanisms the Democrats have institutionalized. A stolen election requires a close election in order to hide the theft. But the polls show no such close election. In order to use the fraudulent electoral means put in place, the Democrats need a candidate that the media can present as neck-in-neck with Trump. Even if Democrats had such a candidate, the Biden Crime Family cannot risk Trump taking office. In the event that Trump has learned not to appoint his most dangerous enemies to the highest offices, Biden out of power faces the risk of a real investigation of his and his son’s suspect business affairs, which appear to boil down to influence peddling.

So far the Biden family has reacted negatively to the pressure on Biden from fellow Democrats to stand down. But there is room for a deal if the Democrats can find a candidate for whom they can succeed in having a stolen election accepted. The deal would be that in exchange for standing down, the replacement candidate when “elected” will have the Justice (sic) Department investigate Joe and Hunter’s business dealings and clear them from all suspicions. One wonders why the corrupt merrick garland hasn’t already done this. For Trump the main problem is how does he form a loyal government committed to Trump’s and Trump’s supporters agenda? The Rino Republican establishment is almost as opposed to Trump as the Democrats. Where are there aware Republicans with brains and a willingness to fight the Establishment and the media which serves the Establishment? Supposing such people exist and that Trump finds them, how does he get them confirmed in office? Confirmation is up to the Senate. Is the Senate going to put in office people who intend to dismantle the Establishment that the Senate represents?

The most important question is who will sacrifice his chances for success in life by serving in a Trump administration and going against the Establishment. There are so many ways in which the Establishment can ruin you. When Trump, if elected, is confronted with his isolation, as he was during his first term with no reliable advisers having abandoned Bannon and Flynn, what does he do? Does he declare his re-election as vindication and make his peace with the Establishment, thereby surviving and recovering from his damaged business interests? Trump’s support is in the people, but the people are impotent. The media lies to them continually, but enough of them continue to support the media and partake of their indoctrination from CNN, NPR, the New York Times and the rest of the presstitutes for the media to continue its lies. The media’s lies sustain the official narratives.

The people have no influence on the cabinet departments that serve the private agendas of the Establishment. All the people can do is to cast votes that might or might not be properly counted. We already see an unpromising change in Trump. In place of analysis he blusters. If he had been in office Russia would have been too afraid to invade Ukraine and Hamas to attack Israel. In other words, he has bought into the Establishment explanations. We no longer hear that he is going to normalize relations with Russia. Instead, he is going to intimidate Russia. This is not what the world on the brink of World War III wants to hear. We want to see leadership that acknowledges Washington and NATO’s responsibility in the ever-widening conflict. As long as we are full of self-justification, we can’t see the Russian point of view. Unless we can bring ourselves to see the Russian point of view, we will continue on our path to a major war.

Read more …

Vovan and Lexus strike again.

Hillary Clinton Welcomes Ukraine ‘Attacking’ Trump (RT)

Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has signaled her support if Ukraine attempted to dig up dirt on GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump. She made the comment in a phone call with Russian prankster duo Vovan and Lexus, one of whom posed as ex-Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko. According to a recording of the conversation made public on Wednesday, Clinton and the man she believed to be Poroshenko discussed the political landscape in the US leading up to the November election, as well as the potential repercussions of a Trump victory for both Kiev and Washington. Trump has repeatedly criticized the way the administration of US President Joe Biden has handled the Ukraine conflict, saying he would end hostilities within 24 hours if elected and stop sending unconditional financial support to Kiev.

Clinton said that she is “doing everything” she can to secure Biden’s reelection, while acknowledging that those efforts come at “a very difficult time in this country.” Her comments followed a recent television debate between Biden and Trump, widely seen as a disaster for the incumbent. The former presidential candidate, who lost the 2016 election to Trump, described her former rival as “very dangerous,” adding that he “would be very bad for the United States as well as for… Ukraine,” and that Kiev was right to be concerned. Later in the conversation, ‘Poroshenko’ offered to “request a hearing in the [Ukrainian] parliament to find something on him [Trump] before the election,” recalling that the 45th president is already facing serious legal trouble in the US. “I think we can attack him from different sides,” the prankster suggested.

Clinton seemed to like the idea. “Good. Anything you could do, attack him, I’m all for it, because he is a very dangerous man,” she responded. ‘Poroshenko’ then followed up with a suggestion to “send my people in the US,” without clarifying what he meant, but the former secretary ignored this proposal. Biden and Trump faced-off on June 27, with the US president widely being perceived as incoherent and fumbling. According to several reports, many prominent Democrats and party donors are scrambling to find a replacement for Biden. Meanwhile, Trump is heading into the election as the only former or current US president to be convicted of a crime. In May, the GOP frontrunner was found guilty of falsifying business records stemming from an alleged ‘hush money’ payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, with whom Trump allegedly had an affair. The ex-president maintains his innocence and has denied being involved with Daniels.

Read more …

Fiona Hill.

Will Putin Attack Poland & the Baltics? (Ray McGovern)

At Thursday’s debate with Donald Trump, President Joe Biden, calling Russian President Vladimir Putin a “war criminal,” claimed that he “wants all of Ukraine. … Do you think he’ll stop? … What do you think happens to Poland and other places?” Spoiler Alert: Official Ukrainian sources confirm that Putin did stop in March 2022, after Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky agreed to forswear membership in NATO. This was the key provision in the Ukraine-Russia deal initialed by Davyd Arakhamia, who at the time was Zelensky’s chief negotiator (and his party’s faction leader in the Rada) at the talks in Istanbul at the end of March, hardly a month into the war. The Russians lifted their objection to Ukraine joining the EU, as the Ukrainians agreed to neutrality. Security guarantees sought by Kyiv (short of NATO membership) would be worked out. The fighting would stop. Agreement on the status of Crimea would be put off to the future.

Putin and Zelensky reportedly were micromanaging the March 2022 negotiations, and at that early stage the Russians expressed readiness for the two to meet. At the same time that Biden and other Western leaders raise the alarm that Putin will attack other parts of Europe when he’s through with Ukraine, they claim Russia can’t even take the Ukrainian province of Kharkiv, has lost more than 500,000 men to just 30,000 Ukrainians and its economy is faltering (none of which is true.) But Cold War Western power was based on an exaggerated Soviet threat and the same is true today. In a November 2023 Kyiv Post report titled “Russia Offered to End War in 2022 If Ukraine Scrapped NATO Ambitions – Zelensky Party Chief,” Arakhamia confirmed that in the March 2022 negotiations Russia proposed ending the war on the condition that Ukraine abandon its NATO aspirations and adopt a neutral stance.

Arakhamia continued: “Neutrality was the biggest thing for them, they were ready to end the war if we took — as Finland once did — neutrality and made commitments that we would not join NATO. This was the key point. While negotiations continued in Istanbul, former U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson unexpectedly arrived in Kyiv on April 9 and said that Ukraine shouldn’t sign anything with them at all – and ‘let’s just fight.’ ” Arakhamia’s candor was refreshing. But it came as no surprise to those of us following Ukraine in early 2022. On May 5, 2022 — a year and a half before Arakhamia spilled the beans to the Kyiv Post — Ukrainska Pravda ran a report under the title “Possibility of talks between Zelensky and Putin came to a halt after Johnson’s visit”: “According to sources close to Zelenskyy, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Boris Johnson, who appeared in the capital almost without warning, brought two simple messages.

The first is that Putin is a war criminal, he should be pressured, not negotiated with. And the second is that even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they [the West] are not. The collective West felt that Putin was not really as powerful as they had previously imagined, and that here was a chance to press him.” Three days after Johnson left Kyiv, Putin publicly stated that talks with Ukraine had “turned into a dead end.” Putin expressed confidence that Russia would ultimately prevail and added that it would “rhythmically and calmly” continue conducting the operation in Ukraine. In his major speech to the Russian Foreign Ministry on June 14, Putin said the Russian troops approaching Kyiv in February-March 2022 were there “to push the Ukrainian side to negotiations.” From Feb. 24 on, the Russians had expressed readiness for diplomacy. Interestingly, Zelensky appointed Arakhamia chief negotiator on Feb. 28.

Putin continued: “Surprisingly, as a result, agreements that satisfied both Moscow and Kyiv were indeed reached and initialed in Istanbul. … The document was titled ‘Agreement on Permanent Neutrality and Security Guarantees for Ukraine’. It was a compromise but resolved the problems that were stated as major ones even at the start of the special military operation. But the path to peace was rejected again. … The former UK prime minister said directly during his visit to Kyiv – no agreements. Russia must be defeated on the battlefield. … Thus they began to intensively pump Ukraine up with weapons and started talking about the need to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.”

Who has been telling Biden that Putin “will not stop at Ukraine?” Exhibit A would be Fiona Hill, disciple of arch-Russophobe historian Richard Pipes, and national intelligence officer for Russia (2006-09). Her insights appeared in The New York Times exactly a month before Russia invaded Ukraine. On Jan. 24, 2022, the Times featured a guest essay by Hill titled “Putin has the U.S. Right Where He Wants It”: “This time, Mr. Putin’s aim is bigger than closing NATO’s ‘open door’ to Ukraine and taking more territory — he wants to evict the United States from Europe. As he might put it: ‘Goodbye, America. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.’”

Read more …

”What is happening to Europe is not just a crisis, or collapse, or loss of position. It truly is a disaster..”

Western Talk of Ukraine Peace Just For Show – Zakharova (RT)

Any Western talk of peace in the Ukraine conflict is merely a “decoy” as the US and its allies remain intent on inflicting a strategic defeat on Moscow, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban visited Kiev on Tuesday, where he urged Vladimir Zelensky to seek a ceasefire with Russia to facilitate peace talks. The Ukrainian leader rejected the proposal, saying he has a different way to end the conflict. Whatever discussions Ukraine and Western nations have about peace are mere “decoys, screens, tropes and memes,” said purely for their own sake, Zakharova said on her weekly radio show on Wednesday. The Ukraine conflict is dominated by the goal of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia, which the US and its allies have declared “absolutely clearly and specifically,” the official explained.

In practical terms, the West seeks to dismantle Russia and to end its existence, she claimed. What did you expect from the people chosen by the US as their tools? Tools don’t have a say in what they do. Clear-eyed politicians in the EU can see the place allocated to their nations in the US grand plan, which is that of a sacrificial animal on the altar of victory against Russia, Zakharova added. Europe’s grim future is evident in the state of its economy, she said. ”What is happening to Europe is not just a crisis, or collapse, or loss of position. It truly is a disaster,” she argued. Western officials such as Hungary’s Orban, who publicly object to the course of action chosen in Washington, probably want to set the record straight for the future generations of Europeans, who will blame the leaders of today for their inaction, Zakharova said.

The Hungarian prime minister has repeatedly argued that Western sanctions imposed on Russia as punishment for the Ukraine conflict have failed to end hostilities and ended up hurting EU members more than they did Russia. Budapest has used its veto power in the bloc to stop proposed restrictions that would have undermined core Hungarian national interests, such as its cooperation with Russia on nuclear energy. Russian President Vladimir Putin has pledged to order a ceasefire with Ukraine as soon as Kiev renounces its bid to join NATO and pulls its troops out of all territory which Moscow claims under its sovereignty.

Read more …

“..Ukraine is not interested in Orban’s proposal and claimed that a ceasefire “cannot be considered in isolation.”

Orban Reveals Zelensky’s Reaction To Ceasefire Proposal (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky was not receptive to Budapest’s proposal to establish a temporary ceasefire with Russia, according to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who recently traveled to Kiev. During his surprise visit on Tuesday, which was his first trip to Ukraine in over a decade, Orban proposed that Zelensky think about “whether it would be possible to take a break. To reach a ceasefire and start negotiations [with Russia] since a quick ceasefire could speed up these negotiations.” Ahead of the trip, Orban stated that he hoped to explain to Zelensky that “time is running out and it is important to establish peace, as hundreds of soldiers are dying on the front every day and we do not see how a solution can be found on the battlefield.”

However, following his conversations with Zelensky, Orban told the Swiss Die Weltwoche news outlet, that the Ukrainian leader “had some doubts” about the ceasefire proposal and “didn’t like it very much.” He explained that Zelensky “had a bad experience in the past with ceasefires, which, in his opinion, did not benefit Ukraine” and because of this believed there were “limits” to what could be achieved. While Zelensky himself has not yet commented on Hungary’s proposal, his deputy chief of staff, Igor Zhovka has stated that Ukraine is not interested in Orban’s proposal and claimed that a ceasefire “cannot be considered in isolation.”

Instead, Zhovka said that Kiev will continue to seek a resolution to the conflict based on Zelensky’s own ‘peace formula’. The ten-point program, initially floated in late 2022, calls for a complete withdrawal of Russian forces from territories Kiev claims as its own, reparation payments and an international war crime tribunal for Russia’s leadership. Moscow has vehemently rejected Zelensky’s plan as a non-starter and has stressed that any peace talks with Kiev must be based on “realities on the ground.” Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin has presented his own set of terms for starting ceasefire talks, which include a full Ukrainian withdrawal from the regions that voted to be part of Russia, as well as legally binding guarantees that ensure Ukraine will never become a member of NATO.

Read more …

‘You planned to mobilize this number of people, but mobilized that. We have provided you with funds for weapons and that number of troops, and you fail to hold your end of the bargain,..”

US Dissatisfied With Ukraine’s Mobilization Rate – Former PM (Sp.)

The United States expresses its dissatisfaction with the insufficient mobilization rate in Ukraine, causing trouble in Washington-Kiev relations, former Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov said on Wednesday. “After the adoption of the bill facilitating mobilization, the number of mobilized people increased, but the Kiev regime failed to achieve the numbers set by the Americans, failed by far. That is why they are having problems with their US masters who are openly saying: ‘You planned to mobilize this number of people, but mobilized that. We have provided you with funds for weapons and that number of troops, and you fail to hold your end of the bargain,'” Azarov said on Telegram. There is active agitation in Ukraine in favor of signing of the temporary ceasefire agreement, he added.

“They say, we should sit tight, gain strength and win [the lost territories] back. That is the idea of all that [agitation] talks. No one is promoting the idea of giving up these territories indefinitely, the idea of a permanent peace treaty, the idea of giving up on NATO membership. These ideas are mentioned nowhere,” the former prime minister added. Martial law was introduced in Ukraine on February 24, 2022. The next day, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a decree on general mobilization. The martial law and mobilization have been continuously extended since then. On May 9, the Ukrainian president signed bills to extend mobilization and martial law in the country for another 90 days. Under martial law, Ukrainian citizens aged from 18 to 60 are prohibited from leaving the country.

Western countries have been providing massive military and financial aid to Kiev since the start of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine in February 2022. The Kremlin has consistently warned against continued arms deliveries to Kiev, saying it would lead to further escalation of the conflict.

Read more …

“Stage [the interview] on neutral grounds or he might have you disappeared like Gonzalo Lira..”

Tucker Carlson Announces Zelensky Interview (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky has finally accepted a request to be interviewed by Tucker Carlson, the American journalist has revealed. A notorious Ukrainian government-linked website branded Carlson an enemy of the state, in particular for his interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this year. Carlson used to host a highly-rated evening show on Fox News until he was fired last April for reasons never quite explained. He has since launched his own network, posting on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram. “Looks like we’ve got the Zelenskyy interview,” Carlson said on Wednesday. “We’ve been trying for two years, and with particular intensity after interviewing Putin in February.” “The point is to bring Americans much-needed information about the conflict that’s completely reshaping their country’s position in the world. Coming soon we hope,” he added.

Following the Putin interview, Carlson revealed that he also reached out to Zelensky to give him a chance to “explain his position,” but said that the Ukrainian leader ignored his overtures. The influential American journalist has long been critical of the US policy to fund Kiev in the conflict against Moscow. “Ukraine can’t win. Everybody knows that around the world. People are very clear on that. There is not one informed person outside the United States who thinks that somehow Ukraine is going to beat Russia,” he said in April.Last month, during an interview with Donald Trump Jr, Carlson argued that Ukraine was being sold off to foreign corporate investors and that the Ukrainian nation would disappear within 50 years. “We betrayed them like no other country ever,” he said at the time.

Carlson’s announcement has caused some concern among his fans, given that he was placed on Ukraine’s notorious list of public enemies back in 2023, labeled as “an accomplice of Russian occupiers and terrorists.” “Stage [the interview] on neutral grounds or he might have you disappeared like Gonzalo Lira,” conservative blogger Ian Miles Cheong warned Carlson, referring to an American-Chilean journalist who was tortured to death in a Ukrainian jail earlier this year. The controversial Mirotvorets (Peacemaker) database was launched by Ukrainian government-linked activists in 2014. It has often been called Ukraine’s ‘kill list’, as a number of prominent journalists and other public figures featured on the website have been murdered over the years.

Read more …

Good topic for Tucker’s interview.

Ukraine To Be Warned It’s ‘Too Corrupt’ For NATO – Telegraph (RT)

NATO wants Ukraine to make more effort to crack down on endemic corruption as a condition for any progress towards joining the bloc, the Daily Telegraph reported on Tuesday, citing sources. According to the British paper, concerns that Ukraine is “too corrupt” to become a full-fledged NATO member will be highlighted in the communique at the bloc’s Washington summit on July 9-11. A senior US State Department official told The Telegraph that the West must “applaud everything that Ukraine has done in the name of reforms over the last two-plus years.” However, he added that “we want to talk about additional steps that need to be taken, particularly in the area of anti-corruption. It is a priority for many of us around the table.”

NATO members first agreed in 2008 that Ukraine would eventually join the bloc, without setting an exact timetable. After the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, Ukraine made its NATO aspirations a strategic goal and formally applied to join the bloc in 2022. The move came after four of its former regions voted overwhelmingly to join Russia. However, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said Ukraine’s accession is out of the question while it is in conflict with Russia, insisting that membership can only be approved “when allies agree and conditions are met.” Moscow has said Ukraine’s plans to join NATO are among the key reasons for the conflict. Ukraine has been plagued by corruption for years. The hostilities with Russia have made the problem even more apparent, and the Ukrainian military has been rocked by several high-profile procurement scandals in recent months.

Graft is high on the list of concerns for Ukraine’s Western backers in the EU and US. Last month, the EU set up a special watchdog to combat the possible embezzlement of billions of dollars allocated to Kiev. In May, Robert Storch, the Pentagon’s inspector general, released a report stating that “endemic corruption persists” in Ukraine while calling its government “one of the least accountable” in Europe. An NBC report in June claimed that Kiev has been irritated by constant US demands to ramp up anti-corruption efforts. American and Ukrainian officials have acknowledged that it is one of the issues poisoning bilateral relations. According to Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index, Ukraine is in the ‘red’ zone, ranking 104th out of 180 countries.

Read more …

“The stocks of their weapons have been depleting, many tunnels have been destroyed, infrastructure has been devastated. Their combatants must be exhausted as they have been fighting for a long time. But from the political point of view, Hamas has never been stronger..”

‘Hamas Has Never Been Stronger’: Israel Is Stuck In A War It Can’t Win (Blade)

Through April, the IDF had targeted more than 32,000 military sites belonging to Hamas and its allies. In June, Israel announced that 15,000 of the group’s militants had been eliminated. But experts are certain those measures won’t eradicate the Islamic group that has been in charge of Gaza since 2007. “We are advancing to the end of the stage of eliminating the Hamas terrorist army,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday, addressing the cadets of Israel National Defense College. “I was very impressed by the achievements above ground and below ground, and by the commanders’ fighting spirit. With this spirit we will achieve our objectives: Returning our hostages, eliminating Hamas’ military and governing capabilities, ensuring that Gaza will not constitute a threat…” he added. Since October 7, 2023 – when hordes of Hamas militants attacked Israel and killed more than 1,500 people – Israel has eliminated dozens of Hamas tunnels.

It has seized weapons depots and cash, destroyed various military sites, killed operatives of Hamas and of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and captured thousands others. But almost nine months in, Israel’s victory over Hamas still seems remote. Before the deadly October 7 attack, the Islamic group that has been in control of the Strip since 2007, boasted five brigades or 25 battalions with a total number of active combatants standing at 30,000. In June, Israel admitted that it had only eliminated half of that original force, or 15,000 Hamas combatants. On Tuesday evening, the country’s chief of staff, Herzi Halevi, said Israeli forces had killed at least 900 militants in Rafah, south of the Strip. Reports suggest that Hamas is now actively recruiting new cadets, many of whom are 18 year-olds, to replenish its ranks, but even if they fail to reach their initial numbers, the existing battalions are more than enough to challenge Israel.

Just on Monday, Hamas militants fired twenty rockets from Khan Yunis at Israel’s southern communities, showing they are still capable of putting up a fight. Areas that had been vacant of Hamas before are now seeing a resurgence. Israeli soldiers continue to fall in the Strip, almost on a daily basis, with the total number already exceeding 670. “I don’t believe Israel can destroy Hamas completely,” said Shadi Abdelrahman, a political analyst and native of Gaza who left the Strip shortly before the war. “Hamas is not like any other group. They are not outsiders. They have an ideology connected to a cause, and that cause is to fight for their lands or to avenge the death of their loves ones,” he added.

Stemming from the Muslim Brotherhood, a radical Islamist organization that’s deemed terrorist by many regional and international players, Hamas was established in Gaza in late 1980s as a response to what they call Israeli occupation and the inability of other Palestinian factions, including Fatah, to confront it. But they were far more than just a group that wanted to resist Israel militarily. Just like their patrons, the Muslim Brotherhood, they were a social movement: they established schools and hospitals, they ran charities and served as mediators in family feuds, and that made them an indispensable part of the Gazan society.

“Socially speaking, Hamas of today doesn’t have that much power and cannot provide what it used to before, simply because they cannot move freely due to Israel’s heavy shelling,” explained Abdelrahman. “Militarily, their capabilities have also been damaged. The stocks of their weapons have been depleting, many tunnels have been destroyed, infrastructure has been devastated. Their combatants must be exhausted as they have been fighting for a long time. But from the political point of view, Hamas has never been stronger,” added the analyst.

Read more …

“If they want to take the risk, get themselves into trouble, and put themselves into the same predicament that Eisenhower was, let them come..”

Houthis Vow USS Theodore Roosevelt Primary Target Once it Enters Red Sea (Sp.)

The USS Theodore Roosevelt is set to take over duties in the region after Yemen’s Ansar Allah movement (Houthis) targeted the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower in the Red Sea with missiles and UAVs in response to earlier bombings, leading the supercarrier to exit after an eight-month posting. Yemen’s Houthi militia has released a video promising to sink the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt once it arrives in Red Sea waters. The aircraft carrier is a “primary target for the Missile Forces of the Yemeni Army from now on, and will be subject to targeting upon its entry into the Red Sea,” Ansar Allah leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi stated in the video. “If they want to take the risk, get themselves into trouble, and put themselves into the same predicament that Eisenhower was, let them come,” al-Houthi warned.

The Houthis have vowed to stop all Israeli-owned or bound naval traffic through the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden until Israel halts its assault on the Palestinian Gaza Strip. The armed forces have tried to strike the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower carrier on several occasions, but the US Navy insists that those attacks caused no damage to the supercarrier or its escorts. A missile and drone barrage targeted the vessel shortly before it departed the region in early June.

“In response to US and UK air strikes on some cities and civilian targets in Yemen, which killed and injured more than 58 people, most of whom were civilians, the USS Eisenhower aircraft carrier was attacked in the Red Sea with a large number of ballistic, cruise missiles and drones,” Ansar Allah political office member Hezam al-Asad told Sputnik in May. Yemeni forces hit a US aircraft carrier in the Red Sea with missiles and UAVs in response to the bombing of the country – Ansar Allah. Most of those killed and wounded in US and British strikes on Yemen were civilians, a member of the Ansar Allah political bureau told Sputnik. The Yemeni blockade of Israel prompted the United States to send warships to the Red Sea along with a handful of ships from a ‘coalition’ of NATO member states including the UK. Those forces have attacked targets in Yemen.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

FSD

 

 

Chicken
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808274583784403372

 

 

Snow leopard

 

 

Baby sleep

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 032024
 


René Magritte The son of man 1946

 

Trump Sentencing Delayed Two Months, ‘If Such Is Still Necessary’ (ZH)
SCOTUS Ruled For The Office of the President, Not Trump (Paul Craig Roberts)
Age of Rage: Critics Unleash Threats and Abuse on the Supreme Court (Turley)
No, The Supreme Court Did Not Remove All Limits on the Presidency (Turley)
Ex-Hillary Aide: Debate Setup “Soft Coup” By Democrats To Replace Biden (MN)
Major US Democrat Donors Threatening Party Over Biden (RT)
The Long Sordid Career of Creepy Joe Biden (Jeffries)
What US Allies Should Learn From The Biden-Trump Debate (Amar)
Democrats Hint At Assassination In Response To SCOTUS Immunity Decision (ZH)
BBC Presenter Calls For Trump To Be Assassinated (RT)
Trump Could End NATO Expansion – Politico (RT)
UK Military Unprepared For Conflict Of Any Kind – Ex-Defense Official (RT)
Zelensky’s New ‘Plan’ Possible ‘First Step’ To Negotiations (DeMartino)
Le Pen Accuses Macron Of Preparing ‘Coup d’État’ (RT)
France Rapidly Being ‘Brought to its Knees’ Regardless of Vote Outcome (Sp.)
UniCredit Challenges Order To Leave Russia (RT)
Chevron Deference (Spike Cohen)

 

 

 

 

Short
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807931860128854162

 

 

Trump lawfare
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807907184631861446

 

 

Poso
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807878480476156148

 

 

Tucker Obama
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807538203458683010

 

 

RFK Dr. Phil

 

 

Trump Taliban
https://twitter.com/i/status/1808179617397719127

 

 

 

 

All the charges and indictments appear to be -slowly- falling apart.

Trump Sentencing Delayed Two Months, ‘If Such Is Still Necessary’ (ZH)

Update (1505ET): Donald Trump’s sentencing date has been kicked down the road more than two months – from July 11th to September 18th, ‘if such is still necessary.’

https://twitter.com/james_jinnette1/status/1808215098797838392

Interestingly, New York prosecutors agreed to a delay.

[..] Hours after the US Supreme Court granted Donald Trump immunity for official acts committed in office, the former president began an effort to toss his recent conviction in Manhattan and postpone his upcoming sentencing over 34 felony counts related to his cover-up of a sex scandal leading up to the 2016 US election. In a letter to judge Juan Merchan just hours after the Supreme Court ruling – and 10 days before he’s set for sentencing, Trump’s lawyers sought permission to file a motion to set aside the verdict while Merchan considers whether the Supreme Court ruling affects the conviction. That said, Trump’s attempt might be a long shot given the fact that the Manhattan case revolves around acts Trump took as a candidate, not as president.

As the NY Times notes, however, Trump’s lawyers are likely to argue that prosecutors partially built their case using evidence from his time in office. Under the Supreme Court’s new ruling, prosecutors may not charge a president for official acts, but also cannot cite evidence involving official acts that affect other accusations. It is unclear how the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which brought the case, will respond, or whether the judge will delay the first sentencing of an American president. But Mr. Trump’s effort appeared to cause at least a brief interruption: The district attorney’s office did not on Monday make a sentencing recommendation to the judge about whether to imprison Mr. Trump, as was expected. Merchan may also punt on the request, as the deadline for filing post-trial motions ended last month. Instead, Merchan may instruct Trump’s attorneys to raise the issue when they appeal the conviction post-sentencing.

