Menu Icon

Debt Rattle September 12 2026

Sep 122026
 
 September 12, 2026  Posted by at 10:07 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  25 Responses »


Roy Lichtenstein Woman With Flowered Hat 1963


• Trump: If I Had To Do Iran Again I Would Do Exactly As I Did (ZH)
• Trump Says He Wouldn’t Have Bombed Nuke-Armed Iran (Antiwar)
• Flight 93 Hero’s Dad Warns of Threats From Within (Tim O’Brien)
• 9/11 After a Quarter of a Century (Paul Craig Roberts)
• We Are in World War Xi (AmG)
• RFK Tells the Brutal Truth About Islam on Eve of 9/11 Anniversary (Salgado)
• What the AfD Really Wants From China (Zemánek)
• EU Urges Kiev To Mobilize Women – Moscow (RT)
• Light and Dark (James Howard Kunstler)
• The Secret to “Sleeping Well” (Turley)
• To Hell with the Digital Revolution & Its Bastard Child AI (Paul Craig Roberts)
• More Than 62,000 Arrested For Speech-Related Offenses In Britain (AmG)

 


 

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2098213757335789979?s=20 https://twitter.com/PutinVladimirv0/status/2098085347712246160?s=20

 


 


Very consistent. But people want it over before it began.

• Trump: If I Had To Do Iran Again I Would Do Exactly As I Did (ZH)

An interesting moment from Thursday night’s Lara Ingraham exclusive with President Trump…


Q: Any regrets about Iran?

Trump: I don’t believe in the word “regret.”


Trump even commented to Ingraham that he would make the same decisions all over again if he had a chance. The Fox show host had posed to the president, “If we hadn’t done Iran, you would be cruising to midterms victory right now” – and made reference to high gas prices. Trump replied: “supposing we were cruising, and all of a sudden Iran has a nuclear weapon. They would use it.”

Explaining that he doesn’t believe in “regrets” and that he has none especially about launching the Iran war, Trump asserted: “If I had it to do again, I would do exactly what I did.” He further argued that if Iran had a nuclear weapon, its leaders wouldn’t hesitate to “wipe out” Israel and the Middle East, and could go so far as to hit American cities. In a separate brief interview with the press this week, President Trump was asked about reports that Vice President Vance and Secretary State Marco Rubio warned him of the possibility that the Iran conflict could persist for the remainder of his term…


Trump vehemently denied that there’s so much as a chance of this, but didn’t actually explain how he intends to wind down the war in a way favorable to the US and White House policy. Or in other words, the American public still awaits words on a realistic exit strategy.On going into Iran “full” – Trump did underscore that the midterm elections makes this a bad idea. His administration has also repeatedly said there won’t be boots on the ground in Iran. Was this a quiet part out loud moment?


Among the most interesting parts of the interview came when he was asked about the young men in MAGA who are angry over the Iran war:

Q: What do you say to all the young men who supported you in 2024? Trump: They still do.

Q: Some of them are demoralized. Trump: I don’t think they’re demoralized. I think they’re very proud of the fact I’m not letting Iran have a nuclear weapon.


Trump earlier this week insisted of Iran’s position in the conflict, “I don’t know that they’re gonna be able to hold out,” Trump said. “But it’ll get settled after the elections. Or maybe sooner. But it’ll get settled right after the election.” The reference to it’ll “get settled” could have ominous meaning. It suggests Trump could ether escalate against Tehran dramatically, or else there could be the opposite: de-escalation. The world will find out within a couple months.

Read more …

“Trump Says If Iran Had a Nuclear Weapon, He Would Have Politely Called the Supreme Leader Instead of ‘Bombing the Crap Out of Him’”

Bomb bomb bomb;

bomb bomb Iran

• Trump Says He Wouldn’t Have Bombed Nuke-Armed Iran (Antiwar)

President Trump said at the Republican National Midterm Convention in Dallas, Texas, on Wednesday night that if Iran had a nuclear weapon, he would have politely called up the Supreme Leader instead of “bombing the crap” out of the country.


“If they had a nuclear weapon, I’d be calling the Supreme Leader, and I’d be saying, ‘Mr. Supreme Leader, how are you, sir? Is there anything we can do for you?’ as opposed to bombing the crap out of him.” Trump said, evoking cheers from the crowd. “It’s very simple. We cannot let them have a nuclear weapon,” the president added.


While Trump has continued to frame his war with Iran as necessary to prevent the country from obtaining nuclear weapons, there was no evidence either before the June 2025 war or the current conflict that Tehran had decided to pursue a bomb, and that was the consensus of US intelligence agencies at the beginning of Trump’s second term.

“We continue to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003, though pressure has probably built on him to do so,” read the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s annual threat assessment that was published in March 2025 and represented the assessment of the entire US intelligence community. Trump also spent the months following the June 2025 war, known as the 12-Day War, boasting that the US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities had “obliterated” its nuclear program.

During negotiations with the US before both wars, Iran made clear it was willing to reduce uranium enrichment back down to 3.67%, the level it agreed to under the 2015 nuclear deal, far below the 90% needed for weapons-grade. But as Joe Kent, the former director of the National Counterterrorism Center who resigned due to opposition to the Iran war, has pointed out, the administration adopted the Israeli position, conflating any nuclear enrichment for civilian energy purposes with a desire for a nuclear bomb.

Read more …

“Are you guys ready? Okay. Let’s roll.”

• Flight 93 Hero’s Dad Warns of Threats From Within (Tim O’Brien)

If you dig into the history of 9/11, inevitably one of the names that will rise to the surface pretty quickly is Todd Beamer. He was a passenger aboard ill-fated United Flight 93, which on that day crashed into an empty field in Shanksville, Pa. His story has been well-documented and told in print, on the web, in documentaries, and even in dramatic movies. He’s the one who said those famous words, “Let’s roll,” just prior to the passengers’ attempt to take back the aircraft from those radical Islamic hijackers.


To appreciate those words, it’s worth being reminded of the context. On Sept. 11, 2001, Beamer was a 32-year-old account manager who worked for the big tech company Oracle. He was also a Sunday school teacher and the father of two boys. His wife Lisa was pregnant with their third child. His United flight left late that day, departing Newark at 8:42 a.m. At about 9:28 a.m., four al-Qaeda hijackers stormed the plane’s cockpit somewhere over Ohio. They either killed or incapacitated the pilots and then took control.

They herded everyone else into the back of the plane. They lied and said they had a bomb, when all they really had were box cutters. Thanks to the plane’s late departure, the passengers had the chance to use onboard Airfones and cell phones to call loved ones and emergency dispatchers. That’s how they found out that other planes were being hijacked and that this was likely a suicide mission for the hijackers.

Beamer used an Airfone to place a call and ended up talking to GTE Airfone supervisor Lisa Jefferson. They talked for 13 minutes, while he told her in detail what was happening. He told her of the knives, the possible suicide vest on one hijacker, and that at least one passenger was already killed. He told Jefferson that he and a few other passengers had a plan to take back the plane. Those individuals were Tom Burnett, Jeremy Glick, and Mark Bingham. Beamer told Jefferson that they decided this plane would not hit its intended target.

In a very real and true moment that is now the stuff of 9/11 lore, Beamer asked Jefferson to pray with him. The two recited the Lord’s Prayer and Psalm 23, which starts with, “The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.” He told Jefferson to deliver a message to his wife and family that, if he did not survive, he wanted them to know he loved them. Jefferson has said that his last words on that call were clear and unmistakable. She heard him ask the passengers around him, “Are you guys ready? Okay. Let’s roll.”

Immediately after that, the passengers reportedly rushed the hijackers and tried to take back the plane, which then nosedived into that field in Somerset County at 10:03 a.m.


If you watched that clip, I’ll give you a moment to collect yourself. Yes, the events of 9/11 happened 25 years ago, and yes, 25 years ago was just yesterday, because the realness of what these people did on that day lives with us to this very moment. If you’re paying attention, none of this has faded. Too many have forgotten because they’ve distanced themselves from the event with time, with their own hectic lives, and a lack of curiosity. But any time you’re confronted with the events of that day, large and small, it will come rushing back.

Todd Beamer was a credit to his parents and to his upbringing. Someone you may not be familiar with is Beamer’s father, David. The Beamer family seems to have tried to maintain a low profile since 9/11, not hiding from the media, but seeking privacy when possible. This makes it highly unusual on the 25th anniversary of 9/11 that we’d be hearing from that Flight 93 hero’s dad, who, for clarity, I will refer to as David. He recently participated in a rare interview with Fox News.

He’s a Michigan voter, and he has serious concerns with the state of American politics right now, specifically the Senate race in Michigan, which pits former congressman and military veteran Mike Rogers against Abdul El-Sayed, an Islamic socialist. David Beamer believes that El-Sayed and his allies pose an existential threat to America. He told Fox News that voting in November will be akin to what his own son did to defend this country. He pointed to El-Sayed’s radical beliefs, which are better reflected in his BFF Hasan Piker’s words than his own. Piker famously said, “America deserved 9/11.”

David said, “These Democratic socialists are really more closely aligned with domestic terrorists than with our way of life.” He added, “I’m [going to] vote against those that want to destroy America. I’m [going to] vote for an American, a real Michigan man. His name happens to be Mike Rogers. I want everybody across all the platforms, Democrat, independent, Republican, vote American this time. Don’t vote for those who are set about to destroy our [freedoms].”

Some on the left have criticized David for what they’re framing as a father sullying the memory of his son by getting political. These hypocrites say this as they politicize everything they touch. Then David went where any intelligent leftist feared he would go. He drew parallels between the 9/11 radical Islamic attacks and this election season. He warned that just as America was unprepared for 9/11, it may be unprepared for what a socialist takeover of our government would look like this November. He said Americans can’t afford to be caught by surprise.

David made the point that today’s threats to America don’t come from some foreign country in every case, but rather, more and more of them come from within – within our borders and within our own political system and government. “Our enemies haven’t gone away,” David told Fox News. “They identify themselves as Democratic socialists. Their platform is one that aims to destroy all the values and the foundations of this country that we’ve enjoyed for hundreds of years.”

He punctuated his comments by reminding the cable news network’s audience that he plans to vote against the Islamic socialist and his allies. And he called on everyone who cares about America, just as his son Todd did on 9/11, to get out and vote.

David is correct in that this threat to America can be pushed back in the most non-violent of ways. You have a vote, and so do all the people around you. Make sure that everyone you know and care about, and who care about the future of America as we know it, get out and vote this November.

Let’s roll.

Read more …

Got to do some 9/11.

• 9/11 After a Quarter of a Century (Paul Craig Roberts)

The shock of September 11, 2001, was so great that, despite some initial skepticism, it was four or five years afterward that professional and scientific independent investigators presented evidence that the official narrative had serious problems. Over the years as the evidential problems for the official narratives grew in number and magnitude, I reported the findings. On many anniversaries of the event, I reminded readers that there was more evidence against the official narrative than there was evidence for it. I am not going to repeat all of this information today, as it would be book length. Instead, I am going to show you a different way to think about what is in some ways a defining event.


Before we begin, keep in mind that as early as 2006–long before evidence began accumulating that the official narrative was a lie–a Zogby Poll found that 42% of Americans believed the government concealed and refused to investigate important evidence. How could they believe otherwise with New York’s Chief Fire Marshall protesting that in violation of law the forensic evidence contained in the debris of the Twin Towers and Building 7 was carried away and shipped out of the country before it could be investigated?

How could they believe otherwise when the Cheney/Bush/Zionist Neoconservative administration refused for one year to even convene, not an investigation, but a politically selected committee to ratify the official narrative, especially when afterward the co-chairman of the committee and chief legal counsel wrote books saying the committee was set up to fail, that information was withheld from the committee and that the committee had considered criminal referrals?

Of course, the whore American media reported all doubts as conspiracy theory. Any skeptic of the official narrative was a “conspiracy theorist,” as an AI check using the official narrative as the data base will tell you today. If memory serves–I am not going to go back and read my years of columns and search my archives for the documents as my memory is problem-free–the first professional assault on the official 9/11 narrative was by a professor of physics at Brigham Young University. Being a physics professor, he understood force. He knew that the Twin Towers had been built according to code to withstand airliner hits.

He knew that the effect of an airliner hitting a massive structure of steel and concrete would be the disintegration of the airliner, not the disintegration of the building, just as the airliner that allegedly hit the Pentagon, a structure not built to withstand an airliner strike, disintegrated without a trace with little damage to the building. The official narrative did not explain why the airliner that allegedly hit the Pentagon disappeared into dust, but the airliner hits on the twin towers caused the massive buildings to disintegrate into dust.

The physics professor’s name was Steven E. Jones. He obtained dust from the twin towers, which existed in abundance. Being a scientist, he knew evidence was in the dust. He examined and tested the dust and found unequivocal evidence that the dust contained both reacted and unreacted nano-thermite, the substance used in controlled demolitions. In September 2006 a federally intimidated BYU administration placed Professor Jones, a tenured professor, on paid leave to investigate his controversial public claims. Think for a moment.

When have you ever heard of a professionally qualified professor placed on leave and investigated for reporting a finding? In my opinion based on my Washington and university experience, the BYU administration was told by the George W. Bush regime to shut down Professor Jones or lose federal funding. Professor Jones, if memory serves, realized that his career was over and was paid $850,000 to resign. Jones’ removal served as an indication of what the fate would be for any physicist who took exception to the official narrative.

Ask yourselves, why would a physics professor destroy his career by concocting a false report, indeed, a report that to this day has not been shown to be incorrect. Why would a mistake, if it was, be a suspension worthy of an investigation? Clearly the corrupt George W. Bush Zionist regime intended the shutdown of a truth-teller.

In 2009 Jones together with University of Copenhagen scientist Niels Harrit and other scientists again proved the presence of nano-thermite (“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe,” Open Chemical Physics Journal, April 2009).

American science depends heavily on federal funding, and this was too hot for dependent scientists. In my opinion no physicist anywhere in the world is stupid enough to believe the official 9/11 story. What they do know is that to challenge it is a career-ending event as it was for Professor Jones. Therefore, with mortgages, car payments, children to educate they don’t jeopardize their career and family by endorsing studies that contradict the official narrative. The despicable Wikipedia still labels all factual findings by scientists “conspiracy theory.”

In 2006 architect Richard Gage realized five years after the event that the official narrative had serious problems. He organized the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Enormous information poured out that the official 9/11 narrative was impossible. The NIST fabricated explanation for Building 7 was discredited by a high school physics professor, who showed that the building collapsed at free fall acceleration, which can only be achieved by controlled demolition. The NIST fabrication was discredited again by structural and forensic engineers at the University of Alaska, apparently the only university in America willing to risk federal funding for the truth.

Washington and its whore media labeled the facts a “conspiracy theory” but failed to discredit the independent reports. If it were a conspiracy theory, the establishment would have supported an investigation, as that would have proven that it was a conspiracy theory. Instead the regime worked to prevent and to discredit investigation. The facts were the official narrative. Anything else was a conspiracy theory. The American whore media went along with the fiction.

Structurel architects and high rise engineers face the same problem as professors of physics. If they say what they know, they loose clients. Washington and the whore media have been very successful in turning expressions of truth into anti-Americanism. If you don’t go along with official narratives you are not only a tin hat conspiracy theorist, you are also an anti-American on the side of “Muslim terrorists,” and you lose your clients.

Today anyone who believes the official story of 9/11 is brainwashed. The stupidity of a large percentage of the American population serves to suppress truth. Washington has learned that a story that implants fear in the feeble-minded American population is a success.

We can expect more such instances.

Read more …

Not really… Nukes neutralize the ideas.

“The real architect of World War III isn’t Putin. It’s Xi Jinping—and Russia’s war in Ukraine may be giving Beijing exactly what it needs.”

• We Are in World War Xi (AmG)

As the Russo-Ukrainian war continues, Americans may blame Russian leader Vladimir Putin for starting “World War III.” It is correct that World War III has started, but its cause is the People’s Republic of China (PRC), not Russia.


The war did not start with Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 or with the appeasement of Russia in the years before Putin’s foolish aggression. It started with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The CCP has been at war with the U.S. since coming to power in 1949 and has employed many fronts in this war to undermine America and the West. The CCP’s May 2019 declaration of “People’s War” against the U.S. was CCP leader Xi Jinping’s call for a maximal effort against America. Not coincidentally, the COVID-19 outbreak soon followed. The CCP lied about COVID’s origins, refused to share information with the world, and used Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the World Health Organization (WHO), as its willing accomplice.

Another front is CCP election interference. President Trump has revealed the CCP’s interference in the 2020 U.S. presidential election in an effort to secure President Joe Biden’s victory. Biden’s open borders allowed many hundreds of thousands of military-age Chinese men into the United States—prepositioning a force to strike against the American people in their homeland. The sustained chemical warfare attack that is fentanyl is another avenue of attack, destroying American lives and families. The CCP’s success at buying American and European politicians and journalists to serve as its agents of influence is yet another, as is TikTok.

Putin is not the source of World War III. Putin is, in the scheme of World War III, a secondary player. It is Xi who is driving World War III. It seems that the common denominator for every manifestation of this global crisis, whether overt or covert, foreign or domestic, is that Xi Jinping and his CCP have either inspired or enabled them—or at least, stand to be the principal beneficiaries. Consequently, while some call this World War III, one might consider a more apt name to be “World War Xi.”

It was Xi who gave the green light to Putin to invade Ukraine when they met in early February 2022. Xi and Putin have met over 11 times since then, most recently in Bishkek, and on each occasion, Xi has evinced strong, public support for Putin’s war. While the Russo-Ukrainian war is not yet resolved—it has lasted longer than World War I—it already has a clear winner: the PRC. The PRC provides great assistance to Russia—diplomatic, economic, and “dual-use” military aid—all of which is important to sustain Russia’s war. Beijing is receiving a prodigious return that is helping Xi win World War III.

First, by sustaining the war, the PRC occupies the U.S. and so diverts attention from its aggressive acts and preparations for war over Taiwan, which might include attacks against the U.S. itself. The U.S. intelligence community and military have only so much bandwidth, and the conflicts in Iran, Ukraine, and elsewhere in the Middle East are filling it. In addition, U.S. stockpiles are drained by the conflict in Iran and aid to Ukraine, including Patriot, ATACMS, and other missiles, and 155mm artillery rounds, all of which reduce the ability of the U.S. military to fight a high-intensity war with the PRC. In turn, a reduced U.S. arsenal hurts U.S. conventional deterrence in key theaters, like the western Pacific and Taiwan.

Second, the war cements Putin’s dependence on the PRC. Putin is Xi’s myrmidon, the supplicant in the relationship. Truly, Putin is Xi’s useful idiot. Xi drafted Putin to serve in his anti-Western alliance, which costs Putin his autonomy. Xi’s ultimate ambition is to overthrow U.S. power and position in the world and shackle the world to the PRC’s tyrannical ambitions. Putin’s interest would have been better served by emerging as the tertius gaudens of the conflict between the U.S. and the PRC. Now that he has tied Russia’s interests to the PRC, he will walk the path Xi requires of him.

That requires Russia to accept diminished influence when Russia’s interests conflict with the PRC, such as in Central Asia, and to serve as an instrument of distraction for the U.S. and its NATO allies while China expands its military power and strategic ambitions. Putin must fear that once he has served his usefulness, Xi may overthrow him. Third, Putin also serves as a lightning rod, attracting the world’s animus and attention for his acts while Xi’s genocide in Xinjiang remains too often unremarked and in the background. The PRC’s preparations for war against Taiwan and its increasingly coercive measures against the Philippines also do not receive the attention they deserve.

Fourth, as a result of the Ukraine war, Xi has secured his northern flank. Russian conventional and nuclear military power is now a tool to be employed in conjunction with or apart from the PRC’s military—but to serve Beijing’s interests. The U.S. has a “multiple front” war problem with which it must contend.

Moreover, Xi has secured his western flank in Central Asia. The Central Asian states perceive Russia as a threat due to the invasion of Ukraine and see Moscow as the junior partner in the Sino-Russian relationship. For Xi, this is a remarkable occurrence at the same time that China is committing genocide against Kazakh, Kyrgyz, and Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang or East Turkistan. The PRC’s western flank is as secure as it has been in recent years. With two flanks secure and Xi’s ability to project power expanding, it is no surprise that Xi is aggressing on the PRC’s southern and eastern flanks.

The bottom line is that the Russo-Ukrainian war greatly benefits the PRC. As the PRC gains in military might, this hurts the ability of the U.S. to defend its national security interests elsewhere, including in the western Pacific. In turn, this weakens the ability of the U.S. to deter aggression against Taiwan, the Philippines, and other states, as well as the ability to fight a war with the PRC, should deterrence fail. The costs of the Russo-Ukrainian war are high in every respect. While Moscow may eke out a Pyrrhic victory, the true winner of the war is Beijing. The war continues because Xi wants it to, and his aid allows Putin to pursue his folly. =

Read more …

“He lauded Israel “as America’s most critical frontline ally in fighting the toxic ideology of Islamism..”

• RFK Tells the Brutal Truth About Islam on Eve of 9/11 Anniversary (Salgado)

Islam is in an existential war with Judeo-Christian civilization, Health and Human Services Sec. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. warned Americans on the eve of the 9/11 terrorist attack anniversary.


America stands for liberty, equality, freedom of religion, Biblical morality, civil rights, and meritocracy. Islam stands for theocratic tyranny, religiously motivated genocide, sexual perversion, slavery, and violence. Inevitably, there is a struggle between the two ideologies for global dominance. And there are countless Muslims both in the United States and around the world who want to see a second 9/11 — Democrat campaign surrogate Hasan Piker practically said as much. Kennedy’s warning at the Republican midterm convention is particularly timely as this September 11 is the 25th anniversary of the infamous al-Qaeda attacks.

“RFK Jr. isn’t hiding behind politically correct terms and he’s calling out Islam for what it is. A radical ideology waging war on America. And Democrats no longer care. Communists are merging with Islamists. The unholy alliance is anti-American and anti-West. No more pretending.::— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) September 11, 2026

I cannot agree with Kennedy that the Democrat Party used to be honorable and patriotic, because the leadership of the party has always been anti-constitutional, racist, elitist, and pro-violence. But I do applaud Kennedy for being willing to state the truth about Islam, even if he did so in a mistaken context of attributing his own views to previous Democrat politicians.

Kennedy condemned purveyors of “human slavery and of ethnic religious genocide.” He lauded Israel “as America’s most critical frontline ally in fighting the toxic ideology of Islamism, which, by its own account, is waging an existential war against our country and against Western liberal democracy. It is an ideology that has subjugated, impoverished, and tyrannized, and tortured the people of Palestine,” apparently meaning Gaza, because “Palestine” does not exist as a nation or political jurisdiction, “and [tortured] the people of Iran.”

Furthermore, Kennedy cautioned, fundamentalist Muslims “openly promise to do the same to us.”Indeed, in the same city where the Twin Towers collapsed due to al-Qaeda hijackers on 9/11, a Muslim who prays for the death of the infidels is now the mayor. “NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani Attends Friday Prayers at Al Khoei Islamic Center in Queens – Linked to Alavi Foundation Cited by the DOJ as an Iranian Front; Imam Prays for the Mahdi to Kill the Infidels by His Sword https://t.co/xrRsIpalcH”— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) February 23, 2026

It’s very important, as too many Republicans fall prey to antisemitic propaganda, to note that Kennedy praised Israel and highlighted the plight of the people of Iran, who are longing for freedom. The Persians who have fought their Islamic regime and watched their family members killed this year would fully agree with Kennedy’s assessment and his warning. The 9/11 attacks were not an anomaly; they were part of an ongoing and g lobal war.

Read more …

“The AfD is not asking Germany to choose between Washington and Beijing. It is asking Germany to choose itself..”

• What the AfD Really Wants From China (Zemánek)

For decades, German foreign policy rested on a simple assumption: Germany belonged politically to the West, and its relations with the rest of the world would be conducted largely within that framework. The AfD is challenging that assumption. ts approach to China is one of the clearest tells. Beijing is not treated as an ideological enemy, but neither is it embraced uncritically. Instead, China is seen as a sovereign great power, an indispensable economic partner, and one pole of an emerging multipolar world.


Germany, in the AfD’s view, should cooperate with Beijing where German interests demand it, defend itself where necessary, and refuse to turn China policy into an extension of either American strategy or European ideological politics. For Germany, and therefore for Europe, that could become a genuinely transformative foreign-policy doctrine.

From cautious engagement to strategic realism
The AfD’s 2021 foreign-policy program already described China’s Belt and Road Initiative as a “century project” and called for Germany to participate actively, including by developing complementary connections from West to East. The idea was that if China was building the infrastructure connecting Eurasia, Germany should take advantage of it and represent its interests, not stand on the sidelines and complain about it.

By 2023, the position had become more explicitly geopolitical. When the German government published its China Strategy, AfD senior member Petr Bystron attacked it as an attempt to import American geopolitical confrontation into German foreign policy.

Then came the AfD’s first parliamentary delegation to China. In June 2023, Alice Weidel, Peter Felser and Bystron travelled to Shanghai and Beijing. The delegation’s conclusion was unequivocal: China had become too important for Germany to keep pretending that confrontation was a viable strategy. Felser rejected the idea of both “de-risking” and decoupling, promoted by other EU officials, and argued that German trade with China was simply too important to sacrifice to geopolitical fashion.

The 2025 federal election program adopted at Riesa consolidated this direction. China is treated as a major economic partner, while Germany is urged to protect its own technological and security interests. The party continues to support exploiting opportunities associated with the Belt and Road Initiative while rejecting the idea that Germany should subsidize a country that is already a major economic power.

No more moral foreign policy
Perhaps the deepest difference between the AfD and Germany’s political establishment is not actually about China. It is about what foreign policy is for.mThe AfD’s approach is realpolitik in the German interest, rather than moralpolitik. It explicitly endorses non-interference in the internal affairs of other states and rejects what it calls presumptuous lecturing and destabilizing intervention.

The AfD rejects making human-rights criticism the organizing principle of German-China relations. This does not require pretending that every Chinese policy is admirable. It does, however, mean refusing to make Germany’s relationship with a major sovereign power conditional on Berlin’s approval of its domestic political system. The AfD has argued that Western governments should stop behaving as if they were entitled to act as the world’s political schoolmasters. For Beijing, this is obviously a more comfortable basis for relations than the moralized language of mainstream Western European China policy.

The AfD does not consider all Chinese policies beyond criticism. It has criticized Chinese economic practices, strategic dependencies, technology transfers and the potential consequences of excessive state control over digital infrastructure and society. The party’s position is not ‘China is always right.’ It is ‘China is sovereign. Germany is sovereign. Let us deal with one another as sovereign powers.’

Partnership without dependence
The party wants more economic engagement with China while simultaneously warning Germany against excessive dependence on China. Felser, now chairman of the German-Chinese Parliamentary Group in the Bundestag, has repeatedly emphasized both sides of the equation. In February 2026, he described China as “by no means our enemy” but an “important partner,” while insisting that Germany must protect its “Mittelstand” and establish fair conditions for competition.

In March, he criticized the enormous dependence on China in strategic technologies and raw materials, contrasting German weakness with China’s systematic drive toward technological self-sufficiency. And in July, Felser warned against a trade war with China. Importantly, he did not deny the existence of Chinese dumping, “overcapacity” or competitive distortions. His argument was that tariffs are not an adequate substitute for negotiation.

By September, Felser went further: strategic dependence on China should be reduced not through decoupling, but by making Germany stronger – with lower taxes, less bureaucracy, and cheaper energy. China is not the problem; German weakness is. Germany should not become dependent on China. But neither should it destroy valuable relationships merely to demonstrate would-be ideological purity or geopolitical loyalty to another power.

The Weidel factor
Perhaps no one embodies this approach more naturally than Alice Weidel. The AfD co-leader’s knowledge of China doesn’t come exclusively from briefing papers. She studied in China, speaks Mandarin and has professional experience there. Her familiarity with the Chinese economy is unusual among senior European politicians.

That background provides the AfD with a senior political figure who approaches China neither as an exotic threat nor as a distant ideological abstraction, but as a country she has actually experienced – a rare trait in modern Western European politicians.

For a future German government, that kind of familiarity could be an asset, because China is not going away, and neither is Germany’s industrial dependence on the Chinese market. Pretending otherwise will not make the problem disappear.

[..] The stakes are larger than the AfD itself. Germany is the economic center of the European Union. If Berlin changes its understanding of China, the consequences will not stop at the German border.

A Germany that pursued pragmatic relations with Beijing, Moscow and Washington simultaneously would challenge the strategic assumptions that have governed Europe for decades.

A Germany that rejected automatic economic decoupling from China could force Europe to reconsider whether confrontation is really in its economic interest.