As the Times further notes, Merchan faces an ‘unprecedented conundrum’ with massive legal and political ramifications. Imprisoning Trump would drop-kick a hornet’s nest, while sparing Trump from prison would immediately draw the wrath of vengeful Democrats who say he gave Trump special treatment. While there’s no requirement that Trump be sentenced to time behind bars, Merchan could sentence him to months or several years in prison – or he could be sentenced to home confinement or probation. He could also postpone any sentence until after the election, or after Trump serves another term in office, should be he reelected. Meanwhile, Trump’s other criminal cases have been largely derailed or otherwise postponed – including his trial in Washington DC, where he stands accused of mishandling classified information while still in office.

Read more …

“..the legal machinery the corrupt Democrats have employed against Trump is too corrupt to be able to do its assigned political assassination.”

SCOTUS Ruled For The Office of the President, Not Trump (Paul Craig Roberts)

The US Supreme Court has ruled that a president has immunity for official acts, but not for personal acts. Which is which will be a contentious issue. For example, if a president were to have the CIA, FBI, or Secret Service murder a political rival that would be a personal act. But when President Obama had the US military murder a US citizen suspected of being a terrorist, it was an official act. But was it? The justification for the murder was suspicion alone, a bare-faced accusation unconfirmed by a trial and therefore in violation of due process. Has it ever been established that it is an official act for a president to have a US citizen murdered without due process? Perhaps it has happened secretly by the CIA but my impression is that President Obama’s murder of the Muslim religious leader who was an American citizen was the first public murder without due process and conviction delivering a death penalty.

Nothing was made of the murder because Americans had been indoctrinated with fear of Muslim terrorists and regarded the murder as an act of war. When vice president Biden bragged on TV that he forced by withholding billions of dollars in US aid from the Ukraine government unless it fired the prosecutor investigating the Ukrainian company that paid his son $50,000 a month as a director, was it an official act or a personal act? Why has there been no investigation of this self-serving use of presidential authority? The Supreme Court majority emphasized that a president must have immunity for official acts or he can be stopped by law suits and politically motivated charges from performing his designated functions. In other words, the Court’s decision is based on elementary common sense.

If a president believes an election is fraudulent, it is his responsibility, and thereby an official act, for him to have the election verified. However, the Democrats and whore media defined the issue as “Trump overthrowing the election.” Even experts with the evidence in their hands were indicted for aiding and abetting Trump’s attempted overthrow of the election. In other words, the criminal indictment brought against Trump assumed without justification that there was no evidence of election fraud. As Trump had appointed a Justice Department and an entire government consisting of his enemies, his own government treated his official action as his private action. A rally in support of Trump was mischaracterized by Democrats, whore media, and Republicans such as Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell as an “insurrection.”

What we should be disturbed about is the ability of the Democrats and the whore media to disrupt the 4-year term of a US president with a series of false charges that were never confirmed and then to use unconfirmed charges to indict a former president in an effort to prevent him from again running for president. Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, the indictments against Trump were falling apart. The biased “special counsel” prosecuting Trump was caught lying to the federal judge, who has put the case on hold. Fani Willis entrusted by the White House with Trump’s prosecution in Atlanta has been found to have given her lover $700,000 of taxpayers’ money with which he took Fani on vacations. Her case against Trump is also on hold. In other words, the legal machinery the corrupt Democrats have employed against Trump is too corrupt to be able to do its assigned political assassination.

Read more …

“The Supreme Court was designed to be unpopular; to take stands that are politically unpopular but constitutionally correct.”

Age of Rage: Critics Unleash Threats and Abuse on the Supreme Court (Turley)

Within minutes of the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity, liberal politicians and pundits seemed to move from hyperbole to hyperventilation. When not breathing into paper bags, critics predicted, again, the end of the republic. CNN’s Van Jones declared that it was “almost a license to thug, in a way.” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) declared: “My stomach turns with fear and anger that our democracy can be so endangered by an out-of-control court” and denounced six justices as “extreme and nakedly partisan hacks — politicians in robes.” Blumenthal has previously shown greater intestinal fortitude, as when he threatened the justices that they would either rule as Democrats demanded or face “seismic” changes to their court. Jones warned the justices that “politically it’s bad” for them to rule this way. The comment captures the misguided analysis of many media outlets. The Supreme Court was designed to be unpopular; to take stands that are politically unpopular but constitutionally correct.

Indeed, the Democrats have become the very threat that the court was meant to resist. Recently, senators demanded that Chief Justice John Roberts appear to answer to them for his own decisions. (Roberts wisely declined.) Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer previously declared in front of the Supreme Court, “I want to tell you, [Neil] Gorsuch, I want to tell you, [Brett] Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.” Now Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) announced that she will seek the impeachment of all six of the conservative justices. She was immediately joined by other Democratic members. Notably, scholars have long disagreed where to draw the line on presidential immunity. The court adopted a middle approach that rejected extreme arguments on both sides. Yet, because Ocasio-Cortez disagrees with their decision, she has declared that this “is an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture.”

Previously, Ocasio-Cortez admitted that she does not understand why we even have a Supreme Court. She asked “How much does the current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.” Other members, such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), have called for packing the Court with additional members to immediately secure a liberal majority to rule as she desires. For these pundits and politicians, justice is merely an extension of politics and subject to the whims of the majority. These are same voices who chastised Judge Aileen Cannon for “slowwalking” her decisions by holding hearings on constitutional questions. They pointed to Judge Tanya Chutkan, who supported the efforts of special counsel Jack Smith to try Trump before the election, turning her court into a rocket docket. Chutkan quickly set aside this challenge, as well as other objections from Trump.

Indeed, at the oral argument, Chief Justice Roberts marveled at the conclusory analysis by Patricia Ann Millett in upholding Chutkan. He referred to the opinion celebrated by the left as little more than declaring “a former president can be prosecuted because he’s being prosecuted.” Chutkan and the DC Circuit were fast but ultimately wrong. Indeed, the Supreme Court noted that the judge created little record for the basis of her decisions. In a perverted sense, Democrats are giving the public a powerful lesson in constitutional law. As Alexander Hamilton stated in The Federalist No. 78, judicial independence “is the best expedient which can be devised in any government to secure a steady, upright and impartial administration of the laws.” This is the moment that the Framers envisioned in creating the Court under Article III of the Constitution. It would be our bulwark even when politicians lose faith in our Constitution and seek to dictate justice for those who they dislike.

Read more …

“President Biden’s hyper-ventilated response is crushingly ironic. He was vice president when President Barack Obama killed an American citizen without a trial or a charge. ”

No, The Supreme Court Did Not Remove All Limits on the Presidency (Turley)

One of the most glaring moments in the address came when President Biden declared that “for all…for all practical purposes, today’s decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits on what a president can do.” That is not true. The Court found that there was absolute immunity for actions that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” while they enjoy presumptive immunity for other official acts. They do not enjoy immunity for unofficial, or private, actions. The Court has often adopted tiered approaches in balancing the powers of the branches. For example, in his famous concurrence to Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), Justice Robert Jackson broke down the line of authority between Congress and the White House into three groups where the President is acting with express or implied authority from Congress; where Congress is silent (“the zone of twilight” area); and where the President is acting in defiance of Congress.

Here the Court separated cases into actions taken in core areas of executive authority, official actions taken outside those core areas, and unofficial actions. Actions deemed personal or unofficial are not protected under this ruling. It is certainly true that the case affords considerable immunity, including for conversations with subordinates. However, this did not spring suddenly from the head Zeus. As Chief Justice John Roberts lays out in the majority opinion, there has long been robust protections afforded to presidents. There are also a host of checks and balances on executive authority in our constitutional system. This includes judicial intervention to prevent violations of the law as well as impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors. President Biden’s hyper-ventilated response is crushingly ironic. He was vice president when President Barack Obama killed an American citizen without a trial or a charge.

When former Attorney General Eric Holder announced the “kill list” policy (that included the right to kill any American citizen), he was met with applause, not condemnation. The Obama-Biden administration then fought every effort by the family to sue the government. President Biden would have been outraged by any attempt of a Republican district attorney to charge him or President Obama with murder. He would also be outraged by prosecutors pursuing criminal charges for the deaths associated with the deluge of undocumented persons over the Southern border. In his address, President Biden also claimed that “the law would no longer” define “the limits of the presidency.” That is also untrue. This case was remanded for the purpose of defining what of these functions would be deemed private as opposed to official. Even on official actions, former president Donald Trump could be prosecuted if the presumptive immunity is rebutted by prosecutors.

What was most glaring for many civil libertarians was President Biden’s portrayal of himself as a paragon of constitutional fealty. He declared that “I know I will respect the limits of the presidential powers as I have for the last three-and-a-half years.” That was also untrue. President Biden has racked up an impressive array of losses in federal courts where he was found to have violated the constitution. This includes rulings that his administration has exceeded his authority and engaged in racial discrimination in federal programs. Indeed, Biden has often displayed a cavalier attitude toward such violations. For example, the Biden administration was found to have violated the Constitution in its imposition of a nationwide eviction moratorium through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Biden admitted that his White House counsel and most legal experts told him the move was unconstitutional.

But he ignored their advice and went with that of Harvard University Professor Laurence Tribe, the one person who would tell him what he wanted to hear. It was, of course, then quickly found to be unconstitutional. Biden showed the same disregard over the unconstitutionality of his effort to unilaterally forgive roughly half a trillion dollars in student debt. Courts have already enjoined that effort as presumptively unconstitutional (though an appellate court in one of those cases relaxed aspects of the injunction). The address was used to reinforce his “democracy is on the ballot” campaign theme. Pundits have repeated the mantra, claiming that if Biden is not elected, American democracy will perish. While some of us have challenged these predictions, the other presidential candidates are missing a far more compelling argument going into this election. While democracy is not on the ballot this election, free speech is.

Read more …

“They wanted to test him against Trump early while there was still time to replace him if he failed to rise to the occasion. Which, of course, he did spectacularly..”

Ex-Hillary Aide: Debate Setup “Soft Coup” By Democrats To Replace Biden (MN)

Sources close to the Democratic Party have claimed that the debate last week was purposefully setup for Biden to fail as part of a “soft coup,” by insiders who know he is incapable of winning or serving a second term. A former Hillary Clinton aide told The Daily Mail that they wanted Biden to be exposed so he can be replaced by a more capable candidate. “There has never been a debate this early before,” the source stated, adding Traditionally, the debates are held after the Republican and Democratic conventions, which are in July and August.” “There is a growing belief this was a ‘soft coup’ because they know he isn’t fit to govern and have known for some time,” the aide further asserted. “They wanted to test him against Trump early while there was still time to replace him if he failed to rise to the occasion. Which, of course, he did spectacularly,” the source added.

Another insider told the Mail that “Publicly, the Democratic leadership has been backing Biden because they can’t appear to be disloyal to the President. But privately, there have been discussions going on for a long time that he’s too old to beat Trump.” “There were whispers for weeks that ‘Joe’s going down at the debate,’” the source further stated. The Mail also claims that Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer “secretly” sent out an advance team to Washington DC weeks ago to prepare a snap presidential campaign.

The report claims “The team has been ‘on manoeuvres’ and meeting with Democratic officials,” with one source saying “Gretchen was the first to act. Now the floodgates have been opened.” Despite these claims, prominent Democrats including the Clintons, Obama and Nancy Pelosi are still defending Biden and publicly stating he remain the nominee. Pelosi told CNN Sunday that Biden “has the stamina (to continue)” and that “there are uh, uh, health care professionals, who think that uh, Trump has dementia. That his connection, his thoughts do not go together.” Meanwhile, despite his public support for Biden, Obama is privately lobbying to get rid of him, telling insiders he cannot defeat Trump, according to another insider.

Read more …

“..72% of Americans say Biden does not have the mental and cognitive health capabilities to serve as president.”

Major US Democrat Donors Threatening Party Over Biden (RT)

A growing number of top Democratic donors are fuming over US President Joe Biden’s performance in his debate with GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump, the Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Biden’s performance during Thursday’s face-off with Trump, widely seen as incoherent and fumbling, has also highlighted concerns about the US president’s ability to govern. Several US media outlets reported that the showdown had left many Democrats and their donors scrambling to find a replacement for Biden as the party’s presumptive presidential nominee. The British daily claimed that the discontent “appears to be turning into a full-blown party revolt” in the wake of the event, adding that key Democratic donors are threatening to “pull the plug” unless Biden drops out of the race.

Former hedge fund manager Whitney Tilson, who has donated several hundred thousand dollars to the Democratic Party, lashed out at the US president, telling the Daily Mail: “For Biden’s own good and the good of the country, he should step aside immediately.” He added that the incumbent had so far failed to reassure any party donors, which he claimed “confirms my worst fears.” Meanwhile, several Democrats interviewed by the tabloid vented their frustration at what they called attempts by Biden’s team to “gaslight” them into believing there was nothing to worry about. Tilson echoed this sentiment, saying: “They’re p**sing on our legs and telling us it’s raining… How stupid do they think we are?” An Axios report also provided insight into the campaign’s push to reassure donors during a Zoom call on Monday. The outlet claimed, citing sources, that while “there wasn’t much panic” during the call, there was a lot of skepticism. “It was a damage-control call,” one source said.

However, the report said Biden’s team had not tried to put a positive spin on the debate debacle, instead echoing the president’s own assessment, in which he acknowledged that “I don’t debate as well as I used to.” At the same time, Biden officials reportedly gave donors data and made arguments designed to prove that the president still has a chance of beating Trump. A CNN flash poll conducted after the debate found that 67% of the viewers thought Trump had performed better. Meanwhile, according to a CBS News poll, 72% of Americans say Biden does not have the mental and cognitive health capabilities to serve as president.

Read more …

“If you have a piece of crack cocaine no bigger than this quarter that I’m holding in my hand, one quarter of one dollar, we passed a law — with leadership of Sen. Thurmond and myself and others — a law that says: you’re caught with that, you go to jail for five years..”

The Long Sordid Career of Creepy Joe Biden (Jeffries)

[..] people might not remember quite everything about Joe Biden’s lengthy career as a beloved resident of the Washington, D.C. swamp that Trump promised to drain. Biden was first elected as a U.S. Senator from Delaware in 1973. Even I was very young then. In 1981, the great “liberal” senator strongly supported the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, passed in the wake of CIA whistleblower Philip Agee’s disclosures about the Agency is his best-selling book Inside the Company. Biden declared that “I do not think anybody has any doubt about Mr. Agee. We should lock him away in my opinion.” The good senator really liked locking people up, it seems. As a strong supporter of the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, he took credit for a draconian provision that mandated a five year sentence for possessing small amounts of crack cocaine.

Little did Biden know that, decades later his own troubled son Hunter would be caught with enough crack cocaine to garner a long prison sentence under the original 1986 Act, which was softened a bit in 2010. With every ounce of “liberal” ardor that he could muster, Biden bragged at the time, “If you have a piece of crack cocaine no bigger than this quarter that I’m holding in my hand, one quarter of one dollar, we passed a law — with leadership of Sen. Thurmond and myself and others — a law that says: you’re caught with that, you go to jail for five years. You get no probation, you get nothing, other than five years in jail. Judge doesn’t have a choice.” Senator Biden also authored the horrendous 1994 crime bill which featured “three strike you’re out” and mandatory sentencing, significantly increasing the prison population.

A JFK assassination researcher attended a Joe Biden seminar in 2005. He was able to briefly question Biden about the assassination. As recounted on a discussion forum, this was the short conversation: “Senator Biden, do you believe JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy?” Answer: “No.” “So do you believe that Lee Harvey Oswald, alone and unaided, killed President Kennedy?” Answer: “Yes.” This is hardly surprising, of course, but reflects Biden’s ironclad establishment mindset. In 2019, the American Prospect published a piece headlined, “Joe Biden’s Love Affair With the CIA.” Biden was very helpful to Reagan’s CIA Director William Casey, who praised him in a classified early 1980s memo to his intelligence staff. Biden would state, in a speech at Stanford, that the intelligence community had been compromised by leaks.

Nasty piece of work

So Joe Biden was never one of the Democratic Party politicians I admired back in my misguided youth. He wasn’t going to expose the abuses of the intelligence agencies, like a Frank Church. He wasn’t interested in any “sunshine” laws that would make it easier for the People to be informed about their government. His concern then about “leaks” would evolve into concern over whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange. In a January, 2023 tweet, Snowden would comment on Biden’s classified documents scandal, accusing the Department of Justice of suppressing the story until after the election, and declared, “Worth noting that the President seems to have absconded with more classified documents than many whistleblowers.” Biden is on the record as saying that Snowden should “face the consequences of his actions.”

Following Julian Assange’s release from exile last week, some assumed that the Biden administration had been responsible for it, given Biden’s recent statements that he was “considering” dropping the charges against the Wikileaks founder. However, the White House would issue a statement maintaining that they had not played a role in Assange’s plea deal. A deal which, incidentally, made the disappearance of all those troubling DNC emails a prerequisite for his release. So if you’re tempted to think that perhaps, after over fifty years of serving the interests of the corrupt Deep State, Joe Biden finally did something good, you’d be wrong. Why spoil a perfect record? Even Barack Obama commuted Bradley/Chelsea Manning’s sentence.

Read more …

“..Democratic Party apparatchiks are engaging in Orwellian falsifications to cover Biden’s catastrophic cognitive failure..”

What US Allies Should Learn From The Biden-Trump Debate (Amar)

There is very little to say about the content of the recent televised debate between the current American president, Joe Biden, and the former and likely next president, Donald Trump. That’s because the one feature that mattered was so obvious: Biden is, as those with eyes to see have known for a long time, deeply senile. That is a personal if not uncommon tragedy. Given Biden’s many sins – a lifelong record of systematic, almost compulsive lying, of policies that have, for decades, abused the weak and the poor and pandered to the rich, and, last but not least, the Gaza genocide co-perpetrated with his Zionist friends – it is impossible to feel pity for him. But given the unfortunate power of America, his mental decline is also a global scourge. Yet another one the ‘indispensable’ nation is inflicting on the rest of us on this planet.

The difference between before and after the debate is simply that now even the most mendacious Democratic Party hacks and behind-the-scenes manipulators cannot deny this fact any longer. Don’t get me wrong: Many of them are at least pretending to try, including former president Barack Obama, despite ongoing, widespread, and irrepressible speculation that Michelle Obama, his wife, might enter the fray at the last minute in the melodramatic role of – nobly reluctant – savior. And, of course, Democrats are also blaming anyone but themselves and their atrocious president. Yet their efforts are largely in vain. Even in America, with its post-truth media, the “secret” that never really was, is out, and the taboo is broken.

Panicked by the return of Donald Trump, key outlets of extreme Centrism, such as, to name only three, the very popular TV ‘news’ (really, agitation and propaganda) show Morning Joe, the de facto Democratic Party newspaper the New York Times, and The Economist, the British Pravda of the American empire, are openly and insistently calling for Biden to quit. Polls in the US indicate that the public has had enough, too: According to a CBS News poll, only 28% of registered voters think Biden should stay in the race, while 72% acknowledge the obvious: Biden is mentally unfit for the presidency.

Yet none of this is a surprise. What is more interesting now is what the political fallout of Biden’s debate fiasco reveals about the nature of two things that, unfortunately, still shape much of our world: American ‘democracy’ and American empire. Regarding ‘democracy’, even in the US, some observers – such former President Jimmy Carter and researchers at Princeton University, have long understood that it’s silly to describe their country as a democracy. Instead, any halfway objective assessment of its real political system has to start from the fact that it is an oligarchy. But Carter and the Princeton researchers acknowledged that fact a decade ago. The question is where are we now?

Spoiler alert: Things have only gotten worse. Exhibit A – the manner in which the Biden dementia debate debacle is being handled. It is not only the fact that Democratic Party apparatchiks are engaging in Orwellian falsifications to cover Biden’s catastrophic cognitive failure that enables us to see with our own eyes. It is also the way in which Biden’s family (or would clan be a more exact term?) is still widely treated as having the apparently divine privilege to help him decide whether finally to drop out or not. A family matter? A political system in which issues of obvious and extremely urgent public interest are up to a totally unaccountable ‘family council’ – such as whether a dementia case should have final say over almost 5,000 nuclear weapons – does not qualify as a democracy. Indeed, it does not even qualify as a republic anymore. It may, with a ginormous dose of generosity, pass as a rather rotten monarchy. Less charitable observers would class it as a form of mafia or mobster rule.

Read more …

“..these “theories” on how Biden could respond to the Supreme Court are not simple hypotheticals for the sake of argument, there is an element of desperation and bloodlust.”

Democrats Hint At Assassination In Response To SCOTUS Immunity Decision (ZH)

Nobody likes to lose but leftists take indignant defeat to a whole new level. Though they claim to “defend democracy” in their spare time, Democrats also have a tendency to abandon the democratic process when that process interferes with their intentions to remain in power. Case in point: The Supreme Court’s recent decision to give immunity from prosecution to Donald Trump in the case of “some official acts” taken during his tenure in office. Leftists have responded with outrage at the 6-3 decision with much of their political hopes resting on the strategy of burying Trump in as many legal battles as possible to keep him from running for president again. Democrats are now flooding social media and the news feeds with suggestions that the SC decision makes it possible for Joe Biden as president to eliminate the conservative competition “as a part of his official duties.”

The tools for legally punishing presidents already exist, including impeachment and charges of treason. And, keep in mind, if Trump does not have immunity for previous actions as president, then neither does any other president. How many skeletons are in the closets of men like Bill Clinton, George W. Bush or Barack Obama? Beyond this, assassination of a political opponent or the conservative members of the Supreme Court is not recognized as an official duty of the presidency. Democrats, as usual, take their conclusions to the dramatic extreme in order to provoke public fear through emotionally energized disinformation. Leftists have been fantasizing publicly about murdering Trump for some time now. However, these “theories” on how Biden could respond to the Supreme Court are not simple hypotheticals for the sake of argument, there is an element of desperation and bloodlust.

Read more …

Satire? Switch around the names Trump and Biden, and see how that feels.

BBC Presenter Calls For Trump To Be Assassinated (RT)

BBC presenter David Aaronovitch has called for the “murder” of former US President Donald Trump in a post on X (formerly Twitter). Aaronovitch later deleted his message following a backlash, claiming it had been “satire.” Aaronovitch, the voice behind the British state broadcaster’s Radio 4 program ‘The Briefing Room’, tweeted on Monday: “If I was Biden I’d hurry up and have Trump murdered on the basis that he is a threat to America’s security.” The post was accompanied by the hashtag #SCOTUS, indicating that the comment had been triggered by Monday’s confirmation from the US Supreme Court that former presidents have “absolute immunity” from prosecution for their official actions. Aaronovitch was forced to delete the post after an online backlash, and claimed in a follow-up message that he had been accused of inciting violence by “a far right pile.” The presenter insisted his tweet was “plainly a satire.”

On Monday, the highest US court ruled that under “our system of separated powers, the President may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts.”In an interview with Fox News Digital, Trump touted the verdict on presidential immunity as a “big win for our Constitution and for democracy.” President Biden attacked the Supreme Court ruling, urging citizens to “di ssent” against the verdict. US federal prosecutors have charged Trump with four criminal counts related to the 2020 presidential election, alleging that he “conspired” to overturn the results. The Supreme Court verdict still grants lower courts the right to hold evidentiary hearings to determine whether the actions are official or unofficial. Unofficial acts by the president are not covered by immunity from prosecution. Trump has repeatedly called his prosecution politically motivated, describing it as a “witch hunt” launched by Biden and his administration.

Read more …

“..EU countries are “plainly not prepared to fill a dramatically expanded military role anytime soon..”

Trump Could End NATO Expansion – Politico (RT)

The former and possibly future US President Donald Trump is reportedly considering a deal with Russia not to expand NATO to Ukraine and Georgia, according to a Politico article citing anonymous sources. Trump is the presumptive Republican challenger to the incumbent President Joe Biden in the November election. His campaign has not yet named a national security team, or published a new agenda for NATO, but Politico Magazine pieced together a possible one in a story published on Tuesday. “As part of a plan for Ukraine that has not been previously reported, the presumptive GOP nominee is mulling a deal whereby NATO commits to no further eastward expansion — specifically into Ukraine and Georgia — and negotiates with Russian President Vladimir Putin over how much Ukrainian territory Moscow can keep,” the story said, citing two “Trump-aligned national security experts.”

One anonymous source supposedly familiar with Trump’s thinking said he was “open to something foreclosing NATO expansion and not going back to the 1991 borders for Ukraine,” but did not exclude any other options, “including supplying large amounts of weapons” to Kiev. While Trump is “unlikely” to quit NATO outright, he is likely to overhaul the US-led bloc to make its European members take on more responsibilities – something Politico’s sources worry they are not actually capable of. European members of the bloc that don’t spend at least 2% of their GDP on the military “wouldn’t enjoy the defense largess and security guarantee” of the US, according to one anonymous Trump-aligned source. The US “does not have enough military forces to go around,” Elbridge Colby, Trump’s deputy assistant defense secretary for strategy, told Politico. “We can’t break our spear in Europe against the Russians when we know the Chinese and Russians are collaborating, and the Chinese are a more dangerous and significant threat.”

European members of the bloc “need to be producing combat credible forces to deal with a Russian attack, like now,” Colby added. As part of a “radical reorientation” of NATO under Trump, the US would maintain its air and naval bases in Europe, but leave the “bulk of infantry, armor, logistics and artillery” to be handled by the continental allies. According to Politico, EU countries are “plainly not prepared to fill a dramatically expanded military role anytime soon,” while the continent is “weaker economically and more dependent on US energy supplies than ever before.” “It’s important to note that all these opinions are not from Donald Trump,” Richard Grenell, his former acting director of national intelligence, said on X (formerly Twitter) in response to the Politico article. The Trump campaign did not respond to the outlet’s requests for comment.

Read more …

True for all of NATO. Yes, including the US.

UK Military Unprepared For Conflict Of Any Kind – Ex-Defense Official (RT)

Britain’s military is in such a bad state that it may not be able to defend the country, let alone mount an expeditionary force of any significant strength, a former official tasked with assessing the armed forces has told the Financial Times. Rob Johnson, director of the Oxford Changing Character of War Centre, was appointed in May 2022 for a two-year term as head of the Defense Ministry’s Office for Net Assessment and Challenge (SONAC). The researcher told the FT he wanted to share his grim conclusions with the public because he is “deeply worried” about what he discovered. He insisted his assessment is realistic, rather than alarmist. The armed forces “cannot defend the British homelands properly” and have a “bare minimum” to conduct small-scale peacekeeping missions, disaster relief operations, evacuations of civilians from war zones and anti-sabotage activities, according to the article published on Monday.

“In any larger-scale operation, we would run out of ammunition rapidly” Johnson warned. “Our defenses are too thin, and we are not prepared to fight and win an armed conflict of any scale.” If the UK were to deploy an expeditionary force comparable to those dispatched during the Falklands (Malvinas) War of 1982 or the invasion of Iraq in 2003, it “would be under-equipped, leaving troops at risk.” The deficiencies are spread across the military branches, according to Johnson. British air defenses could be unable to stop large-scale long-range missile strikes, the Royal Navy does not have enough ships to patrol the North Atlantic, while the Royal Air Force needs to double its fleet of fighter jets.

“The government is not taking the public into its confidence about the scale of the threat because it knows it’s not ready,” Johnson said. The revelations do not damage national security because “the Russians already know this anyway,” he claimed, referring to the fact that London considers Russia an imminent military threat to Britain. The British government last year set out to restore the UK’s global prominence as part of its foreign policy. The state of the military does not support that, Johnson indicated, saying: “We have to cut our coat to fit our cloth.” The warning adds to a plethora of similar British media reports and remarks by officials, who advocate ramping up defense spending.

Read more …

“..still based in the fantasy land that he can dictate terms to Russia while losing the war..”

Zelensky’s New ‘Plan’ Possible ‘First Step’ To Negotiations (DeMartino)

Ukraine’s illegitimate President Volodymyr Zelensky’s recent promise to put forth a new “comprehensive plan” to end the conflict in Ukraine may be the first tentative steps by the regime to sit down at the negotiating table with Russia. Zelensky announced on Friday during a press conference in Kiev that he was creating a new plan that should be “supported by the majority of the world.” He also used the opportunity to, for the first time, admit high casualties on the battlefield. International relations and security expert Mark Sleboda told Sputnik’s Final Countdown that while Zelensky’s comments are still based in the fantasy land that he can dictate terms to Russia while losing the war, the change in tone could represent the regime’s first tentative steps towards admitting reality. “The fact that he said he’s willing to speak to Russia through an intermediary at some undisclosed point months in the future, I guess that is progress, but not much,” Sleboda explained.

“There is a possibility that this is a first tentative, one step forward, two steps back in the direction of eventual negotiations to end the conflict.” Zelensky made the comments not long after his so-called “peace summit” fell flat on its face, with China declining to attend and several influential countries outside of the West refusing to sign the final document, including Brazil, South Africa, India and Saudi Arabia. Iraq and Jordan asked for their signatures to be removed the day after they signed. “Certainly, I think [Zelensky’s] statement is representative of coming out of the failed Kiev regime war rally. Sentiment within the rest of the world outside of the West, i.e. the real international community – the global majority, that [said] they want real peace negotiations, and, perhaps, at least this is a nod in that direction,” Sleboda speculated.

The change in Zelensky’s tone is not just a reflection of the failed so-called “peace summit” but also the reality on the battlefield, where Ukraine is losing significant ground regularly. On Monday, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced that they had liberated Stepovaya Novoselovka in the Kharkov region and Novopokrovskoye in the Donbass People’s Republic. “Even if [Zelensky’s comments] are a symbolic step in that direction [of negotiations], it is driven by the desperate state on the battlefield that the Kiev regime is facing,” Sleboda argued. “Once again, [Ukraine] stripped veteran troops from Toretsk in Nyu-York, they moved them to Kharkov. Russia knew about it immediately, of course, and launched a significant offensive in the area and has made significant progress. Now, the Kiev regime is scrambling and shuffling troops around again and again.”

Read more …

“Le Pen said that if her party came to power, it would reverse these appointments so it “could govern.”

Le Pen Accuses Macron Of Preparing ‘Coup d’État’ (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron is undertaking a last-minute reshuffling in government agencies in order to prevent National Rally leader Jordan Bardella from governing as he wishes, former party leader Marine Le Pen believes. The RN is widely expected to gain a plurality in this Sunday’s runoff. RN and its allies secured the lead in the first round of the snap parliamentary election last week, while projections in the French media anticipate the party ultimately winning between 230 and 280 seats in the 577-seat National Assembly. “It’s a kind of administrative coup d’état,” Le Pen told France Inter radio on Tuesday, commenting on press reports that claimed Macron was rushing to appoint senior civil servants, including to top EU jobs.

Over the past days, Macron reportedly appointed several top officials, including the military governor of Paris, the new chief of the General Staff of the French Air Force, the new director of the EU at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and three ambassadors. He also proposed in Brussels last week reappointing Thierry Breton as France’s European commissioner. According to Le Pen, “the aim” of such appointments is “to prevent Jordan Bardella from governing the country as he wishes,” should the RN win a majority in Sunday’s runoff. Le Pen said that if her party came to power, it would reverse these appointments so it “could govern.”

“When you want to counter the electorate’s vote, the results of elections, by appointing people of your own, so that they prevent you within the state from being able to carry out the policy that the French want … I call that an administrative coup d’état,” Le Pen concluded. Macron called early parliamentary elections after the RN’s strong performance in last month’s European Parliament elections. The party formerly led by Le Pen and now by Bardella won 30 of the 81 French seats in the EU legislature. The first round of early parliamentary elections was held on June 30. The RN and its allies came in first with 33.15% of the vote. The left-wing alliance New Popular Front took second place with 27.99%, while Macron’s Ensemble coalition garnered just 20.04%.

Read more …

“I remind you that France has an official public debt of 3,000 billion euros, and that this sum is absolutely non-repayable..”

France Rapidly Being ‘Brought to its Knees’ Regardless of Vote Outcome (Sp.)

President Emmanuel Macron’s center-right alliance Ensemble was practically wiped out by Marine Le Pen’s right-wing National Rally (RN) in the first round of France’s snap legislative elections. Projections regarding the outcome of the second round on July 7 suggest that Macron’s coalition is set to hemorrhage seats in the National Assembly. Whatever the outcome of the parliamentary elections, France today “no longer has the means for its policy,” Emmanuel Leroy, president of the Institut 1717, for a new Franco-Russian alliance, told Sputnik. He underscored that quite possibly next Sunday, Marine Le Pen’s right-wing National Rally (RN) will not obtain an absolute majority required to govern in the country, creating “an objectively uncontrollable situation.” “Without an absolute majority, the country will be in a state of incapacity to be governed in a valid manner and we will probably observe a crisis situation which will bring France completely to its knees on the international political level,” speculated the French political scientist.

“Emmanuel Macron’s bet today is to play on the victory of this party [RN] in such a way as to create a situation of political chaos in France,” Leroy suggested. Prime Minister Gabriel Attal has already stated that Macron’s centrist coalition will pull out around 60 of its candidates to allow other contenders to have a chance at defeating the RN. But this could be nothing more than a “window dressing,” said Leroy. The analyst noted that whether France switches to a right-wing or left-wing policy, this wouldn’t change the fundamentals. And these fundamentals are that the France of Emmanuel Macron, which has been “at the forefront in the desire to completely engage in this war in Ukraine to help the regime [led] by Zelensky,” is in phenomenal debt. “I remind you that France has an official public debt of 3,000 billion euros, and that this sum is absolutely non-repayable,” the former Russia adviser to Marine Le Pen stressed.

Read more …

Too expensive.

UniCredit Challenges Order To Leave Russia (RT)

UniCredit has appealed to the EU’s top court to clarify an order issued by the European Central Bank (ECB) for the Italian institution to reduce its presence in Russia. The lender has applied to the General Court of the European Union for “definitive legal clarification” of obligations set by the ECB for winding down its Russian business, UniCredit said in a statement on Monday. UniCredit said that while it is complying with the regulator’s request to slash its activities in Russia, it is concerned “about the terms upon which this reduction has to take place as provided for in the decision issued by ECB, that goes beyond the current legal framework.” The ECB has pressured EU banks with operations in Russia to speed up their exit from the country amid the threat of harsher US sanctions on Moscow over the conflict in Ukraine.

In May, the Frankfurt-based regulator sent letters to lenders with a request for an “action plan” to end their business in Russia as early as June. UniCredit currently has the second largest exposure to the Russian market among EU-based banks, and is included in the Russian central bank’s list of 13 systemically important credit institutions. Other EU banks – including Austria’s Raiffeisen Bank International (RBI), Dutch lender ING, Germany’s Commerzbank and Deutsche Bank, Hungary’s OTP Bank, Italy’s Intesa SanPaolo, and Sweden’s SEB – also maintain a presence in the Russian market despite Western sanctions. Announcing its legal challenge, the bank noted that it had reduced its cross-border exposure to Russia by 91% and its domestic exposure by 65% since February 2022. The Italian lender said the application could take several months and asked for an interim suspension of the regulator’s decision.

“Unprecedented circumstances, the complexities inherent in the geo-political and economic scenario and the lack of a harmonized regulatory framework applicable to it and the potential for serious unintended consequences of implementing the decision that would impact not only the Russian subsidiaries” compelled UniCredit to seek clarity. Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani welcomed the bank’s challenge, saying the ECB “must take into account the situation in which Italian companies operate in Russia, in compliance with EU sanctions.” “Hasty decisions merely risk damaging Italian and EU companies,” Reuters quoted him as saying. UniCredit operates in Russia through a subsidiary, with some 3,100 employees and more than 50 branches.

Read more …

X thread. “It will be used, for years to come, to roll back federal agencies, and we’ll all be better of for it. And that’s why politicians and corporate media are freaking out about it.”

Chevron Deference (Spike Cohen)

For those who don’t understand what is, and why SCOTUS ended it, here’s the long and short of it: A family fishing company, Loper Bright Enterprises, was being driven out of business, because they couldn’t afford the $700 per day they were being charged by the National Marine Fisheries Service to monitor their company. The thing is, federal law doesn’t authorize NMFS to charge businesses for this. They just decided to start doing it in 2013. Why did they think they could away with just charging people without any legal authorization? Because in 1984, in the Chevron decision, the Supreme Court decided that regulatory agencies were the “experts” in their field, and the courts should just defer to their “interpretation” of the law. So for the past 40 years, federal agencies have been able to “interpret” laws to mean whatever they want, and the courts had to just go with it.

It was called Chevron Deference, and it put bureaucrats in charge of the country. It’s how the OHSA was able to decide that everyone who worked for a large company had to get the jab, or be fired. No law gave them that authority, they just made it up. It’s how the ATF was able to decide a piece of plastic was a “machine gun”. It’s how the NCRS was able to decide that a small puddle was a “protected wetlands”.

It’s how out-of-control agencies have been able to create rules out of thin air, and force you to comply, and the courts had to simply defer to them, because they were the “experts”. Imagine if your local police could just arrest you, for any reason, and no judge or jury was allowed to determine if you’d actually committed a crime or not. Just off to jail you go. That’s what Chevron Deference was. It was not only blatantly unconstitutional, it caused immeasurable harm to everyone. Thankfully, it’s now gone. We haven’t even begun to feel the effects of this decision in the courts. It will be used, for years to come, to roll back federal agencies, and we’ll all be better of for it. And that’s why politicians and corporate media are freaking out about it.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

SNL

 

 

Spaghetti dance

 

 

Dogslide

 

 

McDo
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807747770314588287

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 022024
 
 July 2, 2024  Posted by at 9:14 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  48 Responses »


René Magritte Man in a bowler hat 1964

 

US Supreme Court Rules Trump Has Presidential Immunity (RT)
Trump Says Immunity Ruling ‘Big Win For Democracy’ (ZH)
Biden Reacts To Trump Immunity Ruling (RT)
Biden ‘United Democrats And Republicans’ With Debate Performance – Musk (RT)
Obama Telling People Biden Can’t Win – Tucker Carlson (RT)
Biden’s Family Urges Him To Fight On (ZH)
DNC Weighs Early Nomination For Biden To Quash Internal Party Dissent (ZH)
Surprise, Surprise! (Kunstler)
Too Clever By Half (Turley)
The Resurrection of French Nationalism? (Paul Craig Roberts)
The West – Indubitably – Has Lost Russia, And Is Losing Eurasia Too (Crooke)
‘Unipolar US Dollar’ Mutated Into ‘Politically Weaponized’ Tool (Sp.)
Charles Nenner Warns “Very Hard Times Are Coming” (USAW)

 

 

 

 


https://twitter.com/i/status/1807804054136856803
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807766810130796737

 

 

Tapper

 

 

Plan B
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807876540648047090

 

 

 

 

“The President is not above the law. But under our system of separated powers, the President may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers..”

US Supreme Court Rules Trump Has Presidential Immunity (RT)

American presidents have “absolute immunity” for their official actions, the US Supreme Court ruled on Monday, addressing a series of charges against former President Donald Trump. Federal prosecutors have charged Trump with four criminal counts related to the 2020 presidential election, alleging that he “conspired” to overturn the results by spreading “knowingly false claims” of fraud to obstruct the collection, counting, and certification of the results. “Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority,” the court said in a 6-3 decision. “And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, which saw the six conservative-leaning justices opposed by the three liberal ones.

The decision favors the former president in terms of his tweets to the American public on January 6 and conversations with then-Vice President Mike Pence about his presiding over the certification of election results, as both of those clearly fell within the scope of official duties. However, the verdict allows lower courts to hold evidentiary hearings to determine which actions by Trump may have been unofficial, such as when he contacted state and local election officials about the 2020 vote. “In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives,” the court warned. “The President is not above the law. But under our system of separated powers, the President may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts,” said the ruling.

The Supreme Court saved the immunity case for the last day of its term. The long-awaited decision puts a dent in the plans for special counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump in the federal court in Washington, DC before the November election. Trump challenged the 2020 election – marked by a series of unusual procedures, ostensibly adopted due to the Covid-19 pandemic – as irregular and possibly tainted by fraud, pointing to delays in counting mail-in votes that suddenly went in Democrat Joe Biden’s favor after the polls closed in a handful of states. Democrats have insisted that the election was the most secure and legitimate ever and that any questioning of the result is an attack on democracy.

Read more …

“.. ‘all but ensures’ that a trial won’t happen in Trump’s classified documents case before the November election..”

Trump Says Immunity Ruling ‘Big Win For Democracy’ (ZH)

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled in a 6-3 vote that former presidents, including Trump, enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct involving official acts during tenure in office, but he’s not immune from unofficial acts. As Bloomberg notes, the decision – which kicks the ball back to the lower court – ‘all but ensures’ that a trial won’t happen in Trump’s classified documents case before the November election.The justices, voting 6-3 along ideological lines, said a federal appeals court was too categorical in rejecting Trump’s immunity arguments, ruling for the first time that former presidents are shielded from prosecution for some official acts taken while in office. The majority ordered the lower courts to revisit the case to decide the extent of the allegations that are off limits to prosecution.

“Just as former presidents have immunity from civil liability for official acts, they have immunity from criminal prosecution unless they are impeached and removed from office for the crime alleged. This decision is supported by the writings of the framers of the Constitution, the text of the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent,” wrote X user Martin Harry. As constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley notes, now “the issue is whether what constitutes official acts,” adding that the ruling will “further delay the lower court proceedings, but Trump will have to argue that his actions fall within these navigational beacons.” “The lower court judge has been highly favorable for Jack Smith in the past. Yet the court is arguing that there is a presumption of immunity for their official acts beyond the absolute immunity on core constitutional powers.” Meanwhile, Justice Thomas called into question the legality of Smith’s office:

In a blistering dissent, Justice Sotomayor writes that the ruling “makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our constitution and system of government, that no man is above the law.” “Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom… the court gives former President trump all the immunity he asked for and more.” Special counsel Jack Smith is leading two federal probes against Trump, both of which led to criminal charges. In Washington, Trump has been targeted over alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election, while a Florida case revolves around the mishandling of classified documents – for which Trump has claimed presidential immunity. In response to the ruling, Trump said on Truth Social that it was a “”BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY.”

Read more …

No president should attack the Supreme Court.

Biden Reacts To Trump Immunity Ruling (RT)

US President Joe Biden has attacked the Supreme Court, urging citizens to “dissent” against its ruling that American presidents have “absolute immunity” for their official actions. In a 6-3 decision on Monday, the highest US court ruled that under “our system of separated powers, the President may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts.” Biden criticized the decision in a brief statement, calling it “a fundamentally new principle” and a “dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law.”

“There are no kings in America. Each, each of us is equal before the law. No one, no one is above the law, not even the president of the United States,” Biden claimed – even as the Supreme Court ruling specifically stated that “the President is not above the law” and that “there is no immunity for unofficial acts.” Federal prosecutors have charged former President Donald Trump with four criminal counts related to the 2020 presidential election, alleging that he “conspired” to overturn the results. The Supreme Court verdict allows lower courts to hold evidentiary hearings to determine which actions by Trump may have been unofficial. Trump called the ruling – which puts a dent in the Democrats’ plans to prosecute him in the federal court in Washington, DC before the November election – a “big win for our constitution and democracy.”

Biden warned Americans about a possible presidential return for Trump, saying that “people must decide if they want to entrust … the presidency to Donald Trump, now knowing that he’ll be even more emboldened to do whatever he pleases whenever he wants to do it.” Biden went on to quote Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent, in which she wrote: “In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law. With fear for our democracy, I dissent.” “So should the American people dissent, I dissent,” Biden added, concluding his prepared remarks and taking no questions from the press.

Read more …

Very presidential…

Biden ‘United Democrats And Republicans’ With Debate Performance – Musk (RT)

US President Joe Biden has united Democrats and Republicans in a common recognition of his cognitive decline, following a debate with Donald Trump last week, businessman Elon Musk has argued. The billionaire, who is a vocal critic of some Biden administration policies, such as on border security, supported an assessment made on Sunday by vlogger Farzad Mesbahi on X (formerly Twitter). The Spanish-born YouTuber and self-proclaimed troll said: “America seeing Biden’s cognitive decline at the debate feels like one of the most uniting things this country has experienced in a long, long time.” “True, first time I’ve seen Republicans & Democrats agree on something in a long time,” Musk responded, adding an emoji of a face with tears of joy. The entrepreneur also weighed in immediately following the debate after former 2024 GOP hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy said that Biden’s presentation made him wonder who runs the US government. Musk replied: “Maybe nobody.”

This election cycle’s first faceoff between Trump and Biden took place last Thursday in Atlanta, Georgia. Political observers have widely agreed that the incumbent failed to counter the perception that he has neither the energy nor mental acuity to lead the country for four more years. Some Democrats, either publicly or in private communications with journalists, have said Biden should stop his campaign after his dismal performance. By contrast, former President Barack Obama maintained his support for Biden’s bid despite the flop, posting on Friday: “bad debate nights happen” and that “last night didn’t change,” the stakes in the November election. Former President Bill Clinton echoed that sentiment, stating that he will relegate “the debate rating to the pundits.” The US president’s family, who reportedly are among the few who could convince him to quit, urged him to stay in the race during a meeting on Sunday, CNN sources have claimed.

Read more …

“Carlson also claimed that relations between Obama and Biden – who served as vice president between 2009 and 2017 – have never been warm, and were at times even “hostile.”

Obama Telling People Biden Can’t Win – Tucker Carlson (RT)

Former US President Barack Obama is telling Democrats that incumbent Joe Biden has no chance of being reelected after his recent debate against GOP frontrunner Donald Trump, American conservative journalist Tucker Carlson has claimed. According to Carlson, Obama’s recent public endorsement of Biden was not sincere. Biden and Trump faced off in an open debate on Thursday night, with the president’s performance widely seen as “incoherent” and “fumbling,” underscoring concerns about his age. Following the showdown, many Democrats and their donors reportedly scrambled to find a replacement for Biden as the party’s presumptive presidential nominee. Publicly, however, many Democratic heavyweights, including Obama, reaffirmed their support for Biden. While admitting that “bad debate nights happen,” the former president insisted that “this election is still a choice between someone who has fought for ordinary folks his entire life and someone who only cares about himself.”

Writing on X (formerly Twitter) on Monday, Carlson said, citing an “unusually good source,” that Obama’s post had been “disingenuous.” “In private, Obama is telling people Biden can’t win, and he is therefore in favor of an open convention,” the journalist claimed. He added Obama is not saying whom he supports, but recently met with Biden in person to deliver the message. Carlson also claimed that relations between Obama and Biden – who served as vice president between 2009 and 2017 – have never been warm, and were at times even “hostile.” According to the journalist, those ties “recently… deteriorated further,” mostly due to First Lady Jill Biden, who allegedly “kept her husband cloistered away from anyone who might convince him to drop out” of the race for the White House after the disastrous debate.

Carlson added that Biden’s wife remains “the driving force behind her husband’s reelection campaign,” echoing a recent NBC report naming her as the only person who could convince the president to “change course.” However, CNN reported on Monday that Biden’s family, including Jill, had urged him not to end his campaign, blaming his poor performance on his team. While the Biden-Obama relationship has often been described as a “bromance” to the point of becoming meme material, numerous media reports indicated that things have been much more complicated. An Axios report in March suggested that Biden “often measures himself” against his predecessor, with a rivalry dynamic present in their relations. According to Politico, Obama also shared serious concerns about Biden’s ability to win the 2020 election.

Read more …

“..not telling Biden which camera would be on him as he blankly stared a thousand miles into space with his mouth agape..”

Biden’s Family Urges Him To Fight On (ZH)

At a Camp David gathering on Sunday, President Biden’s extended family urged him to ignore the growing number of voices asking him to quit the race — and many of his loved ones blamed his disastrous debate on his advisors. According to Politico, the two who most forcefully encouraged the 81-year-old Biden to continue were his wife Jill and his son Hunter — the two people whose opinion he reportedly values most. The reports will strengthen a growing sense that Jill Biden is putting her own interests above that of her humiliated and failing husband. As one Democratic advisor told the New York Post over the weekend, “Jill Biden likes being First Lady…she doesn’t want to give that up.”

Meanwhile, Hunter, who doesn’t exactly have strong reputation for sound judgment, is said to long for Americans to see a version of his father that — as paraphrased by the Times — is “scrappy and in command of the facts.” Much as he once was in denial about his drug problem, Hunter now seems incapable of admitting that that version of his father is gone forever: Biden family members are said to have blamed the debate debacle on three advisors: Anita Dunn, her husband Bob Bauer — who played the role of Trump in practice sessions — and Biden’s former chief of staff Ron Klain, who was in charge of the debate training. Aides to Biden denied these reports from multiple outlets.

With Biden having spent a full week at Camp David gearing up for the debate, his family members and others are claiming the team worked the 81-year-old too hard, and tried to pack him full of too many statistics. They even fault advisors for a debate-night makeup job that transformed his summer-tanned face to one that was pale and unhealthy-looking. Relatives also blamed debate-host CNN for not “fact-checking” Donald Trump and not telling Biden which camera would be on him as he blankly stared a thousand miles into space with his mouth agape.

Jill

Read more …

“Democrats had already planned to nominate Biden, 81, before the convention in order to ensure he appears on the ballot in Ohio..”

DNC Weighs Early Nomination For Biden To Quash Internal Party Dissent (ZH)

Bloomberg reports that the Democratic National Committee is considering formally nominating Joe Biden as early as mid-July to ensure that the president is on November ballots, while helping to stamp out intra-party chatter of replacing him after last week’s poor debate performance. Democrats had already planned to nominate Biden, 81, before the convention in order to ensure he appears on the ballot in Ohio, which had an Aug. 7 deadline for candidates to be certified. A potential date for Biden’s nomination is July 21, when the Democratic convention’s credentials committee meets virtually, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity.nThe panel is meeting to finalize procedures before the party’s convention in Chicago starts on Aug. 19.

Interestingly, former President Trump’s sentencing hearing is set for July 11th, so he may well be in prison by then given the amount of pressure we assume is being placed on Judge Merchan’s shoulders to “lock him up”. Additionally, July 21 is just three days after Trump is scheduled to accept his party’s nomination at the Republican convention in Milwaukee. The desperate attempted message from all this narrative-shaping is simple – …nothing to see here, move along. Except we all saw the fireworks factory exploding with our own eyes. [..] At a Camp David gathering on Sunday, President Biden’s extended family urged him to ignore the growing number of voices asking him to quit the race — and many of his loved ones blamed his disastrous debate on his advisors. According to Politico, the two who most forcefully encouraged the 81-year-old Biden to continue were his wife Jill and his son Hunter — the two people whose opinion he reportedly values most.

The reports will strengthen a growing sense that Jill Biden is putting her own interests above that of her humiliated and failing husband. As one Democratic advisor told the New York Post over the weekend, “Jill Biden likes being First Lady…she doesn’t want to give that up.” Meanwhile, Hunter, who doesn’t exactly have strong reputation for sound judgment, is said to long for Americans to see a version of his father that — as paraphrased by the Times — is “scrappy and in command of the facts.” Much as he once was in denial about his drug problem, Hunter now seems incapable of admitting that that version of his father is gone forever: Biden family members are said to have blamed the debate debacle on three advisors: Anita Dunn, her husband Bob Bauer — who played the role of Trump in practice sessions — and Biden’s former chief of staff Ron Klain, who was in charge of the debate training. Aides to Biden denied these reports from multiple outlets.

With Biden having spent a full week at Camp David gearing up for the debate, his family members and others are claiming the team worked the 81-year-old too hard, and tried to pack him full of too many statistics. They even fault advisors for a debate-night makeup job that transformed his summer-tanned face to one that was pale and unhealthy-looking. Relatives also blamed debate-host CNN for not “fact-checking” Donald Trump and not telling Biden which camera would be on him as he blankly stared a thousand miles into space with his mouth agape. John Morgan, a top donor and friend of Biden’s brother Frank, was not at the family meeting, but joined the delusional pile-up on Biden’s advisers, telling the Times that the week-long debate prep — which involved rehearsals at various times of the day — was excessive: “It would be like if you took a prizefighter who was going to have a title fight and put him in a sauna for 15 hours then said, ‘Go fight.’ I believe that the debate is solely on Ron Klain, Bob Bauer and Anita Dunn.”

Unlike his family, the president is said to still hold confidence in the trio. Klain assured the Times that Biden will see the race through, saying, “He is the choice of the Democratic voters…We had a bad debate night. But you win campaigns by fighting — not quitting — in the face of adversity.” Of course, Biden is “the choice of Democratic voters” largely because the Democratic National Committee made sure he was the only choice available. A post-debate CBS News poll found that just 54% of registered Democrats think Biden should be in the race. The poll found 41% of Democrats think Biden lacks has the requisite mental and cognitive health. More importantly, 72% of all voters give him a failing grade on mental health. The family gathering at Camp David was reportedly scheduled before the debate, with the expectation that it would be a celebration of his performance and an opportunity for the extended Biden family — including his children and grandchildren — to be photographed by famed celebrity photographer Annie Leibovitz.

Read more …

“The Bidens flew off to the Hamptons Saturday to milk the showbiz cows and hedge-funders for a campaign that might not still exist..”

Surprise, Surprise! (Kunstler)

Since his hiding-in-the-basement campaign in 2020 “Joe Biden’s” Party of Chaos has pretended that he is fit and alert for the job and now all of sudden they pretend to be shocked to see how far gone in the head he really is. The bullshit shovelers of the mainstream news media were especially rocked, not by the truth of the situation per se, but at being unmasked as the contemptible, confabulating tools that they’ve become. The New York Times wheeled around on a dime from their servile lionizing of the presidential hologram they helped create to its editorial board abjectly yelling for him to drop out and get gone. They were joined instantly by a long list of other opinion-shapers, campaign donors, political celebs, and Beltway players.