A Germany that put national sovereignty and multipolarity at the center of its foreign policy could fundamentally alter the balance between Berlin, Brussels and Washington.

The AfD’s policy is not about choosing China over America. It is about rejecting the idea that Germany must choose at all. It’s not a timid or ambiguous stance – on the contrary, it is unapologetically national, realist and multipolar.

And if the AfD eventually governs Germany, it may prove to be one of the most consequential political changes Europe has experienced in generations. A sovereign Germany engaging China on its own terms could be the beginning of a Europe that finally understands the world as it is – not as the liberal utopians once wished it to remain.

Read more …

EU demands that.

• EU Urges Kiev To Mobilize Women – Moscow (RT)

Brussels believes the move is needed to address the Ukrainian military’s severe manpower shortage, according to Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service Brussels is encouraging Kiev to start mobilizing women amid chronic manpower shortages and has demanded that Ukraine immediately make “a political decision” on the matter, the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has said.


Kiev launched its mobilization campaign soon after the conflict with Russia escalated in February 2022. Amid mounting frontline losses and desertions, the mobilization drive has grown increasingly violent. Recruitment officers have repeatedly been filmed chasing, beating, and forcibly detaining reluctant conscripts before bundling them into vehicles in what in Ukraine has become known as “basification.”

EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, described the idea of expanding the campaign to include women as “a step in the right direction” at a recent informal EU foreign ministers’ meeting, the SVR said on Thursday, citing information it had obtained. She allegedly warned that Kiev could soon run out of manpower due to a growing shortage of men fit for military service and said that Ukraine should use Israel as a “model to follow.”

The mobilization of women has long been a subject of debate in Ukraine. MP Mariana Bezuglaya argued as early as 2024 that it was time Kiev started targeting women to meet its conscription quota. Last year, the Ukrainian presidential administration’s deputy head, Brigadier General Pavel Palisa, also voiced support for mandatory conscription of women. According to the SVR, Brussels demanded that Kiev immediately “move from words to action” and make a formal decision to start mobilizing women. Under current Ukrainian law, men aged 25 to 60 are subject to mobilization, while those aged 23 to 60 are generally barred from leaving the country. Women can serve voluntarily.

Kiev’s brutal mobilization campaign has encountered large-scale draft-dodging and desertion. According to Euronews, around 1.15 million fighting-age Ukrainian men had ended up in the EU as of summer 2026, despite the ban on travelling abroad. According to the SVR, up to 5.6 million Ukrainians are currently residing in various European nations, with women accounting for 43.4% of them. Many men have proven ready to risk their lives to flee the country illegally through forests, rivers, and mountainous terrain.

In February, the head of the Ukrainian border agency, Andrey Demchenko, reported that over 70 apparent draft dodgers had died since 2022, most while trying to cross the Tisza River along Ukraine’s border with Hungary and Romania. Brussels has reportedly urged EU governments to devise legal mechanisms for sending back Ukrainian refugees residing in the bloc, the Russian intelligence service said, adding that the European Commission sees them as a reason behind the “rise of far-right sentiment” in countries such as Germany or Poland.

Some Western officials have also voiced support for the mobilization of Ukrainian women. Last year, former British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said that Vladimir Zelensky should have launched a truly mass mobilization and conscripted all men and women, without sparing the younger generation. “Zelensky took a view that he was going to preserve the 18 to 28-year-olds, so it’s not a mass conscription,” Wallace said at the time, adding that the Ukrainian leader should have mobilized everyone and “asked Europe to train them because that is not a hard ask.”

Ben Hodges, a former top commander of US forces in Europe, argued earlier that Kiev should consider both drafting women and lowering the mobilization age to 18. “I also think that there is enough work for women in the army,” he stated.Moscow has repeatedly slammed Ukraine’s NATO backers as pushing the nation into a war “to the last Ukrainian,” describing the conflict as a Western proxy war against Russia fought through Ukraine.

Read more …

“It’s astonishing that anything exists.” — Ludwig Wittgenstein

• Light and Dark (James Howard Kunstler)


Joe DiGenova
Is this a week to drain our souls, or what? Yesterday, the memory of Charlie Kirk, a decent young man known for acting nobly in an ignoble era, cut down (it is alleged in court) by a pathetic product of Woke cultism — the trans avenging angel, avatar of our national mental illness. And today, the memory of 9/11, for which no alt-theory or engineering lecture can obviate the lonely arc of those little bodies free-falling out of the flaming towers into nothingness.


So, we move on because there is nothing else you can do, really. . . sad, furious, or what. . . and then do what you can to fix this joint. If this was a house in a storm, you’d be hearing the joists groan and the rafters squeak as they torque out of true, like just before the whole shootin’ match goes down. Meanwhile, news is out that Joe DiGenova, the former DC federal attorney supervising the grand jury action in Florida concerning RussiaGate and associated treasons, is out. He said he “resigned.” That’s usually a cover. Somebody gave him the boot, and it was either Todd Blanche or President Trump. Cuz, why? I suppose we’ll find out.

Trollish insinuations are flying in the usual channels that he couldn’t get enough evidence to bring any proper cases, but I don’t believe that for a horse-face Hochul’s New York minute, nor that Mr. DiGenova actually said anything like that. Anyway, at least twenty million civilians ‘out there’ have been following this constitutional death dance closely for years. We know the names, the acts, the memos, the emails, the money trails, the dots and the receipts by heart. Many can even recite long legal memoranda on the likes of John Brennan, Adam Schiff, Jim Comey, Hillary, Strzok, Page, blah blah, dates, times, document numbers.

Joe DiGenova is old, others say. Not a good organizer, turns out. . . not a good team leader. . . things like that. Well, maybe his force of personality or renowned avidity to correct epic insults to the nation concealed all that. Anyway, he was brought in to replace a federal attorney name of Maria Medetis Long, and I bet none of you even know her name. She was on the case down there in Florida during Pam Bondi’s unfortunate commission, too blah even to go down in infamy. To the casual observer, the whole wicked business begins to look like a Chinese fire drill.

Or possibly a circle-jerk. And, of course, everybody is wondering: what’s the blast radius on this one? Can the DOJ’s Southern District of Florida recover some kind of equipoise and carry on and usher this pretty large troupe of scoundrels into courts of law? Or is folding like a Broadway tryout in New Haven? Does it now all get sucked into some vortex of lost causes? And wouldn’t that be demoralizing?

My guess: these acts against the country and its people are too grave, too important, to just go away, and won’t go away. What the diGenova fumble seems to point to is that persons and parties behind that treason — and you might suppose I’m thinking: the Intel (so-called) “community” and its many-footed ancillaries — are both desperate and powerful enough to try to derail the process. Just imagine how many retired Intel rogues are out there after seventy-plus years of, say, the CIA alone. Must be a lot of them, imcluding the fifty-one ex-Intel bigshots who signed the Hunter Biden laptop public letter in 2020 to queer the election.

You’ve got to wonder whether the agency that John Ratcliffe is supposedly in charge of has an equally large shadow org of these people, perhaps operating under the likes of one ex-CIA honcho John Brennan. And then you have to wonder what machinery of government they’ve still got their mitts on? Or maybe they just put the word out that pursuing any just resolution of the traitorous trips laid on America by them could be bad for anyone’s health. In any case, I don’t hesitate to point out that the legions of ex-spooks and their bag-men all have names and records and. . . well. . . apply a little Anthropic hocus-pocus. . . we’ll know where you live and what you had for breakfast before the ten a.m. break.

What I’m getting at — and I regret even having to affect coyness — is that the departure of Joe diGenova could signify some Battle of the Titans, a civil war not on the ground between plain citizens too bamboozled by sexual hysteria to put up a fight, but between the general officer ranks of two opposing elite dominions, the legitimate and the shadow, the light and the dark.

The action won’t stay backstage for long. Barbarians really are at the gate, and that gate is the midterm election. America has gone so crazy that it doesn’t seem to even recognize how crazy many of the candidates for high office are. The shadow dominion appears to be behind them, too: Telarico, el-Sayed, Peggy Flanagan, Becerra, Hochul. . . Lord have mercy! These are not just not-normal people. They are outright sickies, working hard to wreck the country.

Well, Labor Day is gone and the blandishments of summer with it. Time to stop sulking. All hands on deck. The bell has rung.

Read more …

I haven’t paid any attention to the Lindsay Clancy thing, but here it is.

• The Secret to “Sleeping Well” (Turley)

I was surprised to hear on a flight this week that Lindsay Clancy’s defense counsel, Kevin Reddington, had unleashed a torrent of criticism of my commentary on the trial. In the interview with Fox News reporter Bryan Llenas, Reddington even suggested that we meet and debate these issues. I wanted to briefly respond to Reddington’s criticisms.


I actually praised Reddington’s handling through the end of the trial, until I felt he blew the summation to the jury. I was also critical of his motions to substitute a holdout juror with an alternate as running against the overwhelming authority in the area. However, what triggered Reddington was not my commentary on his trial performance, but what he did outside of the courthouse when he attacked the holdout juror. It was a repugnant and unprofessional venting by counsel who should be reaffirming the right of every juror to stand with their convictions against not just the other jurors but the world.

Reddington responded to my characterization of his conduct in front of the courthouse as “reprehensible” by calling my criticism reprehensible and adding, “maybe Jonathan Turley should check out the record before he makes his accusations.”

The “record” supporting this criticism is, in fact, his self-aggrandizing performance outside of the courthouse when he first said that the hung jury was “no time to gloat” and then gloated about how he “crushed” the prosecution in securing an 11-1 result. Yet, my objection was not to chest-thumping. It was a tad ungracious but unfortunately not entirely uncommon. Rather, it was the targeting of the holdout that left me floored as a fellow criminal defense lawyer.

Reddington had previously lit up the courtroom (which was being aired nationally) with his attacks on the juror. Reddington only knew that the other jurors were unhappy with the juror and said that he refused to follow the law. That is a common complaint against a holdout juror. This case turned on the credibility of the defendant and almost visceral reactions to a case where three innocent children were strangled by their mother, who planned the killings by sending her husband on errands.

I was mildly critical of the courtroom attacks, but I give leeway to a defense counsel who is fighting zealously for his client in seeking an acquittal. It was taking that rage outside the courthouse that crossed the line for me. Reddington slammed into the juror who was already identified as one of just three males on the jury. He knew the juror’s name would likely be disclosed in time, given the anger over the trial’s outcome.

We clearly disagree on what lawyers are expected to do in high-profile cases. This is not what I teach my students about the professional standards that govern our conduct as officers of the court. Most of those expectations are not directly enforced by bar or court proceedings. Rather, much of what we do is the result of self-regulation; seeking to reinforce the noble ideals of our profession.

Instead of reminding people that our system is based on this core belief in the right of any citizen to stand alone against the majority, Reddington shredded the juror as presumptively anti-disability and akin to a racist on the jury. In front of the cameras, he declared, “I hope that guy can sleep well at night.”

Reddington knew that he was playing to the mob. District Attorney Tim Cruz had just been heckled on the steps by women who protested throughout the trial in favor of acquittal of Clancy, with one yelling how Cruz “only cares about the three children. What about the Mom?”

Frankly, in the aftermath of the trial, the two things that surprised me most were not the verdict, but the absence of an immediate apology from Reddington for his gratuitous attack on this juror and the failure of Judge William Sullivan to publicly rebuke him for his comments.

While our disagreement focuses on the attack on the juror, Reddington returned to his claim that what this juror did was itself unethical and contemptible. This juror was not convinced by his arguments, but Reddington suggests that no reasonable juror could have reached such a view despite many in this country who saw his client as a troubled murderer, but a murderer nonetheless.

There was a good-faith basis for taking that view even if most people would likely see Clancy as not responsible by reason of insanity. The standard is not whether Clancy was medically ill. She was clearly a deeply disturbed individual who failed to receive adequate mental health treatment. However, you can be suicidal and mentally ill and still appreciate the gravity of your actions.

The defense position was not unassailable. The long list of medications ignored the fact that only a couple of those prescriptions would likely contribute to psychosis and it was not clear how many pills Clancy actually took. She also had a fairly unusual case of postpartum psychosis in terms of the passage of time and said that she first heard a commanding male voice for the first time just before she killed her children.

Most importantly, Clancy took steps that showed planning and control of her actions, including researching how long it would take her misdirected husband to return. She spoke with him on the telephone while she was carrying out the plan and kept him in the dark about her intent to kill their children.

Would that erase reasonable doubt in the minds of most jurors? Probably not. As I stated before the trial, the chances of getting a unanimous verdict in this type of case are slim. This is a visceral case, which is why I was not surprised that the jury asked only to see a couple of pieces of evidence. The views of most people were baked into this trial before it began, and frankly, that may have been true for some of the jurors.

Reddington has every reason to exploit those feelings and play to doubts among the jurors. What he did not have license to do was target and ostracize the one holdout juror. Rather than taking the high ground, he immediately ran for the lowest common denominator among a nation of rage addicts.

Yes, that is indeed reprehensible. To paraphrase Mr. Reddington, it is the type of thing that would keep most of us up at night.

Read more …

An age thing?

• To Hell with the Digital Revolution & Its Bastard Child AI (Paul Craig Roberts)

It has been pointed out that human interaction has been replaced by an app, a code, a portal that a large percentage of the population finds frustrating and inconvenient, especially for older people who did not grow up with the isolating and often difficult to use technology. The people who crammed this technology down our throats in order that they could make more money praise the “innovation.” But in fact it is a technology that isolates people and takes control away from them.


And brings failure. Not a week passes, and sometimes not a day, that I don’t experience the time-consuming failure of the digital systems to work. Why they fail so often I don’t know. Perhaps they are poorly thought out and will improve with time. Perhaps the instability in digital systems is due to the insecurity of the Internet, which requires more and more layers of security hoops to jump through in order to make a connection. One result is security system incompatibilities that result in dysfunction. Perhaps use is rising faster than the systems can accommodate.

I think the only reason there has not been a generalized breakdown is that there are some elements left of the analogue system that, with effort, can still be contacted to bypass or correct the dysfunctioning digital system. I just had another bad experience with “smart” people-free systems. I received an email telling me to confirm and do an early checkin online for an upcoming medical telephone appointment. Now you can do an annual checkup without having to see a doctor. I began the process and immediately encountered a problem. I was asked to confirm my telephone number. It was incorrect from three years ago.

I entered the correct number, and the red box appeared: “This is not the number we have on file. Please enter a correct number.” I had entered the correct number as requested in the update, but as far as the AI system was concerned the correct number was the old number. I puzzled why an old number was in the system as I have twice been in person in the office providing all the latest information and have even had telephone calls from the medical practice on the new number that AI tells me is not on file.

So I picked up my cell phone, which sometimes works, and called. I only had to wait 3 minutes for a human instead of being subjected to a callback within 48-hours, and in 2 more minutes the human had fixed the problem. I wondered how much the medical practice had paid for a digital system that did not work and was probably causing its patients stress-induced heart attacks.

I am convinced that the digital revolution and the AI it spawned will fail, because it will be overwhelmed by complexity. Moreover, once the quantum computers are up and running there will be no such thing as security. So bright boys will have institutionalized an insecure and dysfunctional system, a system whose achievement will have been to further dehumanize an already dehumanized society and impose massive costs for resurrecting the foolishly discarded analogue system which worked and did not dehumanize us.

When the digital system fails, who will there be with the skills and intelligence to rebuild the analogue system that worked? Will there even be a workforce available? The products of AI education are not capable of operating in an analogue system that relies on human ability. AI will have raised generations of illiterates who cannot read, write, do math and who have never learned to think. In the 1950s Mad comic book parodied our present time. AI operated everything, and one day the machine broke and no one knew how to fix it. Amazing that a comic book editor three-quarters of a century ago had more sense than the multi-billionaire architects of AI today.

Read more …

Why so much worse there?

• More Than 62,000 Arrested For Speech-Related Offenses In Britain (AmG)

More than 62,000 people were arrested in Britain for communications offenses over a five-year period, according to a new civil liberties report warning that the country’s increasingly broad speech restrictions are having a chilling effect on free expression. Big Brother Watch found that 62,199 people were arrested between 2021 and 2025, amounting to roughly 34 arrests per day. At least 18,500 people were charged and 12,292 were convicted, according to the organization.


The findings were based on Freedom of Information requests to police forces across the United Kingdom. Big Brother Watch said the actual number of arrests could be higher because some forces did not provide complete data. The report examined enforcement of communications laws that can cover threatening or grossly offensive messages and other online content. Big Brother Watch argues that broadly written statutes have resulted in people being investigated or arrested over controversial social media posts, jokes and other forms of expression.

The group also found stark geographical differences in enforcement. Cumbria Constabulary recorded about 25.7 arrests per 10,000 residents over five years, compared with just 1.9 in neighboring Northumbria.Big Brother Watch described the disparity as a “postcode lottery” that raises concerns about whether speech laws are being enforced consistently. The report follows growing scrutiny of Britain’s Online Safety Act, which imposes extensive content and child-safety requirements on internet platforms. Big Brother Watch says the law has encouraged platforms to restrict lawful material and require age verification for some online content.

Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, called for an independent review of Britain’s speech laws and police practices. “Thousands of people are being arrested for controversial speech, online jokes and non-violent protest,” Carlo said. “Enough is enough.” The organization argues the figures demonstrate that Britain’s approach to policing speech needs significant reform, particularly when arrests do not ultimately result in criminal charges. Big Brother Watch is now calling on the government to conduct a national review of laws affecting freedom of expression and to reconsider police training on speech-related offenses.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 11 2026

Sep 112026
 
 September 11, 2026  Posted by at 9:40 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  31 Responses »


Roy Lichtenstein Femme d’Alger 1963


• Trump Floats $5,000 For Every US Adult Citizen If GOP Holds Congress (ZH)
• ‘The Greatest Evangelist for American Liberty,’ Charlie Kirk (Salgado)
• Tributes Pour in on Anniversary of Charlie Kirk’s Martyrdom (Salgado)
• European Leaders Trying To ‘Buy Time’ For Kiev With Ceasefire Calls – Lavrov (RT)
• ECB Raises Interest Rates to Avoid Settling Ukraine-Russia Conflict (CTH)
• Democrats Asked for It, and Trump and the GOP Delivered (Eric Florack)
• Bessent: ‘Nothing Else Matters’ If China Pulls Ahead of US in AI (ET)
• New Four-hour Elon Musk Documentary (BBC)
• The US Has Entered Stage 3 in the Trade War With Canada (Victor Davis Hanson)
• The Story of Slavery Told Correctly (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Jamaica Demands Answers On Slavery (Egountchi Behanzin)

 


 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2097489781911368179?s=20 https://twitter.com/Alexs_jame/status/2097873034052821190?s=20

 


 


“Stimmy” Checks?!

• Trump Floats $5,000 For Every US Adult Citizen If GOP Holds Congress (ZH)

During a speech Wednesday night at the GOP’s midterm convention in Dallas, Texas, President Trump proposed sending every adult American citizen a $5,000 “Trump dividend” if Republicans retain control of both chambers of Congress in November. “If the Republicans win the House of Representatives and the United States Senate, both of them,” Trump said, “I will issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the United States of America for $5,000.”bHe continued, “It will be called the Trump dividend,” adding, “Now all we have to do is win.”


Trump told the audience at the American Airlines Center: “Your vote will decide whether our country stumbles at the starting gate of our next 250 years or surges forward and never looks back.” nQuick math: A $5,000 payout to 270 million adults would cost the US government approximately $1.35 trillion. The proposal comes as US public debt surpassed $40 trillion for the first time in recent weeks.mBloomberg strategist Mark Cudmore warned that a large fiscal injection could intensify existing market pressures, including weaker Treasuries, dollar depreciation, and demand for commodities and other real assets.

“The general reaction from markets is very muted precisely as everyone sees almost zero chance of this happening. The US economy is strong and already at risk of running too hot, so pumping in so much extra fiscal stimulus when under funding pressure will exacerbate all the dynamics we’re already focused on in markets: weaker Treasuries, a depreciating dollar and a rush to commodities and real assets,” Cudmore said.

The proposal also arrives as Trump acknowledges that significant fuel-price relief may not come until after the midterms. The national average for gasoline remains above the politically sensitive $ 4-per-gallon level, while diesel prices are at record highs. Trump also indicated that the Iran conflict could continue beyond the elections. President Trump’s approval rating is around 38%, according to reporting by The Guardian.

Vice President JD Vance said that these proposed post-election direct payments to Americans could be funded by revenue from Trump’s wide-ranging tariff program.

Read more …

He gave Trump young America. And now?

• ‘The Greatest Evangelist for American Liberty,’ Charlie Kirk (Salgado)

Exactly a year ago today, an LGBTQ radical assassinated Charlie Kirk with one shot, taking away in a split second a man who could have been the next great leader of America’s Patriots for decades to come. At the Republican midterm convention, President Donald Trump paid tribute to Charlie, and the White House released a video in his honor.


The White House video combined clips of Charlie himself, including from that morning at Utah Valley University just before he died, along with clips from Charlie’s funeral and Trump‘s eulogy. “On that terrible day, Sept. 10, 2025, our greatest evangelist for American liberty became immortal; he’s immortal now for American freedom,” Trump had praised Kirk. Do we remember what Charlie stood for enough to carry on his legacy with enthusiasm and courage?


With his speeches and debates around the country from the time he was a teenager, Charlie Kirk was able to electrify young people in a way the most conservatives never have. “Do you know you are part of something bigger than yourself?” the White House clip of Kirk asked. “Do you know that you are part of the most exciting, diverse, powerful movement in the history of this country? This movement is about the citizens versus the oligarchs. This movement is about We the People versus the ruling class. This movement is about America versus the globalists. This movement is about all of us against them.”

Kirk loved the Biblical saying, “Here I am. It means, ‘Lord, use me.’ Abraham, at the binding of Isaac said, ‘Lord, here I am.’ Moses at the burning bush,… Samuel, Isaiah… It means, ‘give me the orders,’” he said. Erika Kirk has harkened back to this attitude of her husband’s and how he had offered himself to God, without realizing that he was going to be a martyr.

Trump made a point of honoring Charlie Kirk at the midterm convention on the evening of September 9, just before the anniversary of his death. “In Charlie’s honor, I just want to say we love you, Charlie, and Erika is here someplace,” Trump said, urging Charlie’s widow to stand up. The packed crowd gave Erika Kirk a standing ovation, and then broke out into chants of, “Charlie! Charlie!”


During the speech, Trump reflected, “It was actually one year ago tomorrow, a far-left extremist assassinated my great friend and conservative voice, Charlie Kirk, because Charlie Kirk spoke the truth.” And of course, it was precisely Kirk‘s success at what he did, and his unfailing charity in doing so, that made him such a promising candidate for president in the future and a particular target of leftist hatred. Tyler Robinson killed Kirk, and countless leftists celebrated the assassination because Kirk was too persuasive with the truth.

https://twitter.com/Newsforce/status/2097884281355849829?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2097884281355849829%7Ctwgr%5Ec72c95f6b84fa6d7c67e7efa1b40cebad9aa11af%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fcatherinesalgado%2F2026%2F09%2F10%2Fthe-greatest-evangelist-for-american-liberty-n4957076


Trump referred to this reality. “What shocked millions of Americans was not only the fact that Charlie was murdered, as bad as it was, but also how many people made an excuse for it or cheered for it. They were cheering, some people, sick people. For a brief moment, the mask came off the radical left, and you saw what they were… all about. And now those same people are trying to get power over you in this election, and they are all voting Democrat.”

We cannot bring back Charlie Kirk, but we can try to continue the work that he began so successfully of bringing young people back to a love for country, faith, and family. Winning this midterm election is what Charlie would want, but it is only the beginning.

Read more …

9/11 commemoration turns into Charlie Kirk memorial.

• Tributes Pour in on Anniversary of Charlie Kirk’s Martyrdom (Salgado)

“One year ago, our nation witnessed pure evil when Charlie Kirk was taken from us,” Attorney General Todd Blanche declared September 10. But as Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton declared, “I miss my friend, and I’ll honor him by never backing down… Charlie will never be forgotten.”

https://twitter.com/AndrewKolvet/status/2098115149609783776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2098115149609783776%7Ctwgr%5E0efbd5ae8ecba063350141b98df8c18e7a20623b%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fcatherinesalgado%2F2026%2F09%2F10%2Ftributes-pour-in-on-anniversary-of-charlie-kirks-martyrdom-n4957089


President Donald Trump paid tribute to Kirk both at the Republican midterm convention Wednesday night and in a video the White House released to “the greatest evangelist for American liberty.” Trump urged Americans to vote against the party that celebrated Kirk’s death. “It was actually one year ago tomorrow, a far-left extremist assassinated my great friend and conservative voice, Charlie Kirk, because Charlie Kirk spoke the truth,” the president emphasized. Many members of his administration also praised Charlie and mourned the anniversary of his death. Secretary of State Marco Rubio illustrated how he is trying to implement policies that would make Charlie proud.


HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote, “One year ago, a bullet silenced one of the most eloquent truth-tellers of our era. But it could not silence the principles Charlie Kirk stood for. Today, we honor Charlie’s devotion to God, to our country, and to the Constitution. We carry his legacy forward by summoning his best virtues in ourselves—and living with the courage, conviction, and faith that defined his life.” Similarly, Bishop Robert Barron praised Charlie‘s ability to see every human being as a beloved creation of God. Like the White House, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth used the biblical commendation, “Well done, good and faithful servant.”


White House advisor Stephen Miller exclaimed, “Charlie was a beloved friend, an unflinching ally, and an indispensable warrior for America. He was murdered not only by an evil assassin but an entire ecosystem of far-left extremism that normalizes, justifies and glorifies violence against its political opponents. The success of America depends upon the dismantlement of these violent networks. As we grieve an unimaginable loss, we pledge ourselves to accelerate the work for which Charlie gave his very life. No one can remain on the sidelines when the stakes are so vast.”


One artist is honoring Charlie with a statue in New York City, and there is also a new statue of Charlie in Phoenix.


Charlie’s own Turning Point USA and his widow Erika released heart-breaking homages. “We have had to learn how to carry on without the person who was at the center of everything we do,” the TPUSA team said soberly. “We have celebrated milestones that Charlie should have been here to celebrate. We have stood on stages where his voice should have been heard. We have watched his children grow without their father there to see it. And we have felt the weight of his absence in ways that never seem to get easier.” Indeed, “For the people who knew and loved Charlie, September 10 will never simply be an anniversary. It is the day our lives were changed forever.”


The Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro warned against conservatives splitting into hate-filled and conspiratorial factions, urging a united front against all the leftists celebrating “Kirkiversary.”

There were even international tributes. Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa posted, “A man of strong faith, a husband and a father, Charlie believed that political and ideological differences should be confronted through argument and democratic debate – never through hatred or violence… Charlie Kirk is no longer with us, but the values he stood for – freedom of expression, faith, courage and peaceful political debate – remain. They deserve to be defended.”

But the greatest tribute that any of us can ever give Charlie Kirk is to continue the work that he started and refuse to let the radical, godless left take over America.

Read more …

“Russia will not accept as a neighbor a nation ruled by a “Russophobic and aggressive neo-Nazi regime,” the top diplomat has said ..”

• European Leaders Trying To ‘Buy Time’ For Kiev With Ceasefire Calls – Lavrov (RT)

Zelensky and Finnish President Stubb, Kiev, Ukraine, August 24, 2026

European leaders calling for a ceasefire in the Russia-Ukraine conflict are seeking to preserve the government in Kiev in its current aggressive anti-Russian form, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Even politicians who acknowledge that Kiev cannot militarily retake the former Ukrainian regions that have joined Russia since 2014 and now advocate a truce are pursuing an agenda that threatens Russia and its citizens, the top diplomat said. Speaking in an interview on Tuesday, Lavrov named Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni as examples.


The proposed ceasefire “is also just a way to buy time, as everyone knows,” Lavrov said, adding that Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky “makes no secret of that” as he seeks additional weapons supplies. mAccording to the Russian minister, the goal of this ploy is to preserve and keep in power “the regime currently ruling in Kiev,” whose defining traits he described as “Nazism, aggressive Russophobia, violations of human rights, language rights and religious freedom.” As for Europe, it wants to preserve that openly Russophobic and aggressive neo-Nazi regime. It is the European plan. I don’t see how the Russian people can accept this outcome.

Moscow’s objections to freezing the conflict remain unchanged, as does its opposition to proposals to deploy troops from NATO member states in Ukraine following a potential peace deal, Lavrov said. “Any people in military uniforms and any military facilities will be legitimate [targets] for us, and no scenario under which Ukraine will acquire NATO membership in all but name is acceptable to us,” he stressed.Lavrov was interviewed in Moscow by Russian-American television host Dimitri Simes and visiting US political commentator Andrew Napolitano, better known as Judge Napolitano, after his former role on the New Jersey Superior Court.