Right after the debate, First lady Dr. Jill led a cheerleading session before a roomful of partisans that went beyond cringeworthy into uncharted territory of mortification. (“You were great, Joe! You answered all the questions!”). By the time the entourage moved to a pre-planned event at a nearby Atlanta Waffle House, “JB” had gone full-on zombie. If all that was intended to be reassuring, the effect was the opposite. Someone handed the blank-faced old grifter a milkshake and they beat it out of there. The Bidens flew off to the Hamptons Saturday to milk the showbiz cows and hedge-funders for a campaign that might not still exist. “Everyone paid in advance. . .so it could be an opportunity to encourage him to drop out,” an invited guest told a New York Post reporter. “I wanted to go and see the train wreck,” another donor said. “I’d rather choose someone from a phone book than have Biden.”

That was generally the tone among the woke-gay-communist echelons all over the land — surprisingly vehement, considering that just forty-eight hours before they were all in on re-election. Some could probably see their lucrative hustles whirling around the drain, and others might fret about just how far and wide prosecutions under a Trump Attorney General might loom. “JB” and his family circle attempted to regroup over the weekend at Camp David where first son, Hunter (“the smartest man I know,” the president often says), led the buoying-up session, perhaps mindful of the many bank accounts set up by his lawyers in the name of Biden family members (including little grandchildren) for receipt of influence-peddling revenue gathered sedulously from entities abroad during “Joe Biden’s” post-veep high-earning years. The family emerged from that meet-up triumphantly, ready to forget the one bad evening and jump back into the election game.

Read more …

“Smith has long tended to push the law to the breaking point to bag defendants..”

Too Clever By Half (Turley)

The Supreme Court’s decision in Fischer v. United States rejecting the use of obstruction of legal proceedings against January 6th defendants will potentially impact hundreds of cases. For some, it may lead to dismissals or, in the cases with multiple charges, resentencings. One of those cases that will be impacted is the pending prosecution of former president Donald Trump who is facing four charges, including two obstruction counts. However, it is not clear if Special Counsel Jack Smith will yield to the decision or possibly take the dubious path laid out by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her concurrence. Smith has long tended to push the law to the breaking point to bag defendants. That was the case when his conviction of former Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell was unanimously reversed as overextending another law.

It is doubtful that he will go quietly into the night after the Fischer decision. In most cases, a prosecutor would go back and secure a superseding indictment in light of the loss of the obstruction claims. Those claims were central to the narrative of the government under the current indictment. That is not Smith’s style. He may decide to push even harder for a trial before the election on the remaining counts. Smith has made the trial before the election an overriding priority throughout his appointment. He also has a very favorable and motivated judge in United States District Judge Tanya Chutkan. He could also take a not-so-subtle hint from Jackson in her concurrence. Jackson supported the majority in finding that the obstruction provision, Section 1512(c), was enacted after the Enron case to address the destruction of documents and records.

Section 1512(c)(1) prohibits corruptly obstructing an official proceeding by altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing a record, document, or other object with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding. However, a second provision under subsection (c)(2) allowed for charges that would “otherwise” obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceeding. The Court held that the obstruction cases under Section 1512(c)(2) must be tied to impairing the integrity or availability of evidence. However, in a single justice concurrence, she added a way that Smith and other prosecutors might still be able to shoehorn January 6th into a Section 1512 offense:

“That official proceeding [Congress’s certification of the Electoral College vote] plainly used certain records, documents, or objects—including, among others, those relating to the electoral votes themselves. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 65–67. And it might well be that Fischer’s conduct, as alleged here, involved the impairment (or the attempted impairment) of the availability or integrity of things used during the January 6 proceeding “in ways other than those specified in (c)(1).” Ante, at 8. If so, then Fischer’s prosecution under §1512(c)(2) can, and should, proceed. That issue remains available for the lower courts to determine on remand.” Notably, no other justice joined Jackson in the concurrence. However, Smith and Chutkan could reason that it was not expressly rejected and presumably, the three justices in dissent would support the broader reading since they were willing to sign off on the ultimate extension of the obstruction of justice statute. That includes Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

However, that still leaves less than a majority and an application that runs against the grain of the opinion. Just saying that a proceeding involves “certain records” is transparently artificial and forced. Even the submission of an alternative slate of electors is not the destruction of electors certified by the secretaries of state. The federal law allows for challenges in Congress, which Democrats previously utilized without claims of insurrections or attacks on democracy. J6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), voted to challenge the certification of the 2004 results of President George W. Bush’s reelection; committee member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sought to challenge Trump’s certification in 2016. Both did so under the very law that Trump’s congressional supporters used in 2020. And Pelosi and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) praised the challenge organized by then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) in 2004.

Those challenges under the same loose theory could have been viewed as attempting to negate or destroy certifications from the states. It would likely, in my view, result in another reversal. It is, in my view, too clever by half. That may not concern Smith who may still want to use the obstruction counts to increase the likelihood of convictions on the other counts. In such a circumstance, the overturning of the two obstruction convictions might still leave the conviction for conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy against the rights of citizens. We will see in the coming weeks, but Smith is likely waiting for the other shoe to drop in the Trump immunity case. That could add additional complications if the case is remanded by the Court for further proceedings. There is little time for a trial before November if the district court must hold hearings on claims that statements or actions were taken by Trump as part of his office.

Read more …

“If Putin does not immediately use sufficient force to terminate the conflict, World War Three seems certain..”

The Resurrection of French Nationalism? (Paul Craig Roberts)

France was the last European nation to lose its sovereignty, and France might be the first to recover its sovereignty. In the 1960s France was still a nation of ethnic French as contrasted with the tower of babel and a geographical entity that it is today. During the ten-year presidency of Charles De Gaulle (1959-69) France’s policy was one of national independence. DeGaulle refused to join NATO, and he opposed a supranational Europe in which nations would subordinate themselves to a European Union.French independence could be on the point of return judging from the success of Marine Le Pen’s party yesterday in the current French elections. Her nationalist party has in the first round of the parliamentary elections taken 34% of the votes with President Macron’s centrist coalition receiving only 21% support. If the second round produces similar results, a restoration of French independence is possible.

For many years European governments have worked consistently to overwhelm their ethnic populations with third world immigrant-invaders. It has reached the point where ethnic European women raped by immigrant-invaders fear to report the crime as it can result in a charge of racism or worse against the victim. For example, in response to a gang-rape of an ethnic German female, a 20-year old ethnic German female citizen called one of the gang rapists a “disgraceful rapist pig.” The German citizen was sentenced to jail for defaming an immigrant-invader, a protected species under German law, while the rapist was given a suspended sentence and served no jail time. For many years the European working class has experienced their living standards reduced in the name of economy. Not long ago the French were protesting the rise in the retirement age, which forces them to work longer for their pension.

The French have noticed that economy measures only apply to their living standards and not to the vast sums that Macron pours into the West’s war against Russia in Ukraine. Now all of Europe hears continually that they must prepare, and cough up money for, war with Russia. The French don’t want war with Russia. Nor do the Germans, or the Italians. Only “their” governments do, and war is what Washington’s puppets have put on the agenda. Europeans don’t want the high energy cost and lost profit and employment opportunities imposed on them by Washington’s “Russian sanctions.” It seems to Europeans that the purpose of Washington’s sanctions is to make Europe more dependent on Washington, essentially reducing them to serfs. Finally, after suffering decades of abuse, insult, and total disregard by their leaders, Europeans protested in the recent European Union parliamentary elections. The ruling parties were repudiated across the board.

The Belgian prime minister had to resign. The French president had to call national elections. I wrote that if the repudiation carries over into the national elections, we could see the unravelling of NATO, the European Union, and a return of sovereign European nations. World War II gave control of Europe to the US instead of to Germany. The Soviet collapse gave Washington control over the Warsaw Pact, placing NATO on Russia’s border. Washington’s policy was to de-Germanize Germany and to destroy a national awareness. Washington controlled German education and indoctrinated Germans that nationalism was racist, produced Hitler and the Holocaust. Legislation was passed essentially criminalizing a positive attitude toward German nationalism. It meant that you were a Nazi. It still does. It is unclear if a German state can ever be resurrected.

Rid of the Germans, Washington turned its efforts on France. De Gaulle’s departure weakened France. It took time, but eventually Washington controlled who the French president would be. With France, Germany, and the British in Washington’s pocket, the rest of Europe went along. Today European nations that shared the rule of the world are puppets of a criminal regime in Washington. The notion that there is any military power in these puppet states is laughable. The self-confidence that made the British the ruler of the world has long departed. It was destroyed at Oxford and Cambridge. No Western country has a positive opinion of itself. All are being keyed for war with Russia, China, Iran, while they themselves are being overrun by immigrant-invaders who are paid tribute for their support and permitted to rape European women as a form of restitution.

The Kremlin does not understand the hollowed out, empty, West where there is no support for any government. Western peoples are brainwashed into impotence and cannot even protect their constitutional rights. Why would anyone fight for these governments, and if forced, with what spirit? Putin sits there in his legalistic way accepting insult after insult, provocation after provocation, as his way of avoiding war with the West. It is not only Western provocations that are widening the Ukraine conflict into World War III. Putin has permitted the conflict to go on and on and on, and this has enabled Washington to get more and more and more involved, thus widening the conflict. If Putin does not immediately use sufficient force to terminate the conflict, World War Three seems certain. There is hope that if Le Pen wins France and does not sell out to Washington, the unravelling of NATO and resurrection of European independence will begin. But this can be a slow process, while the developments in Ukraine toward wider war are accelerating. The time is rapidly ending during which Putin can use sufficient force to end the conflict before it results in World War Three.

Read more …

“The West has ‘lost’ Russia much more profoundly than is understood..”

The West – Indubitably – Has Lost Russia, And Is Losing Eurasia Too (Crooke)

There perhaps was a momentary shrugging-off of slumber in Washington this week as they read the account of Sergei Lavrov’s démarche to the U.S. Ambassador in Moscow: Russia was telling the U.S. – “We are no longer at peace”! Not just ‘no longer at peace’, Russia was holding the U.S. responsible for the ‘cluster strike’ on a Crimean beach on last Sunday’s Pentecost holiday, killing several (including children) and injuring many more. The U.S. thereby “became party” to the proxy war in Ukraine (it was an American-supplied ATACM; programmed by American specialists; and drawing on U.S. data), Russia’s statement read; “Retaliatory measures will certainly follow”. Evidently, somewhere an amber light flashed hues of pink and red. The Pentagon grasped that something had happened – ‘No going around it; This could escalate badly’. The U.S. Defence Secretary (after a pause since March 2023) reached for the phone to call his Russian counterpart: ‘The U.S. regretted civilian deaths; the Ukrainians had full targeting discretion’.

The Russian public however, is plain furious. The diplomatic argot of ‘there now being a state of betweenness; not war and not peace’ is but the ‘half of it’. The West has ‘lost’ Russia much more profoundly than is understood. President Putin – in his statement to the Foreign Ministry Board in wake of the G7 sword-rattling – detailed just how we had arrived at this pivotal juncture (of inevitable escalation). Putin indicated that the gravity of the situation demanded a ‘last chance’ offer to the West, one that Putin emphatically said was to be “No temporary ceasefire for Kiev to prepare a new offensive; nor a freezing the conflict – but rather, needed to be about the war’s final completion”. It has been widely understood that the only credible way to end the Ukraine war would be a ‘peace’ agreement emerging through negotiation between Russia and the U.S. This however is rooted in a familiar U.S.-centric vision – ‘Waiting on Washington …’.

Lavrov archly commented (in paraphrase) that if anyone imagines we are ‘waiting for Godot’, and ‘will run for it’, they are mistaken. Moscow has something much more radical in mind – something that will shock the West. Moscow (and China) are not simply waiting upon the whims of the West, but plan to invert completely the security architecture paradigm: To create an ‘Alt’ architecture for the ‘vast space’ of Eurasia, no less. It is intended to exit the existing bloc zero-sum confrontation. A new confrontation is not envisaged; however the new architecture nevertheless is intended to force ‘external actors’ to curtail their hegemony across the continent. In his Foreign Ministry address, Putin explicitly looked ahead to the collapse of the Euro-Atlantic security system and to a new architecture emerging: “The world will never be the same again”, he said.

What did he mean? Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s principal Foreign Policy adviser (at the Primakov Readings Forum), clarified Putin’s ‘sparse’ allusion: Ushakov reportedly said that Russia increasingly has come to the view there is not going to be any long-term re-shaping of the security system in Europe. And without any major re-shaping, there will be no ‘final completion’ (Putin’s words) to the conflict in Ukraine. Ushakov explained that this unified and indivisible security system in Eurasia must replace the Euro-Atlantic and Euro-centric models that are now receding into oblivion. “This speech [of Putin at the Russian Foreign Ministry], I would say, sets the vector of further activities of our country at the international stage, including the building of a single and indivisible security system in Eurasia,” Ushakov said.

Read more …

“.. the United States has massively over-extended itself and damaged its own reliability as a global trade partner.”

‘Unipolar US Dollar’ Mutated Into ‘Politically Weaponized’ Tool (Sp.)

“In essence, the more the United States prints and spends USD, the more the rest of the world is expected to invest in US government paper, and subsidize this debt-spending. The BRICS nations and their adherents are advocating for the use of national currencies for cross-border trade, eventually de-linking from the increasingly unipolar and visibly unreliable US Dollar,” Goncharoff explained. Furthermore, analysts at the Russia’s Pivot to Asia website wrote that two “main global financial evolutionary events” are unfolding right now. These involve changes to the role of the US dollar, and “technology and the digitization of financial transactions.” America has itself to blame for the loss of the greenback’s credibility as a global currency, mainly due to the mind-boggling US-dollar issued debt – a whopping $32.72 trillion.

“It has created a scenario where foreign governments are increasingly wary of investing in additional US dollar debt until a management system is put in place that will be able to support such a load,” Goncharoff noted. He forecasts that the US dollar “will become prone to increasing shocks, leading to uncertainty and mistrust on the global financial markets.” If the US were to default on its debt, American bondholders would carry losses on their investments, and the negative impacts on global trade would be huge, he warned. He underscored that the US treasury norm of printing of more dollars to cover up the fiscal debt “debases the actual value of the currency and encourages inflation.”

While Moscow has effectively “inoculated” itself from looming future problems with the US economy, other countries, like China, are doing the same. The trade focus is shifting away from the United States, fueling a geopolitical evolution of trade blocs like BRICS, the Eurasian Economic Union and Shanghai Cooperation Organization, with some like BRICS discussing alternative currency platforms. “One proposal for a unified BRICS trade unit is the “BRICS Bridge” allowing the ten current members to exchange units based 60% of their sovereign currencies and 40% backed by their gold reserves,” noted Goncharoff, and summed up:. “For Russia, and most other nations, there is a far bigger picture – where non-US dominated, global trade opportunities beckon.” Furthermore, the US has used the dollar as a trade and geopolitical weapon, said the pundit, seeking to abuse economies of Venezuela, Iran, Turkey and Russia amongst others.

“It has done this in two main areas, firstly by manipulating the US dollar currency exchange rates in order to damage other national currencies when the US wants to inflict fiscal punishments or seek trade advantages,” remarked the analyst, adding that Washington “has also used the global SWIFT payment network as a switch to turn US dollar trade on and off according to its policies.” “Other governments are becoming concerned that these punishments could in future be meted out to them, which also creates mistrust and fear of US dollar over-exposure. Any one of these problems are serious. It appears ultimately unlikely the United States will be able to fend off the repercussions of them all. In short – the United States has massively over-extended itself and damaged its own reliability as a global trade partner.”

Read more …

“The children here have not gone to school for a year, and we are under rocket fire day and night. It is a very strange situation.”

Charles Nenner Warns “Very Hard Times Are Coming” (USAW)

This week, Nenner’s war cycle “turned straight up” and his economic cycle “turned straight down.” The next big conflict is not going to be in Ukraine or Taiwan–just yet. On Saturday, this headline: “Iran Threatens Israel With ‘Obliterating War’ If It Attacks Lebanon.” Nenner says all hell is about to break loose. Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iran and Turkey are key players in an escalating war with Israel. Nenner, who lives on the border with Lebanon in Northern Israel, interviewed with USAW just after a barrage of 100 rockets hit near his location. Nenner reports, “The children here have not gone to school for a year, and we are under rocket fire day and night. It is a very strange situation. What I don’t understand is the Arab resistance, led by Iran, did not see what happened in Gaza. If this really goes, Lebanon is going to disappear from the map…

How do I know these things? I know these things because I work with several governments in the world… In the 1960’s, there was a war, and half of Cypress ended up Turkish and half of Cypress is Greek. Turkey never accepted that. . . . Israel is using airfields in Cypress. . . . If this really gets going, Turkey is going to take over Cypress because they support Hamas (and Hezbollah). Turkey will invade Cypress, and this will lead to a war between Greece and Turkey. Of course, Iran is going to be involved also. Big boats are heading to Israel, so America is going to be involved. Russia has its ideas too… I don’t think Americans have any clue what is going on there, and they have no background. They are only busy with trying to win the Election, and it’s going to lead to catastrophe. If there is a war, Turkey is going to be involved, Cypress is going to be involved, NATO is going to be involved, and it is going to be much more serious than people think.”

Nenner says, “We are already in the next big war cycle.” Nenner still thinks China is going to be a big problem and says, “I would say if the world is busy with all this nonsense, then this is a time for China to take Taiwan over. The war cycle is extra up, so we have to be very careful. A lot of my wealthy clients are busy trying to get visas . . . to Caribbean islands. I know many wealthy people busy trying to get visas and trying to get out of America. This is what is going on below the surface, and most small investors don’t know what is going on… They are worried about a nuke strike or terrorists blowing stuff up left and right because they came through the border. This is a very dangerous situation. They are not leaving right now, but they are preparing now… The war cycle has turned up, and it is going to be extra dangerous from the 3rd of July on.”

Nenner says his big clients are also leaving the cities and buying houses in rural locations. Nenner told me this is a trend that has been going on for about 5 years, but it has picked up speed in the last year and a half. Nenner says his economic cycles have turned straight down. In NYC, Nenner points out, “I have very wealthy clients that just got out of commercial real estate with a 67% loss. I also know the banks, they are holding all these bad loans.” “The banks have US bonds coming to maturity that they have lost a fortune on. So, the banks, especially the regional banks, are going to be in big trouble… The regional banks are very weak. A lot is burning below the surface, which nobody tells you about.” Nenner still likes gold, but it’s going to consolidate here. Inflation is getting ready to take off again, and Nenner says, “Layoffs are coming soon. . . . Very hard times are coming.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Macgregor
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807746047541694893

 

 

Thomas

 

 

Issa

 

 

Silicone

 

 

Wave

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 012024
 


René Magritte The human condition 1935

 

Le Pen’s Conservative National Rally Crushes Macron, Socialists (ZH)
Orban Announces New EU Parliament Alliance (RT)
Russia Will Recover, ‘Not Disappear’ Due to Sanctions – Jim Rogers (Sp.)
EU, Euro Will Break Up Someday – Jim Rogers (Sp.)
Major Democratic Donors Weighing Biden’s Future – NYT (RT)
Biden Campaign’s Future Hinges On His Wife – NBC (RT)
Nikki Haley Urges Republicans To Prepare For Biden’s Replacement (RT)
Biden Beat Trump In The Spinach Debate (Helmer)
West Loses $257 Billion on Trade Restrictions With Russia (Sp.)
Zelensky Outlines Model For Talks With Russia (RT)
Ukraine Aid Hits Record Low of $2Bln Per Month Since February 2022 (Sp.)
Alan Dershowitz Compares Lawfare Against Trump To McCarthyism (JTN)
Supreme Court Downsizes the “Insurrection” to Largely Trespassing (Turley)
Klaus Schwab Reportedly Facing Sexual Harassment Allegations (Sp.)
DOJ to Charge Boeing With Criminal Fraud (Sp.)

 

 


© Sebastien SALOM-GOMIS/AFP

 

 

Stolen election

 

 

Bannon

 

 

Marc Elias has the answer: Blame SCOTUS!

 

 

Vivek

 

 

Galloway
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807113580803743754

 

 

Democracy

 

 

 

 

“..a 28 year old kid may soon be a prime minister of the 2nd largest European economy…”

Far right? Not strong enough. In Holland, someone’s come up with “radical right”.

Le Pen’s Conservative National Rally Crushes Macron, Socialists (ZH)

As expected, Le Pen’s conservative (or in the world’s of the liberal media, “Far Right”) National Rally (RN) party won the first round of France’s parliamentary election on Sunday, exit polls showed, but the final result will depend on several days of horsetrading before next week’s run-off. The RN was seen winning around 34% of the vote, exit polls from Ipsos, Ifop, OpinionWay and Elabe showed. That was ahead of both far-left and centrist rivals, including President Emmanuel Macron’s Together alliance, whose bloc was seen winning a paltry 20.5%-23%, a far cry from his crushing victory several years ago. The New Popular Front (NFP), a hastily assembled left-wing coalition, was projected to win around 29% of the vote, the exit polls showed. The exit polls were in line with opinion polls ahead of the election, but provided little clarity on whether the anti-immigrant, eurosceptic RN will be able to form a government to “cohabit” with the pro-EU Macron after next Sunday’s run-off.

The RN’s chances of winning power next week will depend on the political dealmaking made by its rivals over the coming days. In the past, centre-right and centre-left parties have teamed up to keep the RN from power, but that dynamic, known as the “republican front,” is less certain than ever. If no candidate reaches 50% in the first round, the top two contenders automatically qualify for the second round, as well as all those with 12.5% of registered voters. In the run-off, whoever wins the most votes take the constituency. According to Reuters, the high turnout on Sunday suggests France is heading for a record number of three-way run-offs. These generally benefit the RN much more than two-way contests, experts say. Sure enough, the horsetrading began almost immediately on Sunday night. In a written statement to the press, Macron called on voters to rally behind candidates who are “clearly republican and democratic”, which, based on his recent declarations, would exclude candidates from the RN and from the hard-left France Unbowed (LFI) party.

The problem, of course, is that Macron’s party was crushed in the recent European parliamentary elections precisely because the people have had enough with “clearly republican and democratic” puppets of the World Economic Forum and want actual change. LFI leader Jean-Luc Melenchon said the second-placed NFP alliance will withdraw all its candidates who came third in the first round.”Our guideline is simple and clear: not a single more vote for the National Rally,” he said. It is, however, unlikely that many will care what the French socialists want: after all, last week the French socialist leftist alliance said it would raise the top marginal income tax rate to 90% if it were to take over the government. Meanwhile, Jordan Bardella, the 28-year-old RN party president, said he was ready to be prime minister – if his party wins an absolute majority. That’s right, a 28 year old kid may soon be a prime minister of the 2nd largest European economy.

He has ruled out trying to form a minority government and neither Macron nor the NFP will form an alliance with him. “I will be a “cohabitation” Prime Minister, respectful of the constitution and of the office of President of the Republic, but uncompromising about the policies we will implement,” he said. While the RN is seen winning the most seats in the National Assembly, only one of the pollsters – Elabe – had the party winning an absolute majority of 289 seats in the run-off. Experts say that seat projections after first-round votes can be highly inaccurate, and especially so in this election. Voter participation was high compared with previous parliamentary elections, illustrating the political fervour Macron aroused with his stunning decision to call a parliamentary vote after the RN trounced his party in European Parliament elections earlier this month.

His decision plunged France into political uncertainty, sent shockwaves around Europe and prompted a sell-off of French assets on financial markets. A longtime pariah, the RN is now closer to power than it has ever been. Le Pen has sought to clean up the image of a party known for racism and antisemitism, a tactic that has worked amid voter anger at Macron, the high cost of living and growing concerns over immigration. At 1500 GMT, turnout was nearly 60%, compared with 39.42% two years ago – the highest comparable turnout figures since the 1986 legislative vote, Ipsos France’s research director Mathieu Gallard said. In short, the people have had enough and they finally want to be heard.

Read more …

More right wing. Orban chairs the EU as per today, July 1.

Orban Announces New EU Parliament Alliance (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has announced the creation of a new EU Parliament alliance, in cooperation with right-wing parties from Austria and the Czech Republic. The announcement comes a day before Budapest takes on the rotating six-month EU presidency. The new group, presented as “Patriots for Europe” comprises Fidesz, the party led by Orban; the Czech Republic’s largest opposition bloc, ANO, chaired by the country’s former prime minister, Andrej Babis; and the Austrian Freedom Party (FPO), headed by Herbert Kickl. “Today we are creating a political formation that I believe will very quickly become the largest faction of the European right-wing,” Orban said during a press briefing which was also attended by Babis and Kickl. The Hungarian leader expressed hope that the alliance would dominate the right of the EU’s political spectrum.

The bloc’s policies must be altered in accordance with the results of the latest European Parliament elections, according to the Hungarian leader, who stressed that the current parliamentary groups will inevitably split. The results of the election carried out on June 9 revealed that citizens across the 27-nation bloc had mostly shifted away from the left, although the performance of the right-wing and conservative parties varied from country to country. The ruling coalitions in Germany, France and Italy were effectively trounced by the right. Orban’s Fidesz won 11 seats in the EU parliament, while FPO and ANO have six and seven seats respectively, with all three parties becoming strongest in their countries’ elections. According to the current rules, 23 members are needed to form a political group in the European Parliament, and at least one-quarter of the member states must be represented within the alliance.

In a statement to the media, the leaders of the three parties expressed hope that the new group would be joined by many other European parties in the coming days. Hungary is set to take over the presidency of the Council of the European Union on July 1 and will remain in charge until the end of the year. During the period, Hungarian diplomats will chair meetings in Brussels and shape the EU’s political agenda. Orban has faced sharp criticism in the EU for pursuing policies that run counter to those of Brussels. Since the beginning of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Budapest has refused to provide weapons to Kiev, calling for a diplomatic solution instead, and has maintained economic ties with Russia. The prime minister had previously said that the results of the election had won time for the bloc and “slowed the train hurtling towards war.”

Read more …

“Russia is a huge country, America is too. Of course, there will be communication and trade again someday. There always has been and there always will be after the war.”

Russia Will Recover, ‘Not Disappear’ Due to Sanctions – Jim Rogers (Sp.)

Anti-Russia sanctions imposed by the West will not make Russia’s economy disappear, the country will recover, renowned US investor Jim Rogers told Sputnik. “Russia is not going to disappear. There have been sanctions against Russia in history, there will be again. There have been sanctions against everybody in history. Russia will recover,” Rogers said. The investor noted that Russia is experiencing a record number of sanctions, which would hurt any country. Rogers said that many people in such circumstances would turn to the black market and go around the sanctions, while many others would abide by them, and Russia will have to deal with the reality of sanctions. “If any country has a lot of sanctions against it, they would hurt the country for a while. So, Russia is going to have to deal with the fact that there are many sanctions against it,” Rogers said.

The investor emphasized that Russia has a lot of oil and agricultural products, which are needed around the world, and has so far done a good job of working around the sanctions. “Russia is finding a way to get around the sanctions. But this always happens whenever somebody imposes sanctions. Many people try to find a way to get around the sanctions and they do,” Rogers said. Once the conflict in Ukraine is over, Russia will start opening up again and people will open up to Russia again, Rogers added. The countries of the collective West stepped up sanctions pressure on Russia after the start of the special military operation in Ukraine in 2022. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the collective West’s long-term strategy of containing Russia was instead hurting the global economy.

Rogers is also optimistic that Russian-US relations will improve, and begin communicating and trading as both are huge countries with consequential economies, renowned US investor Jim Rogers told Sputnik. When asked whether he thinks that relations between Russia and the United States will improve one day, Rogers stated, “Of course, they will someday.” “I can remember when Americans wouldn’t even talk to Russians. And the Russians wouldn’t talk to Americans. That will change again,” he said. “Russia is a huge country, America is too. Of course, there will be communication and trade again someday. There always has been and there always will be after the war.”

Read more …

“Whenever people have economic problems they blame somebody and that always leads to change.”

EU, Euro Will Break Up Someday – Jim Rogers (Sp.)

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine is slowing down the European countries’ economies and some will not be as prosperous as they used to be, renowned US investor Jim Rogers told Sputnik. “It [the Ukraine conflict] causes economies to slow down and some countries will not be as prosperous as they have been,” Rogers said. “Whenever people have economic problems they blame somebody and that always leads to change.” Rogers said the issues facing the global economy will affect not only Europe but also other parts of the world in the next couple of years. “There are many countries in Europe that will try to get around the European problems. So there may be more countries that will leave the European Union,” Rogers said. The investor noted that the United Kingdom left the European Union despite some people speculating such a move would destroy its economy, but added he believes other politicians will start “doing the same thing.”

Rogers expressed doubt that the European Union would survive given that few blocs have lasted for very long. “Most of them have broken up. I’m afraid the Euro will break up someday,” Rogers said. In early June, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said the Eurozone economy was gradually recovering from the coronavirus pandemic measures, the cut in gas supplies from Russia and the consequences of the Ukraine conflict, but the bloc’s aging population and sluggish productivity present risks to growth in the medium term. The IMF warned that intensifying geopolitical tensions, trade disputes and distortive industrial policy could further complicate economic prospects and the policy making environment for a region highly open to trade. The collective West stepped up sanctions pressure on Russia after the start of the special military operation in Ukraine in 2022. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the West’s long-term strategy of containing Russia hurts the global economy.

Read more …

“..discussions were being held with political advisers on “arcane rules” that may allow Biden to be forced off the 2024 ballot..”

Major Democratic Donors Weighing Biden’s Future – NYT (RT)

US Democratic Party donors are looking at ways Joe Biden can be removed from the presidential race against his will, and replaced with a stronger candidate, The New York Times reported on Sunday, citing sources familiar with the efforts. The discussions follow Biden’s poor performance in Thursday’s debate with Republican challenger Donald Trump. A flash poll conducted by CNN revealed that 67% of registered voters who watched the televised clash in Atlanta, Georgia, felt that Trump had won. People close to the situation told the New York Times that discussions were being held with political advisers on “arcane rules” that may allow Biden to be forced off the 2024 ballot before the Democratic National Convention, scheduled for August .

One Silicon Valley donor who had planned to host a fundraiser featuring Biden later this summer has reportedly called off the event, and a major California sponsor left a debate watch party and emailed a friend with the subject line “Utter disaster,” according to a copy of the email obtained by the NYT. Other wealthy Democrats have reportedly expressed hope that Biden will “have an epiphany and decide to exit on his own.” The idea of reaching out to first lady Jill Biden is also being considered, the sources said. NBC News earlier quoted sources as saying that the only person who can impact Biden’s decision is his wife. The couple will reportedly join their children and grandchildren on Sunday at Camp David, where Biden expected to “decide whether to move forward or to end his campaign early.”

Read more …

He’s done. The GOP should hope he stays on.

Biden Campaign’s Future Hinges On His Wife – NBC (RT)

US President Joe Biden is expected to discuss the future of his re-election campaign with his family following a disastrous debate with Republican challenger Donald Trump, NBC News reported on Saturday. The network cited sources as saying the only opinion that can influence Biden’s decision will be that of his wife, Jill. Thursday’s televised face-off highlighted concerns about the 81-year-old president’s fitness for office, with Biden’s performance described in the media as “incoherent,” “stumbling” and “unclear”. Senior Democrats and their donors are now actively pushing for his withdrawal from the race, according to multiple reports.

NBC cited five people familiar with the matter as saying Joe and Jill Biden would join their children and grandchildren at Camp David on Sunday as part of a pre-planned trip. The network said there is “an understanding among top Democrats that Biden should be given space to determine next steps” and that “only the president, in consultation with his family, can decide whether to move forward or to end his campaign early”. One source told the outlet that only two people have a genuine say on the matter – the president and his wife. “Anyone who doesn’t understand how deeply personal and familial this decision will be isn’t knowledgeable about the situation,” he added.

The view was echoed by another NBC source, saying: “The only person who has ultimate influence with him is the first lady. If she decides there should be a change of course, there will be a change of course”. Despite the debate being widely seen as a humiliation for Biden, his team has publicly insisted that he has no plans to drop out of the race. The president has acknowledged his poor performance against Trump, saying at a rally on Friday: “I don’t debate as well as I used to,” but “know how to tell the truth… I know right from wrong. And I know how to do this job, I know how to get things done. And I know what millions of Americans know: When you get knocked down, you get back up.”

Read more …

She found a way to make the news…

Nikki Haley Urges Republicans To Prepare For Biden’s Replacement (RT)

The US Democratic Party is going to replace Joe Biden with a younger presidential candidate after his failure in the debate, and the Republicans must be ready for this, Nikki Haley, who lost to Donald Trump in the race for the GOP nomination, has said. The 81-year-old president’s display during his televised face-off with Trump in Atlanta on Thursday was “shocking,” Haley said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal on Saturday. “What we saw was that Trump was strong, but I don’t even think that mattered because Biden was so amazingly unfit. The way he lost his train of thought, the way he couldn’t grasp topics of what he needed to talk about,” she said.

The US president’s performance projected weakness and “our enemies just saw that they have between now and [the inauguration day on] January 20 to do whatever it is they want to do,” the former US envoy to the UN and ex-governor of South Carolina added. Since the debate, reports have emerged that some Democratic donors are insisting that Biden be dropped as the party’s nominee for the November 5 election, and Haley expressed her belief that their demands will be met. The Democrats “are going to be smart about it: they’re going to bring somebody younger, they’re going to bring somebody vibrant, they’re going to bring somebody tested,” the Republican politician predicted. “This is a time for Republicans to prepare and get ready for what’s to come because there is no way that there will be a surviving Democratic Party if they allow Joe Biden to continue to be the candidate,” she said.

Haley reiterated her call for cognitive testing of all federal candidates, which she made as she competed with 78-year-old Trump in the primaries earlier this year. Washington is “full of older people” and voters should be able to see “who is up to the challenge and who is not,” Haley argued. If the Democrats “continue down this path and they have Biden as their nominee, they are committing to hurting America,” the Republican politician stressed. The president should be replaced on the rival party’s ticket “for the good of the country,” she added. On Friday, Axios published the results of a poll by Morning Consult, which suggested that 60% of voters believe that Biden should “definitely” or “probably” be replaced as the Democratic presidential nominee. When asked by journalists after the debate if the president was planning to step aside, the Biden campaign said “of course not.”

Read more …

“We’re needed to protect the world because our own safety is at stake..”

Biden Beat Trump In The Spinach Debate (Helmer)

If you think that Popeye beat Bluto because he ate spinach, this US presidential cartoon, I mean debate, was for you. That President Joseph Biden, handicapped as he was by Parkinson’s Disease and Lewy body dementia, won the 120-minute television fight with Donald Trump seems so obvious to Russians, they express surprise at the near-unanimity in the US that the opposite was the outcome. While the Russian state propaganda organs are repeating the “Joe Must Go” line — the US-funded Russian opposition media also — military and intelligence analysts in Moscow are concluding that Biden and Trump proved they are equally dangerous for Russia, but that Trump is now the candidate for much bigger wars in the Middle East and against China. Replacing Biden, Russian sources believe, is now an operation of the Zionist and Taiwan lobbies in Washington.

“The Democratic party elites started to think of ways to get Biden out of the way,” according to one Moscow source. “so sending him into a long debate, so early in the campaign, was exactly meant to achieve this – he will look bad but there is enough time to replace him. Republicans have always been this racist but Trump says it more plainly. Biden has always been a wolf in sheep’s clothing but he can no longer find new words to keep up the charade. What is there to see? America has never been weaker. The important thing to see here [Moscow] is the reluctance to drive American imperial power off the cliff.” “Despite Biden’s obvious handicap, I thought he won,” adds a second source. “Biden telling Trump ‘you have the morals of an alley cat’, won it as far as I’m concerned. He also called Trump out on the racism and fascism, something Trump had no answer for except to double down. Didn’t anyone notice Trump’s compulsive repetitiveness? He repeated the same lies and aspersions over and over again. He’s more lucid than Biden, but not by much. He’s an ageing, narcissistic, racist crook.”

The Russian sources also believe that support for Trump in Moscow is an oligarch operation with a similar fondness for Israel. That has been the line of Roman Abramovich since his abortive attempts to save himself from sanctions and defeat the Russian Army failed at the beginning of the Special Military Operation in March and April 2022. “I believe,” said one source, “ ‘Joe must go’ because he expressed some trepidation regarding Israel. He was set up — the guns were loaded and cocked before the debate even started.” There were nineteen references in all to Russia in the debate; seventeen to President Vladimir Putin. Leaving aside mentions by the CNN moderators of the debate, Trump referred to Russia fourteen times; Biden none. Trump named Putin seven times, Biden the same number. The Ukraine was named twenty-two times, Vladimir Zelensky twice. NATO was named thirteen times.

This count reveals that the war in Europe was significantly more important to both candidates than any other foreign policy issue. Compared to the war in the Ukraine, there were eighteen mentions of Israel; thirteen of Hamas; fourteen of China; six of Iran; one of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, one of President Xi Jinping. North Korean President Kim Jong-Un got three. Both Biden and Trump claimed to be tougher and the other weaker in the war against Russia. Said Biden: “we found ourselves in a situation where, if you take a look at what Trump did in Ukraine, he’s – this guy told Ukraine – told Trump, do whatever you want. Do whatever you want. And that’s exactly what Trump did to Putin, encouraged him, do whatever you want. And he went in. And listen to what he said when he went in, he was going to take Kyiv in five days, remember?

Because it’s part of the old Soviet Union. That’s what he wanted to re-establish, Kyiv. And he, in fact, didn’t do it at all. He didn’t – wasn’t able to get it done. And they’ve lost over – they’ve lost thousands and thousands of troops, 500,000 troops…If you want a World War Three, let him follow and win, and let Putin say, do what you want to NATO – just do what you want…I can’t think of a single major leader in the world who wouldn’t trade places with what job I’ve done and what they’ve done because we are a powerful nation…right now, we’re needed. We’re needed to protect the world because our own safety is at stake. And again, you want to have war, just let Putin go ahead and take Kyiv, make sure they move on, see what happens in Poland, Hungary, and other places along that border. Then you have a war.”

Read more …

That’s more than the aid..

West Loses $257 Billion on Trade Restrictions With Russia (Sp.)

Western trade restrictions forced Russian companies to focus on markets in the Global South with enormous purchasing power. Importers from unfriendly countries received less Russian goods in the amount of $256.5 billion, while Russia managed to sell these goods to other states and made a profit of almost $31 billion, Sputnik calculated using open data. According to the trade statistics, Russian exports to unfriendly countries were uneven – while some items grew, others shrank. Russia saw an increase in exports compared to the pre-sanctions period, with companies earning an additional $31 billion from trade with friendly countries, data from the Federal Customs Service show.

Western importers were mostly undersupplied with Russian minerals ($107 billion), jewelry ($38 billion) and metals ($21 billion). Russia has repeatedly stressed that it is happy to trade with friendly nations in the wake of Western economic sanctions and warned that these restrictive measures will backfire, spurring inflation and triggering a cost-of-living crisis. In January-February trade between Russia and China grew by 9.3%, with exports from Russia exceeding $20 billion. Earlier, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping set the goal of doubling bilateral trade. The goal was reached in November 2023.

Read more …

You’re done. Get out of the way..

Zelensky Outlines Model For Talks With Russia (RT)

Kiev is not ruling out peace talks with Moscow, but they can only be held through intermediaries, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky told the Philadelphia Inquirer on Sunday. He suggested that the format used to broker the 2022 Black Sea grain deal could provide a foundation for negotiations. Ukraine has previously refused to accept Russia’s terms as the basis for talks and has accused Moscow of being incapable of good-faith negotiations. In late 2022, Zelensky issued a decree proclaiming the “impossibility” of talks with Moscow while Russian President Vladimir Putin remains in power. Moscow, meanwhile, has maintained that it is ready to restart negotiations, but only if Kiev renounces claims to former territories that have become part of Russia. In autumn 2022, four former Ukrainian territories – the two breakaway Donbass republics and the regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye – formally joined Russia following a series of referendums.

Ukraine has never recognized the results and continues to lay claim to these regions, as well as Crimea, which joined Russia following a similar referendum in 2014. In his interview with the Philadelphia Inquirer, Zelensky claimed that Ukraine “can find a model” for a potential settlement with Russia. He pointed to the deal brokered two years ago by Türkiye and the UN that allowed the establishment of a corridor for agricultural exports from Ukrainian ports. According to Zelensky, Ankara and the UN signed separate agreements with Moscow and Kiev. “It worked,” he said, adding that the grain corridor then existed “long enough.” Moscow and Kiev were close to reaching another grain deal in March, but Ukrainian negotiators abruptly walked away after two months of talks, according to Reuters.

Agreements on “territorial integrity, energy and freedom of navigation” could be struck between Moscow and Kiev in the same format, Zelensky stated. He suggested that other countries could be invited to mediate. “No one should say that it is… just Europe and the US,” he said, adding that nations from Asia, Africa, and South America should participate and help prepare the documents that would be presented to Moscow and Kiev. “So far, there is only this model,” Zelensky added. He stressed, however, that the final agreement must “suit” Kiev and be based on Ukraine’s terms. Zelensky has long sought to promote his own ten-point “peace formula,” most recently during the summit in Switzerland on June 15-16, to which Russia was not invited. Moscow has flatly rejected Zelensky’s terms, insisting that the status of its newly acquired territories is non-negotiable.

Putin further demanded in June that Kiev withdraw all its troops from the areas of the four Russian regions it currently controls. According to Putin, Ukraine must also renounce its plan to join NATO and become a neutral country, as well as limit the size of its army. Despite rejecting Russia’s terms, Kiev has recently signaled its willingness to end the fighting. In June, the deputy head of Vladimir Zelensky’s office, Igor Zhovkva, said Ukraine wanted “peace as soon as possible.” Zelensky said last week that Kiev does not want to “prolong the war” or make it “last for years.”

Read more …

Confusing numbers.

Ukraine Aid Hits Record Low of $2Bln Per Month Since February 2022 (Sp.)

Foreign financial assistance to Ukraine has hit record lows since February 2022 after falling to a monthly average of 1.9 billion euros ($2 billion) in the first half of 2024, an analysis of the Ukrainian Finance Ministry’s data conducted by Sputnik showed on Saturday, adding that Kiev received no funds in May. In 2022, Ukraine’s budget received an average of 2.9 billion euros per month from 17 countries and the European Union, with the United States providing the largest disbursement of 11.4 billion euros, the EU 7.6 billion euros and Canada 1.8 billion euros, the data showed. In 2023, 13 countries and the European Union, which became the largest donor (18.1 billion euros), provided Ukraine with a monthly average of 3 billion euros, the data said. The United States took the second place with 10.1 billion euros, followed by Japan with 3.4 billion euros, the data showed.

Austria, Albania, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Lithuania and Latvia did not provide any financial assistance to Ukraine last year, the data said. This year, Kiev received financial support from the European Union, Canada, Japan, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom and the monthly allocations dropped to 1.9 billion euros, the data showed. Earlier in June, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced that Ukraine would receive 1.5 billion euros from profits generated by frozen Russian assets in July. Kiev is also set to receive 1.9 billion euros from the European Union by the end of June for reforms and investment, she said.

Earlier experts explained to Sputnik that Western voters are gradually getting tired of the Ukrainian crisis and do not want to see their governments sending more aid to the corrupt Kiev regime. Western countries have been providing massive military and financial aid to Kiev since the start of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine in February 2022. The Kremlin has consistently warned against continued arms deliveries to Kiev, saying it would lead to further escalation of the conflict.

Read more …

“The new McCarthyism is by young people, and it represents our future. So we have a dark future unless we can reverse this new McCarthyism.”

Alan Dershowitz Compares Lawfare Against Trump To McCarthyism (JTN)

Harvard Law School Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz is comparing the political lawfare occurring against former President Donald Trump to McCarthyism which began in the late 1950s. “I know lawyers who have been asked to defend Donald Trump on First Amendment grounds,” Dershowitz said on the Wednesday edition of the Just the News, No Noise TV show. “They would normally take the case, but they say, ‘we can’t afford it for our family because they’re coming after our bar license.’ It’s exactly what happened during McCarthyism.” McCarthyism, also called the “Red Scare,” started when Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wis., said he obtained a list of over 200 card-carrying communists that worked at the U.S. Department of State. This resulted in congressional hearings about “communist subversion” in the United States and it led to repression and targeting of left-wing individuals for fear of spreading communist ideas.

“I’m seeing a return of it now,” Dershowitz said. “But it’s much more dangerous today. Because the old McCarthyism…..it was a thing of the past where you were communist in the 1930s. The new McCarthyism is by young people, and it represents our future. So we have a dark future unless we can reverse this new McCarthyism.” Last month, Trump was found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree for his reimbursement of a $130,000 payment his then-lawyer Michael Cohen made to porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Trump had argued that this lawsuit and lawsuits on other states were part of a political witch hunt, which other GOP politicians have echoed. Recently, Missouri GOP Attorney General Andrew Bailey announced he would be filing a lawsuit against the state of New York for using ‘lawfare’ against former President Donald Trump.

“This is a lawsuit to vindicate Missourians rights to have access [and] to and hear from a chosen candidate for President of the United States in the heat of a campaign in the most consequential election in this nation’s history,” Bailey said on a “Just the News, No Noise” special. Trump recently had a gag order lifted that was imposed on him by the New York judge. Trump’s lawyers argued the gag order was stifling his campaign speech, and said it might limit his ability to respond to attacks from Democratic President Joe Biden during the first presidential debate. Bailey argued that lawfare and the politicization of the judicial system is a sign that the U.S. is headed towards a banana republic. “We are absolutely slouching towards a tyrannical dictatorial Banana Republic where the law becomes a joke,” he said. We used to be a country of laws……certainly the law under the Biden administration has hastened this departure from those basic principles of the rule of law. ”

Bailey said that Biden does not respect the rule of law and Trump needs to get back into office. “If the Chief Executive Officer of the United States of America doesn’t support the law and doesn’t support the United States of America, we lose credibility,” he said. “President Trump put America first. He enforced the rule of law.” Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., suggested that if former President Donald Trump gets back into office, he should go after federal agencies like General Ulysses S. Grant attacked Richmond, Virginia, during the Civil War. “When Trump gets back in, he better go through these departments like Grant through Richmond — you can look it up. Grant, during the Civil War, went through Richmond pretty brutally,” Burchett said on the Just the News, No Noise TV show.

Read more …

Now investigate the Jan 6 committee. They locked up 100s of people for insurrection.

Supreme Court Downsizes the “Insurrection” to Largely Trespassing (Turley)

The Supreme Court’s decision on Friday in Fischer v. U.S. struck down one of the most common charges against January 6 defendants. “Obstruction of an official proceeding” had been used in hundreds of cases, and those convictions are now invalid. But the biggest impact of the decision may occur elsewhere. For years, calling January 6 an “insurrection” has been a litmus test for press, pundits and politicians. Members of Congress such as Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) claimed a conspiracy of “armed and organized insurrectionists.” The claim is legally absurd but politically advantageous. It now seems like the insurrection increasingly looks more like a legal case of mass trespass and unlawful entry. I have always believed that criminal charges were warranted for the riot of Jan. 6, 2021. But this week’s decision shows how the Justice Department has wrongly prosecuted hundreds of people for the obstruction crime.

It was all part of what Justice Department official Michael Sherwin proudly declared in a television interview, that “our office wanted to ensure that there was shock and awe…it worked because we saw through media posts that people were afraid to come back to D.C. because they’re, like, ‘If we go there, we’re gonna get charged.’ …We wanted to take out those individuals that essentially were thumbing their noses at the public for what they did.” The Fischer opinion will bring an end to a minority of cases that were based entirely on the charge under 1512(c)(2). The section had been enacted after the Enron scandal in 2001 with the collapse of an energy company accused of corporate fraud. It was designed to allow criminal charges for the destruction of evidence in the form of documents and records. The Justice Department chose to interpret that provision to broadly include any obstruction of any legal proceeding, and then used it in hundreds of Jan. 6 cases.

At least a quarter of the prosecutions included this charge. Most also included other charges, including trespass and unlawful entry. A small number involved serious offenses like violence against officers and an even smaller number involved charges for “seditious conspiracy.” For most cases, the decision may require resentencing. Others with pending charges will go to trial without an obstruction claim. One of those is former President Donald Trump. Special Counsel Jack Smith brought four charges in Washington, D.C.: obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy against rights. The Fischer ruling means that half of the indictment would be dropped. Smith could be compelled to seek a superseding indictment. The loss of the obstruction counts seemed to rip the wings off the plane that Smith has been trying to get off the ground before November.

It was the obstruction theory that held the indictment together — the notion that Trump was directing his followers to stop the certification from occurring by charging the Congress. The court rejected this theory and noted that that the “novel interpretation would criminalize a broad swath of prosaic conduct, exposing activists and lobbyists alike to decades in prison.” Smith has been here before. He was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court in his conviction of Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. Notably, as with today, the court found his theory to be dangerously “boundless.”

[..] Biden has also become the most anti-free speech president since John Adams, including the establishment of a massive censorship system described by one court as “Orwellian.” As I discuss in my new book, the Biden administration has brought together an unprecedented alliance of government, corporate and academic interests to target and silence those with opposing views. These, combined with the weaponization of the legal system and his party’s efforts at ballot cleansing, hardly make Biden look like the defender of democracy to many citizens. For those who have been found guilty under these unlawful charges, it is a bit late to convert the Justice Department’s “shock and awe” into a mere “aw shucks.” It can also seem just awful for many citizens who see the political rage of Jan. 6 replaced by a type of state rage. As a result, Fischer suggests for many that democracy may be on the ballot, but the threat is not exactly what the press and the pundits have suggested.

Read more …

“It’s particularly distressing when contrasted with the eagerness and earnestness with which many of us joined the forum..”

Klaus Schwab Reportedly Facing Sexual Harassment Allegations (Sp.)

Under Klaus Schwab’s decades-long oversight, the World Economic Forum “has allowed to fester an atmosphere” of sexual harassment and discrimination against women and Black people, the World Street Journal has cited numerous sources, including current and former forum employees, as saying. An array of female staffers described sexual harassment they experienced at the hands of senior managers, some of whom remain at the forum, “a tone that was set at the very top of the organization,” according to the WSJ. “Since the Forum’s earliest years, staffers say women received warnings about Schwab: If you find yourself alone with him, he may make uncomfortable comments about your appearance. They describe his behavior as more awkward than menacing, but inappropriate for a leader,” the newspaper pointed out.

Former forum staffer Farid Ben Amor, for his part, told the WSJ, “It was distressing to witness colleagues visibly withdraw from themselves with the onslaught of harassment at the hands of high-level staff, going from social and cheerful to self-isolating, avoiding eye contact, sharing nightmares for years after.” “It’s particularly distressing when contrasted with the eagerness and earnestness with which many of us joined the forum,” Ben Amor added. In separate incidents, white managers reportedly used the N-word around Black employees, who also raised formal complaints to its leaders about being passed over for promotions or left out of Davos. Forum spokesman Yann Zopf has, meanwhile, rejected all the accusations, insisting that the WSJ article purportedly mischaracterizes “our organization, culture and colleagues, including our founder,” who “does not and has never engaged in the vulgar behaviors” the newspaper described.

Read more …

They will have to listen to the victims’ families. There are too many to ignore.

“.. the families oppose the plea deal because it does not include any company executives being prosecuted..”

DOJ to Charge Boeing With Criminal Fraud (Sp.)

The US Department of Justice will indict US aerospace company Boeing on criminal fraud charges over its alleged breach of a 2021 deferred prosecution agreement, a source familiar with the matter told Sputnik.
The source said Sunday that Boeing will face one charge of defrauding the US government regarding the safety of its planes. The Justice Department notified Boeing in May that it was subject to criminal prosecution after it determined the company had breached a 2021 agreement to avoid criminal charges for two fatal 737 MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019. Under the agreement, Boeing paid $2.5 billion in penalties and vowed to improve its safety and compliance protocols. But federal prosecutors recently recommended to senior Justice Department officials that Boeing be prosecuted for failing to improve the safety of its aircraft after a series of mishaps this year, including a door panel that blew off an Alaska Airlines flight shortly after takeoff.

The legal team representing the families of victims of the 737 MAX aircraft crashes was notified of the decision the Justice Department reached to prosecute Boeing, but they do not believe it does enough to hold the company accountable. “The Justice Department is preparing to offer to Boeing another sweetheart plea deal. The deal will not acknowledge, in any way, that Boeing’s crime killed 346 people. It also appears to rest on the idea that Boeing did not harm any victim. The families will strenuously object to this plea deal,” the legal team said in a press release without disclosing details of the expected charge against Boeing. The release added that the families oppose the plea deal because it does not include any company executives being prosecuted and there are also issues with the amount of the fine federal prosecutors intend to ask the court to impose.

Trouble began for the aircraft manufacturer in 2018 when a Boeing 737 MAX plane operated by Lion Air in Indonesia crashed shortly after takeoff, killing all 189 on board. The same model aircraft experienced another catastrophic failure just five months later, when all 157 people on board a flight from Ethiopia were killed under similar circumstances. It was later revealed the two aircraft lacked optional safety features Boeing sold to airlines at a premium, a decision that was sharply criticized.