Read more …

Good observation. The EU blames Putin AND Trump. And it wants no ceasefire.

• ECB Raises Interest Rates to Avoid Settling Ukraine-Russia Conflict (CTH)

The European Central Bank raised interest rates a quarter of a percent claiming the effort will reduce energy prices. However, the primary cause of higher energy costs is energy policy not monetary policy. As you can see, Europe is blaming the Iran conflict, and by extension blaming President Trump for inflicting higher oil and gas prices. Yet in reality, it was the European decision to cut themselves off of Russian oil and gas that led to their massive price increases.


In essence, if you ask yourself how far the EU collective is willing to go in order to combat the fictitious threat represented by Russia’s conflict with non-EU state Ukraine, it appears there is no upper limit. Rather than assist in a resolution of the Ukraine-Russia conflict, they are willing to keep fueling the war and diminishing their own economy in the process. From the perspective of the welfare of the average European, none of this makes sense. This is bureaucratic ideology running amok.

FRANKFURT, Germany (AP) — The European Central Bank raised interest rates Thursday to cool inflation that is being fed by high oil prices from the Iran war. The decision was supported by a stronger-than-expected economy that suggests businesses can weather the higher borrowing costs. The central bank for the 21 EU member countries that use the euro currency raised its benchmark rate by a quarter percentage point to 2.50% at a meeting held in Berlin, away from the bank’s Frankfurt headquarters.

Bank President Christine Lagarde said at her news conference that “the conflict in the Middle East continues to generate inflation pressures, and inflation is set to remain well above target for an extended period.” “The outlook remains highly uncertain, with risks to the upside for inflation and to the downside for economic growth,” she said, adding that the bank would make future rate decisions meeting by meeting based on incoming data. She said the central bank would not commit to any particular path for rates before seeing the data. (read more)

It is ironic his announcement comes from Berlin as the German economy announces the loss of 100,000 auto workers while the EU Central Bank says, “a stronger than expected economy.” Ever the faithful leftist WEF member, Poland Prime Minister Donald Tusk notes that Poland is paying the highest energy prices in the world, but he faithfully supports the EU agenda. Because it’s Russia’s fault, and of course he does.

Read more …

“Stopping him from doing what, exactly?” That’s the question Democrats don’t want asked, because it’s where their whole strategy comes apart.”

• Democrats Asked for It, and Trump and the GOP Delivered (Eric Florack)

Ever the consummate showman, President Trump invented the concept of the midterm convention, and he stepped right in to headline it. But there’s a perfectly legitimate argument that Republicans should run on what they’ve actually accomplished rather than turning this election into another referendum on one man. I made exactly that argument myself, at column length, yesterday in the VIP article, “So, What Has Donald Trump Actually Accomplished?” (If you’re not a VIP member yet, why not?)


Elections ought to be about results, policy, and competing visions for the future — not another round of “Trump good” versus “Trump bad.” That’s the ideal. Unfortunately, politics doesn’t happen in the ideal. It happens in the real world, and every strategy has to survive contact with the reality surrounding it.

And here’s the reality Republicans can’t wish away: Democrats have already made Donald Trump the centerpiece. They’ve been doing it for over a decade. Since he first came down that escalator, Democrats and most of the institutional media have treated virtually everything in American life as somehow being about Donald Trump — his personality, his tweets, his speeches, his insults, his policies, his supporters, his opponents, his legal troubles, his victories, his defeats.

Did the cat hack up a hairball on your pillow while you were sleeping? Trump’s fault. Car won’t start? Trump’s fault. Kid brought home a report card that reads like a cry for help? Also, somehow, Trump’s fault. At this point, Democrats have done everything but formally rename the San Andreas Fault “Trump’s Fault.” For years, Democrats told voters, loudly and on an endless loop, that the defining issue facing the country is Donald Trump. They made him the issue. They made him the villain. They made him the explanation for everything they didn’t like.

They made him the explanation for everything that happened after he left office. They made him the explanation for everything that’s happened since he came back. bAnd now, having spent years insisting Donald Trump is an existential threat to the Republic, they apparently expect Republicans to politely agree that maybe we shouldn’t bring him up too much this fall? That’s adorable.

Sorry. That’s not how this works. Republicans can certainly choose to talk about something else — but that strategy has a fatal flaw: you don’t get to unilaterally decide what the other side’s campaign is about. If Democrats plan to spend the whole cycle talking about Trump (and obviously they do), pretending he isn’t part of the election just hands them the subject uncontested. Not answering them isn’t strategy. It’s surrender with better lighting.

There’s also a real difference between making Trump the centerpiece and simply recognizing that the opposition has already made him the centerpiece. Those aren’t nearly the same move. Republicans don’t have to make every speech about Trump. They don’t need his face on every mailer. They don’t need every candidate sounding like they were personally deputized by Trump to defend Western civilization before breakfast. But they do need to recognize the political battlefield they’re standing on.

The question isn’t whether Republicans should crown Donald Trump the centerpiece of the midterms. It’s whether they’re willing to fight on the battlefield that already exists — which is exactly what I did in yesterday’s column, and from what I saw, what they did last night, in Texas. If Democrats are going to campaign on stopping Trump, Republicans have every right, and frankly an obligation, to ask voters a simple follow-up: “Stopping him from doing what, exactly?” That’s the question Democrats don’t want asked, because it’s where their whole strategy comes apart.

It’s one thing to tell voters that Donald Trump is an awful human being, a threat to democracy, a fascist, a dictator-in-waiting, or whatever label happens to be trending that week. And as they’ve demonstrated, you don’t even need to have any proof of any of it. Simple repetition does the work. However, it’s an entirely different thing to explain why the actual policies voters are living under should be thrown out. Democrats have clearly demonstrated that they can’t do the second part. They’ve never had to — they’ve spent a decade coasting on the former.

Read more …

“There Is No Day After Tomorrow”; Bessent Warns Of Consequences To Losing AI Arms Race To China,

• Bessent: ‘Nothing Else Matters’ If China Pulls Ahead of US in AI (ET)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the United States cannot afford to fall behind China in artificial intelligence, warning that a Chinese lead would outweigh other U.S. advantages. “Beating China – there is no day after tomorrow if China wins at this,” Bessent said on Sept. 9 at Breitbart News’s “State of the Economy” event in Washington. “If they were to pull ahead of us on AI, then nothing else matters.” Bessent made the remarks while answering a question about opposition to data centers and the need to expand the infrastructure required for AI development.


On the same day, the National Security Agency, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and FBI issued a joint advisory accusing six China-based AI companies of conducting industrial-scale campaigns to extract capabilities from U.S. frontier AI models. The agencies named DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, Alibaba, MiniMax, StepFun, and Z.AI, saying the companies had extracted billions of tokens through millions of requests to frontier models including Claude, GPT, Gemini, and Grok since at least late 2024.

Agencies Detail Model Distillation
Knowledge distillation is a machine learning technique in which one model is trained using the outputs of another. The technique is commonly used legitimately, including to develop smaller or less expensive models. The advisory alleged, however, that the six companies engaged in “aggressive, malicious, and targeted” distillation at an industrial scale to extract restricted proprietary functions and capabilities from U.S. models. The NSA said the companies were systematically extracting U.S. model capabilities to train their own systems.

According to the advisory, the companies distributed their activity across model providers, cloud platforms, and other infrastructure to avoid detection. Some used third-party services to relay requests to U.S. models, allowing them to bypass geographic restrictions and other safeguards, the agencies said. The agencies assessed that the alleged activity took place “likely with Chinese government awareness.” The advisory did not state that Chinese authorities directed the individual campaigns.

It said DeepSeek had allegedly conducted an organized campaign since at least late 2024 to obtain reasoning capabilities, specialized optimizations, and other functions for use in its R1 and V3 models. The agencies also attributed large-scale distillation activity to Alibaba’s Qwen models and to models developed by the other four companies. The agencies said such activity could allow Chinese AI developers to narrow the technology gap while avoiding some of the computing power, electricity, foundational research, and other costs required to independently develop frontier models. The advisory stated that advances in Chinese AI models could also expand military and cyber capabilities.

Beijing rejected the allegations on Sept. 9. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said China’s AI development came from domestic technological development and international cooperation. The Sept. 8 advisory urged American AI companies and infrastructure providers to improve detection of suspicious activity and strengthen coordination across model developers, cloud providers, and application programming interface providers to counter large-scale distillation campaigns.

Earlier Warnings From US AI Companies
The federal advisory follows earlier accusations by American AI developers. Anthropic said in February that it had identified industrial-scale campaigns by DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax involving more than 16 million exchanges with Claude through approximately 24,000 fraudulent accounts. The accounts violated its terms of service and regional access restrictions, Anthropic said. It also said that while distillation is a legitimate training method, competitors can misuse it to acquire capabilities developed by other companies without bearing comparable development costs.

OpenAI separately told the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party in February that it had observed activity indicating continued attempts by DeepSeek to distill capabilities from OpenAI and other U.S. frontier models, including through increasingly obfuscated methods intended to make the activity harder to detect.

Data Centers and the AI Race
Bessent tied the competition with China to the U.S. buildout of data centers and other infrastructure needed for AI. He said the United States currently has the lead because of its technology companies, advanced chips, financing, and startup ecosystem, but argued that development could not be paused. “We can’t pause,” Bessent said. “You can’t, because the Chinese won’t pause.”

He criticized technology companies for failing to engage adequately with communities affected by new data-center construction. Bessent also alleged that some opposition to data-center development involved Chinese “agitprop.” He did not identify specific examples for that assertion during the discussion. He gave data-center developers, hyperscalers, and major AI companies a “D-minus” for community outreach and said they needed to do a better job explaining their projects and potential benefits to residents.

Read more …

Missed chance,.

• New Four-hour Elon Musk Documentary (BBC)

The Venice Film Festival has hosted the premiere of major documentary-maker Alex Gibney’s epic and provocative new profile of the richest man on Earth, which has been years in the making. Here are five key takeaways from the film.


Alex Gibney, the Oscar-winning director of Taxi to the Dark Side and Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, has made documentaries about some of the richest and most powerful people on Earth. But none of them has been as rich and powerful as Elon Musk. Maybe that’s why Gibney’s profile of the tech entrepreneur and SpaceX boss is such an epic. Musk, which premiered at the Venice Film Festival on Tuesday, has a running time of 225 minutes, and will be released with a 10-minute intermission – so that’s almost four hours on the life and work of the world’s richest man.

Still, the time rockets by. There is little in the film that isn’t already on record, but Gibney gathers all the extant reporting into one breathlessly fast-moving, largely negative, and terrifyingly apocalyptic profile. Here are five things you should know about the documentary – just in case you don’t have four hours to spare.

1. Musk himself isn’t interviewed – but appears as an AI avatar
Gibney initially tried for an interview with Musk, but when the project was announced back in March 2023, Musk declared on social media that it would be a “hit piece”, to which Gibney responded, “How would you know?” The director’s solution is to have an AI-generated avatar of Musk repeat things that he has said in public. This is apt, says Gibney in his voiceover, because Musk believes that we might all be living in a simulation – a video game being played by our descendants in the future.

2. David Byrne helped write a theme song
David Byrne has co-written Let Me Sell You a Dream for the film’s closing credits, which has lyrics consisting entirely of phrases spoken by Musk in the past. The title is appropriate, according to some of Gibney’s interviewees, who say that Musk tends to attract investment by promising that imagined future accomplishments – such as cities on Mars and completely safe self-driving cars – are imminent or already realised.

“That’s not happening,” says Adam Becker, an author and astrophysicist, about Musk’s scheme to colonise Mars. “The gravity is too low, the radiation is too high, there’s no air, and the dirt is filled with poison.” Musk has consistently defended his visionary philosophy however: “I’m very good at predicting the future,” he told The Economist in a July interview. “I’m not perfect but I’m very good… people don’t realise that what I’m saying will come to pass – maybe not exactly in the timing that I thought, but it will come to pass.”


3. Musk’s time in the White House is scrutinised The film suggests that Musk dealt with the US government the way he dealt with Twitter. Zoë Schiffer, the author of Extremely Hardcore: Inside Elon Musk’s Twitter, says that after Musk bought the social media platform, what she refers to as his “goons” pushed out the majority of the staff without pausing to learn what they actually did. Later, as the head of President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency, or Doge, Musk followed “the Twitter playbook”, Schiffer says, describing how he tried and failed to wipe out the US national debt by slashing the budget of numerous departments, this time with the help of a group of assistants in their early twenties who had no government experience. Musk bemoaned that Doge had become “the whipping boy for everything” in an interview with the Washington Post in May last year, just before leaving the Trump administration.


4. An old British film makes a surprise appearance
Gibney uses clips from a British fantasy film, The Man Who Could Work Miracles (1937), to illustrate his very dramatic view of Musk. In this black-and-white classic, based on an HG Wells story, a celestial being bestows an ordinary man (Roland Young) with infinite powers. The man eventually demands that the world’s leaders change society instantly, but he ends up accidentally destroying the planet.

5. The film has had a strong reception so far
Reviews from the Venice premiere have so far been largely positive. Variety called it “a lacerating and important watch, grounded in Gibney’s supremely insightful but user-friendly mastery of the documentary form”, while in a four-star review, The Telegraph dubbed it “a chillingly forensic hatchet job”. Unsurprisingly, Musk himself has not been one of its admirers: on X on Wednesday, among other comments, he described the film as “a hit piece that misses, and makes the fatal sin of being boring for 4 hours”.

Read more …

“They’re fed up with countries that said for 30 years they were gonna protect themselves and help NATO, and the most egregious offender in the last 15 years has been Canada.”

• The US Has Entered Stage 3 in the Trade War With Canada (Victor Davis Hanson)

The philosopher Heraclitus, an ancient Greek philosopher, once said that you don’t step into the same river twice, meaning the river flows. Other people look at that quote and said he meant panta rhei, everything flows or changes, although he didn’t necessarily say that himself. Everything changes. That applies to our current U.S.-Canadian spat. We were given an initial description in the media, and then we had some clarification, and now we’re in what I would call Stage Three.


Stage One was outrage at Donald Trump and the United States, and this is the narrative that we got from one side, from Mark Carney. He said the Americans are at it again, and Trump in particular. They’re bullying us. They’re demanding that they’re gonna take away our sovereignty, and they’re saying to whom, and with whom we can trade and with whom we can’t. And then, they wanna squash Canadian nationalism, and they want to suppress indigenous reading, literature, influence in the French language, and we’re not gonna do that. So we had to back out.

So, everybody got very angry. The Wall Street Journal said: This is a silly Trump spectacle right on the eve of the midterms. This is crazy. nAnd then we went into Stage Two: clarification. People in Canada, 90%, supported Carney. They were booing the American “Star-Spangled Banner” when it was played at sporting events in Canada. And they started to informally boycott U.S. products.

And then they stuck out their chest and said we might not give four million barrels of oil to the United States from Canada. We may stop our pipeline. We can do all of these things to the United States. They need us. And the world is against Trump. And our prime minister can deal with China if he wants. He prefers China. bSo, we heard all that, and then we found out that the deal was almost cemented, and Carney brought up his objections at the last moment.

Then we found out the United States did not wanna suppress the French language or Indigenous culture in Canada. It just said our digital media companies operate worldwide. Why, in this particular country of Canada, should they pay a 5% surtax on top of charge, in addition to income tax, just to subsidize for the particular agendas of the Canadian government? We don’t do that to Canada. We don’t say, “If you come into the United States and you have a product or a media conglomerate, we’re gonna slap a 5% so we wanna promote DEI, we want to promote poor white people in East Palestine.” We don’t do that.

Then we find out that we don’t want to take away Canada’s sovereignty. We are in an existential struggle to save the West from Chinese mercantilism. They have been dumping product. They have been manipulating currency. They’ve been stealing patents. They don’t respect copyrights. They run up trillion-dollar surpluses with us, half a trillion with Europe, and we’re saying no more. We want symmetry.

And [China], to get around that, is dumping cheap steel and aluminum and saying to Canada, “You can buy our product very cheap, much cheaper than you can produce it. Then you can use it in your assembly of cars and trucks and other manufactured goods and send it into the United States and undercut American producers. You win, and then we get around the American tariffs.” And Trump and his team said, “No, we know what you’re doing.” So, that was a clarification that didn’t look too good.

Then people said, “Well, wait a minute. Canada can’t even send its oil, highly sulfurous and thick tar sands, to Ontario or to British Columbia because the provinces are so at each other’s throats under this weird system that they don’t. They have almost autonomy with one another, and they won’t let pipelines be built. But the Americans will let it be built.” So, they need the 4 million-a-day export. After all, if Canada’s doing so well, why don’t … Alberta said, “We can’t give you our oil. We need it. We’re booming. That’s what we’ve been told.

“Why would we give it to a booming United States that already is the greatest producer of gas and oil in history and self-sufficient, unless it’s in our interest? It’s right across the border. The United States treats us better than our other provinces treat us. They allow a pipeline into a foreign country, i.e., the United States. Our other provinces don’t allow Alberta to do that. “And, by the way, they allow a pipeline then to go into Quebec and Ontario. If we cut off their pipeline, they’ll cut off two of our provinces.”

And then the jobs report came out. We’ve only been at this 10 days, but it already affected the August jobs report. They said, “We didn’t need the United States.” Well, they’re down 41,000 jobs. And we can hurt the United States? The United States is up 160,000 jobs. And so now we’re in a crisis. How does Canada get out of this situation? Because they walked out of a deal that was better than basically any other deal the United States had cut with other countries, and it was only one of two countries. The other in the same league was communist China that retaliated against the United States.

The others admitted, “Aw, shucks. We know we’ve had asymmetrical tariffs with you for a long time. We understand this is a reckoning. Let’s kind of moderate it and don’t get too hysterical that we’ve been taking you to the cleaners on trade.” OK. Not Canada. Canada immediately started retaliating like China. OK. And now they’re in Stage Three. What is Stage Three? Stage Three is the Americans are saying to themselves:

Well, we have 13 times the economy that Canada does, and we have nine times the population, and we have one state, California, that has about the same population as all of Canada. And of all of our states, it’s the worst run, the most socialist, with the most inept governor, and usually with the highest social welfare costs, the highest taxes, the highest unemployment, the highest inflation, the highest power. And guess what? It has double the gross domestic product of Canada, even though there’s the same population. Double.

And then the Americans are saying: “We don’t want—we don’t need your oil. We can produce your oil. We’d like your oil. It helps you. It helps us. But if you don’t wanna cut us off, cut us off. And we’d like to trade with you, but you know what? If you don’t wanna—if you wanna help Canada get around our tariffs, and we understand that, just don’t do it. And the subtext behind all of this is the United States is fed up. They’re fed up with countries that said for 30 years they were gonna protect themselves and help NATO, and the most egregious offender in the last 15 years has been Canada.

Read more …

High time this story was told.

• The Story of Slavery Told Correctly (Paul Craig Roberts)

For several decades I have emphasized that black slavery was a product of black slave wars in Africa for which no white person has any responsibility. It was black African rulers, such as the King of Dahomey, who enslaved and sold black Africans to Arabs and to British and European colonies in the New World where there was abundant resources and fertile land but no work force. This is an indisputable fact. Some of the most famous leftists in history, such as Karl Polanyi, have documented this fact.


Today as I write there stands on the Atlantic coast of Africa three miles south of Ouidan in Benin, the former Kingdom of Dahomey, the Gate of No Return, a memorial erected to mark the departure point where Africans enslaved by Africans were loaded aboard ships to be marketed to Arabs and to British and European colonists in the New World. The Gate of No Return sits at the end of a road known as the Route of the Slaves. As far as I can ascertain, none of this factual history is acknowledged in any black studies program in any Western university or by any of the black organizations agitating for reparations from white peoples who neither enslaved nor owned a slave.

In the Western World the entire story of slavery is a total fabrication. It is important to understand that no white Southerners or white anyone went into Africa to round up black slaves. The black King of Dahomey was a powerful person. His army was armed with rifles obtained from the Arabs in exchange for slaves. The King had an Amazon contingent, reportedly extremely ferocious. No one was going to poach on the King of Dahomey. Any who wanted slaves paid the King’s price. Dahomey dominated the slave wars, and the captives of Dahomey’s wars were the slaves who ended up in America.

As slaves were the products of slave wars between black Africans, many of the slaves sold to colonists in the British colonies that eventually became the US were themselves warriors engaged in slave wars against other blacks who were defeated in combat. I have often made the point that every collection of slaves on Southern plantations in the American South contained trained warriors captured in combat who greatly outnumbered the number of whites on the “slave cotton plantations.” Any such behavior of slave owners, such as that fraudulently reported by Harriet Beecher Stowe in Uncle Tom’s Cabin would have resulted in a successful uprising.

Plantation owners understood this, and for their own preservation and that of their families did not behave as the lying bitch Harriet Beecher Stowe alleges in Uncle Tom’s Cabin. The purpose of Uncle Tom’s Cabin was war propaganda, to stir up hatred of the South by northerners in order to make acceptable Lincoln’s war criminals, Sherman and Sheridan. The south was defeated by the North’s destruction of the South’s livestock and farms, leaving the Confederacy unable to provision the Army of Northern Virginia which in the end was marching in bare feet with no food.

The proof that there was unity between the slaves and the plantation owners was demonstrated by the complete failure of Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. This was a war measure that Lincoln intended would draw Confederate soldiers from the front lines to return home to protect their families from black insurrection. But no insurrection occurred, and the Southern soldiers did not leave the front lines.

Lincoln, a war criminal of the highest order, issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which as Lincoln’s own Secretary of State pointed out, applied only to slaves under Confederate control, and not to any under Union control, out of frustration that Union general after Union general whose forces were three to four times larger than Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia were repeated defeated by General Robert E. Lee, a leader who steadfastly refused to participate in war crimes.

The Emancipation Proclamation was a complete failure as a war measure. But the white liberals misrepresented a war measure as the freeing of the slaves from “Southern oppression.” What are we to think of northern liberals this totally dishonest, this totally devoid of all integrity, of all respect for historical truth? I won’t print the expletives that come to mind. The “freedom” left former slaves without homes and food. Many were raped by Union soldiers. “Liberated” blacks followed behind the Union armies hoping their “liberators” would provide food and water and medical care. But as the Union soldiers did not own the former slaves, no one had an investment or interest in them.

“Liberation” was chaos for the “liberated.” Many of the “liberated” experienced devastating hardship and death. Historians have documented that the contraband camps that were set up by the Union were characterized by overcrowding, poor sanitation, meager food rations and by massive outbreaks of diseases such as smallpox and dysentery. The brutal conditions killed a large percentage of the Southern black population. The consequence of “emancipation” was genocide. The former slaves who survived did so by performing manual labor for the Union occupying army.

A country with a high percentage of people as dishonest as white liberals has no chance of being great if it is to be a multicultural society. No multicultural society can exist when the disparate interests are turned against one another in hate, which is what the white liberals have done to America.

The alleged American “civil war” is another fabrication. The war was the result of the North, which Lincoln called the Union, invading a separate country, the Confederacy, which had exercised its constitutional right to exit the United States in order to avoid being economically exploited by northern manufacturing which insisted on a tariff to be paid by the South on its exports and imports. The day before Lincoln’s inauguration the Northern Congress passed the Morrill Tariff that imposed massive economic cost on the South. Simultaneously Lincoln and the Northern Congress offered the South Constitutional protection forever of slavery if the South would stay in the Union and pay the tariff.

The South replied that their concern is the tariff, not slavery. Despite all evidence the white liberals claim without a shred of evidence that the Union cause was to deliver blacks from slavery. Clearly, people as unworthy as white liberals desperately need to be replaced by immigrant-invaders. I was delighted when I read that the white liberal government in Massachusetts had decided to replace themselves with Muslims. Perhaps there is some virtue in The Camp of the Saints. The white liberals will be the first to go, just as they are in The Camp of the Saints.

Read more …

“Egountchi Behanzin, founding president of the international African Black Defense League, spokesperson for the Pan-African Brothers, political analyst, and pan-African activist..”

• Jamaica Demands Answers On Slavery (Egountchi Behanzin)

Knocking on the king’s door: Decades in the making, the September 7 filing brings a direct legal challenge against the British Crown for its ties to the slave system


On September 7, 2026, a high-level Jamaican delegation delivered a historic legal petition to Buckingham Palace addressed to King Charles III. Its objective was to compel the monarch, as Jamaica’s head of state, to refer to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the island’s highest court of appeal, three questions that have haunted the British Empire for centuries. Was the forced transportation of Africans to Jamaica and their subsequent enslavement lawful? Did this system constitute a crime against humanity? Does the United Kingdom bear an obligation to make reparation for slavery and its enduring consequences?

Culture Minister Olivia Grange, who led the delegation, shared a photo on X of herself holding the document aloft, captioned: “The petition has been filed.” King Charles III was not present at the handover. British media reported he was on vacation at the time, though Buckingham Palace said it had worked closely with the Governor General of Jamaica to ensure the petition was properly lodged.

Why the date is no coincidence
The day before, on Sunday, September 6, the delegation had taken part in a church service in south London under the theme of “remembrance, justice and repair,” ahead of the formal filing the following day. This timing is no accident: September 6 commemorates the 1781 departure of the slave ship Zong, aboard which more than 140 enslaved Africans were thrown into the sea so their owners could collect an insurance payout. That crime, unpunished for 245 years, now stands as the symbol of a justice the diaspora refuses to let fade into oblivion.

“In relation to the wrongs that were done, we want answers,” Grange told the Associated Press the day before the filing. “Once we get those answers, then our attorneys will determine what the next move is.” This petition is part of a strategy, built step by step by Jamaica’s National Council on Reparations chaired by Laleta Davis Mattis, with the support of a legal subcommittee led by attorney Bert Samuels, and a team of UK lawyers. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) has thrown its full weight behind the effort proof that this question reaches beyond the borders of a single island. The entire post-slavery Caribbean is rising behind Jamaica.

The UN slavery resolution as a first step
But it is precisely here that Jamaica’s fight joins Africa’s own, and this link must now be made visible, since Western media have worked hard to keep it quiet. On March 25, 2026, the United Nations General Assembly adopted, on Ghana’s initiative, resolution A/RES/80/250 – the very first resolution in UN history devoted exclusively to slavery and the transatlantic slave trade.One hundred and twenty-three states voted in favor. Only three opposed it: the United States, Israel, and Argentina. Fifty-two countries, mostly European including the United Kingdom itself, chose to hide behind abstention.

The resolution designates the transatlantic trafficking of Africans and racialized chattel enslavement as the “gravest crime against humanity.” Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama, speaking on behalf of the African Group of 54 states, the UN’s largest regional bloc, declared that voting for the text meant standing on the right side of history. It calls for the restitution of looted cultural property, formal apologies, and opens the door to the consideration of financial compensation. This is an international normative framework, patiently built by the African Union since February 2024, when it proclaimed 2025 the “Year of Justice for Africans through Reparations for Slavery, Colonialism, and Apartheid.”

Jamaican jurist Bert Samuels was not mistaken when he stated that this UN resolution strengthens Jamaica’s legal position against London. Here is the thread that binds Accra to Kingston, the African motherland to the diaspora torn from it. A single struggle is fought on two complementary fronts – one continental and diplomatic, the other insular and judicial, both aimed at the same goal of making the former empire pay for four centuries of human plunder.

A history of reversed debts
To grasp the full weight of this gesture, one must recall that Haiti, the first free black nation of the modern era, was forced in 1825 to pay France a colossal indemnity to “compensate” former slave owners for the loss of their “human property” – a debt that bled Haiti’s economy for more than a century. History, as written by the colonial powers, long decreed that it was the enslavers who deserved compensation, never the enslaved.

Jamaica’s petition overturns this criminal logic. It is no longer the victims who owe the executioner, it is the executioner who must now answer to its victims. This reversal builds on groundwork laid over more than a decade by the CARICOM itself, which as early as 2013 adopted its own ten-point plan for reparatory justice, demanding formal apologies, debt cancellation, technology transfers, and public health programs to offset the health devastation bequeathed by slavery.

The September 7 filing is therefore the legal culmination of a long matured Caribbean strategy that has now chosen to confront head on, in a court of law, the very institution that sanctioned and protected the slave system: the British Crown.

What it means for the diaspora
For the African diaspora across Africa, the Americas, Europe, and the Caribbean alike, this filing is experienced as a long-deferred reckoning. For generations, our elders awaited a political gesture of this magnitude – a formal legal demand addressed directly to the head of the house that organized, financed, and profited from the trade.

Reparations movements that once fought each in their own corner Caribbean organizations, Afro-descendant collectives in the Americas, African diasporas in Europe, activists on the continent itself are beginning to speak with a single voice, carried by recognized institutions: the African Union on one side, CARICOM on the other, and now the UN as a global sounding board.