A series of shocking whistleblower testimonies have offered troubling details about the company’s safety practices, including reports of employee drug use and allegations that contractors use substandard parts and ignore manufacturing defects. One former employee claimed he was pressured to overlook hundreds of production faults in order to ensure that Boeing supplier Spirit AeroSystems continued to meet its quotas. Whistleblower Santiago Paredes claimed he was demoted and moved to a different part of the factory after reporting numerous concerns. Two Boeing whistleblowers, Joshua Dean and John Barnett, suddenly died shortly after going public with their concerns.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Neuralink 1st patient

 

 

Cow pool

 

 

Fibonacci

 

 

Bowie Ricky
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807092337610240080

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jun 302024
 
 June 30, 2024  Posted by at 8:54 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  66 Responses »


René Magritte Empire of light 1950

 

Imagine a Missile Massacre On a Florida Beach On the Fourth of July (SCF)
Biden Should Be Removed As President – US House Speaker (RT)
Trump the Peacemaker? His Presidency Might Help End The War In Ukraine (RT)
US and NATO Accomplices Play Terror Card Against Russia (Van den Ende)
‘She Eats Russians For Breakfast’ (RT)
EU Bureaucrats ‘Want War With Russia’ – Orban (RT)
Ursula von der Leyen: Beyond Redemption (NC)
Why Does Türkiye Want to Join BRICS? (RT)
The Art of Being Eternally Shocked (Turley)
Trump Sentencing Will Put Merchan’s Bias in Crosshairs (RCP)
Iran Threatens Israel With ‘Obliterating War’ If It Attacks Lebanon (ZH)
Over 80 UK War Planes Deployed From Cyprus To Lebanon Since 7 Oct (Cradle)
Chevron and Bitcoin (Crossman)
Banksy ‘Launches’ Migrant Boat Stunt At Glastonbury Festival (MN)

 

 

 

 

Debate Eagle
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807076748946723280

 

 

Tucker

 

 

Decline
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807019531656638865

 

 

Don’t

 

 

McAfee 2020 (!)


https://twitter.com/i/status/1806945470566056163

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Washington is unhinged and depraved. A collection of psychopaths as are its minions in Brussels and other NATO capitals.”

Imagine a Missile Massacre On a Florida Beach On the Fourth of July (SCF)

The scenario is not hyperbole. Imagine a sunny beach in Florida crowded with families enjoying a holiday weekend. In a split second, mayhem and murder are unleashed as crowds flee in panic from a foreign missile exploding over the beach. There is no doubt that the United States would go to war immediately against the perpetrator. Furious condemnations would ring out for days, weeks, and months among American politicians and their media. But what is also obvious from this hypothetical scenario is the egregious double standard and hypocrisy of American and Western responses. Last weekend, Russia was celebrating its annual Day of Remembrance and Sorrow. The day honors the dead of the Great Patriotic War instigated by Nazi Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941. That weekend also combines Trinity Sunday, a prominent religious holiday in the Orthodox calendar.

As Russian families were enjoying the festive weekend, the Kiev regime fired five U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles at the Crimean city of Sevastopol. It was a deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure. Four missiles were shot down by Russian air defenses, but a fifth exploded over a nearby beach, where hundreds of people were enjoying sun-splashed sand and the gentle lapping of waves. In the ensuing horror, four people including two children were killed. Over 150 were injured, dozens of them seriously, from the explosions caused by cluster bomblets released by the missile. Video footage clearly shows explosions and not merely ordnance shrapnel falling from the sky. This was an act of state-sponsored terrorism against civilians. The United States and its NATO partners bear responsibility for the massacre.

Only a week before the attack, U.S. President Joe Biden and other NATO leaders had signed off on supplying the Kiev regime with long-range (300 km) ATACMS weapons and a green light to use these missiles on Russian territory. Arguably, too, the atrocity was an unpardonable act of war against Russia. As the foreign ministry in Moscow noted, the U.S.-led NATO proxy war in Ukraine has become a direct war against Russia. The situation has entered a most dangerous moment. The Kremlin has warned that retaliation is coming. There is no question that under international law, the Russian Federation has every right to respond to murderous aggression. It only remains to be seen what the form of retaliation will be. It is doubtful that Russia would take revenge on innocent American civilians. The Russian leadership and its people are far too moral and strategically intelligent to countenance such barbarity.

The scenario of bombing a beach in Florida is invoked to demonstrate the heinous reality of what occurred in Crimea last weekend. And it also demonstrates the rank moral bankruptcy of American and European leaders. Only days before the missile attack on Crimea, the American Senate introduced a bill to declare Russia a “state sponsor of terrorism”. The bill was a hysterical reaction to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s state visit to North Korea and the signing of a mutual defense pact with Chairman Kim Jong Un. The irony of the U.S. reaction in light of the subsequent attack on Crimea is not merely bitter. Washington is unhinged and depraved. A collection of psychopaths as are its minions in Brussels and other NATO capitals.

Read more …

“We have a serious problem here, because we have a president who, by all appearances, is not up to the task..”

Biden Should Be Removed As President – US House Speaker (RT)

Joe Biden should be replaced as US president, having shown he is “not up to the task” during his debate with Donald Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson has said. The US president’s performance in his first election face-off with Trump on Thursday was widely viewed as a disaster. The 81-year-old appeared frail and confused, struggling to finish his sentences and mixing up words. According to media reports, Democrats were “panicking” after the debate, and some donors have demanded that the president be dropped from the party’s ticket for the November 5 election. “I would be panicking too if I were a Democrat today and that was my nominee. I think they know they have a serious problem,” Johnson told journalists on Thursday. The Republican politician argued that Biden should not only withdraw from the race, but also be immediately removed from office.

“It’s not just political. It’s not just the Democratic Party. It’s the entire country. We have a serious problem here, because we have a president who, by all appearances, is not up to the task,” he said. Johnson said Biden’s administration could force him to step down by invoking the 25th Amendment – which states that the vice president and cabinet members can vote to declare the president “unable to discharge the powers and the duties of his office,” making the VP the acting head of state. If the commander-in-chief refuses to comply, the final decision on the issue would be made by Congress. The amendment has never been used in US history. “There are a lot of people asking about the 25th Amendment, invoking the 25th Amendment right now because this is an alarming situation,” the House speaker stressed.

Due to Biden’s mental condition, “our adversaries see the weakness in this White House as we all do. I take no pleasure in saying that.” “I think this is a very dangerous situation… And it needs to be regarded and handled as such. And we hope that they will do their duty, as we all seek to do our duty to do best for the American people,” Johnson stated. “I would ask the Cabinet members to search their hearts.” The results of a poll by Morning Consult, published by the news website Axios on Friday, suggested that 60% of the voters believe Biden should “definitely” or “probably” be replaced as the Democratic presidential nominee following his disappointing performance in the debate.

Read more …

“.. the plan threatens Ukraine with certain defeat, regime, and, possibly, even state disintegration; it threatens Moscow with a harder time – a type of threat that has no record of success.”

Trump the Peacemaker? His Presidency Might Help End The War In Ukraine (RT)

The likely next president of the US, Donald Trump, has signaled that he has a plan for bringing the war in Ukraine to an end. Or, at least, two of his advisers have such a plan. More importantly, they have submitted it to Trump. And most importantly, they have said that he has responded positively. As one of the plan’s authors has put it, “I’m not claiming he agreed with it or agreed with every word of it, but we were pleased to get the feedback we did.” It is true that Trump has also let it be known that he is not officially endorsing the plan. However, it is obvious that this is a trial balloon which has been launched with his approval. Otherwise, we would have either not have heard about it or it would have been disavowed.

The two Trump advisers are Keith Kellogg, a retired lieutenant general, and Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst. Both held significant positions on national security matters during Trump’s presidency. Currently, both play important roles at the Center for American Security: Kellogg serves as co-chair and Fleitz as vice chair. Both, finally, are clear about their belief in what is perhaps Trump’s single most defining foreign policy concept: America First. Fleitz recently published an article asserting that “only America First can reverse the global chaos caused by the Biden administration.” For Kellogg, the “America First approach is key to national security.” The Center for American Security, finally, is part of the America First Policy Institute, an influential think tank founded in 2022 by key Trump administration veterans to prepare policies for his comeback.

Clearly, this is a peace plan that has not come out of nowhere. On the contrary, it has not merely been submitted to Trump to receive his – unofficial – nod, it has also emerged from within Trumpism as a resurgent political force. In addition, as Reuters has pointed out, it is also the most elaborate plan yet from the Trump camp on how to get to peace in Ukraine. In effect, this is the first time that Trump’s promise to rapidly end this war, once he is back in the White House, has been fleshed out in detail. The adoption of the plan or any similar policy would obviously mark a massive change in US policy. Hence, this is something that deserves close attention.

What does the plan foresee? In essence, it is built on a simple premise: to use Washington’s leverage over Ukraine to force the country to accept a peace that will come with concessions, territorial and otherwise. In the words of Keith Kellogg, “We tell the Ukrainians, ‘You’ve got to come to the table, and if you don’t come to the table, support from the United States will dry up’.” Since Kiev is vitally dependent on American assistance, it is hard to see how it could resist such pressure. Perhaps to give an appearance of “balance” for the many Republicans still hawkish on Russia, the plan also includes a threat addressed to Moscow: “And you tell Putin,” again in Kellogg’s terms, “he’s got to come to the table and if you don’t come to the table, then we’ll give Ukrainians everything they need to kill you in the field.”

Yet it is obvious that, despite the tough rhetoric about Russia, the plan will cause great anxiety in Kiev, not Moscow, for two reasons. First, the threats addressed to Russia and Ukraine are not comparable: If the US were to withdraw its support from Ukraine, Kiev’s Zelensky regime would quickly not just lose the war but collapse. If the US were to, instead, increase its support for the Zelensky regime, then Moscow would respond by mobilizing additional resources, as it has done before. It might also, in that case, receive direct military assistance from China, which would not stand by and watch a potential Russian defeat unfold, because that would leave Beijing alone with an aggressive, emboldened West. In addition, Washington would, of course, have to weigh the risk of Russia engaging in counter-escalation. In sum, the plan threatens Ukraine with certain defeat, regime, and, possibly, even state disintegration; it threatens Moscow with a harder time – a type of threat that has no record of success.

The second reason the plan is bad news for Ukraine but not for Russia is that the peace it aims at is much closer to Moscow’s war aims than to those of Kiev. While the document that has been submitted to Trump has not been made public, American commentators believe that a paper published on the site of the Center for American Security under the title “America First, Russia, & Ukraine” is similar to what he – or his staff – got to see. Also authored by Kellogg and Fleitz, this paper, too, repeatedly stresses just how “tough” Trump used to be toward Russia. Plenty of strutting there for those who like that kind of stuff. These statements, however, are balanced by an emphasis on what used to be called diplomacy: “At the same time,” we read, “Trump was open to cooperation with Russia and dialogue with Putin. Trump expressed respect for Putin as a world leader and did not demonize him in public statements … This was a transactional approach to US-Russia relations … to find ways to coexist and lower tensions … while standing firm on American security interests.”

Read more …

“..making no differentiation between conservatives and liberals, social democrats or Republicans and Democrats. All belong to the de facto Western War Party serving U.S.-led Western imperialism.”

US and NATO Accomplices Play Terror Card Against Russia (Van den Ende)

Recently, two U.S. senators, Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal, introduced a bill to designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. “We will push for a vote, and the best thing we can do, I think, to shape the future is to label Putin as a terrorist leader, because that’s what he is,” said Graham. Graham can be compared to a (rather stupid) criminal cowboy. There are many senators with the same criminal mentality in the U.S. government. Graham is Republican, Blumenthal is a Democrat. It doesn’t matter who rules the U.S., both political parties are on the warpath and both are under the influence of the U.S. deep state (lobbies like the arms industry, military complex, etc.). Elections are a farce, just like in Europe. The U.S. together with its partners in the European Union and NATO, have instigated and prolonged all kinds of illegal wars for many years, with the reckless supply of weapons and money.

Recent wars include Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and the bombing of Libya into the stone age, and now it is Russia’s turn. Since the start of the Special Military Operation in Ukraine in February 2022 (even before that going back to 2014), Russia has been the target of the entire West. European leaders have recently become even more radical than Uncle Sam and are using threatening war language – rabid rhetoric we have not heard since the Second World War. Now that Ukraine cannot win on the battlefield, the U.S. and the West are turning to other means, as they always do, namely terrorism. We see a pattern here over several decades. The worst manifestation perhaps were the bloody wars that culminated in terrorism in Syria and Iraq, where the U.S. and EU/NATO sponsored and still sponsor terrorism. ISIS or Daesh was created by the U.S. The deceased senator (a Republican) John McCain was one of the godfathers of ISIS, whose murderers were trained at the U.S. Camp Bucca in Iraq.

The same John McCain was in Kiev during the unfolding Maidan coup in December 2013 and told thousands of NeoNazi chanting demonstrators that Americans support their resistance to closer ties with Russia. The coup was executed in February 2014. Other senators and government officials from the U.S. and Europe were also present for the Kiev coup, such as Chris Murphy and Victoria Nuland from the U.S. From Europe, the Dutchman Hans van Baalen, the former Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstad (now EU MEP) and other EU delegates were present and supported the neo-Nazi groups wreaking violence on the Maidan square, killing police officers and sacking public buildings. I must emphasize that the Western coup backers were from all kinds of political parties in the EU and the U.S., making no differentiation between conservatives and liberals, social democrats or Republicans and Democrats. All belong to the de facto Western War Party serving U.S.-led Western imperialism.

Victoria Nuland (now retired from the CIA-riddled U.S. State Department) followed in the footsteps of John McCain and emerged as the greatest Russia hater in the U.S. It was she who threatened Russian President Vladimir Putin with “nasty surprises” only weeks before the terrorist attack in March this year on the Crocus City Hall shopping-theater complex just outside Moscow where 144 people were killed by a team of gunmen. The embassies (U.S. and EU) issued warnings for their fellow countrymen not to go to events or busy places in the near future, so they knew something was coming – because they planned it themselves.

Nuland has spoken vulgarly over the years. We all know her “fuck the EU” comment. But at her so-called farewell speech in February this year, she literally said: “The war in Ukraine is not to help Ukraine, but to thwart Russia.” Also revealing was Nuland’s explanation of the background of the war. Nothing about saving Ukraine, but all about her aversion to Russia. “We wanted a partner that was focused on the West, that wanted to be European. But that was not what Putin brought,” she said. So, in other words, Putin has to go and Russia needs a regime change that is pro-West, in other words a puppet regime.

Read more …

So we make her our top ‘diplomat’?!

‘She Eats Russians For Breakfast’ (RT)

Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas has been nominated by the leaders of EU member states to become the next high representative for security and foreign policy. The politician – selected to speak for Brussels internationally and balance conflicting interests in the EU – has a reputation as an uncompromising hawk on Russia. Before beginning a five-year term, Kallas will need approval from the European Parliament, whose members are expected to vote on her appointment in July, a step widely seen as a formality. The 47-year-old’s attitude towards Moscow was summed up by an unnamed EU official, explaining why Western European nations were resisting her candidacy for another top job – the secretary general of NATO. “Are we really putting someone who likes to eat Russians for breakfast in this position?” the source told Politico in March. Kallas reacted by posting a picture of her breakfast, consisting of blueberries, muesli, a dairy product, and a drink.

Kallas has embraced the idea that at some point NATO countries may have to deploy troops in Ukraine to prevent Moscow from defeating Kiev, first put forward by French President Emmanuel Macron in February. “We shouldn’t be afraid of our own power. Russia is saying this or that step is escalation, but defense is not escalation,” the Estonian politician said of the proposal. Macron’s stated goal in voicing the idea publicly was to leave Russian President Vladimir Putin guessing as to how far the US-led military bloc might go in supporting Ukraine. After multiple member states, including the US, ruled out sending their soldiers to fight for Kiev, the suggestion was downgraded to a military training mission in Western Ukraine. Kallas has backed the new plan, saying it does not amount to an escalation – because a potential attack on the instructors would not trigger a mandatory joint NATO response. “If you send your people to help Ukrainians … you know the country is at war and you go to a risk zone. So you take the risk,” she explained in May.

According to Kallas, there should be no “Plan B” for Ukraine, because contemplating it would amount to undermining the primary goal of helping Ukraine prevail in the conflict. ”Victory in Ukraine is not just about territory,” she told the BBC in early June. “If Ukraine joins NATO, even without some territory, then that’s a victory because it will be placed under the NATO umbrella.” The Estonian politician believes the optimal scenario of a defeat for Russia would result in the country’s dissolution. Russia is composed of “many different nations” that could become independent, and “it is not a bad thing if the big power is actually [made] much smaller,” she argued last year. The Estonian daily Postimees argued earlier this month that leaving domestic politics behind may be the best thing the prime minister can do for her country. The Baltic nation is enduring a recession and severe budget deficit, and Kallas’ coalition government is unable to find common ground on tackling the problems, the editorial argued.

“She has earned the reputation of a strong voice of the eastern part of the EU and a convincing supporter of Ukrainian victory,” the newspaper said. “It’s all good, but the citizens of Estonia did not elect her based on her international image”. Her looming appointment has “paralyzed the government,” as the coalition is unable to function while everyone waits for Kallas to quit, Postimees said. Kallas is a vocal proponent of cutting all business ties with Russia as part of the Western response to the Ukraine conflict. However, last year Estonian media revealed that her Husband Arvo Hallik held a 25% stake in a logistics company that provides services in Russia. She has denied any wrongdoing and rejected calls to step down over the scandal, which she claimed to be a politically motivated hatchet job. But her reputation was severely damaged, at home and internationally. “This is hypocrisy in a cube,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said at the time. He was referring to Kallas’ criticisms of Budapest, which views the EU decision to decouple from the Russian economy as self-harming, while having no impact on the hostilities.

Read more …

“Orban also accused the EU leadership of “imposing their own ideologies” on the populations of member states, instead of “looking after the interests of the people.”

EU Bureaucrats ‘Want War With Russia’ – Orban (RT)

The EU leadership is pushing the bloc towards war with Russia, while neglecting the interests of their own people, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has claimed. In an op-ed published in the Magyar Nemzet newspaper on Saturday, Orban warned that the EU is facing a series of crises, including economic challenges and the heightened threat of terrorism. “To make matters worse, the Brussels bureaucracy that lives in a bubble has made a number of bad political decisions in recent years,” the prime minister argued. “Europe is increasingly being dragged into a war, in which it has nothing to gain and everything to lose.” “The bureaucrats in Brussels want this war. They see it as their own, and they want to defeat Russia. They keep sending the money of the European people to Ukraine. They have shot European companies in their feet with sanctions. They have driven up inflation and they have made making a living difficult for millions of European citizens.

The Brussels bureaucrats want this war, they see it as their own, and they want to defeat Russia. They keep sending the money of the European people to Ukraine, they have shot European companies in the foot with sanctions, they have driven up inflation and they have made making a living difficult for millions of European citizens. Orban also accused the EU leadership of “imposing their own ideologies” on the populations of member states, instead of “looking after the interests of the people.” The Hungarian prime minister made his comments shortly after EU leaders nominated Ursula von der Leyen to serve for a third term as the president of the European Commission. At the same time, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas was nominated to replace Josep Borrell as the bloc’s top diplomat. Known for her hawkish foreign policy, Kallas has been one of the key champions of tougher sanctions on Russia and more weapons shipments to Ukraine.

She is also an advocate of using frozen Russian assets for aid to Ukraine. Orban is an outspoken critic of the EU’s approach to the Ukraine conflict, favoring a diplomatic settlement through negotiations as opposed to more escalation. Unlike many other NATO members, Hungary has refused to send weapons to Kiev and lobbied against unconditional financial assistance. Orban previously claimed the US and the EU were “the sources” of the “war madness” sweeping the continent, and accused Brussels of dangerous brinkmanship with Russia.

Read more …

Europe has all these women compensating for a lack of testicles.

Ursula von der Leyen: Beyond Redemption (NC)

To be accused of impropriety on one occasion may be regarded as a misfortune but to be accused on four occasions looks like carelessness. (With apologies to Oscar Wilde) If there is one individual who, more than anyone else, symbolises the ineptitude of the European Commission then it is surely the Commission’s president, Ursula von der Leyen (hereafter, VDL). Questions about VDL’s lack of probity first surfaced in 2015 when she was accused of plagiarising her doctoral dissertation. She was eventually cleared of the accusations but as the BBC reported on 9 March 2016, the president of the Hannover Medical School, Christopher Baum, conceded that “Ms von der Leyen’s thesis did contain plagiarised material”, but he added “there had been no intent to deceive”. Her first lucky escape.

VDL’s lack of probity continued while she served as Germany’s Minister of Defence between 2013 and 2019. During her tenure at the ministry, she became embroiled in a scandal regarding payments of €250 million to consultants related to arms contracts. Germany’s Federal Audit Office found that, of the €250 million declared for consultancy fees, only €5.1 million had been spent. Furthermore, one of the consultants was McKinsey & Company, where VDL’s son was an associate, thus raising a possible conflict of interest. It also emerged that messages related to the contracts had been deleted from two of VDL’s mobile phones. Although she was eventually cleared of corruption allegations, questions over her probity during that period remain to this day.

Having survived two scandals, VDL couldn’t believe her luck when in July 2019 Macron, together with Merkel, bypassed the Spitzenkadidaten process and nominated her as Jean-Claude Junker’s successor as head of the European Commission. The Spitzenkadidaten process, through which the lead candidate emerges and is then ratified by the European Parliament, is itself somewhat arcane. In VDL’s case, she was fortunate that the EU couldn’t agree on either of the two lead candidates at the time, Martin Weber and Frans Timmermans. It was thus left to the consummate fixer, Macron, and VDL’s mentor, Merkel, to come to an agreement using that great democratic and transparent tool called the ‘backroom deal’. VDL’s nomination was accepted by the European Council and on 16 July the European Parliament voted to accept her appointment. But it was a close vote. Out of a total of 747 MEPs, only 383 voted for her, 327 voted against, 22 abstained, and one vote was invalid. Under the EU rules, the president of the Commission must be elected with more than 50% of the MEP votes. Thus, she received only 9 votes more than the threshold. Compare this to her predecessor, Juncker, who in 2014 received 422 votes.

After she was appointed president of the European Commission, VDL again became embroiled in controversy, this time involving the procurement of the Covid-19 vaccine from Pfizer. The scandal, which the media dubbed Pfizergate, related to the purchase of 1.8 billion doses of the Pfizer vaccine for use across the EU. It transpired that: a) the number of doses was far greater than was required, resulting in a significant number having to be either destroyed or donated; b) the excess doses cost the EU €4 billion; c) the total value of the contract, which Politico reported as being approximately €20 billion, was inflated; and d) the most damaging charge, the contract for the vaccines was negotiated directly between VDL and Albert Bourla, the CEO of Pfizer. The negotiations were conducted using sms messages, which VDL later claimed to have deleted.

The New York Times, which initially carried out the investigation into Pfizergate, brought a lawsuit against the European Commission for failing to provide access to the sms conversations between VDL and Bourla. In Belgium, a lobbyist, Frederic Baldan, filed a criminal complaint citing corruption and the destruction of documents. The Belgian lawsuit was eventually taken over by the European Public Prosecutors Office, which opened a criminal investigation. The outcome of these legal proceedings/investigations is still pending.

Read more …

“BRICS countries are home to 45.2% of the world’s population, compared to just 9.7% in the G7..”

“Data on oil reserves show that BRICS countries now hold 45.8% of global volumes, while the G7 holds only 3.7%..”

Why Does Türkiye Want to Join BRICS? (RT)

At the beginning of this month, news of Türkiye’s desire to join BRICS drew global media attention. The announcement was made by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan during his visit to China. “Of course, we would like to become a member of BRICS. Let’s see what we can achieve this year,” said the minister, as quoted by the South China Morning Post. This issue was also discussed at the BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting in Nizhny Novgorod, attended by Türkiye’s chief diplomat, Hakan Fidan. Türkiye’s desire to join is not entirely new – during the BRICS summit of 2018, where Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan was a participant, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Ankara could join in 2022. However, subsequent events on the world stage apparently delayed that ambition, and Ankara is only now showing renewed interest.

[..] With the confrontation between the countries of the global majority and the West growing, BRICS is considered to be emerging as an alternative to the G7. This is determined by several key reasons related to economic, political, and social aspects. The G7, comprising leading economically developed countries – the US, Canada, the UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan – has traditionally dominated the international arena, shaping the global economic and political agenda. However, the emergence and development of BRICS have changed this balance, offering an alternative view on global governance and cooperation. BRICS unites the largest developing economies in the world, which together account for a significant share of global GDP and population. Collectively, BRICS countries possess vast resources and potential for economic growth, making them important players on the global stage.

To provide a clearer understanding, let’s compare some indicators. With its five new members, BRICS now accounts for almost 34% of the world’s land area, while the G7 accounts for 16%. BRICS countries are home to 45.2% of the world’s population, compared to just 9.7% in the G7. The combined GDP based on purchasing power parity in BRICS countries is 36.7% of the global total as of 2024, compared to 29.6% for the G7. Data on oil reserves show that BRICS countries now hold 45.8% of global volumes, while the G7 holds only 3.7%. Thus, in many respects, BRICS surpasses the G7. The economic power of BRICS allows these countries to propose alternative models of development and economic cooperation, differing from the Western approaches represented by the G7.

Due to international contradictions and the destructive hegemony of Western countries led by Washington, questions about the need to transform the world order are actively arising. BRICS advocates for a multipolar world, where the balance of power is more evenly distributed among various regions and countries. While the G7 represents the interests of economically developed Western powers, BRICS focuses on the issues and interests of developing nations, which are often marginalized in global politics. This makes BRICS an important platform for countries seeking greater autonomy and independence from Western influence. Moreover, the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) demonstrates the BRICS countries’ desire to establish alternative financial institutions capable of competing with traditional Western institutions, particularly the IMF and the World Bank.

[..] Türkiye shows significant interest in joining BRICS, seeing it as an important step toward enhancing its international influence and economic potential. This aspiration is driven by several key factors related to economic, political, and geostrategic aspects. Possessing one of the largest economies in the region, Türkiye aims to diversify its economic ties and strengthen cooperation with rapidly developing countries. Joining BRICS would give Ankara access to a vast market and opportunities to increase trade and investment with the leading economies of the developing world. This is especially important in the context of global economic challenges and uncertainties, where diversifying partners becomes a key factor for sustainable growth.

Türkiye has repeatedly faced financial difficulties and restrictions imposed by Western financial institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank. Joining BRICS would provide Türkiye with access to the New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement, allowing it to secure funding on more favorable terms and with fewer political commitments. This is particularly relevant for Türkiye, which seeks to maintain its economic independence and minimize external pressure.

Read more …

“Suddenly, it is not a cheap fake but reality.”

The Art of Being Eternally Shocked (Turley)

No one would think of the Beltway as being a place of the naive innocents of our society. Washington is the only ecosystem composed entirely of apex predators. Yet, this week everyone seems to be eternally shocked by what has been obvious for years. The press and pundits are coming off an embarrassing couple of weeks where the Hunter Biden laptop was authenticated in federal court as real. This occurred in the trial of the president’s son almost on the anniversary of a debunked letter of intelligence officials claiming that the laptop appeared to be Russian disinformation. Biden then repeated the claim in the last presidential debates to avoid answering questions over the massive influence peddling scheme of this family revealed by the laptop. After the story was suppressed before the 2020 election, it took years for the media to admit that, oops, the laptop is surprisingly real.

For years, the press and pundits piled on experts who suggested that Covid 19 escaped from a Chinese lab. The New York Times reporter covering the area called it “racist” and implausible. Now, even W.H.O. accepts the lab theory as possible and federal agencies now believe it is the most likely explanation. The response: surprise and spin. This week, the Supreme Court ruled that the Justice Department has unlawfully charged hundreds of people with obstruction of an official proceeding after the January 6th riot. For years, objections to the excessive treatment of these cases were dismissed as the view of the radical right. Now, even Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson voted to toss out these convictions. Surprise. Whether it was the false story about agents whipping migrants in Texas or the photo op claim in Lafayette Park, false stories were disproven only to have a collective shrug from those who spread them.