In West Africa, Jamaica’s move is being followed with particular attention, seen as the natural extension of the fight President Mahama carried to the UN stage. The Africa that watched its children leave in chains is, four centuries later, reunited with a part of its diaspora now come to knock, together, on the same imperial door. In Southern Africa, where the memory of apartheid remains raw, many Pan-African organizations see in this filing further proof that struggles for historical justice slavery, colonialism, apartheid can no longer be treated separately, but must be understood as a single, unified case against the West.

In Europe, among Afro-descendant communities in France, Belgium, and the United Kingdom itself, Jamaica’s petition serves as both a signal of hope and a painful reminder: That our own states of origin or residence still drag their feet on these questions, while little Jamaica, with its modest means, dared to carry the fight directly to the monarch’s door. In the Americas, Afro-descendant movements from Brazil to Colombia are also watching this case closely, seeing in it a potential legal precedent that could be mobilized for their own claims against the former Iberian colonial powers.

This convergence is visibly rattling Western capitals. The United Kingdom’s vote – an abstention, that is, a refusal to choose – speaks volumes about the quiet panic setting in London. One can sense, in the remarks of certain British political figures, particularly within Euroskeptic and identitarian factions, a desire to ridicule Jamaica’s move, to dismiss it as an expensive whim or a political stunt.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2098040640378425446?s=20 https://twitter.com/Alexs_jame/status/2098084514627019002?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 7 2026

Sep 072026
 
 September 7, 2026  Posted by at 9:06 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  30 Responses »


Vasily Kandinsky Capricious Line 1924


• One Major Shift Can Solve the Iran Problem and So Much More (CTH)
• Wright and Bessent Explain the Squeeze on Iran (David Manney)
• View from Russia: Experts on why Kushner and Witkoff came to Moscow (RT)
• How Britain Built A War Network Around Russia (Yanovsky)
• AfD Sweeps Saxony-Anhalt Election In First “Far Right” Victory Since WW2 (ZH)
• France Can’t Finance Ukraine Forever – Le Pen Party’s Head (RT)
• Leftists Are Erasing the Truth About 9/11 From Classrooms (Matt Margolis)
• Asylum Denials Hit 94% in June (Catherine Salgado)
• The U.S. Has 13 Times the Economy — Carney Has 13 Times the Pout (Florack)
• U.S. Job Growth of 162,000 vs Canada Job Losses -42,000 (CTH)
• Operation Twist 2.0, 2032 Gold Target & 100,000 Robotic Soldiers (Armstrong)

 


 

https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/status/2096209394350412223?s=20 https://twitter.com/thewriterme/status/2096314115060887761?s=20

 


 


This from Sundance is brilliant, and he thinks Trump is aware. . If Trump makes peace with Russia, their oil comes in to the market and lowers the price enough to sink the Iran regime. End the war with Iran, end the war in Ukraine. Lower the price at the pump. One fell swoop.

• One Major Shift Can Solve the Iran Problem and So Much More (CTH)

History has a tendency to rhyme. There is one move on the geopolitical chessboard that can put all of the U.S. and President Trump’s problems into an immediate checkmate. However, the forces against the alignment are significant. If President Trump can end the Ukraine-Russia conflict and end the sanctions regime against Russia, everything changes.


Bringing Russian oil, gas and natural resources back into the global economy not only removes all leverage held by Iran, but it also wipes out intransigent resistance against the geopolitical reset and upends over a hundred years of EU and Commonwealth financial manipulation.


Not only does the Iran problem immediately shift, but so too does any/all leverage carried by Canada on behalf of London and the broader commonwealth structure. With a U.S-Russia strategic economic alliance, something factually stated at the end of every message from Moscow, the dynamics of global structures is entirely different. However, all the oppositional interests are well aware of the consequence and their actions reflect it. The United States and Russia ended World War II. A U.S-Russia alliance would change everything.

Who would benefit from such a strategic partnership? The USA, Russia, India, China, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States (GCC), ASEAN countries and even Japan and the Caribbean, including Cuba.

Who would oppose such a seismic shift? The U.K, specifically the financial constructs within the City of London, Canada, the EU-NATO states, all the Commonwealth countries and the Five-Eyes group (Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the U.K and the U.S. Intelligence Community).

Now we have appropriate context for the dynamic of the issue, along with context for exactly why all oppositional elements are conducting current activity. A strategic partnership between the U.S. and Russia represents an existential threat to all the old systems – everything. The first step would be solving the Ukraine-Russia conflict. So, let’s look at that problem specifically and how a transactional approach might frame the four corners of an end to it.


Russia now occupies approximately 20% of the Ukraine land mass in eastern Ukraine and they are not going to ever concede it again. For the Federation of Russia, represented by Vladimir Putin and the overwhelming majority of those within influence inside the Federation, the NATO encroachment is an existential threat long term. Russia views the objective of the legacy system powers as intent on taking Russia apart. Ukraine represents their immediate shot to stop this from happening. All prior agreements and treaties by EU and NATO agreements were violated. Russia will no longer allow the wolves to circle their camp.

Looking at the challenge through the transactional prism, a ceasefire may include Russia retaining their current land gains, while giving up the confiscated $500 billion sovereign wealth fund as the purchase price. The fund could be considered reparations by Zelenskyy and his EU-NATO handlers, it matters not. What matters more than the sovereign wealth fund in this transaction, is the elimination of western sanctions.

With sanctions removed, immediately the Russian economy surges with sales of oil, gas, minerals and raw materials back to the global market. With the Iran conflict still afoot all that oil and gas carries a higher value. That is the pricing dynamic that makes loss of the Russian sovereign wealth fund more contextualized. However, with all of those abundant natural resources now back in the global supply chain, the leverage for all other western countries that rely on their natural resources, specifically Canada, is diminished.

Russian oil and gas could flow immediately and easily back into Europe. Currently, the power structures within the EU, those more concerned about raw power and control than the financial health and livelihood of their citizens, are against a return of cheap and abundant energy. They should think about the return of lower energy costs as a value to their economies and people; however, the EU ‘leaders’ are more concerned about the geopolitical reset -ultimately their diminished power, that would lay in the background.

As a consequence, the EU doesn’t really care about how much financial benefit there would be to their economic condition. For them this is a zero-sum power issue. Just as Russia doesn’t want to be torn apart by the grand ambitions of London, so too does the EU not want to lose the power to assist in the tearing apart aspect.

The rest of the problem is one of the future. A problem of security guarantees; of agreements that are bolstered against some significant non-wavering constant that can ensure no further expansion of NATO intent and no further threat to create purposeful conflict. The United States has constant regime changes, that takes the U.S. out of the ability to be the guarantor. However, THAT level of security guarantee is possible through the one construct that has put tentacles into every geopolitical economic structure in the world, CHINA.

There is a visible deal where President Trump sets up the transactional end to the conflict, the payments and economic mechanisms that conclude the Ukraine-Russia war, while Chairman Xi sets up the security guarantee aspect by leveraging everything that Beijing has created for decades. As paradigm resetting as that sounds, it’s not impossible. In fact, I would argue that’s exactly what China is saying HERE.


The Washington Post is getting the direction correct, but they are unaware of the destination. TDS infects all media analysis. They put the review of Chairman Xi’s comments through the prism of anti-Trumpism. That’s not at all what this looks like to me. From my perspective, Trump is looking to solve problems beyond his tenure in the White House. After all, how many times has each Trump supporter said, “well yeah – great, but what happens after Trump leaves office?”

Think about it carefully, through the prism of peace and stability – while understanding that President Trump is structuring long-term U.S. economic stability and retaining the perspective that Beijing influence in U.S. economic matters must be removed. Handle the transaction. Solve the Ukraine-Russia crisis. Form a strategic partnership and build fortress north America. Leverage the systems that Beijing has already put in place, including leverage upon the EU, and make Chairman Xi the minder for everything OUTSIDE our hemisphere.

President Trump looks to have gamed this out quite well. The tool that cuts the gordian knot is in the relationship.

Read more …

Operation Economic Outcast.

• Wright and Bessent Explain the Squeeze on Iran (David Manney)

Energy Secretary Chris Wright got a blunt question Sunday morning: After seven months of fighting with Iran, are Americans looking at a new normal of tanker strikes, military escorts, and an open-ended confrontation in the Persian Gulf? Wright didn’t duck it. The United States remains open to negotiations, he said, but its immediate military mission includes stopping Iranian oil and gas exports. He plainly described the goal: “We are strangling their economy” to force a change in Tehran’s policies or leadership.


From the Conservative Daily News: “Secretary of Energy Chris Wright outlined America’s long-term goal for securing global trade passing through the Strait of Hormuz even as its conflict with Iran threatens such traffic. Wright touted the sustained traffic transiting the Strait of Hormuz before telling Dana Bash during a “State of the Union” interview Sunday that securing the passageway “shouldn’t be just the United States’s responsibility” looking forward. His appearance on the CNN show comes the day after U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces reported taking out three Iranian oil tankers.

“The president says the Strait of Hormuz is under U.S. control. Just yesterday, the U.S. struck three Iranian tankers in retaliation for Iran firing missiles at U.S. warships. Meanwhile, The New York Times reports that Iran struck at least 23 merchant ships in the Strait in the last two months,” Bash said before asking Wright, “Does that sound to you like it’s a situation completely under control?” “Our transits through the Strait are averaging over 9 million barrels a day now. And with the access pipelines that go around the Strait, we’re probably two-thirds or more of pre-conflict flows,” Wright responded. “So Iranians are still causing trouble, but the United States Navy is winning that battle.”

Bash then asked Wright if he is suggesting that the U.S. Navy is going to have to stay in the Strait “indefinitely” to maintain the current flow of oil and tankers. “Oh, I think we’ll see a change in the Iranian regime, or certainly a change in their policy if they want to become a trading nation again and engage with the world,” Wright said. “But they have not lightly given up their nuclear weapons program.”The comments came after U.S. forces struck three Iranian oil tankers Saturday. U.S. Central Command said Iranian ballistic missiles had targeted American warships.

Two tankers were disabled, while a third was destroyed. The military said the ships belonged to a shadow network helping finance Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.


Wright’s argument was straightforward. President Donald Trump still prefers a negotiated settlement, but the administration isn’t counting on one. Wright said Iran’s nuclear capabilities are being degraded militarily while its economy is being squeezed through reduced energy exports and sanctions. He also left open the possibility that a nuclear agreement might have to wait for a different Iranian government. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has been delivering the economic half of the same message.

Bessent said Saturday that Trump’s blockade and Treasury sanctions amount to “one of the most powerful one-two punches” ever used for economic isolation. From Breitbart News: “During an appearance on FNC’s “My View” on Saturday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent praised the impact of U.S. policy regarding Iran. According to Bessent, the blockade paired with economic sanctions was having a crippling impact on the Iranian regime. “Just to stay with the Strait of Hormuz for a moment, you’ve also noted that you say the U.S. and China actually have more in common than we disagree on when it comes to safely navigating the Strait of Hormuz,” host Lara Trump said.

“I think the question for a lot of Americans is really how much can we trust China? They are still taking oil from Iran, so how do you navigate that situation?”Bessent replied, “Well, one of the things we’ve done, and what the president’s done, is fantastic sequencing. So we are running Operation Economic Outcast right now, and this is the greatest economic isolation operation in the history of the world. We are going to asphyxiate this regime.”

“Now we have the blockade, and because of the blockade, the oil is not getting out,” he continued. “So there’s probably only about 30 million barrels of Iranian crude oil left that China hasn’t bought. So that will run out soon, and there will be no problem with China buying because they have no product, so the blockade is — the blockade is working. It’s working like nothing we’ve ever seen, and the combination, everyone says, “Oh, sanctions don’t work. I can tell you, blockade and sanctions are one of the most powerful one-two punches in the history of economic isolation.” He argued that China’s purchases of Iranian crude will eventually become irrelevant if Iran can’t move the oil out of its ports.

The administration has given the financial campaign a name: Operation Economic Outcast. Treasury launched it Aug. 24 with the stated goal of cutting Iran off from the financial networks, banks, oil revenues, and sanctions-evasion systems keeping the regime funded. The campaign moved again Friday when Treasury sanctioned a Turkish financial institution and its subsidiaries for allegedly helping Iran’s Revolutionary Guard move money internationally.

From the Treasury Department: Announced by Secretary Bessent on August 24, 2026, dubbed Economic D-Day, Operation Economic Outcast is severing the remaining economic lifelines that sustain the Iranian regime. Treasury has mapped the networks, facilitators, and financial channels that Iran uses to smuggle oil, evade sanctions, and fund terror. Working with partners across the U.S. government, the European Union, United Kingdom, Gulf partners, and others, Treasury is targeting any source of the regime’s illicit revenue, as well as its sanctions evasion schemes to move funds.

Read more …

What/which part of the above did they discuss?

The man in the middle is Kyrill Dimitriev, Putin’s go-to guy.

• View from Russia: Experts on why Kushner and Witkoff came to Moscow (RT)

The latest visit to Moscow by Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff has triggered a fresh wave of speculation in Russia about what Washington is really trying to achieve. With US President Donald Trump under pressure at home and much of his administration’s foreign-policy bandwidth consumed by Iran, the trip has been interpreted less as a breakthrough mission than as a signal – one that may be aimed as much at domestic American politics and alliance management as at Russia itself.


Russian analysts see the visit in different ways. Some believe the Americans are simply sounding out Moscow before returning to Kiev, trying to gauge whether any space remains for movement on Ukraine. Others argue the mission is part of a broader performance of diplomatic activity by the Trump White House, intended to project momentum where little real progress is possible. Still others view it as an exercise in ‘shuttle diplomacy’, useful mainly for information-gathering and atmospherics rather than for producing concrete results.

Roman Romanov, American studies specialist, lecturer at the Faculty of International Relations, Political Science, and Foreign Regional Studies at RSUH
I have two explanations regarding the visit and the format of this visit. First, the American side has already shown several times that it is interested in maintaining dialogue with both Moscow and Kiev. And this visit – or rather, this tour – is aimed at “synchronizing watches.” What does that mean? The Americans are trying to understand what conditions might be acceptable to the parties for resuming an active negotiating process. In other words, what can be offered to both sides so that they are prepared to move the dialogue in the direction of progress.

The second explanation is purely domestic-political for the United States. Against the backdrop of the failure of the Iran campaign, it is necessary to demonstrate some other kind of political activity that at least theoretically resembles progress with a concrete result. Trump has done this kind of thing more than once.

Do they have any ready-made proposals? I do not think so, because, first, at the moment a significant part of US foreign-policy resources is concentrated on Iran, and second, because despite the constructive role of both Witkoff and Kushner, they still act more as envoys of the American president on a specific issue than as direct participants formulating the American president’s position on this issue.

It is difficult to explain why they first went to Moscow and then to Kiev. One can assume they first want to hear Moscow’s stance, because it is in a more advantageous position – Russia is advancing, winning on the battlefield – so the US believes it would be more expedient first to hear out Moscow’s demands and gauge how much they’ve changed since August 2025, since the meeting in Anchorage.

At the same time, although we do not observe public participation by the EU, through closed channels the European Union surely communicates its interests. Their representatives are not there, but the position the Americans are shaping includes the EU’s position as well.

Dmitry Dtobnitsky – Russian political scientist specializing in American studies, expert in US foreign and domestic policy
These negotiations will continue – that’s the only perspective they have. What are we negotiating with the US about? About how to stop the conflict in Ukraine? Let’s be serious. First, this conflict is much broader than Russia’s military operation. It is a geopolitical conflict with very high stakes, the kind that happens with Europe once every several decades or even centuries. The Cold War period with the US was still an exception in that there were at least attempts to play at détente from time to time.

The world has entered an era of major transformation. In that sense, the narrow focus is – will they reach an agreement on Ukraine? No. Every time you think about that, you have to recall how it all started, why it is like this, how wrongly the world is structured, how important it is for Russia to insist on its interests, why the European bureaucracy itself cannot accept that, because otherwise that would mean the end of both it and the political class of many countries. Why can’t this conflict stop? Because it can’t be settled.

Someone has to win. Just as with the US and Iran (which, incidentally, is a much more local conflict) – it is impossible to agree, there can be no deal. There can only be some movement in which one of the sides explicitly or implicitly recognizes its defeat. It may not be total defeat, but at least at some stage one side wins and the other side does not recognize it. Such a process will last a long time, but in the end there will still be some de facto consolidation of the results of this conflict. Not a negotiated one, unfortunately, but a factual one. Diplomats may formalize such a conclusion, or they may not. Frankly, that is no longer important.

When we talk about Russia-US negotiations on Ukraine, there are two extremes, and both miss the essence. Yes, we are negotiating, and we constantly demonstrate that Russia and the US have nothing to fight over. We are ready to coexist with the US on the same globe. That is exactly why Putin says: “Of course, Kushner and Witkoff are welcome guests, come. What else should we show you from Moscow’s kitchen?” You see, the US cannot conduct negotiations on Ukraine because it cannot force either Kiev, London, or Brussels to accept Russia’s reasonable demands. And how are they going to pressure Russia? I think the Trump administration more or less understands that it is pointless. So what kind of negotiations on Ukraine can there be?

Some say [Russian Finance Minister] Siluanov and [US Treasury Secretary] Bessent will come to some understanding, and perhaps there will be incredible financial, economic, or investment cooperation between the US and Russia. I have said many times that there can be no serious cooperation between Russia and the US. There are neither material nor geopolitical grounds for it. Are we now supposed to throw away all the achievements of localizing our civilian aviation industry and start buying Boeing again?

Are we going to hand over half of the most convenient Arctic territory on the planet to the US? Is that it? Or are we going to sell all Russian oil through Mr. Kushner? How do you imagine that? Some say: “Investments will come here.” But that would mean that instead of creating a sovereign financial system, we would say: “No, let’s reintegrate ourselves back into the collapsing dollar system. Let’s support it with our achievements of the past five years.” It’s obvious that there can be no real cooperation.

One can have symbolic cooperation. It is a wonderful look when two great countries can do something together. The most we will get is a hockey match and an ‘Apollo-Soyuz’. It must be understood that these are purely token steps, which only demonstrate that nothing particularly substantial can happen. It does not mean it will be forbidden. It simply will never play a substantial role. Even in 2019, before Covid and the military operation, trade turnover between Russia and the US was negligibly small. And that is understandable: it is geopolitics, geoeconomics – you cannot jump over that. And now, after so much effort has been spent to become independent and to work with Eurasia on a new basis, to say, “No, now let’s start doing something again with the Americans” is just laughable. That will not happen.

Read more …

“The UK is spinning a web of influence designed to survive any Ukraine peace deal..”

While Trump is making peace?

• How Britain Built A War Network Around Russia (Yanovsky)

Last week, UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham announced in Kiev that defense manufacturer MBDA had been authorized to disclose information concerning the British components of the SCALP missile, the French version of the long-range Storm Shadow, to Ukraine.Officially, the decision concerns documentation required to organize local assembly, but in practice, it could facilitate the transfer of blueprints, components, assembly kits or finished missiles.


Moscow regards this technology transfer as the UK crossing a red line, as London hasn’t even attempted to shift responsibility onto intermediaries and the decision was publicly authorized by the prime minister. Britain has therefore assumed direct responsibility for the resulting escalation and deepened its involvement in military operations against Russia.

SCALP was developed through a joint British-French program and its assembly requires classified information about British components and French sub-assemblies, as well as access to a secure facility. Ukraine doesn’t possess a complete production cycle, but even a partial transfer of classified data would integrate Ukrainian assembly into the British-French manufacturing chain and bind all three parties together for years.

Before this decision, Britain had been far more careful about covering its tracks. For example, the Flamingo missile, marketed as a product of the Ukrainian company Fire Point, is identical to a design unveiled in 2025 by the British-Emirati Milanion Group. That arrangement allowed London to keep its distance, with formal responsibility for the missile’s development and deployment resting with Kiev.

Britain is also attempting to free future missile projects from the American vetting process, so under Project Brakestop, the Ministry of Defense has commissioned MBDA UK, MGI Engineering and Rotron Aerospace to produce three prototypes of long-range missiles for Ukraine. The purpose is to reduce dependence on US authorization and, consequently, on the position of the administration in Washington. London wants to determine for itself when and under what conditions such weapons are transferred.

British drones are already being used by Ukraine to strike targets deep inside Russia. They include the Nyan jet-powered drone, manufactured by Callen-Lenz, a subsidiary of BAE Systems. For its developers, the battlefield offers something particularly valuable: operational data with which to refine the weapon. Russia has also repeatedly pointed to the direct involvement of British specialists in the deployment of Storm Shadow missiles.

On the same day as the SCALP announcement, London secured access to Avengers AI Labs, an extensive body of data gathered by Ukrainian frontline sensors, so now British companies will be able to use this information to train target-recognition and autonomous-control systems, greatly shortening the journey from development to battlefield deployment.Five British governments have come and gone during the active phase of the Ukraine conflict, but the country’s anti-Russian course has remained remarkably consistent.

Boris Johnson began a program to develop the Ukrainian navy, Rishi Sunak signed a ten-year security agreement, Keir Starmer followed with the Centenary Partnership Agreement and Burnham has now authorized access to classified missile technology. Each government has built upon the commitments made by its predecessor.

The same continuity is visible in Britain’s strategic doctrine, where Sunak’s Conservative government described Russia in its 2023 Integrated Review Refresh as the “most acute threat” to British security and Starmer’s Labour government retained that position. The 2025 National Security Strategy called Russia “the most obvious and pressing example” of confrontation, while the Strategic Defence Review described it as an “immediate and pressing threat.” That review established the principle of “NATO first, but not only NATO” and committed Britain to preparing for war.

These doctrines are supported by long-term financial obligations, given London has promised Ukraine £3 billion, approximately $4 billion, annually until at least the 2030-31 financial year. The century-long partnership agreement provides for joint production, technology transfers and cooperation in the Baltic, Black and Azov seas where Britain’s presence is intended to endure for decades, regardless of when the current military campaign ends.

The declaration signed by Britain, France and Ukraine on January 6, 2026, already outlines arrangements for the postwar period. These include multinational forces, military logistics hubs, secure facilities and a special legal regime for foreign personnel. In London’s calculations, a ceasefire wouldn’t end its involvement, but it would consolidate a new phase of Britain’s military and industrial presence.

Read more …

Saxony-Anhalt is small, 1.7 million voters, so it says little. But it makes me realize that this went fast! Where was AfD a year ago? Stuck in court.

Dutch news: AfD has 39 out of 83 seats. But the “populist” BSW party, which promised to support it, unexpectedly got its 5 seats, and could bring it to 44.

And the labels keep coming: far right, radical right, extreme right etc. That’s just for not wanting more immigrants?!

• AfD Sweeps Saxony-Anhalt Election In First “Far Right” Victory Since WW2 (ZH)

Update(1400ET): In a political earthquake, the AfD has taken a massive lead, per exit polls, at the Saxony-Anhalt election in what the party’s state leader hailed as sending a resounding “signal to Berlin.” This moment marks the first time what has been dubbed a German “far-right party” taking power at a state level since World War II. This is absolutely historic. “The exit polls, published by German public television stations, suggested that the party, known by its German initials AfD, would win between 39 and 41 seats in the eastern state of Saxony-Anhalt,” NY Times reports. “That would leave it just short of an absolute majority of 42, but far ahead of its nearest rival.”


But it remains unclear whether it will be able to form a government. Below is the latest via Deutsche Welle: Alternative for Germany (AfD) co-leader Tino Chrupalla says his party secured a mandate to govern with its strong election result in Saxony-Anhalt. “We have halved the CDU, so from that point of view it’s a great evening,” Chrupalla told journalists in Magdeburg, referring to an earlier remark by Christian Democratic Union (CDU) leader and chancellor Friedrich Merz that AfD’s result could be cut in half.

Chrupalla called the outcome “sensational.” “Ulrich Siegmund will be the new premier of Saxony-Anhalt,” he said. “From here, we will change Germany.” If the party falls short of an absolute majority, Chrupalla said it would be open to talks and even suggested an AfD minority government could be tolerated by other parties. AfD has signaled it is open to a coalition partner that would be open to changing its migration and energy policy – though this option doesn’t seem to be on the political map realistically at this early point. Youth turn to AfD in droves…

 


 

From last night:

Voters in Saxony-Anhalt head to the polls today in an election that could deliver Germany’s most massive political shock in decades, with the right-wing Alternative für Deutschland on track to beat Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democrats.

Final polling estimates put the AfD at 40% to 41%, nearly double the CDU’s 23%. The party’s lead candidate, 35-year-old Ulrich Siegmund, has ruled out governing in a coalition, suggesting the AfD would need an outright majority to take power of its first German state government.

About 1.7 million people are set to vote today, with polls closing at 6 p.m. local time. AfD’s rapid ascent comes as voters are furious over Germany’s stagnant economy, deindustrialization, energy costs, and the Third World migrant invasion. The Polymarket bet on how many seats the AfD is expected to win today assigns a 74% probability to 38 to 41 seats, with 42 to 45 seats at 16%. Ahead of the historic election, thousands of far-left Antifa crazies took to the streets wearing all black and holding Antifa and LGBT flags. Others were seen carrying signs reading “FCK NZS” and “FCK AFD.”

https://twitter.com/COMPACTMagazin/status/2096309332111507721?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2096309332111507721%7Ctwgr%5E855b88b12e1dd9c69d1daa6ec38f09e58692f2c5%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fafd-predicted-win-saxony-anhalt-merz-panics-antifa-floods-streets

A reported 15,000 left-wing activists joined a so-called pro-democracy festival in the state capital, Magdeburg, on Saturday, organized by the “Saxony-Anhalt Open to the World” alliance. Yet the whole globalist cult in Germany has likely run its course. It has been nothing more than what some call a nation-killing experiment, pushing uncontrolled mass migration and deindustrialization policies that have sent Europe’s largest economy into a tailspin.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on Saturday threatened the AfD, saying, “We will not let these people, who trash Germany and everything we have achieved in recent years and decades,” before adding, “We will not let these people talk our country into ruin!”

https://twitter.com/MarioBojic/status/2096535311597662449?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2096535311597662449%7Ctwgr%5E855b88b12e1dd9c69d1daa6ec38f09e58692f2c5%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fafd-predicted-win-saxony-anhalt-merz-panics-antifa-floods-streets

Yet what did Merz actually achieve? Destroying Germany’s economy? That is something he certainly accomplished.

Read more …

“Paris needs guarantees that Kiev will repay the money it’s been getting during its conflict with Moscow, Jordan Bardella has said”

• France Can’t Finance Ukraine Forever – Le Pen Party’s Head (RT)

France lacks money for itself and simply cannot keep funding Ukraine indefinitely, Jordan Bardella, the president of Marine Le Pen’s right-wing National Rally (NR) party, has said. The main French opposition party faced harsh criticism from its rivals earlier this week after its vice president, Louis Aliot, said that NR “would turn off the tap” for Kiev if it comes to power after the 2027 presidential vote. Le Pen is seen as having strong chances to succeed in the election next year, no matter who her rival will be in the second round.


Bardella weighed in on the issue during his speech at the Ambrosetti Forum in Italy on Saturday, saying that Ukraine needs support from France and other Western nations during the conflict with Russia, but “our objective should not be to finance the war ad vitam æternam,” which means ‘forever’ in Latin. France has a national debt of €3.5 trillion ($4.6 billion) and cannot be “giving money that we no longer have” to Vladimir Zelensky’s government, he argued.

“The extremely serious and worrying state of French public finances means we can’t give money without any guarantees or assurances that this money will be repaid one day,” the National Rally president said. Paris has been one of the strongest backers of Kiev in the EU after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, providing it with billions in military aid and supplying various sophisticated weapons, including CAESAR self-propelled howitzers and Mirage fighter jets.

According to Bardella, the Americans were “much smarter” than the Europeans when it came to assistance for Kiev “because the money they gave to Ukraine is secured against rare earth mining.” He was referring to the deal agreed upon between Washington and Kiev last year, which grants the US preferential access to Ukrainian mineral resources. During US President Donald Trump’s second term, Washington also significantly reduced aid to Ukraine, making European NATO members pay for American-made arms supplied to the country.

Earlier this week, Trump warned that he intends to present Europe with a belated bill for billions of dollars that Washington spent arming Ukraine under his predecessor, Joe Biden. He previously estimated that Biden gave Zelensky more than $300 billion worth of weapons for “free.” Le Pen said on Thursday that the National Rally is skeptical about further assistance to Ukraine because it believes that the conflict with Russia needs a diplomatic solution.

A poll by Harris Interactive in late August suggested that Le Pen has the support of 34% of the French public, which should guarantee her a place in the second round of the presidential election, where she would likely win comfortably against either her left-wing rival Jean-Luc Mélenchon or the centrist candidate, former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe. Russian officials said repeatedly that foreign weapons being sent to Kiev will not prevent Moscow from achieving its military goals, but will merely prolong the fighting, while increasing the risk of a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO.

Read more …

You mean we know that truth?!

• Leftists Are Erasing the Truth About 9/11 From Classrooms (Matt Margolis)

Friday marks 25 years since 19 terrorists hijacked four planes and murdered 2,977 people on American soil. In the wake of those attacks, this country made itself one promise: Never Forget. Twenty-five years later, it’s clear some people are working hard to make sure we do exactly that: forget.


Here’s the number that should make every American furious: only Arizona and Florida legally require public schools to teach about the September 11 attacks. Ten states have statutes that merely encourage some form of 9/11 instruction, according to an August University of Wisconsin study, and that can mean anything from a moment of silence to a full lesson. New York, where the towers actually fell, mandates only a moment of silence and a passing mention in Board of Regents standards. No statewide curriculum exists.

Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), who is pushing legislation to require 9/11 education in all 50 states, told the New York Post, “We made a promise to ‘Never Forget’, but today, only a handful of states require 9/11 to be taught in their schools.” But it gets worse. So much worse.

According to the North America Values Institute, an education watchdog group, leftist activists, some backed by George Soros, have produced 9/11 lesson plans now used in schools nationwide, including in New York City. One, “Teaching Beyond September 11th,” spends exactly one paragraph on the actual attacks and never once calls the hijackers terrorists, instead building entire units around “Right-Wing Extremism” and “Islamophobia and the Oval Office.” It describes Osama bin Laden only as a man the United States “accused” of masterminding the attacks, leaving out his own confessions and his declared jihad against a country he called the “worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind.”

The curriculum was developed by the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education beginning in 2019 and is now recommended by education departments in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and Oregon. Zineb Riboua, a research fellow at the Hudson Institute, said this kind of material teaches kids “that America is responsible for the atrocities around the world to develop a moral framework that can be activated very quickly to get policies that reduce America’s power and sovereignty.” She said the tactic mirrors what the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps use to target young people. “Ayatollah Khamenei said the best audience to target is students,” she added.

It still gets worse.Adam Feinberg, a teacher at Brooklyn’s City Polytechnic High School, assigns ninth through 12th graders Osama bin Laden’s “Letter to America” alongside a worksheet asking them, without a hint of irony, “Why do you think Osama bin Laden hates Jews so much?” He uploaded it to the American Federation of Teachers’ own lesson-sharing portal back in 2020. He never denied writing it.

None of these curricula bother to mention that nearly 10,000 first responders and civilians have since died from illnesses tied to Ground Zero toxins, or what any of this does to the families left behind. Gail Silke’s brother, NYPD officer Stephen Driscoll, 38, died in the South Tower. She didn’t hold back: “They’re not affected by it, they’re not in our shoes, and they don’t want to be in our shoes. Those people can kiss my a*s.” A Manhattan mother whose father-in-law died on 9/11 said, “They were disgusted with the [expletive] they were taught, it’s not fair, they lost their grandfather.”

New York state Assemblyman Matt Slater (R-N.Y.) said, “Nearly 3,000 innocent people were murdered by al Qaeda on September 11th. They were the victims. The terrorists were the perpetrators. Any curriculum that blurs that fundamental truth, or makes the victims secondary to a political narrative, isn’t teaching history, it’s rewriting it.”

When Soros-linked groups are writing lesson plans that soft-pedal the hijackers and focus on “Islamophobia” instead, we have a problem. The left is so devoted to its woke ideology that it is trying to rewrite the history of 9/11.

Read more …

Takes some getting used to. But you get to keep your country.

• Asylum Denials Hit 94% in June (Catherine Salgado)

A combination of judicial firings and federal reforms has led to the denial of most asylum claims, an area where illegal aliens are known to exploit our system egregiously. In June 2026, over nine out of 10 asylum claimants did not receive what they requested. That’s good news for America.


I have emphasized many times here at PJ Media that huge numbers of illegal alien criminals, particularly under Joe Biden’s administration, simply claimed asylum and stated they were too afraid to go back home, which in prior years was practically enough to ensure they would receive asylum in the U.S. But in most cases, these people do not actually meet the legal standards for asylum. In some cases, indeed, they are afraid to go home, but only because they are gang members or convicted criminals fleeing justice.

On August 31, TRAC Immigration reported the following: “The number of individuals Immigration Judges grant asylum to each month has been falling. In June 2026, only 771 individuals were granted asylum—less than a quarter of the number of individuals awarded asylum just three years ago. At the same time, the number of asylum decisions has grown resulting in soaring asylum denial rates. In June 2026, 94 percent of all asylum cases were denied.

It appears that President Donald Trump’s administration has replaced many immigration judges with individuals less likely to take illegal alien criminals at their word. TRAC seems extremely upset about the change, but it is great news for Americans, as we can be sure that illegal aliens will have much less of a chance of abusing this loophole in order to obtain U.S. residency.

The Center for Immigration Studies’ (CIS) Andrew R. Arthur explained that the percentage of granted asylum claims is actually even lower than TRAC indicated, because it did not take into account claims that were withdrawn, administratively closed, or not adjudicated. He elucidated in some technical detail what all of those categories meant, but essentially, not every claim ends up going all the way through the process to denial or approval for various reasons.

Of the 254,680 asylum decisions IJs issued in the first nine months of FY 2026, 7,231 (2.8 percent) were grants, 89,740 (35.2 percent) were denials, 44,062 (17.3 percent) were not adjudicated, 18,251 (7.2 percent) were withdrawn, and 3,315 (1.3 percent) were administratively closed — but 92,081 (36.2 percent), the largest single category of IJ asylum decisions, were ones in which the claim was “abandoned”.

So actually, based on these figures, fewer than 3% of asylum applicants this fiscal year received the asylum they requested. That’s how few of the applicants were able to prove in court that they truly needed asylum. Many illegal aliens also abuse the asylum process to try to obtain work authorization, after which they never show up in court again, Arthur warned.

In short, if there is a record high of asylum denials, it is because the Biden administration encouraged excessive and widespread abuses, and the Trump administration now has to restore the integrity of the asylum process.

Read more …

“Ottawa appears to have shown up to a knife fight with a strongly worded press release.”

• The U.S. Has 13 Times the Economy — Carney Has 13 Times the Pout (Florack)

At first glance, it looks almost silly. Here we have two countries sharing the world’s longest undefended border, deeply intertwined economies, decades of trade agreements, and an enormous volume of commerce crossing back and forth every single day. Surely, one might think, reasonable adults could sit down and work this out over a Tim Hortons double-double. But, see, that’s the problem with looking at this purely as a spat over tariffs. It isn’t about tariffs at all. It’s about leverage — and Ottawa appears to have shown up to a knife fight with a strongly worded press release.


Here’s the inconvenient math sitting underneath the whole argument. According to current GDP data, the U.S. economy runs about $30.8 trillion, against Canada’s roughly $2.3 trillion. That’s not a rival negotiating across the table — that’s a difference of about $28.5 trillion, which means Canada isn’t negotiating with a comparably sized economy. It’s negotiating with one more than 13 times its size, and acting surprised when the bigger guy gets to set the terms.

Then there’s energy, where the gap gets even more embarrassing for Ottawa. The United States produced a record 13.6 million barrels of crude oil per day in 2025, the most any country has ever pumped, and also hit a record 39 trillion cubic feet of natural gas — America has been the world’s largest natural gas producer since 2011 and isn’t giving that title back. Canada’s oil sands are a genuinely valuable resource. The trouble, from Ottawa’s side of the table, is that Washington already has plenty of its own.

And Canada still can’t quit the American market even if it wanted to: in 2025, the U.S. imported 3.9 million barrels a day of Canadian crude, making America overwhelmingly Canada’s dominant customer. Canadian oil matters to the United States. The United States is Canada’s oil industry, full stop. That’s not a negotiation between equals — that’s a landlord reminding a tenant who holds the lease. Carney might try to shut that oil off, but it’s a surefire way to make Alberta the 51st state, which he can ill afford.

Then there’s the part of this fight Washington has been increasingly willing to say out loud: Canada’s approach to government spending, immigration, and social policy. The Trump administration has argued that Canada’s expansive government and rapid population growth eventually become someone else’s problem — namely, the strained housing market, the overloaded infrastructure, and the public services buckling under the weight.

Before anyone waves that off as typical American bluster, it’s worth pointing out that Ottawa has been saying the same thing about itself. Canada’s own government has acknowledged the pressure population growth put on housing and social services, which is precisely why it’s now slashing its own targets — permanent residency holds flat at 380,000 a year through 2028, while temporary-resident arrivals get cut from 2025’s 673,650 down to 385,000 next year and 370,000 the two years after, with the explicit goal of getting the temporary population under 5% of the country by the end of 2027. Trump didn’t write that policy memo. Carney’s own government did.


And the numbers behind it are genuinely striking. According to Statistics Canada’s 2021 Census, 26.4% of the population was first-generation — born outside Canada — and another 17.6% was second-generation, meaning Canadian-born with at least one foreign-born parent. Add those together and you land at roughly 44% of the country having an immediate immigrant connection. That’s not a talking point. That’s the census.

None of which means immigration itself is the villain here — Canada was built by it, and immigrants contribute to the economy. The actual question is whether the rate and mix of that growth can be reconciled with housing, infrastructure, employment, and a social safety net that has to be paid for by someone. Even Ottawa seems to have concluded the honest answer, for now, is “not at the pace we were running it.” Gee, guys, welcome to reality. You might start by noticing what others have noted from afar: the huge percentage of these immigrants are dependent on large social support outlays.

Even the OECD’s own 2025 economic survey of Canada — an organization not exactly known for MAGA sympathies — flags weak business investment and a widening productivity gap between Canada’s best firms and everyone else as structural problems, not passing headwinds. And that’s where this whole trade fight starts making a lot more sense.

The United States walks in with the world’s largest economy, record domestic energy production, a massive consumer market, and an industrial base most countries would trade their currency reserves for. Canada walks in with real resources, a well-educated population, a serious industrial economy, and one very good card: energy and commodities the U.S. genuinely wants. That’s a relationship worth keeping. It just isn’t a relationship between equals, and pretending otherwise, as Carney seems bent on doing, doesn’t change the scoreboard.

Maybe that’s the part some people in Ottawa are struggling to swallow. It isn’t that Washington discovered some secret new lever to pull. It’s that Washington has always had this much leverage, simply by virtue of being what it is. When one side shows up with a $30.8 trillion economy, record energy output, and a consumer market Canadian exporters can’t afford to lose, and the other side shows up with a $2.3 trillion economy that depends heavily on access to that exact market, the interesting question isn’t why Washington thinks it can ask for concessions. It’s why anyone in Ottawa, Carney in particular, assumed it couldn’t.

Sometimes the uncomfortable part of a negotiation isn’t finding out the other guy is bluffing. It’s finding out he isn’t — and that he’s been holding the better hand the entire time. That’s the position Carney finds himself in just now. The reality is Carney doesn’t have nearly the cards he’d like Canadian voters to believe he does. I’ve already pointed out the leftist proclivities Carney harbors.

Before becoming PM, Carney sat on the board of Canada 2020, a think tank Maclean’s has called the outfit that effectively runs Liberal Party policy behind closed doors, with documented ties to Obama-world Democrats and access to Soros Open Society funding streams. More recently, Carney delivered the closing keynote at a closed-door Global Progress Action Summit in Toronto, sharing a stage with Barack Obama, Alex Soros — George’s son, now chairman of OSF — John Podesta, Pete Buttigieg, and Sen. Elissa Slotkin.

Every critter listed in that paragraph considers Trump an enemy. No serious analysis of Carney’s actions would be complete without acknowledging this. Carney has run on standing up to America and particularly standing up to President Trump. The trouble for Carney is that he simply hasn’t got the leverage to do that. It’s time for either Carney to grow up and face reality, or for Canadian voters to remove him. Preferably the latter.

Read more …

Painful.

• U.S. Job Growth of 162,000 vs Canada Job Losses -42,000 (CTH)

In this episode from Promethean Action’s Barbara Boyd she takes a look at the U.S. economy and the Main Street policies of President Trump versus the banking/Wall Street Canadian economy. In the August jobs report the U.S. economy added 162,000 jobs, while the Canadian August jobs report reflected 42,000 job losses.


Boyd – “A blockbuster U.S. jobs report showing 162,000 jobs created is contrasted with Canada’s 40,000 job loss under Mark Carney, as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent tells Steve Bannon that Wall Street and major outlets like the Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal stoke economic panic and spread “fake news,” citing a misframed story about Norway’s sovereign wealth fund shifting from Treasuries into higher-yield Fannie and Freddie securities.

This episode frames today’s challenge as a “Red Queen economy,” arguing America must grow productivity fast enough to outrun debt, China’s advances, and infrastructure and skills obsolescence, while blaming Biden-era inflation and spending. It spotlights Trump administration workforce initiatives, including expanded training and Pell Grant use and the new Foundry School—an advanced manufacturing program with a Stanford curriculum and international PAX Silica partners. Finally, it covers Trump executive orders aiding ranchers’ beef processing and DOJ antitrust scrutiny of major meatpackers and retailers.”

Read more …

No more people in armies, but robots.

• Operation Twist 2.0, 2032 Gold Target & 100,000 Robotic Soldiers (Armstrong)

In Part 2 of this interview, economic cycle expert Martin Armstrong breaks down the immediate impact of the Fed’s latest operations on precious metals, the underlying drivers of the market, and why he projects gold’s long-term macro peak won’t arrive until 2032. Plus, Armstrong shares insights on the shift toward autonomous warfare, including the military’s development of 100,000 robotic soldiers, and why traditional AI still falls short of human curiosity.


Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/ivan_8848/status/2096176506523304402?s=20 https://twitter.com/warDaniel47/status/2096288093531730158?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 12 2025

Sep 122025
 
 September 12, 2025  Posted by at 9:45 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  102 Responses »


Constantin Brancusi Portrait of George 1911

 

• US Is Suffering An Epidemic of Leftist Violence (Miranda Devine)
• ‘You Are the Hate’: Anna Paulina Luna Rips Dems (Salgado)
• The Day the Masks Came Off (Jamie K. Wilson)
• The Incredible Articulation of Charles James Kirk (CTH)
• Charlie Kirk Assassin Picked Spot Very Carefully (NYP)
• Musk Calls Left The ‘Party Of Murder’ After Charlie Kirk’s Shooting (RT)
• You Don’t Silence Charlie Kirk By Killing Him – Scott Ritter (RT)
• US Democratic Party is America’s Ukraine – Dugin on Charlie Kirk’s Murder (RT)
• Ukrainians Online Celebrate Charlie Kirk’s Shooting Death (RT)
• Medvedev Warns MAGA Of Left-Wing Banderite Scum After Charlie Kirk Murder (ZH)
• Trump Dismisses Claims Of ‘Russian Drone Incursion‘ Into Poland (RT)
• Europe Is a Powder Keg (J.B. Shurk)
• Britain Sacks Envoy To US Over Epstein Links (RT)
• Why Did Qatar’s Air Defenses Fail During Israel’s Attack? (Sp.)
• 9/11 After 24 Years (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Vance Names Two Issues Preventing Russia-Ukraine Peace Deal (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1966139122361544817


https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1965984391168987396


https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1965944278770676128
https://twitter.com/AdamMoczar/status/1965867076989702305


https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1966079530478801310

One hour
https://twitter.com/DrEliDavid/status/1965859806138478908

 

 

 

 

I like that the first three pieces today were written by women.

• US Is Suffering An Epidemic of Leftist Violence (Miranda Devine)

We are suffering through an epidemic of leftist violence. The ruthless assassination of conservative youth leader Charlie Kirk, 31, at a crowded campus event in Utah on Wednesday is the latest manifestation of the hateful rhetoric aimed at President Trump and his MAGA movement. It’s a sad irony that Kirk’s shockingly public murder happened the day before the trial begins of Ryan Routh, one of the alleged assassins who tried to rub out Trump during the 2024 campaign. Prescient as always, Kirk understood the consequences of the escalating violent rhetoric of the left, as he and Trump kept winning the hearts and minds of a new generation, especially young men, with logic and common sense.b“Assassination culture is spreading on the left,” he tweeted two months ago. “Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.”

In California, activists are naming ballot measures after alleged CEO-killer Luigi Mangione. “The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.” Contrary to the narrative pushed by left-wing media and fanned by President Joe Biden and his administration, the political violence is almost exclusively from the left. Setting the scene were the deadly BLM-Antifa riots that engulfed the country in the summer of 2020, which were tacitly encouraged by Democrats like Kamala Harris and Tim Walz as a way to destabilize then-President Trump and then project their own culpability and motivations onto the J6 Capitol riot by Trump supporters one afternoon. Then, of course, Trump was the target of two assassination attempts last year, including almost having his head blown off, but miraculously tilting it at the right moment for the bullet to nick his ear instead.

There was also the arson and vandalism against Tesla dealerships to intimidate Elon Musk and punish him for his support for Trump. A few months ago, Israeli Embassy staffers Yaron Lischinsky and fiancée Sarah Lynn Milgrim were assassinated, allegedly by a Palestinian activist, outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, DC. UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was assassinated in December 2024, allegedly by a wealthy leftist spouting left-wing critiques of corporate greed and health care inequities. There was the assassination attempt against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh at his Maryland home by a deranged abortion activist, and of course the leftist who shot up Republicans at a congressional baseball practice in Virginia in 2017. Even the arson attack on the home of Pennsylvania’s Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro, which pundits like Jake Tapper try to cite as an example of bipartisan targets, was perpetrated by a left-wing, pro-Hamas, anti-Israel activist.

Charlie Kirk’s answer was civil discourse. Contrary to the lies spread by MSNBC and CNN on the day of his death, he was not “a divisive figure” and he did not engage in “hate speech.” He reached across the aisle and engaged young people respectfully in dialogue. He was never personal or nasty. He was courteous and civilized. He was kind and patient. He would tour universities under the banner “Prove Me Wrong,” encouraging students to challenge him with any question. He put forward his views calmly and with a smile — capitalism is better than socialism, there are only two sexes — and was happy and courageous enough to debate anybody in good faith. That’s why he won hearts and minds on campuses and galvanized a generation. It’s what made him such a potent political force, helping Trump win in 2024.

It’s why his political opponents had to lie that he was hateful and divisive. It’s precisely because he was neither of those things that young people listened to him. He was not afraid to be plainspoken. He didn’t sugarcoat uncomfortable facts. He told the ugly truths that America tries to bury. A protective father and husband, he was particularly exercised by the random stabbing murder of 23- year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska on a light rail car in Charlotte, NC. In one of his last tweets, he wrote: “If we want things to change, it’s 100% necessary to politicize the senseless murder of Iryna Zarutska because it was politics that allowed a savage monster with 14 priors to be free on the streets to kill her.” “This was one of the … coldest, most senseless murders I’ve ever seen,” he said in an interview. “This whole criminal justice reform stuff has been a complete failure.”

He knew that the lies the Democrats and the media told about George Floyd’s death in 2020 are what got Zarutska killed. The lies are what drove disastrous criminal justice reforms, like cashless bail and emptying prisons, that were predicated on systemic racism, a nonexistent problem designed to drive a wedge between black and white Americans. Kirk called out that rancid, divisive lie for what it is. He held up a mirror to Democrats and made them see themselves as they are: the party of projection, accusing others of what’s in their own hearts. When Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed a prayer for Kirk on the House floor Wednesday afternoon, a dozen Democrats reportedly protested. You could hear them shout “No!” and “Pass some gun laws!”

“America will never be the same,” Kirk wrote Tuesday night in his final tweet about Zarutska. It was accompanied by a photo of the young woman, just after she was stabbed, wide-eyed, terrified, in shock as she looked around at her killer, hand to her mouth, knees pulled up in the fetal position, before she slumped to the floor and bled out. Kirk wasn’t to know that 12 hours and 35 minutes after he wrote those words, he would join her in death. No, America will never be the same. But Kirk’s death, like his life’s work, is a turning point. Look at what he accomplished in 31 years. Imagine what he might have gone on to do. In his short life, he formed a future generation of leaders who see the world as he did, clearly, logically, with reason tempered by compassion, and with faith in Jesus Christ.

In death, he may yet accomplish more than he already has. His mode was to be strong, brave and resolute. Live your values. Get married, have children, make the world a better place, with courage and grace for your fellow man. That’s his legacy, and it’s up to all Americans of goodwill to take up his mission.

Read more …

“You were too busy doping up kids, cutting off their genitals, inciting racial violence by supporting orgs that exploit minorities, protecting criminals, and stirring hate. YOU ARE THE HATE you claim to fight.”

• ‘You Are the Hate’: Anna Paulina Luna Rips Dems (Salgado)

After Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk was assassinated at a Utah Valley University event today, Republicans tried to have an extra moment of prayer on the House floor, but Democrats objected. Following this, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna unleashed the anger that many feel against Democrats for encouraging so much hatred against conservatives. Luna is tired of pretending Democrats don’t hate our country and anyone who disagrees with them. “I am done with the rhetoric this rotten House and corrupt media has caused,” she declared. “EVERY DAMN ONE OF YOU WHO CALLED US FASCISTS DID THIS.” The congresswoman declared, “You were too busy doping up kids, cutting off their genitals, inciting racial violence by supporting orgs that exploit minorities, protecting criminals, and stirring hate. YOU ARE THE HATE you claim to fight.”

She hammered her point home: “Your words caused this. Your hate caused this. Charlie. His family. Those kids. No one deserved this. Enough is enough.” Later, she revealed yet more of the sickness inherent in the Democrat Party. “My office has been receiving calls from individuals celebrating the assassination attempt on Charlie Kirk,” she wrote on X. “I am disgusted by the level of depravity the Left has stooped to— including one caller who even demanded my location. All of this has been reported to our threats team.” These crazed leftists are no doubt happy to make every conservative afraid that he or she will be next.

Scott Presler, the indefatigable campaigner who made sure Trump could win Pennsylvania, was equally disgusted at the Left’s vitriol. “Record every single person celebrating the assassination,” he urged. “Hold them accountable. Every single one.” Kirk’s babies will never see him again, because he dared to speak truths with which others disagree. He didn’t commit any violence; he just invited people to debate him. Yet leftists immediately took to social media in high glee after he was killed, and leftist media used their coverage of the assassination to insult Kirk.

And while we don’t know who the shooter is, Luna is totally right to say that Democrats vilified Kirk, Trump, and everybody who agrees with them. They radicalize people like Robert Westman, the “transgender” mass shooter who killed children at a Minneapolis Catholic school at the end of August. But then again, Democrats have been pushing domestic terrorism for well over a century. From the caning of Charles Sumner to the Civil War to the KKK and Red Shirts to Antifa, the history of the Democrat Party is a history of politically motivated violence. How horrific that it is still claiming the lives of patriots like Charlie Kirk.

Read more …

“That imbalance shaped our politics: one side wanted to persuade, the other side wanted to destroy.”

• The Day the Masks Came Off (Jamie K. Wilson)

Charlie Kirk should be alive today. He should be at home tonight with his beautiful wife and their two little children—three bright futures entwined with his own, now stolen away forever. He should be grinning that irrepressible grin, telling stories, cracking jokes, and planning his next campus stop. Instead, he was gunned down in Utah while doing what he always did: speaking directly to anyone willing to listen. Charlie had a gift that made him unique in our movement. He carried himself like everyone’s little brother — fearless, approachable, quick with a smile. He walked into hostile rooms and faced jeers, insults, and ugly words with a kind of radiant good humor. And then, instead of lashing back, he answered with questions. He wanted to draw people out, to meet them where they stood, to turn confrontation into conversation. Often he didn’t change minds, but he left behind something just as valuable: respect.

Charlie valued all lives, regardless of color, creed, or nation of birth. But he had a special place in his heart for the smallest and most defenseless — the unborn, the voiceless, the forgotten. That conviction animated everything he did. He believed America could still be a place where truth mattered, where faith mattered, and where human dignity mattered. I don’t remember ever seeing him without a smile. Even when he was under attack, even when the words were venomous, he seemed to carry joy as a weapon. He feared nothing and no one, and he made friends wherever he went — on the right, and yes, even among some on the left who couldn’t help but like him despite their politics.

And now he’s gone.

Charlie Kirk is dead — murdered in Utah during what should have been a routine campus event. That sentence alone should be enough to unite Americans in grief and outrage. But it hasn’t. On Twitter, the progressive crowd erupted in celebration. Memes, jokes, cheers — many of the same people who preach about compassion and “our shared humanity” couldn’t resist mocking the death of a man who devoted his life to building conservative institutions and defending ordinary Americans. On MSNBC, hosts and guests blamed everyone but the shooter. In Congress, when the Speaker of the House tried to hold a moment of silence, Democrat radicals shouted him down. This was not just another tragedy. It was a revelation.

For years, conservatives have described liberals as misguided, wrong, or naïve. We thought they were mistaken but basically well-intentioned. Liberals, on the other hand, increasingly painted conservatives as evil — racist, fascist, subhuman. That imbalance shaped our politics: one side wanted to persuade, the other side wanted to destroy. But with Charlie Kirk’s murder, that asymmetry collapsed. Conservatives watched in real time as prominent voices on the Left celebrated the death of a man they despised. The mask of “tolerance” slipped, and underneath was malice. Today, conservatives are saying what we once resisted: they are not just wrong. They are evil.

That recognition is a cultural turning point. The death of Charlie Kirk is not just the silencing of a voice — it is the beginning of a new conversation on the Right. A conversation about what it means when our opponents openly cheer our destruction. A conversation about how we respond when politics ceases to be a contest of ideas and becomes, in their eyes, a war of elimination. The Left has chosen its posture. They have declared who they are. And now, conservatives must decide how to live in a country where half of our opposing political class celebrates the murders of conservatives. Charlie Kirk’s voice is gone. But the silence left behind speaks louder than words.

Read more …

“This is a remarkable exhibition of a skillset that will be exceptionally difficult to replace.”

• The Incredible Articulation of Charles James Kirk (CTH)

Sadly, I had not seen this video until after he was assassinated and it was shared on social media. That said, the intellectual capacity, the gift of articulation carried within the vessel Charlie Kirk represented, is evident in this video segment. This is a remarkable exhibition of a skillset that will be exceptionally difficult to replace.

Read more …

“..within three to five minutes of that shot going off, that person could have been in a vehicle on his way out and miles and miles away..”

• Charlie Kirk Assassin Picked Spot Very Carefully (NYP)

Charlie Kirk’s assassin appears to have picked a rooftop from where they could make a quick escape and be “miles and miles away” in mere minutes, according to a retired FBI expert. The sniper — who remains at large early Thursday — fired the single, fatal shot from the top of the Losee Center Building at Utah Valley University, some 200 yards away from where Kirk was seated in a pop-up tent speaking in front of 3,000 people, authorities have said. “If you come off that roof — and I’ve seen the drone footage of this — there’s an open-air parking lot behind that building,” retired FBI supervising agent James Gagliano told “Fox and Friends.” “So this is a big concern because this person, within three to five minutes of that shot going off, that person could have been in a vehicle on his way out and miles and miles away,” he said.

“Provo airport’s only about 45 minutes from there,” he said — suggesting that the killer could have quickly escaped Utah, too. Kirk, a 31-year-old married father of two, was fatally shot in the throat at the outdoor speaking event at the college on Wednesday, sending students screaming and running for their lives as he fell to the ground bleeding. Chilling footage recorded immediately after the gunshot rang out appears to show a small, dark shape jump up and sprint across a roof in the distance as people in the crowd ducked for cover. Another clip filmed earlier shows the dark shape lying prone on top of the rooftop from which the gunman fired as people below wondered aloud what they were looking at. Kirk was shot moments later. “People are suggesting this was a professional hit. And yet from that distance, we’re talking a little over 500 feet, just short of 200 yards, that’s not a tough shot with a rifle, if this suspect had a scope,” Gagliano said.

“It’s a very easy shot.” US Army Sergeant Nicholas Ranstad, an elite American sharpshooter, also called it an “easy shot,” suggesting there was no reason to believe the killer was a trained sniper, further complicating the hunt. Lack of security at UVU made the campus “a buffet for someone who wanted to kill someone,” Ranstad, who held the record for longest American kill in Afghanistan, told the Daily Mail. “When you have events like that, you look at the security, if you push 250, 300 yards, it’s an easy shot,” he said. “Not to mention out in the open, wind is low out in the country. It’s not like in the city, where a bullet flying past the buildings will move more,” Ranstad added. UVU Police Chief Jeff Long said his department had just six officers working Kirk’s event alongside the activist’s personal security team. Kirk was rushed to a local hospital, where he died from his wounds, leaving behind a wife and two children.