For years, the press and pundits have repeated like gospel that Trump had called neo-Nazis “fine people.” At the time, most of us noted that Trump condemned the racists and neo-Nazis and made the statement about fine people on both sides of the controversy over the removal of historic statues. Six years later, Snopes finally decided to do a fact check and, surprise, found that Trump never praised neo-Nazis as fine people. The only person not surprised was Biden who repeated the false story on Friday as true. Heading into the presidential debate, the White House and the media attacked Fox News and other outlets for “cheap fake” videos designed to make the President look confused and feeble. For months, politicians and pundits have insisted that Biden is sharp and commanding in conversations even after Special Counsel Robert Hur cited his decline as a reason for not charging him criminally for the unlawful retention and mishandling of classified material.

On MSNBC, Joe Scarborough stated “start your tape right now because I’m about to tell you the truth. And F— you if you can’t handle the truth. This version of Biden intellectually, analytically, is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I have known him for years…If it weren’t the truth I wouldn’t say it.” Then the presidential debate happened and, after years of being protected by staff, tens of millions of people watched the president struggle to stay focused and responsive. After the debate, there was total surprise, if not shock, on CNN and MSNBC. Suddenly, it is not a cheap fake but reality.

Read more …

“Given the multitude of errors at trial and the pending election, it is a near certainty that his request for a stay will be granted.”

“..federal statutes generally require that the highest court in a state rule before the Supreme Court intervenes..”

Trump Sentencing Will Put Merchan’s Bias in Crosshairs (RCP)

On July 11, acting New York Judge Juan Merchan will sentence former President Donald Trump. Trump was convicted in a New York State court in Manhattan on a novel theory and on facts never before used to secure a conviction in New York. Disregarding at least a dozen reasons his conviction should be reversed, because Trump was convicted of falsifying records with the intent to commit a second crime – illegally interfering in the 2016 presidential election – the falsification was upgraded to a class E felony, comprising 34 counts, one for each entry. The maximum penalty is four years in jail on each count, not to exceed a total of 20 years. New York defendants sentenced to less than a year are usually jailed in notorious Rikers Island, known for its overcrowding, drug problems, and violence. The New York City Council voted to close the facility by 2026. New York Post photos from just a few years ago show the awful conditions there.

For sentences of a year or longer, Trump could be remanded to one of 41 state prisons for men, though most likely to one of the three minimum security facilities. It seems highly unlikely that the U.S. Secret Service would permit Trump to be held in a New York prison. While space might be made available in a federal prison, or a building converted for exclusive use by Trump, it is more likely that he would serve any sentence in home confinement, wearing an ankle monitor. Alternatives to incarceration include probation for up to 10 years, unconditional discharge, or discharge, without probation, conditioned on not committing a further crime during the following three years, and a fine of up to $5,000. Merchan could order that confinement be limited to weekends or nights, and could permit exceptions for political or business activities. He also could split the sentence, for example, requiring 30 days of home confinement followed by conditional discharge.

Even if Trump is conditionally discharged or given probation but is later convicted of another crime, he could be remanded to prison. In setting the sentence, Merchan will consider a mandatory Pre-Sentence Report and the nature of the crime in addition to Trump’s background, age, and health. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg follows a policy of not recommending incarceration for those convicted of non-violent class E felonies. During the trial, Merchan observed that he sees incarceration as a “last resort.”Trump’s indictment for numerous other crimes and his frequent violations of Merchan’s gag order will make unconditional release less likely. However, Trump’s evaluation also will suffer because of recent verdicts that he is liable for civil fraud and defamation, and for presumably refusing to accept guilt during the pre-sentence interview.

If Merchan properly considers the nature of the offense, that similar offenses have not been prosecuted in New York, the “false records” were internal Trump accounts, there was no monetary loss, and the so-called effort to interfere in the 2016 election failed in New York (where Clinton overwhelmingly won), and Trump has no prior record, there should be no jail time or home confinement.However, if Merchan approaches sentencing with the same antagonism to Trump’s rights he brought to the trial, he can be expected to cite a fraud on the national electorate to justify at least a brief period of home confinement. Even then, it would be shocking if Merchan did not stay the sentence until after the election, pending Trump’s appeal. Trump likely will appeal to New York’s intermediate appeals court and will seek to have any sentence stayed pending the outcome of the appeal. Given the multitude of errors at trial and the pending election, it is a near certainty that his request for a stay will be granted.

Trump could also bring an action in federal district court asserting that Bragg and Merchan lacked jurisdiction to accuse him of interfering in a federal election, and he was not given adequate notice of the alleged crimes. It is unlikely a federal judge would get involved prior to a state appeals court. Trump could seek intervention from the U.S. Supreme Court, but federal statutes generally require that the highest court in a state rule before the Supreme Court intervenes. In the end, it seems likely that Trump’s conviction will be overturned. Whether the sentence is harsh or a slap on the wrist, the entire process has been a political prosecution intended to keep Trump off the campaign trail and give Biden the talking point that Trump is a convicted felon. That flagrant abuse of due process is not how our justice or electoral systems are supposed to work.

Read more …

“Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah has told Israel and its allies that a war with no limits will ensue if Israel attempts to invade southern Lebanon..”

Iran Threatens Israel With ‘Obliterating War’ If It Attacks Lebanon (ZH)

Iran’s mission to the United Nations has put Israel and the world on notice, saying that if Israel launches an all-out war against Hezbollah in Lebanon the whole region will burn. A Friday statement from Iran’s ambassador warned the UN that any “full-scale military aggression” in Lebanon against Hezbollah will mean that “an obliterating war will ensue.” The Iranian statement continued by emphasizing that “all options, including the full involvement of all resistance fronts, are on the table” in a statement posted to X. By “resistance fronts” Tehran means the militias it supports in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen will also ramp up their military activities. On a few occasions, Iraqi Shia militias have launched missiles and drones against southern Israel, as have the Houthis, with limited effect.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has acknowledged this week that a “seven front war” could open up, in reference to all of Iran’s proxies across the region. For years already, Israeli jets have been regularly attacking ‘Iranian assets’ inside Damascus, also in a continued effort to weaken Assad, despite the presence of Russia’s military primarily in the northwest coastal region. Israel has meanwhile continued to pound Hezbollah positions in south Lebanon, amid continued fears of a bigger war at any moment. The US has even sent amphibious military ships closer to Israel and Lebanon in the Eastern Mediterranean to be ready to evacuate Americans if a bigger conflict ensues.

The Israeli Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper wrote Saturday, “In the past few hours, warplanes attacked several Hezbollah targets, including a military site for the organisation in the Zabqin area, two operational infrastructure sites in the Khiam area, and a Hezbollah building in the al-Adissa [Odaisseh] area.” Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah has told Israel and its allies that a war with no limits will ensue if Israel attempts to invade southern Lebanon. Some Israeli officials fear that the IDF could be stretched too thin if this happens, considering it’s still in the thick of anti-Hamas Gaza operations in the south. Most analysts agree that Hezbollah is far more capable a paramilitary and guerilla force than Hamas, or any other Iran-linked group in the region for that matter. In the 2006 Lebanon war, there were reports that IRGC operatives were on the ground in Lebanon assisting Hezbollah.

Read more …

“..the Cypriot government has become part of the war and the resistance [Hezbollah] will deal with it as part of the war..”

Over 80 UK War Planes Deployed From Cyprus To Lebanon Since 7 Oct (Cradle)

The UK has sent over 80 military transport planes to the Lebanese capital of Beirut since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza nine months ago, Declassified UK reported on 28 June. All the flights have gone from the UK’s massive Akrotiri airbase on the nearby island of Cyprus, long a staging post for UK bombing missions in West Asia. Declassified UK notes that the number of UK military flights to Beirut has risen dramatically in recent months. The group tracked 25 flights in April and May and 14 so far in June. Flights from the UK base take around 45 minutes to reach Beirut, which Israel has increasingly threatened to bomb in a possible full-scale war with the Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah. The Ministry of Defense declined to disclose the number of UK military flights to Lebanon since the start of the war on 7 October or their purpose. A defense source told Declassified UK that the flights “have been primarily for the purpose of facilitating senior military engagement” with the Lebanese army.

But it is widely assumed the planes are carrying weapons to Beirut to arm anti-Hezbollah militias. The US, UK, and Israel would presumably use these militias to attack Hezbollah from within the country in the case of an Israeli invasion from the south. Declassified UK notes that nearly every Royal Air Force flight to Lebanon has been the Voyager KC mark 2, which can carry a payload of 45 tons and 291 personnel or provide air-to-air refueling. Another flight involved a vast C-17 cargo plane. Israeli threats to invade Lebanon have accelerated in tandem with the increase in flights. Israeli military leaders have increasingly warned of a Lebanon campaign to push Hezbollah away from the border and past the Litani River. Last week, the Israeli army approved “operational plans for an offensive in Lebanon,” and the US pledged to support Israel with weapons if a full-scale war breaks out.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah warned the resistance movement will use its massive rocket and missile arsenal to hit targets across Israel in a “total war” if Tel Aviv decides to launch an invasion. Nasrallah also threatened Cyprus, noting its role as a US, UK, and Israeli staging ground. “The Cypriot government must be warned that opening Cypriot airports and bases for the Israeli enemy to target Lebanon means that the Cypriot government has become part of the war and the resistance [Hezbollah] will deal with it as part of the war,” he said. Nasrallah’s threat appeared to include the Akrotiri base, which lies in territory retained by the UK when Cyprus gained independence in 1960. The territory now hosts vast military and intelligence hubs for Britain and the US, Declassified UK notes.

Read more …

“With the Chevron doctrine overturned, any future regulatory attempts to impose such burdens will require explicit and unambiguous congressional authorization..”

Chevron and Bitcoin (Crossman)

Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, delivered a decisive opinion that dismantles Chevron deference. The Court held that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires courts to exercise independent judgment when interpreting statutes, rejecting the notion that ambiguities in law should default to agency interpretations. “Chevron defies the command of the APA that ‘the reviewing court’—not the agency whose action it reviews—is to ‘decide all relevant questions of law’ and ‘interpret . . . statutory provisions,’” Roberts wrote. “It requires a court to ignore, not follow, ‘the reading the court would have reached’ had it exercised its independent judgment. … Chevron cannot be reconciled with the APA… .” Slip Op., at 21 (emphasis added).

The ruling emphasizes that statutory ambiguities do not automatically delegate interpretive authority to agencies. Instead, courts must use traditional tools of statutory construction to determine the best reading of a statute, ensuring that agencies do not exceed their conferred powers. The implications of this ruling extend far beyond administrative law, reaching into the heart of the Bitcoin mining industry. Much like the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. EPA, which curbed the Environmental Protection Agency’s overreach, this ruling reinforces the need for clear congressional authorization before agencies can impose significant regulatory burdens. For the Bitcoin mining industry, this decision is a clear win. Regulatory uncertainty has long been a thorn in the side of Bitcoin miners, who rely on predictable and stable access to power and other resources. By curbing the ability of agencies to unilaterally expand their regulatory reach, the Court has created a more favorable environment for Bitcoin mining operations.

Bitcoin miners have often been at the mercy of shifting regulatory landscapes, which can dramatically impact their operations. For instance, stringent environmental regulations targeting power consumption could have severely constrained the industry. With the Chevron doctrine overturned, any future regulatory attempts to impose such burdens will require explicit and unambiguous congressional authorization, followed by detailed judicial scrutiny. This decision also invigorates the major question doctrine, which posits that significant regulatory actions with vast economic and political implications require clear congressional authorization. This doctrine can be a powerful tool for Bitcoin miners and other industries to challenge regulatory overreach, ensuring that agencies cannot impose wide-ranging policies without clear legislative backing.

Read more …

“Admittance is only granted to the select few who pay the massively extortionate ticket price..”

Banksy ‘Launches’ Migrant Boat Stunt At Glastonbury Festival (MN)

The ‘street’ artist Banksy carried out a stunt at the now uber trendy Glastonbury Festival Friday night by launching a mock-up small boat complete with dummy migrants into the crowd. The Guardian reports that many in the crowd thought it was part of the band Idles’ set given that their songs are all about lefty political positions such as the idea that limiting mass illegal immigration is right wing and evil. The report notes, however, that Banksy was behind the stunt stating “The raft, a reference to the small boats carrying migrants across the Channel that have been such a high-profile target of Rishi Sunak’s immigration policy, was crowdsurfed through the thousands-strong Other stage crowd, which Idles were headlining on Friday night.” Given that Sunak has done practically nothing to prevent the boats and the Conservative government has actively incentivised mass illegal immigration for years now, you’d be forgiven for thinking the stunt was some sort of endorsement.

Indeed, it’s difficult to pinpoint exactly what the point of it was. What is the crowd cheering about here? The report further notes that the boat was ‘launched’ during a song called Danny Nedelko, which contains the following lyrics: “My blood brother is an immigrant, a beautiful immigrant. My blood brother’s Freddie Mercury. A Nigerian mother of three. He’s made of bones, he’s made of blood. He’s made of flesh, he’s made of love. He’s made of you, he’s made of me. Unity. Fear leads to panic, panic leads to pain. Pain leads to anger, anger leads to hate.” The report also notes that “Migration is a major theme at this year’s Glastonbury festival, with a new area dedicated to the topic.” Mega cringe. It continues, “Entrants to ‘Terminal 1’ must answer a question from the UK government’s citizenship test for prospective migrants.”

The message being that having some form of secure border and vetting system is oppressive… or something. If people manage to pass the test they’re then treated to “music by representatives from Notting Hill carnival and Bristol’s St Paul’s carnival, alongside visual art by global artists including Love Watts, Yoshi Sodeoka and the Turner prize winner Mark Wallinger.” No thanks then. Admittance is only granted to the select few who pay the massively extortionate ticket price and can afford to spend more than the majority of people earn in an entire month once inside. It’s basically full of metropolitan shitlib ‘creatives’ and influencers with trust funds and disposable incomes. So it’s the perfect venue to engage in empty virtue signalling stunts.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

CO2

 

 

Whale

 

 

Cracks

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jun 292024
 
 June 29, 2024  Posted by at 9:08 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  87 Responses »


Ivan Aivazovsky The Galata tower by moonlight 1845

 

Biden Won’t Drop Out Of Presidential Race – Campaign Official (RT)
Robert Hur Emerges as the Clear Winner in the Presidential Debate (Turley)
Biden’s Team Offers Excuse For Debate Performance – Axios (RT)
The New York Times Editorial Board Urges Biden To Quit The 2024 Race (RT)
Kamala to Be ‘Leapfrogged’ in Quest to Find Biden Replacement (Sp.)
Debate Debacle: Democrats Need to Find New Candidate ASAP (Sp.)
Joe Biden Catches Cold (Kunstler)
Ukraine: US Starts Conflict And Tasks Europe With Fueling It (Dionísio)
Zelensky Preparing ‘Plan To End War’ (RT)
Putin – Behind the Shoji (Patrick Lawrence)
SCOTUS Overturns ‘Chevron Deference’ In Massive Blow To ‘Administrative State’ (ZH)
Supreme Court Casts Doubt On Hundreds Of Jan 6 Cases (BBC)
Supreme Court Rejects Bannon Bid To Avoid Monday Prison Deadline (ZH)
Assange Agreed to Destroy Unpublished Classified Material (Lauria)
Inquisition Redux at the Vatican (Karganovic)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1806525328036073626

 

 

 

 

Macgregor

 

 

 

 

“..he is “the only person who has ever beaten Donald Trump. He will do it again.”

Biden Won’t Drop Out Of Presidential Race – Campaign Official (RT)

US President Joe Biden will not drop out of the 2024 election race despite his poor performance during Thursday’s first presidential debate with Donald Trump, campaign spokesperson Seth Schuster has announced. Following the debate, in which Biden was largely panned, even by fellow Democrats, many in the party suggested that the president should be replaced on the November 5 ballot. In a text message seen by The Hill, Schuster is apparently attempting to reassure the president’s supporters that he will continue his efforts to be reelected. “Of course he’s not dropping out,” the campaign spokesperson wrote. Another member of the president’s team told Politico that Biden will stay in the race because he is “the only person who has ever beaten Donald Trump. He will do it again.”

Biden himself has also dismissed the notion that he should bow out of the race, explaining to reporters at a Waffle House following Thursday’s event that “it’s hard to debate a liar.”Meanwhile, according to Politico, the Democratic Party is reportedly “panicked” by Biden’s “faltering” display against Trump and is actively discussing the possibility of replacing him with another candidate. “No one expected this nosedive,” one senior Democratic adviser told the outlet. Biden “was bad on message, bad on substance, bad on counter-punching, bad on presentation, bad on non-verbals. There was no bright spot in this debate for him.” Concerns over Biden’s performance have also been expressed by a number of major Democratic donors, with one telling Politico that the president had delivered “the worst performance in history” during the debate and “needs to drop out.”

Biden’s team, however, has been scrambling to explain the president’s poor display. One person close to his election campaign claimed that the 81-year-old was “over-prepared and relying on minutiae when all that mattered was vigor and energy.” They prepared him for the wrong debate. He was over-prepared when what he needed was rest. It’s confounding,” the person said. US media outlets have also suggested that Biden’s shaky performance was due to a cold, which they claim has been confirmed by a doctor who examined the president ahead of the debate.

Read more …

“..the question is whether a man who was too diminished to be a criminal defendant can still be a president for four more years..”

Robert Hur Emerges as the Clear Winner in the Presidential Debate (Turley)

The presidential debate last night was chilling to watch as President Joe Biden clearly struggled to retain his focus and, at points, seemed hopelessly confused. The winner was clear: Special Counsel Robert Hur. For months, Democrats in Congress and the media have attacked Hur for his report that the president came across as an “elderly man with a poor memory.” Hur concluded that prosecuting Biden would be difficult because a jury would view him as a sympathetic figure of a man with declining mental capabilities. That was evident last night and the question is whether a man who was too diminished to be a criminal defendant can still be a president for four more years.

Hur laid out evidence that President Biden had unlawfully retained and mishandled classified evidence for decades. However, he also concluded that “at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” He found that “it would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him—by then a former president well into his eighties—of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.” What has followed is the usual pile-on in the media with legal analysts, press, and pundits denouncing Hur for his findings. Hur likely does not anticipate any apologies even as commentators on CNN and MSNBC admit that there are now unavoidable questions of Biden’s ability to be the nominee. Democrats have repeatedly insisted that Hur did not find Biden diminished and that he actually was impressed by his memory and mental acuity. Hur contradicted that in his own testimony before Congress.

Indeed, the denial campaign took on a bizarre character, particularly when Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D., Wash.) insisted that Hur “exonerated” Biden. Hur pushed back: “I need to go back and make sure that I take note of a word that you used, ‘exoneration.’ That is not a word that is used in my report and that is not a part of my task as a prosecutor.” Jayapal shot back, “You exonerated him.” Hur responded, “I did not exonerate him. That word does not appear in the report.” The debate also further undermines the ridiculous effort of the Biden Administration to continue to withhold the audiotape of the Hur interview as privileged (despite saying that the transcript is not privileged). The debate showed not only what Hur saw but why the Justice Department is making a clearly laughable privilege claim to delay any release of the audiotape until after the election.

Read more …

“They prepared him for the wrong debate. He was over-prepared..”

Biden’s Team Offers Excuse For Debate Performance – Axios (RT)

Joe Biden’s team claims the US president’s poor performance during Thursday’s debate with Donald Trump was the result of him being “over-prepared” for the event and not getting enough rest, according to Axios news outlet. The first presidential debate ahead of November’s election, which was held in Atlanta, Georgia, has overwhelmingly been described as a low point in Biden’s bid for a second term. The 81-year-old sounded hoarse, lost his train of thought several times, and struggled to get his points across. According to Axios, which claims to have spoken to a person close to Biden, the president’s poor performance was due to him being prepared for “the wrong debate.” “He was over-prepared and relying on minutiae when all that mattered was vigor and energy,” the source said. “They prepared him for the wrong debate. He was over-prepared when what he needed was rest. It’s confounding.”

The outlet also spoke to a former White House official, who argued that people on Biden’s team needed to be fired for the blunder. He noted, however, that this probably wouldn’t happen because “Biden rarely dismisses people.” Meanwhile, Politico has reported that the Democratic Party is now actively discussing the possibility of replacing Joe Biden on the November 5 ballot following his “faltering” display on Thursday. “No one expected this nosedive,” a senior Democratic adviser told the outlet, noting that Biden “was bad on message, bad on substance, bad on counter punching, bad on presentation, bad on non-verbals. There was no bright spot in this debate for him.” A number of major Democratic donors have also expressed bewilderment at Biden’s performance, with some insisting that the president needs to drop out of the race.

“Our only hope is that he bows out, we have a brokered convention, or dies. Otherwise we are f**king dead,” an adviser to Democratic donors told Politico. Despite the blunder, Biden’s team has indicated that the US president does not plan to drop out of the race, with one campaign official telling Politico that he is “the only person who has ever beaten Donald Trump” and will “do it again.” According to a CNN flash poll after the debate, 67% of registered voters who watched the contest felt that Trump had outperformed Biden.

Read more …

“I know how to get things done. And I know, like millions of Americans know, when you get knocked down, you get back [up],” Biden said.

The New York Times Editorial Board Urges Biden To Quit The 2024 Race (RT)

Democrats must admit that US President Joe Biden is no longer capable of resoundingly defeating Donald Trump on Election Day in November and that is why they must find a more suitable candidate to replace him, The New York Times editorial board wrote on Friday. The appeal came a day after Biden delivered what many described as a disastrous performance against Trump during the live presidential debate in Atlanta, Georgia. Observers noted that Biden appeared frail and confused, struggling to finish his sentences and mixing up words when speaking. In a piece published on Friday, the Times cast doubt on the certainty that Biden would repeat his 2020 win over Trump. “That is no longer a sufficient rationale for why Mr. Biden should be the Democratic nominee this year,” the editorial board wrote. “Voters… cannot be expected to ignore what was instead plain to see: Mr. Biden is not the man he was four years ago.”

The board further argued that Biden appeared on the debate stage “as the shadow of a great public,” who “struggled” to articulate his own policy position and ultimately failed to adequately counter Trump. “There are Democratic leaders better equipped to present clear, compelling and energetic alternatives to a second Trump presidency,” the board wrote. “It’s too big a bet to simply hope Americans will overlook or discount Mr. Biden’s age and infirmity that they see with their own eyes.” The editorial board concluded that Democrats have a better chance of defeating Trump if they “acknowledge that Mr. Biden can’t continue his race, and create a process to select someone more capable to stand in his place.” While the board did not propose any alternatives, the US media and pundits have suggested that several prominent Democrats could potentially replace Biden as candidate, including Vice President Kamala Harris, California Governor Gavin Newsom, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker.

Multiple leading liberal journalists and public figures have acknowledged that Biden performed badly on Thursday night. A flash poll conducted by CNN revealed that 67% of registered voters who watched the debate felt that Trump had won. Several outlets cited unnamed Biden staffers who tried to justify the president’s performance by saying that he has been suffering from a cold and was “over-prepared and relying on minutiae.” Biden appeared to acknowledge his flaws shortly after the debate. “I know I’m not a young man, to state the obvious,” he told a crowd of supporters during a rally in Raleigh, North Carolina on Friday. “I don’t speak as smoothly as I used to. I don’t debate as well as I used to.” Nevertheless, he vowed to continue the campaign and insisted that he is best qualified for the presidency. “I know how to get things done. And I know, like millions of Americans know, when you get knocked down, you get back [up],” Biden said.

Read more …

“You need someone who is a known commodity that is already recognized by every single person, whether good, bad or ugly, and who has the ability to fundraise, you know, the half billion dollars they’re going to need to fundraise for the course of the next several months. And the only person who fits that bill will be Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama, and Michelle ain’t doing it.”

Kamala to Be ‘Leapfrogged’ in Quest to Find Biden Replacement (Sp.)

US Vice President Kamala Harris will be skipped over if her running mate President Joe Biden decides to drop out of the race, attorney and civil rights organizer Robert Patillo II speculated on Sputnik’s Fault Lines on Friday. “President Biden had a very bad night. The worst part was that he reinforced the narrative about him, of being kind of this doddering old man who didn’t know where he was, couldn’t complete a sentence, kind of got lost midway through sentences, those sorts of things.” The post-debate analysis, even on left-leaning MSNBC, focused heavily on finding a potential replacement for Biden, with the choices of Harris and California Governor Gavin Newsom being floated on the air. Patillo described Biden’s performance as “Just an old man dying in front of us,” saying that “It got uncomfortable for people watching.” In what appeared to be an attempt at damage control, Harris appeared on both MSNBC and CNN defending Biden’s performance and vehemently declining to call for him to step down. She may have been the only one.

CNN analyst Van Jones called Biden’s performance “personally painful for a lot of people,” and openly noted that the Democrats could make a switch before the convention. NBC analyst Chuck Todd said Democratic leaders are in “a full-on panic about this performance.” Almost 48 million viewers watched the debate, many more likely saw clips of Biden’s worst moments after they were posted online. However, the Democrats may have difficulty finding a replacement for Biden because they all but shut down the party’s primary this cycle, making Harris the only potential candidate with a reasonable claim to the nomination as Biden’s running mate. Unfortunately for Democrats, Harris is unpopular with the voting public, According to poll aggregator 538, only 39% of Americans view her favorably, leading commentators to speculate that another candidate may be chosen by party leadership. That causes its own set of problems, however, because Harris is the first woman vice president and the first Black vice president. Whoever is the eventual Democratic nominee will need support from both voting blocs if they hope to defeat Donald Trump in November.

“The problem then becomes you can’t hop over the first Black female vice president and put Gavin Newsom, let’s say, in the catbird seat,” explained Patillo. “Every once and a while the Democratic Black folks know exactly what their place is in the party and it’s pretty clear that the white feminists don’t hold Kamala Harris in the same regard that they held Hillary Clinton, for example,” he added later. According to Sportsbook Review, Biden’s odds went from +137 on May 31, to +400 after the debate. That means a $100 bet placed on May 31 would have returned $237 ($137 profit) if Biden won the presidency. Now, a $100 bet will net you $500 ($400 profit) if Biden wins. By comparison, Trump’s odds are -185, which means a $100 bet will net you $185 ($85 profit). Even more interesting is how the odds of the other candidates not named Trump or Biden fared following the debate. Nearly every potential candidate– except Biden and Independent candidate Robert F Kennedy Jr.– saw their odds improve, indicating that betters and sportsbooks are expecting a change at the top of the Democratic ticket.