Read more …

“..an April survey by the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI), which found that 48% of “left of center” respondents said it would be “somewhat justified” to murder President Trump. Some 55% said the same about Musk..”

• Musk Calls Left The ‘Party Of Murder’ After Charlie Kirk’s Shooting (RT)

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has accused the radical left of fostering a climate that encourages violence against conservatives, calling it the “party of murder” following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk. The 31-year-old activist and influencer was shot in the neck while taking questions from a crowd on the campus of Utah Valley University on Wednesday. Authorities said the suspected gunman fired from a rooftop some distance away. According to initial reports, a suspect was detained, but he has since been released. “The Left is the party of murder,” Musk wrote in a post on X, echoing broader claims from Republican allies who argue that Democratic rhetoric and media narratives have long fueled hostility toward conservative figures.

Political commentator Mike Cernovich replied: “Not only ‘the left,’ it’s people who fund them. Like Soros, Bill Gates, and Reid Hoffman. Some patsy boomer who was radicalized by agitprop is not who anyone smart considers responsible for today,” to which Musk responded, “Exactly.” Musk also endorsed another post claiming that “the left-wing mainstream media, as well as figures like Gavin Newsom claiming Trump plans to be dictator, has created a climate of hysteria against right-wing figures that could radicalize any number of unstable people to engage in political violence.”

His remarks came as leading Democrats, including former President Joe Biden, former Vice President Kamala Harris, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and California Governor Gavin Newsom have issued statements condemning the attack and declaring that “political” and “gun violence” have no place in America. The growing “assassination culture” among left-leaning Americans was highlighted in an April survey by the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI), which found that 48% of “left of center” respondents said it would be “somewhat justified” to murder President Trump. Some 55% said the same about Musk. Earlier this year, radical activists targeted Tesla owners, accusing the billionaire of enabling “fascism” and calling for boycotts of his companies.

Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, rose to prominence through debates with liberal and progressive students. Vice President JD Vance praised him for promoting civil political discourse, noting that his events were “one of the few places with open and honest dialogue between left and right,” where he would answer any question and engage with everyone. In honor of the “truly Great American Patriot,” President Trump has ordered all American flags across the United States to be flown at half-mast until Sunday.

Read more …

“What is not okay is to demonize people to the extent that [you argue] America would be better off without these ideas being articulated.”

• You Don’t Silence Charlie Kirk By Killing Him – Scott Ritter (RT)

The assassination of a political speaker you disagree with is antithetical to American values, making Charlie Kirk’s murder a grave signal for US society, former Marine Corps intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter told RT. The founder of the conservative student group Turning Point USA was shot dead Wednesday at Utah Valley University by a gunman firing from a nearby rooftop. Kirk was famous for his public debates on hot-button topics, such as transgender issues or US support for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia.

Apparently motivated by politics, the crime shows that constitutionally protected free speech in America “is no longer free,” and that some words can be met with violence rather than counterarguments, Ritter said. “In the battleground of ideas, the solution to somebody’s bad ideas isn’t to shoot the person,” he said. “The last thing you do is silence Charlie Kirk by shooting Charlie Kirk.” Ritter blamed the US government for increasingly embracing censorship of speech it considers inconvenient and for enabling intimidation by activists. He said he has personally faced harassment over his public statements, including online death threats aimed at him and his family.

“We have a poisonous environment today on social media, on the mainstream media, and in society in general, where people are physically threatened because of the words they speak,” he said. “It’s OK to be offended by people’s speech,” Ritter added. “What is not okay is to demonize people to the extent that [you argue] America would be better off without these ideas being articulated.” The gunman shot Kirk at a publicly accessible venue. Ritter warned that the attack could discourage US campuses from hosting controversial speakers since many universities cannot afford the level of security needed to prevent such violence.

Read more …

“This is very much like the beginning of a civil war. The Democratic Party is America’s Ukraine. Or vice versa..”

“Dugin’s own daughter, Darya Dugina, was assassinated in 2022 in a car bombing outside Moscow. Russian authorities blamed the killing on Ukrainian agents, a claim echoed by the US government.”

• US Democratic Party is America’s Ukraine – Dugin on Charlie Kirk’s Murder (RT)

The assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk has exposed a dangerous fault line in American society that could lead to civil war, Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin argued in a post on his Telegram channel. Dugin, known for his advocacy of traditional values and the concept of ‘Eurasianism’ – which seeks to unite Europe and Asia against Western liberalism – accused American leftists of fueling division and celebrating the killing of their political opponents. “After confirmation of Charlie Kirk’s death, America exploded. Trump and MAGA feel genuine pain and wild anger… Everyone in MAGA forgot their contradictions and instantly united,” Dugin wrote. By contrast, he claimed, liberals were unable to “contain their joy.” Dugin pointed to MSNBC contributor Matthew Dowd’s controversial on-air remarks and Democrats’ reported refusal to honor Kirk with a prayer in Congress.

He said liberal networks were filled with gloating reactions, with senior party figures publicly calling for unity while privately urging activists not to be too open about their jubilation. The philosopher said many in the US now fear for the lives of other conservative figures, warning that “life [is] under the crosshairs.” “This is very much like the beginning of a civil war. The Democratic Party is America’s Ukraine. Or vice versa,” Dugin wrote, adding that Kirk was shot “from 200 meters by a sniper who disappeared,” and suggesting the true perpetrators may never be identified – drawing a parallel to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Dugin’s own daughter, Darya Dugina, was assassinated in 2022 in a car bombing outside Moscow. Russian authorities blamed the killing on Ukrainian agents, a claim echoed by the US government.

In his post, Dugin argued that the killing of Kirk – like the murder of his daughter – is part of a broader campaign to silence those who reject globalist liberal ideology. “The center giving the order for our destruction, for the extermination of MAGA supporters, is one and the same,” he said. Kirk, 31, was killed by a single rifle shot during a Turning Point USA event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday, in what officials have described as a targeted political assassination. Authorities have located the alleged murder weapon and three unspent cartridges that reportedly bore “transgender and anti-fascist” messages. The gunman vanished from the scene and remains at large, with a $100,000 bounty offered for information leading to his arrest.

Read more …

“Kirk had branded Zelensky an “international welfare queen” and an “ungrateful petulant child who is responsible for 1 million deaths..,”

• Ukrainians Online Celebrate Charlie Kirk’s Shooting Death (RT)

Ukrainian social media users have openly celebrated the shooting death of conservative US activist Charlie Kirk. Kirk, a prominent critic of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and of the push by the administration of former US President Joe Biden to send hundreds of billions of dollars in military aid to Kiev, was killed on Wednesday during a public campus event in Orem, Utah. Though mainstream Ukrainian media reported the killing in a largely neutral tone, providing basic facts and noting Kirk’s criticisms of Kiev, numerous online posts from accounts with Ukrainian names expressed approval and even delight.

“Being pro-Trump means being stupid and primitive,” user “Olga” said on Telegram in response to a report of Kirk’s shooting by UNIAN, a leading Ukrainian news outlet. “Epic,” wrote a user named “Ruslan” about a video showing the moment Kirk was hit by a bullet. Another commenter, “Volodya Yanik,” declared: “Cool. Super shot.” “First he rooted for Russia, and now he is dead,” wrote an account under the name “Valentin Shevchenko.”

Some of the celebratory remarks were later removed by UNIAN administrators. Similar reactions spread across other Ukrainian outlets, with commenters insisting Kirk had “f*cked around and found out” and wishing for him to “rest in pieces.” Kirk had branded Zelensky an “international welfare queen” and an “ungrateful petulant child who is responsible for 1 million dead,” citing Zelensky’s refusal to consider a peace deal with Russia and his continuation of a conflict financed by Western money.

Read more …

“..urging Americans mourning Kirk’s death – and especially those in the MAGA movement – “to realize that by supporting Ukraine, they’re supporting murderers.”

• Medvedev Warns MAGA Of Left-Wing Banderite Scum After Charlie Kirk Murder (ZH)

Russian officials have been highlighting Charlie Kirk’s past commentary on Ukraine in wake of his horrific assassination on Wednesday at Utah Valley University. The Turning Point USA founder had long heaped criticism on US and Western policy of funding Ukraine’s military to the tune of billions, at one point calling out President Zelensky as “an ungrateful capricious child.” For this reason he came under severe criticism by Ukrainian and pro-Kiev pundits.

https://twitter.com/HavryshkoMarta/status/1965862781548376163?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1965862781548376163%7Ctwgr%5E3a4b9e54f50192549a3d89e31bde49cc7e81264a%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fmedvedev-warns-maga-left-wing-banderite-scum-after-charlie-kirks-assassination

The Kremlin is now highlighting this soon after his death. For example, former Russian president and current deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev quickly connected Kirk’s murder to what he called “a variety of left-wing liberal scum who support Banderite” Kiev. This is a reference to Nazi Ukrainian nationalist Stepan Bandera, who was formative in hardline Ukrainian nationalist movements in the 20th century world wars era – and deemed a national hero by the Ukrainian government. His legacy is also condemned by multiple European and human rights institutions as representing antisemitism. Medvedev issued a statement to social media urging Americans mourning Kirk’s death – and especially those in the MAGA movement – “to realize that by supporting Ukraine, they’re supporting murderers.”

“Political crimes and assassinations have been carried out lately by a variety of left-wing liberal scum who support Banderite Kiev. Fico, Kirk. Who’s next?” – he said in reference to the almost fatal May 2024 shooting of Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico. Kirill Dmitriev, Putin’s chief negotiator with the Trump team and head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, reposted a video montage on X that showed leftists “in full celebration mode over Charlie Kirk getting shot.”

Dmitriev described “voices of light” cannot be silenced. He also reposted a message from Elon Musk, among a series of Kirk-related posts, stating: “The Left is the party of murder.” Musk had also in the past agreed with Kirk’s biting criticisms of US/NATO policy toward Ukraine, and the risks of WW3. Online commentators have widely speculated that Kirk could have been targeted by a foreign intelligence service, at a moment the manhunt is still underway and motive for the killing remains anything but clear. Kirk had complex and nuanced views on a host of issues ranging from Israel to Ukraine to the Epstein saga.

For example, he has said multiple times that Epstein was at the center of an intelligence operation to blackmail powerful leaders. All of this has fueled the rampant speculation and theories surrounding his death.

Read more …

Russia invades Poland, first step towards potentially starting WWII, with a handful of minor drones? Why not just fold some paper planes?

• Trump Dismisses Claims Of ‘Russian Drone Incursion‘ Into Poland (RT)

US President Donald Trump has downplayed Poland’s accusation that Russian drones intentionally violated its airspace this week, suggesting that the alleged incident “could have been a mistake.” Moscow has rejected accusations that it committed an “act of aggression” against the NATO state, after Warsaw claimed to have intercepted several drones on Tuesday night. Asked by reporters on Thursday about Warsaw’s claims, Trump responded: “Could have been a mistake… But regardless, I’m not happy about anything having to do with that whole situation. But hopefully it’s going to come to an end.”

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said the country’s military had tracked at least 19 alleged airspace violations over a seven-hour period, with at least three drones shot down. He described the situation as “unprecedented” and accused Moscow of staging a deliberate provocation. The Russian Defense Ministry has insisted that the drones it used in strikes on Ukrainian military targets could not have flown as far as Poland, and emphasized that no targets were planned in Polish territory. With little evidence provided by the Polish side, Moscow could neither confirm nor deny the alleged violations, but stressed it was ready to hold consultations with Warsaw.

The Kremlin has accused Western leaders of issuing “daily” provocation claims without evidence, while Belarus said it had warned Poland of stray drones disrupted by electronic warfare between Russian and Ukrainian forces. European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, condemned the alleged incursion as “reckless” and expressed solidarity with Poland. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte likewise described the reported breaches as “dangerous,” though he added the bloc had not confirmed whether they were intentional and voiced doubts about Poland’s claims regarding the number of drones.

Poland has invoked Article 4 of NATO’s founding treaty, which mandates consultations if a member believes its security is threatened, and requested an emergency UN Security Council meeting on Friday. Last week, former Polish President Andrzej Duda recalled how Kiev tried to draw the US-led bloc into a direct confrontation with Russia in November 2022, when a Ukrainian missile landed on Polish territory but Kiev insisted it was an intentional Russian attack and called for NATO-level retaliation.

Read more …

“Eighty years after the European Union began constructing its continental empire, the “colonies” appear eager to reclaim their right to self-determination.”

• Europe Is a Powder Keg (J.B. Shurk)

Americans who don’t spend time in Europe might not fully appreciate what a powder keg the Old World has become. However bad social relations in the United States now are, they are at least an order of magnitude worse on the other side of the Atlantic. European self-hatred is dissolving traditional cultural bonds. Mass immigration is compounding age-old rivalries. Europe is one spark away from exploding. Europe is a perennial battlefield. Many of our ancestors, after all, left the old country to escape religious, economic, and cultural conflicts that had endured for centuries. Those historic grievances — always simmering in times of peace before boiling over into outright violence — are passed from one generation to the next.

Modern European nations are the product of two thousand years of shifting borders and alliances, and native Europeans trace their family lineages back to regional tribes whose ancient territories do not fit neatly within the politically drawn maps of today. If you think geographical accents in America make it tricky for a Mississippian or Minnesotan to communicate effectively with an English-speaker from the Bronx, consider that Europe is home to nearly three hundred native tongues. Switzerland has four national languages — including Romansch, which derives from the spoken Latin of the Roman Empire. The cornucopia of indigenous languages, dialects, vocabularies, and accents makes it possible for local residents of small towns to recognize “outsiders” immediately. Even more impressively, they can usually tell — just by listening — which towns a stranger’s grandparents once called home.

Two world wars — both ignited in Europe and responsible for immense European destruction — propelled a mid-twentieth-century political movement calling for the eradication of national borders. The European intelligentsia who became the founding members of the continent’s fledgling transnational bureaucracy blamed national pride for Europe’s carnage and effectively turned “nationalism” into a dirty word.

Oddly, this was also a time when crumbling empires, such as France and the United Kingdom, were at least tepidly supporting the national independence of former colonies. Likewise, it was the beginning of a half-century U.S.-led campaign to encourage national revolutions in European countries stuck behind the Soviet Union’s Iron Curtain. So Western power brokers framed nationalism as a kind of intolerable ethos on par with Mussolini’s fascism and Hitler’s national socialism while encouraging former nations or proto-nations in Central Europe, Africa, and Asia to break away from the respective empires that controlled them. While Western leaders pushed for the integration of distinct European nations into a single “Union,” they also promoted national independence movements under the rationale that all humans possess a natural right to self-determination.

In the eighty years since the project for European integration began in earnest, those latent contradictions have transformed Europe into a tinderbox with even greater potential energy for self-destruction than existed before WWI and II. While the bureaucratic ruling class has actively repressed the historic identities of native Europeans, it has flooded the continent with foreigners who are encouraged to retain their own cultural identities. In this way, a Hungarian or Pole or Dane who celebrates his country’s unique heritage is denounced as a “far-right nationalist,” while a Frenchman who insists that African and Middle Eastern immigrants assimilate to the European way of life is denounced as a “racist” and “bigot.”

This anti-European monstrosity was created deliberately. Simultaneous suppression of Europeans’ national identities and protections for foreign nationals create a kind of “multiculturalism dynamo” that converts Europeans into something alien. Stripped of their native religion, culture, and historic customs and forced to praise foreign religions, cultures, and customs taking hold in the West’s civilizational void, Europeans are effectively assimilated within their own lands. Europeans are taught to despise their own civilization and to bow down before those who seek to replicate a foreign civilization inside Europe. Europe’s bureaucratic ruling class uses foreigners to beat the Europeanness out of Europeans.

In the United Kingdom, a grassroots movement of ordinary Brits has initiated “Operation: Raise the Colors.” The strategy is simple: British citizens are encouraged to prominently display and wave the Cross of St. George and Union Jack flags. What could possibly be offensive or dangerous about raising the flags of England and the United Kingdom? Nothing. Yet the globalist Establishment is losing its collective mind. Leftists insist that the flags should be replaced with something more “multicultural” and that only “far-right racists” would stoop so low as to patriotically raise the country’s flags. Open-borders politicians are calling the flag-waving “extremist,” “hate-filled,” and “white supremacist.” In other words, the British people have forced Britain’s “elites” to acknowledge that they have no loyalty to and only antipathy for the United Kingdom.

This rather anodyne form of political speech is proving remarkably effective at exposing globalism’s suicidal contagion. In London, it is perfectly normal to see so-called “gay pride” flags, “Palestinian” flags, Pakistani flags, Iranian flags, and the flags of almost every third-world nation now offloading its citizens onto the shores of the U.K. If a British citizen were to express outrage over the fact that a panoply of foreign flags is flown brazenly throughout the capital, constables would intimidate the outspoken “offender” into silence by threatening him with prosecution for imaginary “hate speech.” Revealingly, however, these same petty tyrants throw hissy fits when native Brits dare “raise the colors” of their own nation’s historic flags.

Similar movements are picking up steam. Ten years ago, it was more common to see such patriotic displays on the streets of Balkan nations or amid independence parades in the Basque region or other areas of Europe seeking national recognition. Today it is easy to stumble into a sea of Dutch, Danish, German, Italian, Swedish, Norwegian, Finnish, Hungarian, Polish, Czech, or Greek flags when crossing borders. Eighty years after the European Union began constructing its continental empire, the “colonies” appear eager to reclaim their right to self-determination.

I think it’s fair to say that ordinary Europeans are no longer willing to remain quiet as the bureaucratic ruling class kills what’s left of Europe and hands the carcass to foreign conquerors. As an American with absolute fidelity to the millennia-long promises of Western civilization, I find these patriotic revivals timely rebuttals to a globalist Establishment that prefers our death. I cannot tell you how many times I have come across the words of Welsh poet Dylan Thomas translated into one of Europe’s many native languages. “Do not go gentle into that good night” and “Rage, rage against the dying of the light” show up on message boards like faint heartbeats on an EKG machine. Many in Europe don’t want to die. To live, they’ll have to fight.

Read more …

What a doofus.

• Britain Sacks Envoy To US Over Epstein Links (RT)

The UK has withdrawn Lord Peter Mandelson as its ambassador to the US after reviewing newly surfaced emails about his relationship with late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the Foreign Office said on Thursday. In the emails, circulated by British media on Wednesday, Mandelson voiced his strong support for Epstein after the latter was indicted by a grand jury over his sex offenses, assuring the disgraced financier that his “friends stay with you and love you.” “The emails show that the depth and extent of Peter Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is materially different from that known at the time of his appointment,” the Foreign Office said, adding that “Mandelson’s suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful and should be challenged is new information.”

The publication of the emails dealt the final blow to the Mandelson, who had already been struggling with the fallout from the Epstein 50th “birthday book” scandal. The massive bound tome was compiled by Epstein’s longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell and contains messages from his acquaintances and friends, including a 10-page letter from the former British ambassador. The ambiguous letter, interspersed with photographs, describes Epstein as Mandelson’s “best pal” and portrays him as an “intelligent, sharp-witted,” and “mysterious” man. “You would spend many hours just waiting for him to turn up… And often, no sooner were you used to having him around, you would suddenly be alone again… Leaving you with some ‘interesting’ friends to entertain instead,” one section reads.

Following the emergence of the “love letter,” British PM Keir Starmer strongly backed the envoy, stating that Mandelson has “played a key part” in strengthening the UK-US ties in recent months. Mandelson has repeatedly expressed regret over ever meeting Epstein, admitting after the emergence of the emails that he had carried on the ties “for far longer than I should have done” and painted himself a victim of a “charismatic criminal liar.” The ultimate downfall of the diplomat comes mere days ahead of US President Donald Trump’s scheduled state visit to the UK.

Read more …

US switched off their Patriot systems at a distance.

“Turkiye refused to purchase the Patriot specifically because the American side could disable these systems at any moment..”

• Why Did Qatar’s Air Defenses Fail During Israel’s Attack? (Sp.)

The missiles fired by Israel could have been intercepted by Qatar’s US Patriot systems. Russian military expert Yuri Knutov weighs in: the Patriots were simply turned off by the US. “The main feature of these systems is their close integration with airborne early warning and control aircraft (AWACS), satellites, and command centers that provide targeting data,” Knutov tells Sputnik. “In addition, they have a [remote] shutdown feature to prevent accidental friendly fire.” This shutdown feature is problematic: Turkiye refused to purchase the Patriot specifically because the American side could disable these systems at any moment, and therefore preferred the S-400, according to the pundit. Apart from using Patriots, Qatar hosts the US’ largest military base in the Middle East.

“According to the agreement between Qatar and the US, the Americans were, of course, supposed to defend Qatar’s airspace by opening fire on Israeli aircraft. However, this did not happen,” Knutov says. The US military knew about the incoming Israeli aircraft yet took no action, effectively allowing them to operate freely against the Hamas delegation invited to Qatar for negotiations. The US was fully aware of this. mArab countries — and not just them — should take note: wherever US Patriots are used, the US can disable them at any moment, leaving their skies completely defenseless. “This is undoubtedly a scandalous situation, given that Qatar is a close US ally and had promised to invest billions in the American economy,” Knutov says. “The Americans warned Qatar of the attack only ten minutes after it had taken place.”

Read more …

Almost forgot.

• 9/11 After 24 Years (Paul Craig Roberts)

It has been 24 years since Dick Cheney, the Zionist neoconservatives, and Israel blew up the World Trade Center and the part of the Pentagon where researchers were trying to find out what had happened to the missing Pentagon trillions of dollars in order to create the New Pearl Harbor that the neoconservatives said was necessary to justify their wars against Israel’s opponents in the Middle East. These wars succeeded in destroying 6 countries for Israel at the expense of US lives, money, and reputation. A seventh–Iran–remains in the crosshairs. The official 9/11 story was preposterous, but Americans fell for it. The US military/security complex was delighted. A new enemy had been created to take the place of the Soviet Union.

It was several years before some physicists, architects, and engineers realized that the official narrative was a hoax. But few could speak out without losing their university or government position or their engineering and architectural clients. America was determined to have “the Muslim threat” and proceeded to create Greater Israel for Israel. The 9/11 narrative is just one of a long line of false narratives, and Americans have fallen for every one of them: the murders of John F. Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy, the Gulf of Tonkin, Watergate, Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Assad’s use of chemical weapons, Russiagate, Russian invasion of Ukraine.

A black felon, George Floyd kills himself with an overdose of fentanyl. A white cop is falsely blamed for suffocating him, and Black Lives Matter with Democrat Party support loot and burn a police station and business centers in many American cities. No one was punished except the innocent white policeman. In contrast, when a few students protest Israeli’s genocide of Palestine they are expelled from university and deported if they are students from abroad. Americans have proven themselves to be suckers for obvious lies, and this paved the way for the decline in government accountability and the rights guaranteed to American citizens by the US Constitution.

Read more …

“They want confidence that if they cut a deal, the Russians aren’t going to come back in a few months or a few years asking for more.”

• Vance Names Two Issues Preventing Russia-Ukraine Peace Deal (RT)

Talks on resolving the conflict between Russia and Ukraine have been narrowed to two major sticking points, centering on territorial issues and security guarantees, US Vice President J.D. Vance said on Tuesday. Moscow has called for a diplomatic resolution of the conflict but warned it will continue military action until the root causes are addressed. It insists that a settlement must include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye regions, which joined Russia following referendums, as Russian territory. In an interview with One America News Network, Vance said talks to end the conflict have “at least narrowed it to a couple of core issues.”

“One issue is territorial,” Vance stated, adding: “The Russians want about 6,000 or so square kilometers that they have not yet conquered through military force. That’s what the Russians want.” Vance said Ukraine, for its part, is pressing for security guarantees “whether from the Europeans or somebody else.” He added: “They want confidence that if they cut a deal, the Russians aren’t going to come back in a few months or a few years asking for more.” Russia has long stressed it has no intention of occupying Ukraine in full. President Vladimir Putin reiterated this when the conflict escalated in 2022, and again later when Russian troops reached Kiev but then withdrew.

Vance said negotiations have made “incredible progress,” but the key question is whether “the Russians and the Ukrainians are going to walk through that door of peace.” “We continue to work hard at it,” he added. “And I do think that eventually you’re going to come to a peaceful settlement. The question really is whether it lasts another year or another month, whether you have another 100,000 or another million, God forbid, people die in the process.” Last week, Putin struck a cautiously optimistic note about the prospects for peace, saying “there is light at the end of the tunnel” given the US shift to mediation. Putin and US President Donald Trump met in Alaska last month. Although the summit produced no breakthroughs, both sides described it as a positive step.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Luongo Armstrong

 

 

RFK

RFK MLK

Bhatta
https://twitter.com/unhealthytruth/status/1965840509449966056

NO!

Gaelic

AI
https://twitter.com/TheProjectUnity/status/1966070687262716014

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 12 2023

Sep 122023
 
 September 12, 2023  Posted by at 8:55 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


Claude Monet O Rio (The River) 1881

 

• Zelensky ‘Senses’ Weakening Western Support (RT)
• Zelensky Threatens To Terrorize Europe (MoA)
• Ukrainians Blame Zelensky For Corruption – Poll (RT)
• EU Believes Ukraine Is ‘A Very Corrupt Country’ – Politico (RT)
• Blinken Contradicts Ukraine On Peace Negotiations (RT)
• Elon Musk Responds To Ukraine ‘Treason’ Claims (RT)
• Medvedev Advocates Suspending Diplomatic Relations With EU (TASS)
• Russian Customs Chief Accuses EU Of ‘Total Lawlessness’ (RT)
• Brazilian Court To Decide About Putin If He Attends G20 Summit – Lula (TASS)
• Lies And Pretence In New London Novichok Hearing (Helmer)
• The Gun Charge Against Hunter Is the Way of Covering Up the Real Issues (PCR)
• The “Why Not” Culture: The Georgia Final Report Should Worry Us All (Turley)
• The Mills of the Gods (Jim Kunstler)
• 9/11 After 22 Years (Paul Craig Roberts)

 

 

 

 

RFK

 

 

 

 

Trump 9/11
https://twitter.com/i/status/1701280839533838398
https://twitter.com/i/status/1701253565702938885

 

 

 

 

Isaacson

 

 

“A judge in Pennsylvania has ruled that former President Trump has ‘presidential immunity’ and cannot be sued over statements he made about 2020 election fraud.”

 

 

 

 

He’s directly threatening Europe now:

“..the millions of Ukrainian refugees now residing in foreign nations. They have generally “behaved well,” but if the hosts “drive these people into a corner,” the end result will not be “a good story” for Europe..”

• Zelensky ‘Senses’ Weakening Western Support (RT)

If Western nations do not maintain their assistance to Kiev, they could face defeats at the ballot box and trouble from the millions of Ukrainian refugees they host, President Vladimir Zelensky has warned. In an interview with The Economist, Zelensky complained about weakening support from senior Western officials, which he claimed to have seen in their eyes during meetings. “I see that he or she is not here, not with us” contrary to spoken assurances, he said, according to the interview published on Sunday. According to Zelensky, failure to support Ukraine amounts to siding with Russia in the conflict, which escalated into open hostilities in February 2022. “If partners do not help us, it means they will help Russia to win,” he stated.

Zelensky believes that Western voters will not forgive their leaders if they “lose Ukraine.” Further trouble may also come from the millions of Ukrainian refugees now residing in foreign nations. They have generally “behaved well,” but if the hosts “drive these people into a corner,” the end result will not be “a good story” for Europe, the president added. The Ukrainian leader said he is “morally” ready for a long war with Russia, but this will require the country to switch to a “totally militarized economy.” He added that now is “a bad moment” for peace talks with Russia, due to the lackluster battlefield progress over the three months of Kiev’s summer ‘counteroffensive’. Moscow has estimated Ukrainian losses during the push at over 66,000 troops and 7,600 heavy weapons.

The Economist noted that the Zelensky government had built up expectations for the offensive, but now he is “carefully adjusting his message to reality.” The Ukrainian president also appeared to take credit for the drone attacks deep inside Russian territory, which Kiev formally refuses to claim as its own. Explaining his strategy, he said public support for the Russian government will fall “because our drones will land.”In a “long war,” Moscow will lose regardless of how the Russians feel because the Russian economy will fail, he added. The Russian government expects the economy to grow by 2.5% or more in 2023. Recent forecasts by the World Bank and the IMF have upgraded their predictions for Russia due to strong industrial production and higher-than-expected energy revenues.

Read more …

Moon of Alabama noticed it too.

“I have seen such threats from low ranking individuals of the fascist Bandera fringe. They spoke of terrorism they would unleash in the West should it end its support for Ukraine. That the Ukrainian president now reinforces such threats shows how deeply he immersed himself in that mindset..”

• Zelensky Threatens To Terrorize Europe (MoA)

The Economist published another interview with the Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenski. It includes his usual unrealistic platitudes about not ending the war until Russia has completely pulled back. Speaking with an English language media he didn’t miss to mention the ever misunderstood story about Chamberlain’s move in Munich: “Tapping loudly on the table, Mr Zelensky rejects outright the idea of compromise with Vladimir Putin. War will continue for “as long as Russia remains on Ukrainian territory”, he says. A negotiated deal would not be permanent. The Russian president has a habit of creating “frozen conflicts” on Russia’s borders (in Georgia, for example), not as ends in themselves but because his goal is to “restore the Soviet Union”. Those who choose to talk to the man in the Kremlin are “tricking themselves”, much like the Western leaders who signed an agreement with Adolf Hitler at Munich in 1938 only to watch him invade Czechoslovakia. “The mistake is not diplomacy. The mistake is diplomacy with Putin. He negotiates only with himself.”

In 1938 Chamberlain had no other choice but to give in on Czechoslovakia. Britain was not ready for war and the parts Hitler wanted to annex from Czechoslovakia had undeniably a largely German population: “He contended that Sudeten German grievances were justified and believed that Hitler’s intentions were limited”. Zelenski goes on to threaten, in rather unthankful fashion, those countries which have delivered aid to Ukraine but may want to cut their losses: “Curtailing aid to Ukraine will only prolong the war, Mr Zelensky argues. And it would create risks for the West in its own backyard. There is no way of predicting how the millions of Ukrainian refugees in European countries would react to their country being abandoned. Ukrainians have generally “behaved well” and are “very grateful” to those who sheltered them. They will not forget that generosity. But it would not be a “good story” for Europe if it were to “drive these people into a corner”.

I have seen such threats from low ranking individuals of the fascist Bandera fringe. They spoke of terrorism they would unleash in the West should it end its support for Ukraine. That the Ukrainian president now reinforces such threats shows how deeply he immersed himself in that mindset. A previous Economist story shows that Ukraine has already set up the necessary infrastructure to wage a terrorist campaign: “In modern Ukraine, assassinations date back to at least 2015, when its domestic security service (SBU) created a new body after Russia had seized Crimea and the eastern Donbas region. The elite fifth counter-intelligence directorate started life as a saboteur force in response to the invasion. It later came to focus on what is euphemistically called “wet work”.

“Valentin Nalivaychenko, who headed the SBU at the time, says the switch came about when Ukraine’s then leaders decided that a policy of imprisoning collaborators was not enough. Prisons were overflowing, but few were deterred. “We reluctantly came to the conclusion that we needed to eliminate terrorists,” he says. A former officer of the directorate describes it in similar terms. “We needed to bring war to them.” In 2015 and 2016 the directorate was linked to the assassinations of key Russian-backed commanders in the Donbas; Mikhail Tolstykh, aka “Givi”, killed in a rocket attack; Arsen Pavlov, aka “Motorola”, blown up in a lift; Alexander Zakharchenko, blown up in a restaurant.

Intelligence insiders say the SBU’s fifth directorate is playing a central role in counter-Russia operations. From there it is just a short step towards total war: “Meanwhile, a long war of attrition would mean a fork in the road for Ukraine. The country would lose even more people, both on the front lines and to emigration. It would require a “totally militarised economy”. The government would have to put that prospect to its citizens, Mr Zelensky says, without specifying how; a new social contract could not be the decision of one person. Almost 19 months into the war, the president says he is “morally” ready for the switch. But he will only broach the idea with his people if the weakness in the eyes of his Western backers becomes a “trend”. Has that moment come? No, not yet, he says. “Thank God.” Does Zelenski know of any country with a totally militarized economy that survived? I have yet to hear of one.

Read more …

“..78% of Ukrainian adults see Zelensky as “directly responsible” for Kiev’s corruption problem..”

“..only 18% of Ukrainian adults disagreed with the statement that Zelensky bears responsibility…”

And we hand him tens of billions.

• Ukrainians Blame Zelensky For Corruption – Poll (RT)

The vast majority of Ukrainians believe that President Vladimir Zelensky is at fault for widespread corruption in the country’s government and military, a new study has revealed. The poll, released on Monday, found that 78% of Ukrainian adults see Zelensky as “directly responsible” for Kiev’s corruption problem. It was conducted by the Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Charitable Foundation and the Kiev International Institute of Sociology. Prior to the launch of Russia’s military offensive in February 2022, Ukraine consistently ranked among the world’s most corrupt nations, but it was touted as a bastion of freedom and democracy as the US and its NATO allies rallied public support for massive aid to Kiev. However, Ukrainian corruption remains a concern and could hinder the country’s bid to join the European Union, an unidentified Western diplomat told Politico on Monday.

Ukraine is a “very corrupt country,” the diplomat said, adding that Zelensky’s plan to use the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) to prosecute graft cases could “send the wrong message.” Upon landing in Kiev for a surprise visit on Monday, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock reportedly said Ukraine needed to step up its efforts to fight corruption. The Ukrainian poll was conducted from July 3 to July 17 in face-to-face interviews with thousands of citizens across the country. There were no major differences in findings based on region or socioeconomic factors. Respondents aged 60 and older took a harsher view, with 81% saying Zelensky was responsible for government corruption. The rate was 70% in the youngest segment, ages 17 to 29. Overall, only 18% of Ukrainian adults disagreed with the statement that Zelensky bears responsibility.

Documents obtained by the International Association of Investigative Journalists in 2021 showed that Zelensky and his business partners set up offshore companies to purchase lavish properties in central London. Zelensky transferred his stake in one of the companies to an aide just before he was elected president in 2019. Supporters of former Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko accused Zelensky and his associates of using their offshore accounts to evade taxes. Zelensky has purged officials in his government for alleged corruption, including an embezzlement scheme involving humanitarian aid. Just this month, he sacked Defense Minister Aleksey Reznikov, who came under fire earlier this year over purchases of military rations at inflated prices. However, the new defense chief, Rustem Umerov, is reportedly under investigation for alleged crimes in his previous job.

Read more …

If everyone’s corrupt, who investigates?

• EU Believes Ukraine Is ‘A Very Corrupt Country’ – Politico (RT)

Widespread corruption in Ukraine could hamper Kiev’s bid for EU membership, a western European diplomat told Politico on Monday. He said Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s efforts to tackle the problem have also alarmed Brussels. Ukraine applied for membership in the European Union last February, and was formally granted candidate status four months later. Although European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is expected to address the issue of enlargement during her state of the union speech on Wednesday, and EU Council President Charles Michel has vowed to admit all candidate nations by 2030, Ukraine’s bid could be hamstrung by rampant corruption. Ukraine is a “very corrupt country,”an anonymous western European diplomat told Politico.

“We want to give a positive signal to Ukraine but things such as this proposal to give more power to [Ukraine’s] intelligence [services] over corruption can send the wrong message.” The proposal in question was raised by Zelensky last month. Following a purge of allegedly corrupt officials at the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, Zelensky announced that he would task the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) with probing and prosecuting corruption cases, taking investigative power away from the country’s multiple anti-graft agencies. The SBU reports solely to Zelensky. Representatives of Ukraine’s existing anti-corruption agencies told Politico last month that by making the SBU the only body allowed to investigate these cases, Zelensky is essentially giving himself the power to decide which corrupt officials to prosecute and which ones to shield.

There is precedent for these fears, the head of the Anti-Corruption Action Center (ACAC), Vitaly Shabunin, said. Oleg Tatarov, the deputy head of Zelensky’s office, was under investigation by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) last year, when the case was unexpectedly transferred to the SBU. “It was buried there,”Shabunin said. “Now [Zelensky’s] office wants to make that into practice.” Ukraine has for years been ranked as one of the most corrupt countries in the world. According to Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index, as of 2022, the country ranked 116th out of 180. Aside from corruption concerns, disputes between Ukraine and European nations over agriculture could also hold up Kiev’s membership bid. Ukrainian farmers could undercut their European counterparts with cheap grain exports, meaning that the EU will likely have to reform its Common Agricultural Policy if Ukraine is to be admitted, Politico noted.

Read more …

“..Russia controlled more land last month than it did at the beginning of the counteroffensive..” But Blinken said Ukraine reclaimed 50%.

• Blinken Contradicts Ukraine On Peace Negotiations (RT)

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has claimed that the Ukrainian government will agree to peace talks with Russia if Moscow offers to negotiate first. Ukrainian leaders have argued otherwise, however, and insist that peace “needs to be won on the battlefield.” “Thus far, we see no indication that [Russian President] Vladimir Putin has any interest in meaningful diplomacy,” Blinken told ABC News on Sunday. “If he does, I think the Ukrainians will be the first to engage, and we’ll be right behind them,” he added. Blinken and other top American officials have long insisted that the Ukrainian government will decide when to seek peace with Russia, and that the US will continue to supply Kiev with weapons until that time comes.

Ukraine agreed in principle to a Turkish-mediated peace deal in April 2022, but walked away from the agreement after a visit to Kiev by then-British prime minister Boris Johnson. Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has since issued a decree forbidding any negotiations with Putin’s government, as well as repeatedly vowing to take back the territories of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporozhye, and Crimea – the latter of which voted to join Russia in 2014 – by force. Retaking this land, however, has proven costly for Kiev. More than three months into its long-awaited summer counteroffensive, the Ukrainian military has lost more than 66,000 troops and 7,600 pieces of heavy weaponry, according to the latest figures from the Russian Defense Ministry.

In exchange, Kiev’s forces have only managed to reclaim a handful of villages near Zaporozhye, while Russia controlled more land last month than it did at the beginning of the counteroffensive, according to the Washington Post. Nevertheless, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba declared last week that the conflict “cannot be ended by simply bringing belligerent parties to the table for negotiations.” “It needs to be won on the battlefield for Russia to become serious about negotiating peace,”Kuleba added. Russia maintains that it is open to a diplomatic solution to the conflict, but that any peace deal would have to take into account the “new territorial reality” – that Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporozhye, and Crimea will never be ceded back to Ukraine. Furthermore, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said negotiations would be held “not with Zelensky, who is a puppet in the hands of the West, but directly with his masters.”

Read more …

“..if anyone is treasonous, it is those who call me such. Please tell them that very clearly.”

• Elon Musk Responds To Ukraine ‘Treason’ Claims (RT)

American tech billionaire Elon Musk has responded to criticism over his refusal to help enable a Ukrainian drone attack on Russian naval forces in Crimea by pointing out that he’s a citizen of only the US and isn’t obliged to fight for Kiev. “I am a citizen of the United States and have only that passport,” Musk said on Monday in a post on his X (formerly Twitter) social media platform. “No matter what happens, I will fight for and die in America.” He added that in light of the fact that the US Congress hasn’t declared war on Russia, “if anyone is treasonous, it is those who call me such. Please tell them that very clearly.”

At issue is Musk’s decision last year to prevent his Starlink satellite network from being used to guide Ukrainian naval drones for an attack against the Russian Black Sea Fleet on the Crimean coast. When news of Musk’s refusal came to light last week, US media outlets suggested that he had been traitorous, and Ukrainian presidential aide Mikhail Podoliak accused him of “committing evil and encouraging evil.” The Tesla CEO and SpaceX founder gave Ukraine free use of more than 20,000 Starlink terminals after Russia launched its military offensive against Kiev in February 2022. His aim was to keep Ukrainians from losing internet access and communications capabilities amid the conflict.

However, Musk expressed concern about his network being used for offensive purposes and potentially playing part in triggering a wider conflict. He therefore refused Kiev’s pleas to extend the country’s Starlink coverage all the way to Sevastopol. “If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.” CNN host Jake Tapper argued on Sunday that Musk had “effectively sabotaged” an American ally, and he asked US Secretary of State Antony Blinken whether the “capricious billionaire” should therefore face “repercussions.” Blinken declined to condemn Musk and pointed out that Starlink had been a vital tool for Ukraine’s defense.

Read more …

..”straightforward and honest Brussels bosses” who “told all Russians directly and without beating around the bush: you are second-class people for us.”

• Medvedev Advocates Suspending Diplomatic Relations With EU (TASS)

Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has called for suspending diplomatic relations with the EU in response to the EU decision to bar Russian citizens from entering the EU with everyday personal items, calling it a spit in the face of every Russian. “What should we do about it? Certainly not impose tit-for-tat retaliatory restrictions on EU citizens. We are not racists, in contrast to many leaders of those countries whose relatives served in the SS (Schutzstaffel, the notorious paramilitary organization under Germany’s Nazi regime – TASS). Moreover, those [Europeans] who travel here usually have a love and appreciation for Russia. It would be better just to suspend diplomatic relations with the EU for a while.

And to call our diplomatic personnel home,” Medvedev suggested, commenting on the European Commission’s clarification on the EU’s ban on importing automobiles, smartphones, suitcases and shampoo, among an entire range of items, into the EU from Russia, even for strictly personal use. Medvedev mockingly “praised” the EU leaders, calling them “straightforward and honest Brussels bosses” who “told all Russians directly and without beating around the bush: you are second-class people for us.” And the EU’s decision is clearly not meant as just punishment for what Brussels sees as the “criminal and aggressive regime in the Kremlin.” Rather, “this is a spit in the face of every citizen of Russia,” Medvedev emphasized. In suggesting measures to suspend Moscow’s diplomatic relations with the EU, Medvedev noted that only such a move could make Brussels officials truly afraid, “because embassies are [traditionally] evacuated before certain very specific events.”

“Who knows what else these ‘orcs’ from that immense ‘Mordor’ are capable of?” Medvedev asked sarcastically, using a common derogatory slur used in the West to refer to Russia and Russians, equating them to the goblin-like humanoid creatures in J.R.R. Tolkien’s fantasy novel “The Lord of the Rings.” The European Commission’s clarification dated September 8 bans the import from Russia to the EU of goods listed in Annex 21 to EU Regulation No. 833/2014, regardless of the purpose of their use and the duration of stay in the EU, including cars with less than 10 seats. The EC emphasized that it does not matter whether the vehicles are being used for private or commercial purposes. The list contains a wide range of all sorts of items from cellular telephones and audio and video recording devices, to suitcases, hold-alls, articles of clothing, toothpaste, shampoo and other hygiene products.

Read more …

“Goods that are classified as prohibited – even shampoo and toilet paper – should be confiscated..”

“..at least “they have not banned [Russian nationals] from wearing pants when crossing the border.”

• Russian Customs Chief Accuses EU Of ‘Total Lawlessness’ (RT)

Russia’s interim customs chief has blasted the European Commission’s instruction to EU member states to confiscate personal possessions of arriving Russian tourists. “How do we take the European Commission’s ban on traveling by personal car or with smart phones? Well, it’s utter nonsense,”Ruslan Davydov told journalists on Monday on the sidelines of an economic forum in the city of Vladivostok. The EU slapped wide-ranging sanctions on trade with Russia over the Ukraine conflict. Last Friday, however, Brussels explained that the restrictions should also apply to items for personal use brought by tourists crossing the bloc’s border. Goods that are classified as prohibited – even shampoo and toilet paper – should be confiscated, according to the clarification. The European Commission urged “EU operators [to] identify, assess, and understand the possible risks of sanctions circumvention” when conducting customs checks.

Davydov branded the decision as “total lawlessness” that defies the normal logic of customs controls. Moscow has little influence on the policies, since the EU broke all cooperation with Russia, he noted. “The way they regulate customs procedures on their soil can only invoke regret and incomprehension,” he added. But at least “they have not banned [Russian nationals] from wearing pants when crossing the border.”=The official assured that the Federal Customs Service, which he heads, shall not adopt a similar policy regarding tourists arriving from the EU. The Russian embassy in Helsinki urged citizens on Sunday not to travel to Finland in cars with Russian license plates, citing the risk of seizure stemming from the new guidelines.

Read more …

Lula opens the door and closes it at the same time. Putin as Schrödinger’s president: “..the decision [on a possible arrest] is within the power of the judiciary, not my government..”

• Brazilian Court To Decide About Putin If He Attends G20 Summit – Lula (TASS)

The issue of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s arrest during his visit to the G20 summit in Brazil in 2024 will be considered by the country’s court taking into account the arrest warrant issued for the Russian leader by the International Criminal Court (ICC), the country’s president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said. “If Putin decides to attend [next year’s summit], the decision [on a possible arrest] is within the power of the judiciary, not my government,” Reuters quoted the politician as saying. On September 9, in an interview with the Indian TV channel Firstpost, Lula da Silva said that as long as he was president of Brazil, “he [Putin] will not be arrested without the authorization of the authorities.” At the same time, Reuters pointed out the president questioned Brazil’s membership in the ICC. He recalled that neither Russia, China nor the US are members of the organization.

According to the leader, such agreements harm developing countries. On March 17, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, alleging that they were responsible for the unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children. It could theoretically be executed if the Russian leader arrives in one of the countries that recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction. Moscow has rejected such accusations, calling “the very phrasing of the question” outrageous and pointing out that Russia does not recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC, so its decisions are null and void for Russia.

Read more …

“Sergei Skripal, the original target and survivor of the Novichok attack allegations in the official narrative, must never be allowed to testify publicly..”

• Lies And Pretence In New London Novichok Hearing (Helmer)

In a London courtroom last week, lawyers for the British government and the presiding judge, Lord Anthony Hughes (lead image, centre), revealed they will resist the efforts of the Dawn Sturgess family to obtain a multi-million pound settlement in compensation for what they claim, and the government says, was her death five years ago from Novichok poisoning by Russian state agents. Secrecy is the key, not only to the big money claim, but to the government’s aim to defeat it and at the same time preserve the official story that the Kremlin ordered and carried out the chemical warfare attack in England in 2018.

Lord Hughes is defending the government’s effort to keep secret enough of the evidence in the case to block Adam Straw KC and Michael Mansfield KC, the Sturgess family lawyers, from demonstrating that the British security services should have known in advance – and did know enough — to have protected Sturgess from the Russian cause of her death. Their argument has been that for this negligence a very large sum of money should be paid to Sturgess’s heirs, to Rowley, and to the lawyers. The judge, the government, and the lawyers have agreed, however, there is one secret they must all keep. Sergei Skripal, the original target and survivor of the Novichok attack allegations in the official narrative, must never be allowed to testify publicly to what he knows.

To cover this up, Straw, Mansfield, and a lawyer representing the British press lied in court last week, claiming they want “open justice” from the secret services and the police. According to Jude Bunting KC representing the media, “open justice is about avoiding ill-informed speculation about proceedings and, insofar as material is in the public domain because of assertion, or even because of state-sponsored [Russian] misinformation, that is all the more reason for disclosing that material in open rather than in closed.” Hughes claimed to be seeking the same openness. “One of the difficulties of this inquiry and this case…is that everybody popularly supposes that they know the answer. They may or may not be right, but the purpose of the inquiry is to find out.” Hughes was pretending.

Read more …

Paul Craig Roberts. “The gun charge is just a way of getting rid of the real charges..”

• The Gun Charge Against Hunter Is the Way of Covering Up the Real Issues (PCR)

Conservatives and Republicans are gleeful that the DOJ has been forced off its sweetheart gun charge deal for Hunter and might now have to bring a felony gun charge. The conservatives and Republicans do not realize that the gun charge is the least serious or important of the charges and that by making the gun charge the issue the real issues, which are threats to Joe Biden, don’t get a day in court. The gun charge is just a way of getting rid of the real charges. Moreover, if Hunter is convicted, something a Democrat jury is unlikely to do, and doesn’t get a suspended sentence, Joe will pardon him.

The conservatives and Republicans don’t understand that they and President Trump, not the Bidens, are the prosecutors’ target. We now have a black quota-hire Fulton County prosecutor adding US Senators and Trump lawyers to her racketeering indictment. The ridiculous indictment is so broadly framed that anyone who expressed doubt about the election is covered by the indictment. When you give power over law to people who see law only as a weapon with which to get enemies, you destroy the rule of law. That’s what the dumbshit white liberals have done.

Read more …

“..But the question is whether such requests are evidence of a crime…”

• The “Why Not” Culture: The Georgia Final Report Should Worry Us All (Turley)

With the release of the special grand jury final report in Georgia, the nation finally was able to see what foreperson Emily Kohrs last February was giggling about in interviews. Call it the “Why not?” report. Back then, when Kohrs was asked if there were recommended charges, she chuckled and said, “Can you imagine doing this for eight months and not coming out with a whole list of recommended indictments? It’s not a short list. It’s not.’” In addition to nodding at an expected Trump indictment, she added, “There may be some names on that list that you wouldn’t expect.” After all, why not? The final product did not disappoint. The members recommended 39 people for prosecution, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and former Sens. Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.).

They also included lawyers who argued for recounts or investigations into alleged election fraud. While the report expressly claims that the Fulton County District Attorney’s office did not create the list, it was the office of Fani Willis that presented the law, the evidence and potential targets to the special grand jury. During that process, these members concluded that politicians voicing support for the former president and his allegations could be criminally charged for doing so. The news that Willis did not indict Graham and others infuriated many on the left. Liberal websites were inundated with comments like “I want all the enablers charged, tried, and given long sentences as traitors to our country” and asking why the list did not include Senators Grassley, Cruz, Lee and “147 current and former members of the House, just to name a few.”

[..] The question is when advocacy or inquiries or negotiations become criminal acts. Willis’s first grand jury clearly believed that senators who called for recounts or Raffensperger’s resignation should go to prison. The comparison between their recommendations and the eventual indictment does not clearly answer how such acts are distinguishable as crimes. The same lack of limiting principle is evident in the new theory being pushed by various experts under the 14th Amendment to bar Trump from ballots on the grounds that he “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or gave “aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” Beyond the tendentious claim that the Jan. 6 riot was an actual insurrection, they also maintain that the provision is self-executing, requiring no vote of Congress for secretaries of state to bar Trump from next year’s ballots.

Even though Trump has not been charged, let alone convicted, of insurrection (or even incitement), these advocates believe that he can be removed from the ballot because of his election claims, his inflammatory rhetoric and his delay in calling for supporters to leave the Capitol. This is one of the most dangerous legal theories to arise in decades. This week, Democratic Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes aptly described the claimed right to disqualify as a “radical” measure that would “encompass every elected office in our government — state, local, federal, and so forth.” Indeed, Democrats have called for barring not just Trump but 120 Republicans in Congress from running for office.

As with the Georgia special grand jury, the question is “Why not?” If the standard is “giving aid or comfort” to insurrectionists, then why not throw hundreds of other Republicans who supported the challenge to certification on Jan. 6 off the ballot? And while we’re at it, why not bar every lawyer who helped file claims of voting fraud from ever running for office? They all gave aid or comfort with their actions. By this reasoning, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and other Democrats could have been barred from ballots for opposing Trump’s certification in 2016 without any basis, along with leaders such as Hillary Clinton, who continued to call the election “stolen” for years. In 2016, there were also violent riots in Washington opposing Trump’s inauguration, thanks in no small part to such rhetoric. We can then have different candidates of both parties removed from ballots in every state.

Read more …

“Mr. Gaetz pushed through an agreement that the process to remove and replace the Speaker of the House could be activated by one vote. Mr. Gaetz reiterated last week that he means business. He’s the one vote.”

• The Mills of the Gods (Jim Kunstler)

Do you think that more than half of the US public may be getting a little irked with “Joe Biden’s” lawfare elf, AG Merrick Garland, as he rolls one innocent J-6 protester after another into decades of hard-time for strolling through the US Capitol building — while the special counsels assigned to only a few of the Biden family crimes play hide-the-salami with due process? For all their cheap talk about “our democracy,” it’s a little scary to see what Democratic Party lawyers actually think of the legal system that is supposed to allow a society based on liberty to function fairly. Court filings last week indicate that Special Counsel David Weiss is about to indict Hunter Biden on that gun charge they have used as the joker in a three-card Monte game for going on five years.

Last time, they ran the game before Delaware federal judge Maryellen Noreika, she detected a teeny-weeny, sneaky clause in the plea agreement to a watered-down gun charge that would have granted immunity to Hunter B from any other past wrongdoing, including, of course, the entire alleged Biden family racketeering operation that had the First Son acting as prime broker and bag-man for tens of millions of dollars in bribes from foreign actors in countries less than friendly to US interests, funneled into any number of Biden family shell corporations. Judge Noreika nixed the plea agreement. Now, Mr. Weiss’s crew seems to be saying that the immunity clause is still tied to any plea deal answering a forthcoming September 29 indictment.

The move would appear to be timed to exactly the moment that a House impeachment committee would begin its inquiry into the Biden family’s moneygrubbing activities. In ordinary House committee hearings, DOJ officials like to use the excuse of “an ongoing investigation” to demur from answering questions. Merrick Garland has done this dozens of times. Will they now try to upgrade that to “an ongoing prosecution?” Could that move lead to a constitutional impasse, requiring the Supreme Court to rule? Or does a House impeachment panel enjoy special privileges of inquiry? It also appears that Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FLA) intends to force the issue of opening an impeachment ASAP against “Joe Biden.” In last January’s maneuvering to seat a new Republican House majority, Mr. Gaetz pushed through an agreement that the process to remove and replace the Speaker of the House could be activated by one vote. Mr. Gaetz reiterated last week that he means business. He’s the one vote.

The argument that Republicans should leave hands-off “Joe Biden” so they can run against the feeble old grifter in 2024 is preposterous because there is no way that the “JB” can possibly run for reelection under any circumstances. It’s just another trip being laid on the American public — and one that illustrates how tragic and dangerous is the absence of an honest news media for challenging such insolent gambits. The President can barely totter into a room now without making some embarrassing pratfall or gaffe. He couldn’t possibly survive a debate, especially with all the new records of his crimes unearthed since the last time around in 2020 when he pretended to know nothing about his son’s business dealings.

Read more …

“..it is pretty clear who is responsible for 9/11 and why. Many Americans today understand what really happened..”

“It is paradoxical that President Trump is in the dock for questioning an election, while Dick Cheney and the neoconservatives, and the whore media that covered up for them, never faced a single charge.”

• 9/11 After 22 Years (Paul Craig Roberts)

Today is the 22nd Anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon known as 9/11. A generation of 22-year olds has grown up after 9/11, and the event probably means nothing to them. They learn that it was an attack on America like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 disappears into history. It is unlikely that anyone under 40 is much concerned with 9/11. A 40-year old today would have been 18 in 2001 and would likely dismiss 9/11 concerns as conspiracy theory. Today’s youth are more likely to be marching in support of sexual perversion than wondering about the source and purpose of the 9/11 attack.

Over the years I have reported the mounting evidence provided by scientists and by architect Richard Gage’s Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth until the organization he created removed him at the request of the government, effectively destroying the organization. But for me the proof that 9/11 was an inside job has always been that no one in government and security agencies was ever held accountable for the worst humiliation ever inflicted on an alleged “superpower.” Instead, it took a year before the White House even agreed to an official coverup with the 9/11 Commission, another in the long line of commissions like the Warren Commission that validates the official story. If a few young Saudi Arabians had actually defeated the entire national security apparatus of the United States, the White House would have been screaming, and heads would have rolled.

The neoconservatives had just called for a “new Pearl Harbor” so they could launch their wars of destruction of Israel’s enemies in the Middle East. They immediately blamed 9/11 on “Muslim terrorists” and began their invasions that halted only when Russia blocked the neoconservatives’ overthrow of Syria. So it is pretty clear who is responsible for 9/11 and why. Many Americans today understand what really happened, but the government will never admit it. It takes decades for the truth to come out, and by then everyone affected by the event is dead, and the event becomes ancient history. It is paradoxical that President Trump is in the dock for questioning an election, while Dick Cheney and the neoconservatives, and the whore media that covered up for them, never faced a single charge.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Great Depression
https://twitter.com/i/status/1701337655886102874

 

 

Smile
https://twitter.com/i/status/1701205047835521236

 

 

Left my heart

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 11 2023

Sep 112023
 
 September 11, 2023  Posted by at 9:37 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  37 Responses »


Edvard Munch Love and Pain (Vampire) 1893

 

• Ukraine, West’s Objectives No Longer Aligned, Russia No Longer A Threat (Exp.)
• 30 Fighting Days Left For Ukraine’s Offensive – US Army Chief (BBC)
• Ukraine’s Defeat Could Mean The End Of NATO In Its Current Form (Bowes)
• Lavrov at G20: Americans Want to ‘Strategically Defeat Russia’ (Sp.)
• West ‘Deadlocked’ Over Russia – Ukraine (RT)
• Ukraine To Change Conscription Rules (RT)
• Second UK Challenger 2 Tank Reportedly Destroyed In Ukraine (ZH)
• NATO To Launch Biggest Military Exercise Since Cold War (Az.)
• France Accused Of Planning ‘Aggression’ Against Niger (RT)
• Lead Author Of Cochrane Mask Review Says Fauci Makes No Sense (Demasi)
• Twilight Of The Democrats (Public)
• Biden Aide Intervenes To End Rambling Press Conference (RT)
• New Filings in the Hunter Biden Laptop Litigation (Turley)

 

 

 

 

RFK


https://twitter.com/i/status/1700145666641535208

 

 

Woody
https://twitter.com/i/status/1700638380101337157
https://twitter.com/i/status/1700525214512140299

 

 

 

 

Tapper goes for Musk

 

 

Alex Jones Musk

 

 

 

 

2 years ago it started
https://twitter.com/i/status/1700928136567742503

 

 

 

 

Is this where we’re going, the new narrative?: “..the war has weakened Russia to such an extent that it “no longer poses a credible threat to Europe..” (see Macgregor’s video). “..the Western objective of this conflict has been achieved”. And thus NATO can leave Ukraine to itself?!