The biggest jump was for Gavin Newsom, who saw his odds go from +5000 to as low as +500 on some sites. By comparison, Harris’ odds went from +6600 to +1400, a large jump but not nearly as large as Newsom’s. The Democratic nominee for the 2016 Presidential election also jumped up the boards: Hillary Clinton’s odds are now +4000, in May, a bet on Clinton would have gotten gamblers +15000. Patillo thinks she may be a dark horse candidate for the nomination. “The reason is you have, what? Four months that you have to get 100% name recognition around the country. You don’t have time to introduce the country to Gavin Newsom. You don’t have time to introduce the country to Kamala Harris, quite frankly,” he explained. “You need someone who is a known commodity that is already recognized by every single person, whether good, bad or ugly, and who has the ability to fundraise, you know, the half billion dollars they’re going to need to fundraise for the course of the next several months. And the only person who fits that bill will be Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama, and Michelle ain’t doing it.”

While Clinton lost to Trump in 2016 and has polled unfavorably with the American public, she can at least appear competent on the debate stage, unlike Biden’s performance on Thursday. “[Biden] was barely able to form a sentence last night and that is why it’s a situation that’s apocalyptic for Democrats because regardless of how much money you raise, regardless of how you try to paint Trump, if people think you’re running essentially against ‘Weekend at Bernie’s’ it’s not going to really matter,” argued Patillo. “And that is why that Hillary train is going to be picking up over the course of the next several weeks.” “How many times have you heard people say this is no time to panic?” constitutional historian Dan Lazare asked while speaking to Sputnik. “Well, if ever there was a time for Democrats to panic, this is it.”

Read more …

“..turned out to be worse for the Democratic Party than the botched Afghanistan withdrawal..”

Debate Debacle: Democrats Need to Find New Candidate ASAP (Sp.)

The first debate between incumbent President Joe Biden and Republican front-runner Donald Trump turned out to be worse for the Democratic Party than the botched Afghanistan withdrawal, according to Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel. “Debate night was a fiasco for Team Biden and for the conspirators in media and elsewhere who have ceaselessly sold Biden disasters on many fronts as ‘successes’,” Wall Street analyst and investigative journalist Charles Ortel told Sputnik. With just a few months until Election Day, the Democratic leadership must now “push Biden and Harris both out and try to find a more credible team to fight the already well-funded and fiercely energized Trump juggernaut,” the analyst said. “This is a very heavy lift as the Democrat bench is light and marginalized by primary cycles of 2020 and 2024 that installed a serial liar and diminished clod into the White House where he fails on all fronts,” Ortel said.

“Whether it is the demolished pier in Gaza, the wreckage across the Middle East and Afghanistan, the horrific meat grinder in Ukraine, or the lawlessness and failures in Democrat run states and cities, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris stand revealed as incompetent losers.” A week ago, Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh called attention to growing concerns among top Democrats and their wealthy donors about Biden’s ability to overcome Trump in the November election. After saying that Biden’s debate performance would be “a major touchstone,” Hersh quoted political insiders as suggesting that if the first showdown with Trump goes badly for the incumbent president, the Democratic convention in Chicago would replace Joe with another, more dynamic candidate in August.

That scenario seems likely after the debate, according to Ortel. “One theoretical approach might be to field an all-female historic ticket, seeking to exploit perceived weaknesses for Republicans over stances on abortion and gender insensitivity. Here, a Michelle Obama ticket with, perhaps, Hillary Clinton might gel. But who gets the top billing and who is second?” the Wall Street analyst remarked. “Thursday’s nightmare will look even worse on Friday morning for Democrats. The Biden and Harris ‘brands’ are unsaleable,” Ortel concluded.

Read more …

“All Mr. Trump would have to do is broadcast the scene from a San Francisco street-cam on “X” (Twitter) 24/7.”

Joe Biden Catches Cold (Kunstler)

It’s obvious that the ruling blob now has to deep-six “Joe Biden.” The problem is they must induce him to renounce the nomination of his own will. The party’s nominating process is so bizarrely complex that it would very difficult to just shove him out. Another problem is that the party had to peremptorily declare “JB” their legal nominee before the August convention in order to keep him on the ballot in Ohio with its 17 electoral votes (due to some arcane machinery in the state’s election laws). As per above, the debate fiasco calls into serious question whether “Joe Biden” is competent to even serve out this term. He (or shadowy figures pulling strings behind him) are making profoundly hazardous decisions right now, such as last week’s missile attack that killed and wounded civilians on the beach in Crimea. Are you seeing how easily “Joe Biden” might start World War Three?

All of which is to say that pressure will soon rise to use the 25th amendment to relieve him of duty, leaving you-know-who in the oval office. If Joe Biden actually has to resign as president, he also loses the ability to pardon his son, Hunter, and peremptorily his other family members who shared bribery money received from China, Ukraine, and elsewhere. If he won’t resign, and the party can’t force him off the ticket, the blob could have no choice except to bump him off. I imagine they would get it done humanely, say late at night sometime, in bed, using the same method as for putting down an old dog who has peed on the carpet one too many times. Or, if that can’t be managed and he clings to his position, maybe the party could cobble up some new nominating rules impromptu. And then, who could they slot in from the bench?

The usual suspects are like the cast of a freak show, each one displaying one grotesque deformity after another. Gavin Newsom we understand: the party’s base of batshit-crazy women may all want to bear his child, but that limbic instinct to mate with a six-foot-three haircut-in-search-of-a-brain might not work with any other voter demographic — and Newsom has the failed state of California hanging around his neck. All Mr. Trump would have to do is broadcast the scene from a San Francisco street-cam on “X” (Twitter) 24/7.

Hillary has been stealthily flapping her leathery wings overhead for weeks as this debacle approached. She may still own the actual machinery of the Democratic Party — having purchased it through the Clinton Foundation some years back when the party was broke and needed a bailout. She could just command the nomination by screeching “Caw Caw” from the convention rostrum. Whatever happens, it will look terrible. Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan? An inveterate and notorious intel blob tool, Whitmer has allowed herself to be used repeatedly by the FBI to frame and persecute conservatives in her state as well as using her state AG Dana Nessel to go after political enemies there, especially poll workers who cried fraud in the sketchiest Michigan voting districts.

Illinois Governor JB Pritzker. Like Dreamboat Newsom in California, Mr. Pritzker is busily running Illinois (and especially Chicago) into bankruptcy and chaos. Looks aren’t everything, but if Dreamboat gives the vapors to Karens across the land, the Illinois governor will get them shrieking in terror as from the sight of King Kong on Skull Island. Who else is there? Michelle O, of course, who will be instantly branded as a catspaw for her husband seeking a fifth term — as Barack himself has averred in so many words: just hanging out in the background, managing things in his jogging suit. That would be the ultimate Banana Republic set-up for us and I don’t think the voters will go for it. It all boils down to the Party of Chaos being thrust into chaos. Can it even survive “Joe Biden?”

Read more …

EU will pay.

Ukraine: US Starts Conflict And Tasks Europe With Fueling It (Dionísio)

The USA, in Europe, behaved like true arsonists. Like any arsonist, they studied the terrain, identifying the main points conducive to propagation and combustion, finally, they caused the ignition and, today, like a painter, in the perspective and security that only distance can provide, they enjoy their destructive work. Satiated with their incendiary thirst, they turn away and leave the victims in charge of fueling the fire they so calculatedly created. The last approval process for the 61 billion dollars, with its difficulties, advances and setbacks, was already the result of this internal tension. The anxiety of exploiting another hotbed of tension in the Pacific that “contains China”, as well as the need to turn to Israel and its pyromaniac on duty, Netanyahu, led to an internal struggle that was responsible for a sharp drop in supplies to Kiev.

If between April 2022 and September 2023, every quarter, the USA sent at least 7.8 billion dollars in “aid”, even reaching 14.7 billion between July and September 2022, already in the period October 2023 As of March 2024, Kiev has only received $1.7 billion. Data from Kiel Institute, Ukraine Support Tracker. Although the amounts have, in the meantime, risen again, at least until we see it, the truth is that, contrary to what has been said so much in the mainstream media, it is the European Union and its member states that owes the largest share of “help”. Until April 2024, the European Union and its member states have committed 177.8 billion euros, while the USA only contributes 98.7 billion euros.

But this number alone tells us a lot about who is really paying the cost of fueling the fire spreading across the USA. While the USA and the EU member states, bilaterally, essentially send weapons, equipment that must be paid for, in the case of EU institutions, what is sent is essentially money. Either outright or in the form of loans in which Ukraine receives the money and the European Commission pays the interest and provides guarantees that future payments are made. The path things take tells us who will bear this payment. Furthermore, these figures do not include expenditure on refugees which, between Germany and Poland alone, exceeds 50 billion euros in subsidies, housing and other types of support.

Even in terms of armament, although the USA, when it comes to some types (howitzers and MLRS) takes the largest share, when we go to tanks, air defense and infantry vehicles, it is the Europeans who send the most, many of these systems supplied despite the lack of protection of its own defenses, which, as we know, does not happen with the USA. Europe helps to defend Ukraine, without needing to defend itself. This is the level of commitment reached. If these data alone already show us who is bearing the Ukrainian burden on their shoulders, the numerous statements by government officials in Washington, who urge Europe (read the European Union) to take greater responsibility on the issue Ukrainian, there are other signs that point to the fact that the U.S. is about to assume a commanding stance, entering when necessary and only if, strategically, this is justified.

Read more …

“These are two parallel things – to be strong on the battlefield and to develop a plan, a clear plan, a detailed plan. And it will be ready this year..”

Zelensky Preparing ‘Plan To End War’ (RT)

Ukraine is preparing a “comprehensive plan” for ending the conflict with Russia that should be ready by the end of the year, Vladimir Zelensky has said. Zelensky made the comments at a press conference in Kiev, after meeting Slovenian President Natasa Pirc Musar on Friday. “We will also work out all other points of the Peace Formula and prepare a comprehensive plan that will be on the table before our partners,” Zelensky said. “It is very important for us to show a plan to end the war that will be supported by the majority of the world. This is the diplomatic path we are working on.” The so-called peace formula is a ten-point document Zelensky unveiled in November 2022, which envisions Russia ceding all formerly Ukrainian territory, withdrawing all of its troops, paying reparations and submitting to war crimes tribunals, among other things.

Moscow has dismissed it as unrealistic and “detached from reality”. Ukraine “must be strong on the battlefield,” Zelensky added, because Russia only respects strength. “These are two parallel things – to be strong on the battlefield and to develop a plan, a clear plan, a detailed plan. And it will be ready this year,” he told reporters. Zelensky’s comment came after he signed a long-term security pact with the EU on Thursday, obligating the bloc to years of military and financial aid. The US and several of its allies have signed separate aid pacts with Kiev, also pledging to prop up Kiev “for the long haul.” Western diplomats have openly said that the purpose of such treaties was to protect the Ukraine policy in case Donald Trump wins the November US presidential election.

Speaking in Brussels, Zelensky had argued that Ukraine “does not want to prolong the war” and does not want the conflict to last “for years.” “We have many wounded and killed on the battlefield. We must put a settlement plan on the table within a few months,” he said, without offering details. Kiev has been coy about Ukrainian casualty figures, insisting instead that it has inflicted massive losses on Russian forces. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, Ukraine lost 35,000 troops in May alone and has lost close to 500,000 since the start of the conflict.

Read more …

“It is translucent, so one can see the movements of those on the other side, but there is no making out what they are doing.”

Putin – Behind the Shoji (Patrick Lawrence)

It is never a good idea to turn to corporate media for an understanding of Vladimir Putin — his thoughts, his intentions, what he does and the outcome of what he does. Whenever the Russian president is the topic, you are always going to get reports so distorted as to obscure vastly more than they reveal. This pervasively Western–centric work makes it impossible, for anyone who relies solely on it, to see either the Russian leader or the nation he represents with any clarity, just as they are. One is invited to think Putin never acts but for the damage his chosen course will inflict on the U.S., the rest of the Atlantic world, and by extension the non–Western allies of this world. The net effect of this unceasing exercise in misrepresentation is to place a nation of 144 million people, and most of all its leader, behind a screen similar to a Japanese shoji: It is translucent, so one can see the movements of those on the other side, but there is no making out what they are doing.

They are reduced to shadows. The consequence of this induced blindness is easily legible in the dangerous shambles the policy cliques in Washington and most of the European capitals have made of their relations with Moscow since, I would say, the winter of 2007. It was in February of that year Putin gave his famously frank speech at the Munich Security Conference, wherein he attacked the West’s “almost uncontained hyper use of force — military force, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts.” Too honest. It was inevitable that the shoji would immediately be put in place such that the man and all he did and said could thereafter be rendered illegible — grist for the propagandists. Last week the Russian leader spent two days in Pyongyang, his first visit to North Korea since he assumed the presidency two dozen years ago. Putin then proceeded to Hanoi for his fifth journey to the Republic of Vietnam.

Both visits involved nations with relations of long duration — histories dating to the decades when they stood on the same side, the anti-imperialist side, during the Cold War. These were consequential occasions of state, let there be no question. But there is simply no way to understand what Putin and his counterparts got done, and why, via the West’s corporate and state-supported media. To them Putin’s intent was all about overcoming the isolation Russia suffers except that it doesn’t, destabilizing East Asia, and — a curious phrase from The New York Times coverage — “leaving behind a redrawn map of risk in Asia.” I would ask where corporate journalists get this stuff, but the answer is perfectly clear when one considers the lockstep uniformity of the coverage: This is what reporters in Washington and correspondents abroad are fed by unnamed briefers from Langley, embassies in East Asia, and elsewhere in the national-security state’s sprawling propaganda apparatus.

Putin’s talks with Kim Jong-un in Pyongyang resulted in all sorts of agreements covering the economic, technology, trade, investment and cultural spheres. But the main event was the conclusion of a “comprehensive partnership agreement” — Putin’s description — that amounts to a mutual defense treaty. Curiously, the formal name of this document is the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty. Unclear why Putin omitted so significant a term, as a strategic partnership is a half-step shy of an alliance. Accords of this kind between Moscow and Pyongyang have a long history, true. But to mark this down as a reflexive Cold War revival, as Western media have done, is a misreading one must mark down as intentional. The immediate antecedent is the Treaty of Friendship Putin signed with Jong-un’s pop, Jong-il, in 2000, just as he, Putin, was replacing Boris Yeltsin in in the Kremlin.

Read more …

“..judges previously had to defer to agencies in cases where the law is ambiguous. Now, judges will substitute their own best interpretation of the law, instead of deferring to the agencies..”

SCOTUS Overturns ‘Chevron Deference’ In Massive Blow To ‘Administrative State’ (ZH)

The Supreme Court has ruled to overturn the so-called ‘Chevron Deference’ dealing a huge blow to the so-called ‘administrative state’ that have enjoyed In an 6-3 decision along ideological lines, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority upended the 40-year administrative law precedent that gave agencies across the federal government leeway to interpret ambiguous laws through rulemaking. Conservatives and Republican policymakers have long been critical of the doctrine, saying it has contributed to the dramatic growth of government and gives unelected regulators far too much power to make policy by going beyond what Congress intended when it approved various laws. The authority of regulatory agencies has been increasingly questioned by the Supreme Court in recent years. Those on the other side say the Chevron doctrine empowers an activist federal government to serve the public interest in an increasingly complicated world without having to seek specific congressional authorization for everything that needs to be done.

As The Hill report, judges previously had to defer to agencies in cases where the law is ambiguous. Now, judges will substitute their own best interpretation of the law, instead of deferring to the agencies – effectively making it easier to overturn regulations that govern wide-ranging aspects of American life. This includes rules governing toxic chemicals, drugs and medicine, climate change, artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency and more. The move hands a major victory to conservative and anti-regulatory interests that have looked to eliminate the precedent as part of a broader attack on the growing size of the “administrative state.” The Biden administration defended the precedent before the high court. As Mark Joseph Stern writes on X: “Today’s ruling is a massive blow to the ‘administrative state’, the collection of federal agencies that enforce laws involving the environment, food and drug safety, workers’ rights, education, civil liberties, energy policy—the list is nearly endless.”

“The Supreme Court’s reversal of Chevron constitutes a major transfer of power from the executive branch to the judiciary, stripping federal agencies of significant discretion to interpret and enforce ambiguous regulations.” Chief Justice Roberts, writing the opinion of the court, argued Chevron “defies the command of” the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs federal administrative agencies. He said it “requires a court to ignore, not follow, ‘the reading the court would have reached had it exercised its independent judgment as required by the APA.'” Further, he said it “is misguided” because “agencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities. Courts do.”The liberals on the court are not happy: “In dissent, Justice Kagan says the conservative supermajority “disdains restraint, and grasps for power,” making “a laughingstock” of stare decisis and producing “large-scale disruption” throughout the entire government. She is both furious and terrified.”

As Stern concludes: “Hard to overstate the impact of this seismic shift.”
Simply put, a massive win for the constitution…

“Wow, this is a big deal for addressing overreaching regulation!” — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 28, 2024

Read more …

“..in a 6-3 opinion which cut across the Supreme Court’s usual ideological lines, the court ruled that the law should be interpreted relatively narrowly – and used only against defendants who tampered with documents..”

Supreme Court Casts Doubt On Hundreds Of Jan 6 Cases (BBC)

Federal prosecutors overreached when using an obstruction law to charge hundreds of January 6 rioters, the Supreme Court has ruled in an opinion that could also affect a case against Donald Trump. The justices ruled that obstruction charges must include proof that defendants tried to tamper with or destroy documents. More than 350 people have been charged with obstructing Congress’ business – the certification of the 2020 presidential election. The law that prosecutors used was passed in 2002, after the Enron scandal, to stop corporate misconduct. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act outlines criminal penalties for anyone who “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object”, and another clause includes anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding”.

Justice department prosecutors argued for a broad interpretation of the law to include those who broke into the Capitol on 6 January 2021 in an attempt to keep Trump in the White House. But in a 6-3 opinion which cut across the Supreme Court’s usual ideological lines, the court ruled that the law should be interpreted relatively narrowly – and used only against defendants who tampered with documents. The ruling has cheered supporters of Donald Trump. While the court introduced another wrinkle into the special prosecution of the former president – and the Supreme Court could rule in a separate case expected next week that he has immunity for his actions – it is unclear whether the decision will halt one of the charges against him.

“For Trump, I think there will be litigation,” said Aziz Huq, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School. “But the charges against him involve falsifying or altering ‘records, documents, or objects’. So I think it likely doesn’t undermine those charges.” In addition, Special Counsel Jack Smith has also charged Trump with other crimes in connection with his attempts to overturn the 2020 result: Conspiring to defraud the US and conspiring against the rights of citizens. Those charges will go ahead regardless of the outcome of the obstruction case. The special prosecutor faces an obvious deadline. If Trump wins the November election, he will be able to remove Mr Smith from his post and end the federal legal case.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was one of a number of laws used against those who stormed the Capitol in January 2021. About 25% of Capitol riot defendants were prosecuted under the law, and according to Attorney General Merrick Garland, all of those faced additional charges. “The vast majority of the more than 1,400 defendants charged for their illegal actions on January 6 will not be affected by this decision,” Mr Garland said in a statement issued after the decision in which he also noted he was disappointed with the ruling. The case was brought to the Supreme Court by Joseph Fischer, a former police officer from Pennsylvania who attended Trump’s rally in Washington on 6 January 2021, then briefly went inside the Capitol. He was seen arguing with police on video before leaving the building.

Lower courts will now decide whether the obstruction charge against him can continue. However, Mr Fischer also faces trial on a number of other charges including civil disorder, disorderly conduct and assaulting, resisting or impeding a police officer. More than 1,400 people have been charged with crimes related to the riot. According to justice department figures, more than 500 defendants have been charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers, including more than 130 who have been charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to a police officer. And more than 1,300 people have been charged with entering or remaining in a restricted federal building or grounds. More than 100 of those have been charged with entering a restricted area with a dangerous or deadly weapon.

Read more …

As such, this court should conclude that the entire prosecutorial process against the applicant was tainted and must be dismissed as a matter of law.”

Supreme Court Rejects Bannon Bid To Avoid Monday Prison Deadline (ZH)

Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon has until Monday to report to prison after the Supreme Court rejected his 11th hour bid to remain free while he pursues an appeal of his conviction for two counts of contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the Jan. 6 committee. US District Judge Carl Nichols had previously put Bannon’s sentence on hold as he pursued his appeal, saying that Bannon had presented a “substantial question of law or fact likely to result in reversal” of the conviction. That, however, was rejected by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in May – leaving him only the Supreme Court to help him avoid time behind bars. Bannon has argued that he was acting on the advice of counsel when he refused to comply with the subpoenas. He must report to prison on July 1.

As the Epoch Times notes further, Bannon through his lawyers asked the Supreme Court to intervene. In the application, lawyers said it would be unfair for Mr. Bannon to start serving his sentence before the full appeals court and justices consider overturning the recent appeal rejection. “If Mr. Bannon is denied release, he will be forced to serve his prison sentence before this court has a chance to consider a petition for a writ of certiorari, given the court’s upcoming summer recess,” the lawyers wrote. Department of Justice attorneys, on the other hand, urged the Supreme Court to reject the application. They said Mr. Bannon “cannot make the demanding showing necessary to override the normal requirement that a convicted defendant begin serving his sentence.”

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), chairman of the House Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, told the court in a brief that the panel that subpoenaed Mr. Bannon produced flawed subpoenas because it failed to comply with House regulations, as it did not have a ranking member appointed by the Republican minority. “Notwithstanding the applicant’s indictment and sentencing, the select committee’s enforcement of the subpoena and the prosecution of Mr. Bannon for failing to participate in a deposition was factually and procedurally invalid,” Mr. Loudermilk wrote. “As such, this court should conclude that the entire prosecutorial process against the applicant was tainted and must be dismissed as a matter of law.” Peter Navarro, another former adviser to President Trump, is already serving a sentence after being convicted of contempt of Congress after also declining to cooperate with subpoenas from the same committee.

Read more …

“..the United States court in Saipan yesterday conceded, and the judge found that there is no evidence that any harm has befallen any individual anywhere in the world as a result of Mr. Assange’s publications..”

Assange Agreed to Destroy Unpublished Classified Material (Lauria)

The 23-page plea deal between Julian Assange and the United States government that freed Assange this week contains a provision that he agree to return or destroy all unpublished U.S. material still in WikiLeaks‘ possession. The agreement says on Page 29: “Before his plea is entered in Court, the Defendant shall take all action within his control to cause the return to the United States or the destruction of any such unpublished information in his possession, custody, or control, or that of WikiLeaks or any affiliate of WikiLeaks. The Defendant further agrees that, if the forgoing obligation requires him to instruct the editor(s) of WikiLeaks to destroy any such information or otherwise cause it to be destroyed, he shall provide the United States (or cause to be provided to the United States) a sworn affidavit confirming the instruction he provided and that, he will, in good faith, seek to facilitate compliance with that instruction prior to sentencing.”

Asked about it at a press conference in Parliament House in Canberra on Thursday, Barry Pollack, Assange’s U.S. lawyer who negotiated the plea deal, dismissed the significance of the agreement to destroy the materials. He said: “You’d have to ask the United States government why they insisted on including that clause. The materials we are talking about are now more than a decade old. I don’t know to what extent any still existed or what possible value they might have, certainly no national security value. In fact, the United States court in Saipan yesterday conceded, and the judge found that there is no evidence that any harm has befallen any individual anywhere in the world as a result of Mr. Assange’s publications. That being said, they did insist that he issue an instruction to the editor of WikiLeaks to destroy any materials they might have that were not published and Julian has complied with that provision and issued that instruction.”

Having had most of this material for more than a decade, and the time to review its enormous archive of documents, it unlikely, but not certain, that what remained unpublished is of great significance to the public. This part of the plea deal had only been vaguely referred to in a handful of press reports leading to speculation that it could mean the deletion of parts or all of WikiLeaks already published material, which the agreement makes clear, remains safe.

Read more …

“He has mandated the use of experimental gene serums, which caused very serious damage, death and sterility, calling them ‘an act of love,’ in exchange for funding from pharmaceutical companies and philanthropic foundations. His total alignment with the Davos religion is scandalous”.

Inquisition Redux at the Vatican (Karganovic)

The initiation by the Vatican of canonical proceedings against gadfly Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano marks a significant new development in the deepening crisis within the Roman Catholic church. Archbishop Vigano was recently summoned to answer accusations of committing three canonical offences: fomenting schism, questioning the legitimacy of the current Pope, and rejecting the second Vatican council of the Roman Catholic church which was held sixty years ago and whose controversial reforms have been agitating traditionalist Catholics ever since. It is a delicious irony which will not be lost upon the students of Vatican affairs that the church organ now prosecuting Vigano, the innocuous sounding Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, historically is the direct successor to the Holy Office, the very agency that used to direct the Inquisition.

The Archbishop has declined to present himself before his accusers at the initial hearing held on 20 June. He has also refused to dignify the proceedings with, as he put it, “a predetermined outcome,” by sending an advocate to plead his cause. Since retiring as apostolic nuncio in the United States in 2016, Vigano has become a powerful voice denouncing moral lapses in the ranks of the Roman Catholic clergy. With increasing stridency, he has been taking the Vatican to task for failure to adequately address its in-house scandals. Over time, the scope of Vigano’s public denunciations has continued to expand. Besides calling attention to the sordid moral atmosphere pervading the Roman Catholic church, Vigano has also been a persistent personal critic of current Pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio, specifically his failure to discipline the wrongdoers. Vigano’s contrarian stance concerning the Covid emergency enlisted him even more enemies.

Whilst Bergoglio publicly urged strict adherence to the Covid regime as practically a religious duty, Vigano used his bully pulpit to massively disseminate evidence to the contrary, echoing assertions by Prof. M. Chossudovsky that the “official ‘corona narrative’ is predicated on a ‘Big Lie’ endorsed by corrupt politicians”. Does Vigano have a case to answer with regard to the Roman Curia’s vaguely formulated accusations against him? We should perhaps delay our response to that question until the trial, when presumably the evidence in support of the Vatican’s charges shall be made public. There is little doubt, however, that Vigano and those who adhere to the traditional teaching of the Roman Catholic faith do have a coherent case for the current Pope and his entourage to answer. Without mincing words, in his response to the Curia’s indictment Vigano has charged that it is the current pontiff who in his preaching and actions appears to be guided by quite another doctrine:

“Globalism calls for ethnic substitution: Bergoglio (Pope Francis) promotes uncontrolled immigration and calls for the integration of cultures and religions. Globalism supports LGBTQ+ ideology: Bergoglio authorizes the blessing of same-sex couples and imposes on the faithful the acceptance of homosexualism, while covering up the scandals of his protégés and promoting them to the highest positions of responsibility. Globalism imposes the green agenda: Bergoglio worships the idol of the Pachamama, writes delirious encyclicals about the environment, supports the Agenda 2030, and attacks those who question the theory of man-made global warming. He goes beyond his role in matters that strictly pertain to science, but always and only in one direction: a direction that is diametrically opposed to what the Church has always taught. He has mandated the use of experimental gene serums, which caused very serious damage, death and sterility, calling them ‘an act of love,’ in exchange for funding from pharmaceutical companies and philanthropic foundations. His total alignment with the Davos religion is scandalous”.

Compared to the gravity of those objections, the best indictment that the Curia was able to muster against Vigano does appear rather contrived and frivolous.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Reagan

 

 

Garland

 

 

 

 

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