The arms industry is in a bind: they want to keep selling, but they don’t want their products to be seen as inferior. They may contemplate cutting their losses.

• Ukraine, West’s Objectives No Longer Aligned, Russia No Longer A Threat (Exp.)

Back in January, a poll of Daily Express readers found that most wanted the UK to give more support to Ukraine to ‘end the war quicker’. However, that was eight months ago and – with Russia digging in – the war shows no sign of ending anytime soon. Some analysts now believe that – as the war grinds on – continuing to write cheques for Urkaine may longer be in the West’s best interests. And a recent CNN poll shows that most Americans oppose Congress authorising additional funding to support Ukraine. Sean Bell, a former RAF Air Vice-Marshal and Ministry of Defence (MoD) staffer, suggests that the war has weakened Russia to such an extent that it “no longer poses a credible threat to Europe”. Given this, Bell argues that “the Western objective of this conflict has been achieved”.

Writing for Sky, Bell said: “Having achieved their strategic objective, Western democratic governments must also address the cost of living crisis, domestic priorities, and re-building national weapons inventories. “Ukraine, however, has not yet met its objective, which is to liberate its territory. Bell writes: “The harsh reality is that Ukraine’s objectives are no longer aligned with their backers.”Many Ukrainians will remain determined to expel all Russians from their territory. That is Ukraine’s right, their fight, their future, and their sacrifice. “The ensuing sacrifices, devastation and suffering will leave a dreadful legacy, but what is the price for peace?”

Macgregor

Read more …

Try on some logic on for size:

“Ukraine is winning and Russia is losing”. “That is because the aim of Russia was to subjugate Ukraine and to put it under Russia’s control..” “That has not happened and it never will happen, and that’s why Ukraine is winning.”

• 30 Fighting Days Left For Ukraine’s Offensive – US Army Chief (BBC)

Ukraine has little more than 30 days left of fighting before the weather hinders its counter-offensive, the top-ranking US military officer says. Speaking to the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, Gen Mark Milley said colder conditions would make it much harder for Ukraine to manoeuvre. He admitted the offensive had gone more slowly than expected. But he said: “There’s still heavy fighting going on. “The Ukrainians are still plugging away with steady progress.” Gen Milley said it was too early to say whether the counter-offensive had failed, but said Ukraine was “progressing at a very steady pace through the Russian front lines”. “There’s still a reasonable amount of time, probably about 30 to 45 days’ worth of fighting weather left, so the Ukrainians aren’t done.

“There’s battles not done… they haven’t finished the fighting part of what they’re trying to accomplish.” Kyiv’s counter-offensive, which was launched in the summer and aims to liberate Russian-occupied territory in Ukraine, has so far seen only small gains. But Ukrainian generals claim they have breached Russia’s formidable first line of defences in the south. “I said at the very beginning of this [war] that this was going to be long, slow, hard, and high-casualty-producing, and that’s exactly what it is,” Gen Milley said. In the same interview, Adm Sir Tony Radakin, the UK chief of defence staff, said “Ukraine is winning and Russia is losing”. “That is because the aim of Russia was to subjugate Ukraine and to put it under Russia’s control”, he said.

“That has not happened and it never will happen, and that’s why Ukraine is winning.” He added that Ukraine was making progress in its battle to regain its territory, having recovered 50% of the ground Russia seized. Ukraine’s progress was also down to the international community “applying economic pressure and diplomatic pressure, and Russia is suffering because of that”, he said. Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin’s alliance with North Korea shows the Russian president is in a “state of desperation”, said Adm Radakin. He said the ties between the two countries showed how few partners Russia had left. North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un reportedly plans to visit Russia this month to meet Mr Putin for weapons talks.s

Blinken
https://twitter.com/i/status/1700821080364216791

Read more …

..‘we tried to help them, but they simply couldn’t be saved from themselves..’

• Ukraine’s Defeat Could Mean The End Of NATO In Its Current Form (Bowes)

As the West’s proxy war in Ukraine slips inexorably towards utter failure, the neocons behind the debacle are faced with dwindling avenues of retreat. Early confidence that Russia, in its current form, would collapse under the pressure of the harshest sanctions regime in history failed to materialize. Early Russian miscalculations on the battlefield were not followed by a military meltdown, but by a pragmatic display of strategic adaptability, which is begrudgingly admired in the military war rooms of the West. The Russian army, far from falling apart, has steeled itself into making bold decisions to retreat when prudent and advance when required, both of which have proven devastating for their Ukrainian opponents. It follows that, as the Western political elites that cultivated this conflict peer into another winter of political, military, and potentially economic discontent, it is now that we potentially face the most dangerous period in Europe since the outbreak of WWII.

The catalyst for a wider war in Europe isn’t, in fact, a limited conflict in Ukraine in itself, one that started in 2014 and, notably, had been largely ignored by Western powers for almost a decade. The real issue is that NATO, which is currently engaged in a proxy War with Russia, is facing a ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ scenario regarding its growing military involvement in Ukraine. If the US-led bloc escalates further as defeat looms, it could likely lead to direct confrontation with Russia. If it doesn’t, its proxy will collapse and leave Russia victorious, a fate once utterly unthinkable in Brussels, Washington, and London, but now becoming a nightmarish reality. Such a defeat would be devastating and potentially terminal for the prestige and reputation of the whole NATO brand.

After all, despite the Soviet Union having long ceased to exist, the bloc still markets itself as an indispensable bulwark against imagined Russian expansionism. In the event of an increasingly likely Ukrainian defeat, that ‘essential partner’ in ‘countering Russia’ will have been proven utterly impotent and largely irrelevant. More cynically, the vast US arms industry would also be denied a huge and lucrative market. So, how does a multi billion-dollar machine that has prophesied absolute victory against Russia even begin to contemplate defeat? And how do senior EU bureaucrats like Ursula Von der Leyen climb down from their quasi-religious devotion to the ‘cause’ of utterly defeating Russia, which she has shamelessly evangelized for over a year and a half? Lastly, how does the American administration, which has gone politically, morally, and economically ‘all in’ against Russia in Ukraine, contemplate what amounts to an increasingly inevitable European version of Afghanistan 2.0?

They will need to do two things: Firstly, find someone to blame for their defeat and secondly, find a new enemy to deflect public opinion onto. The ‘someone to blame’ will be quite easy to identify – the narrative will be flush with attacks on states like Hungary, China, and to some extent India, who will be accused of “undermining the unified effort needed to isolate and defeat Russia.” Blaming Ukraine itself will also be central to this narrative. Western media will insure it’s singled out as incapable of ‘taking the medicine’ proffered by NATO and therefore suffering the consequences, not listening to Western military advice, failing to utilize Western aid correctly and, of course – given that little has been done by Zelensky to tackle the endemic corruption in Ukraine – this fact will be easily weaponized against him and used to lubricate a slick narrative of ‘we tried to help them, but they simply couldn’t be saved from themselves’.

Read more …

“The Americans want to strategically defeat us, as they put it. If they had anything new in mind they would like to tell us, they would have..”

• Lavrov at G20: Americans Want to ‘Strategically Defeat Russia’ (Sp.)

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who was representing Russia at the 18th G20 Summit in New Delhi, gave a press conference on Sunday where he weighed in, among other things, on the issue of the push towards dedollarization and trade in local currencies that is gaining momentum on a global scale. “Everyone understands what the Americans want from Russia… They want to get rid of a competitor,” Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told Sputnik at the G20 Summit in New Delhi. “The Americans want to strategically defeat us, as they put it. If they had anything new in mind they would like to tell us, they would have,” Lavrov, representing Russia at the two-day international gathering, succinctly stated when asked if he had engaged in any bilateral meetings on the sidelines of the summit with US representatives.

As for one of the central trends in the current increasingly multipolar world – ditching the dollar in mutual trade and payments – Lavrov acknowledged that there is “some progress with respect to dedollarization, including in our bilateral relations with India.” “Like I said before, our exporters have a lot of, massive amounts of rupees in their accounts in Indian banks, and now we are looking into the possible ways of investing them in a mutually beneficial way. Now, as for actual transactions, we are working as part of the BRICS group and, back in Johannesburg, a decision was made to look into the ways of expanding the use of national currencies in operations,” Sergey Lavrov said. The historic three-day BRICS Summit 2023 wrapped up on August 24 in the South African city of Johannesburg.

The leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, which together constitute the group of major emerging economies named BRICS, stressed the importance of encouraging the use of local currencies in international trade and financial transactions between members of the group as well as their trading partners. Recalling the decisions hashed out at the recent BRICS Summit, Lavrov continued: “We looked into the ways of the possibility of creating additional payment platforms, because right now we only have platforms controlled by the West. And now, in fact with China, for example, we have financial operations, 70% or 80% of them are in rubles and in renminbi. And the same goes for India. Now, when the global community sees what’s happening with SWIFT, with how the West, with how the United States is using, are using it as their own instrument, they understand that there has to be an alternative.”

Read more …

Losing and at the same time bickering over putting Putin and Lavrov before a tribunal?! Gotcha.

• West ‘Deadlocked’ Over Russia – Ukraine (RT)

Ukraine has made no progress in making the US and its allies agree to its idea of a tribunal for top Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba said in a speech on Friday. The nation’s top diplomat blasted the West’s “divisions” and “lack of will” on the issue at the Yalta European Strategy forum in Kiev. Western nations are just as reluctant to transfer frozen Russian assets to Ukraine, Kuleba said, adding that there has been little progress on this matter as well. “Unfortunately, we are in a kind of deadlock on both,” he said. The G7 group, which includes the US, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, and Japan, “stands firmly” in favor of what the diplomat described as a “hybrid tribunal,” in which Putin, as well as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin, would maintain immunity from prosecution, Kuleba said, stressing that this is absolutely unacceptable for Kiev.

“The special tribunal is needed to create a precedent for punishing the Russian leaders,” he said. “The hybrid tribunal does not answer the question as to how to prosecute those three,” the top diplomat said, noting that he “simply cannot remember” the name of the Russian prime minister. Those who are against the “special tribunal” make a “clear statement that they consider Russia’s crimes in Ukraine less important than the crimes committed during the Yugoslavia war,” Kuleba said. Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Andrey Kostin, also said it would be “impossible to explain to Ukrainians that we could have a tribunal without Putin on the defendant’s bench.” The Ukrainian foreign minister also said he sees no way to resolve these differences between Kiev and its Western backers.

“President [Vladimir Zelensky] has recently asked me what has been done [to push through the idea of a tribunal] and I have admitted for the first time in my ministerial capacity that I cannot suggest a solution,” he said. Kuleba claims that any legal constraints preventing Kiev from achieving its desired results can be altered. “If a law does not fit an idea of attaining justice, the legislation should be changed,” he said. Kiev continues to push for Zelensky’s ‘peace formula’, which includes Russia withdrawing from Donbass, Kherson, Zaporozhye, and Crimea, as well as paying reparations to Ukraine and submitting to war crimes tribunals. Moscow has dismissed these demands as “nonsense” and has said it is ready for peace talks that reflect “the reality on the ground.”

Read more …

Once you start drafting the sick and handicapped, you’re probably close to losing the support of your people. There are reports about drafting all women. Must be popular too.

• Ukraine To Change Conscription Rules (RT)

Ukraine plans to change conscription laws to enable the drafting of citizens whose health problems previously rendered them fit only for limited military duty, according to Dmitry Lubinets, Ukraine’s human rights ombudsman. However, the official offered assurances that people unable to fight on the front line will serve in the rear. The move comes as the country’s faltering counteroffensive has endured what Moscow says are “catastrophic” losses. Speaking on national TV on Saturday, Lubinets said that he had proposed to the country’s National Security Council to abolish the category ‘fit for limited military service’, adding that top officials had agreed with him.

“A Ukrainian citizen must either be fit for military service, or not,” he explained, adding that a potential conscript with health conditions that preclude participating in active combat can still contribute to defense efforts by serving at headquarters, or in missile and cyber forces. Lubinets also noted that the Ukrainian authorities had seen many cases when potential draftees bribed conscription officials to be registered as unfit for military service despite being completely healthy, while people with serious and long-standing medical conditions were told that they were fit for limited duty. “This issue should be addressed,” he stressed. During the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, Ukraine’s conscription system has been repeatedly criticized for rampant corruption. The Financial Times reported last month that some male Ukrainians were paying up to $10,000 in bribes to avoid being sent to the front.

Around the same time, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky sacked all of the regional military conscription officials after a string of corruption scandals. In the wake of the purge, Kiev also said that it would review all draft exemptions issued after the start of the conflict with Russia. However, Zelensky has said that his top military commanders had been asking him to draft more people. Earlier this month, Ukraine’s Defense Ministry issued a decree allowing the conscription of people with such severe conditions as hepatitis, HIV without symptoms, and clinically-treated tuberculosis. The push to expand the draft comes amid Ukraine’s counteroffensive, which has been underway for more than three months but has failed to make any significant progress. According to Moscow, Kiev has lost some 66,000 troops since the start of the offensive.

GZ

Read more …

Of course many tanks have been destroyed, but this -very expensive- one was presented as nigh indestructable. Blown up not even by a jet or a tank, but by a “man-portable anti-tank guided missile”.

• Second UK Challenger 2 Tank Reportedly Destroyed In Ukraine (ZH)

“No Challenger 2 has been lost in combat since it was first deployed in 1994, although one was destroyed in a friendly-fire incident in Iraq in 2003,” The Guardian reported Wednesday after the UK Ministry of Defence confirmed the first Challenger 2 was destroyed on the Ukrainian battlefield. Russian media now says it has happened again: “Russian forces have reportedly destroyed a second Challenger 2 main battle tank out of the 14 that London has supplied to Kiev, RIA Novosti reported on Saturday, citing a local civic leader from Zaporozhye Region.” If confirmed, this would mark another devastating development for Kiev and its backers.

The sources cited in this latest report say the UK-supplied tank took a direct hit from a Russian Kornet missile, which is a man-portable anti-tank guided missile capable of being mounted on a vehicle. One pro-Kremlin activist was cited in Russian media as saying it’s “open season” on British tanks in Ukraine and that they will “burn just as well as any other Western equipment.” While the UK has yet to confirm or deny these latest claims that a second Challenger 2 tank has been destroyed, the defense ministry did confirm destruction of the first one, based in part on ample video evidence: The UK has confirmed the first loss of a Challenger 2 tank by Ukraine, saying it was “hit by Russian artillery.”

Speaking to Sky News on Wednesday morning, the UK’s defence secretary Grant Shapps also confirmed the vehicle’s crew had survived. Video surfaced on social media early on Tuesday morning of a Ukrainian Challenger 2 burning at the side of the road believed to be south of the recently-liberated town of Robotyne. In the aftermath, British military sources further indicated there are as yet no plans for the UK to replace those tanks lost on the battlefield. Kiev is still awaiting the M1 Abrams tanks promised by Washington, but these are sophisticated enough to require many months of additional training for Ukrainian operators. So far, the main battle tanks supplied by the West have not been the “gamechanger” that Ukraine hoped.

Read more …

The arms industry loves it.

• NATO To Launch Biggest Military Exercise Since Cold War (Az.)

NATO is preparing its biggest live joint command exercise since the cold war next year, assembling more than 40,000 troops to practice how the alliance would attempt to repel Russian aggression against one of its members, The Financial Times said, Report informs. The Steadfast Defender exercise comes as part of NATO’s rapid push to transform from crisis response to a war-fighting alliance, prompted by the invasion of Ukraine. It will start in spring next year and is expected to involve between 500 and 700 air combat missions, more than 50 ships, and about 41,000 troops, NATO officials said. It is designed to model potential maneuvers against an enemy modeled on a coalition led by Russia, named Occasus for the purposes of the drill. The exercise is also a first in terms of technical capability, using real world geographical data to create more realistic scenarios for troops.

Read more …

France tries to draw African nations into this, play them against each other.

• France Accused Of Planning ‘Aggression’ Against Niger (RT)

Paris is planning to intervene in Niger, as it continues to deploy troops to several countries in the region, the West African state’s military government has claimed. Relations between Niger and former colonial power France deteriorated following a coup in July. “France continues to deploy its forces in several ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) countries as part of preparations for an aggression against Niger, which it is planning in collaboration with this community organization,” Colonel Amadou Abdramane, spokesman for the government in Niamey, said in a statement broadcast on national television on Saturday, as quoted by AFP. ECOWAS has threatened to intervene in the country to restore its ousted president Mohamed Bazoum to office. Top French officials have also stated several times that Paris would support military action by the bloc.

However, according to Niger’s military-appointed prime minister, Ali Lamine Zeine, military action by ECOWAS is not supported by all member states. He also told the media on Monday that the new government in Niamey was hoping to reach an agreement with the bloc in the “coming days.” Nigerien military leaders have previously denounced the presence of French troops in the country as “illegal” and demanded their prompt withdrawal. While speaking during the G20 summit in New Delhi, French President Emmanuel Macron said that since his country doesn’t recognize the Nigerien military government, any redeployment of its forces might be done only “at the request of President Bazoum.” Paris already had to withdraw troops from Burkina Faso earlier this year. France also pulled its forces out of Mali following tensions with the military government after a coup in 2020.

Read more …

“Once we excluded such low-quality studies from the review, we concluded there was no evidence that masks reduced transmission..”

• Lead Author Of Cochrane Mask Review Says Fauci Makes No Sense (Demasi)

Former chief medical advisor to the US President Anthony Fauci was questioned over the weekend by CNN reporter Michael Smerconish, about face masks being able to curb the spread of covid-19. “There’s no doubt that masks work,” said Fauci. “Different studies give different percentages of advantage of wearing it, but there’s no doubt that the weight of the studies … indicate the benefit of wearing masks,” he added. Smerconish brought up the 2023 Cochrane review which found no evidence that physical interventions like face masks could stop viral transmission in the community and cited my interview with lead author of the study Tom Jefferson who confirmed, “There is just no evidence that they [masks] make any difference. Full stop.” Fauci replied, “Yeah but there are other studies,” stressing that masks work on an individual basis.

“When you’re talking about the effect on the epidemic or the pandemic as a whole, the data are less strong…but when you talk about an individual basis of someone protecting themselves or protecting themselves from spreading it to others, there’s no doubt that there are many studies that show there is an advantage,” said Fauci. Professor Tom Jefferson, who says he is committed to updating the Cochrane review as new evidence emerges, has responded to Fauci’s comments. “So, Fauci is saying that masks work for individuals but not at a population level? That simply doesn’t make sense,” said Jefferson. “And he says there are ‘other studies’…but what studies? He doesn’t name them so I cannot interpret his remarks without knowing what he is referring to,” he added.

Jefferson explains that the entire point of the Cochrane review was to systematically sift through all the available randomised data on physical interventions such as masks and determine what was useful and what was not. Since 2011, the Cochrane review only included randomised trials to minimise bias from confounders. “It might be that Fauci is relying on trash studies,” said Jefferson. “Many of them are observational, some are cross-sectional, and some actually use modelling. That is not strong evidence.” “Once we excluded such low-quality studies from the review, we concluded there was no evidence that masks reduced transmission,” he added. The problem with Fauci is that his story has changed. Initially, Fauci said that masks were ineffective and unnecessary. In March 2020, Fauci told 60 Minutes, “Right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks.”

But only a few weeks later, he did a U-turn and began recommending widespread use of face masks. Fauci defended his U-turn saying, “When the facts change, I change my mind.” Jefferson retorted, “What facts changed? There were no randomised studies, no new evidence to justify his flip-flop. That’s simply not true.” Since then, Fauci has remained adamant that face masks not only stop people from infecting others, but they also protect the wearer. Fauci advocated for the use of cloth masks, and even encouraged double-masking in the absence of evidence. “You put another layer on, it just makes common sense that it would be more effective,” Fauci told NBC News. “What Fauci doesn’t understand is that cloth and surgical masks cannot stop viruses because viruses are too small and they still get through,” said Jefferson.

Read more …

“The old vibrancy and inspiring messages of “hope” and “change” are gone, and all that remains is a cynical and desperate thirst for power..”

• Twilight Of The Democrats (Public)

For many years, Democrats insisted that they were the party of diplomatic solutions; today, they are eagerly sending depleted uranium rounds and internationally banned cluster munitions to Ukraine. Biden’s poor approval ratings are likely also influenced by the brewing scandal around his son. Over half of voters believe that the president’s actions related to the Hunter Biden probe are inappropriate, and 61% say they think the president was involved in his son’s business dealings. Indeed, there is mounting evidence that Biden’s Department of Justice is criminalizing the political activity of his enemies while shielding his son from real prosecution. When Biden took office, he vowed that his administration would put an end to the division of the Trump years and would restore unity. Yet, on several occasions, Biden has made highly charged and antagonistic remarks about ordinary American citizens. Despite the media’s efforts to portray him as a wise and grandfatherly figure, Biden often appears to be angry and confused, lashing out at us unpredictably.

Due to the president’s age and obvious cognitive decline, it is unclear who is actually running the country and calling the shots. Biden, a corrupt and disoriented old man controlled by shadowy figures behind the scenes, is emblematic of what the Democratic Party has become. The old vibrancy and inspiring messages of “hope” and “change” are gone, and all that remains is a cynical and desperate thirst for power. Like its figurehead, the Democratic Party operates through secrecy and can barely conceal its contempt for large swathes of the country. It has become a party of censorship, war, elitism, and dishonesty. There is only so long that Democrats can keep pretending Biden is a competent leader, and the latest CNN poll has provided a chance for many to finally state the obvious.

Said Van Jones on CNN, “A lot of Democrats look at these numbers and say, ‘The whispers are finally showing up in this data’… People are scared to come out and say anything about it, but I think it’s important for us to have this conversation now.” And yet Biden has shown no sign of throwing in the towel. Rumors periodically fly that he is about to announce he won’t run for a second term. Many thought it would happen in August. The problem for Democrats is that they might have no one who can replace him. Kamala Harris is even less popular than Biden, and San Francisco is Gavin Newsom’s albatross. This is perhaps what is most damning about the current state of the Democrats: Biden may really be the best they have to offer.

Read more …

We’ve seen quite a few of such videos, but cutting off your president mid-sentence at an international forum is quite the feat.

And he should never again complain about being babied.

• Biden Aide Intervenes To End Rambling Press Conference (RT)

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre abruptly ended a news conference by US President Joe Biden on Sunday, cutting the president off mid-sentence as he rambled about “the third world” and his conversation with Chinese Premier Li Qiang. Biden took a number of scheduled questions from the press while on a visit to the Vietnamese capital of Hanoi, before telling reporters that he was “going to bed.” However, Biden kept answering additional questions, including on his talk with Li at the G20 summit in India on Saturday. “It wasn’t confrontational at all,”Biden said. “We talked about making sure that the third world…the, uh, the, uh, the southern hemisphere has access to changing…” As Biden continued to mumble, Jean-Pierre announced that “this ends the current press conference.”

After attempting to answer another question, Biden turned around and walked off stage. Biden’s press conferences are typically tightly managed by his aides, with the president handed cue cards and told which journalists to turn to for questions. Nevertheless, Biden still occasionally leaves the stage mid-sentence, often visibly confusedand guided by his staff. According to a recent Wall Street Journal poll, 73% of all voters think that the 80-year-old Biden is too old to serve as president, while 60% believe he lacks the mental capacity for the position. While Republicans have repeatedly hammered Biden over his apparent cognitive decline, Democrats are increasingly concerned about the president’s health too.

According to an NBC News survey in June, 43% of Democrats said that they had moderate to major concerns about Biden’s health, up from 21% in 2020. Biden’s trip to Vietnam came as the US attempts to strengthen its ties with more Asian nations in a bid to counter Chinese influence in the region. On Sunday, Biden and Vietnamese General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong announced a bilateral trade and investment deal, which included measures to boost semiconductor manufacturing and research in Vietnam.

Read more …

“..the absurd court arguments are largely being ignored by the media while an acknowledgment would force major media to fully cover the story.”

“..it seemed off that Hunter was deeply offended by the disclosure of pictures that were “voluntarily shared by [Hunter] Biden with others through the website, ‘Pornhub’ …

“It is the ultimate “to be or not to be” pitch when everyone knows exactly what the true question is. . . and it is not the authenticity of this laptop.”

• New Filings in the Hunter Biden Laptop Litigation (Turley)

An FBI computer expert reportedly assessed the laptop and found that it “was not manipulated in any way.” The authenticity of the information was further confirmed “by matching the device number against Hunter Biden’s Apple iCloud ID.” Emails and messages have been confirmed by third parties who were the recipients. Yet, as Polonius said in Hamlet, “though this be madness, yet there is method in’t.” The Biden team wants, in my opinion, to grind Isaac and delay the litigation as much as possible. It is using the Delaware courts to exact that sweet revenge against a now defunct computer shop owner. Moreover, the absurd court arguments are largely being ignored by the media while an acknowledgment would force major media to fully cover the story.

So, Hunter simply continued to disclaim knowledge of voicemail messages and emails from Isaac about an external hard drive, paying his repair bill and picking up the computer. However, he is crystal clear that he did not give consent to Isaac about gaining access to the laptop that may not be his. This is why Shakespeare wrote: “Neither a borrower nor a lender be, For loan oft loses both itself and friend, And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.” Hunter has to challenge the terms of an agreement that he refuses to admit that he signed. Instead, he criticized the “boilerplate terms of the Repair Authorization” on the work order as being “well below the signature line” and referred to the Repair Authorization as a “typical small-print adhesion clause for which there was no proper notice or opportunity to bargain or negotiate.”

Biden is equally clear that he is terribly “embarrassed” by publication of private material that would be “highly offensive to a reasonable person,” in exposing pictures and communications that may not be him or his. That view was slammed by the Isaac team that noted that it seemed off that Hunter was deeply offended by the disclosure of pictures that were “voluntarily shared by [Hunter] Biden with others through the website, ‘Pornhub’ … the use of the ‘reasonable person’ standard should clearly not apply to Biden … It seems what would embarrass a reasonable person does not embarrass Biden.” What is most striking is how this story continues to be effectively buried by the media. It is not hard to imagine the coverage if one of the Trump kids tried to maintain this combined claim of ignorance and outrage in a court — or tried to continue to question the authenticity of files established by the FBI and other witnesses.

Devine and her colleagues at the New York Post (as well as Fox News and the Wall Street Journal) have pursued this story since the beginning when it was suppressed by social media companies before the election. They have pursued the story for years as the media went through a series of false denials and narratives. Instead, the media endlessly pursued every allegation in the now-infamous Steele dossier and the New York Times and Washington Post received Pulitzer Prizes for a story that not only has been debunked but shown to be the product of Hillary’s Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Yet, in pursuing a true story with sweeping implications of corruption and deceit, the New York Post remains the media’s persona non grata. It embarrassed not only the establishment but other media. That is not how you get a Pulitzer. Indeed, as I discussed in an earlier column, the denial of true stories can be “the stuff that Pulitzer Prizes are made of.” Instead, Hunter will continue his performance of Hamlet on the Delaware in continuing to question reality. It is the ultimate “to be or not to be” pitch when everyone knows exactly what the true question is. . . and it is not the authenticity of this laptop.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

US car market

 

 

 

 

Sync lions
https://twitter.com/i/status/1700765781020057895

 

 

Mother

 

 

Allende

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

The Narrative of Loss

Sep 122021
 
 September 12, 2021  Posted by at 5:15 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  13 Responses »


Thomas Cole The Course of Empire – The Savage State 1834

 

 

There is nothing wrong with people remembering their departed loved ones; mourning has a beneficial function for the human mind -and body. It’s a bit different when it becomes a group process, or even one of an entire nation, especially when a vast media complex gets involved to tell readers and viewers what to think.

And when one of the eulogists is the guy who used the deaths to inflict death upon millions of others, it has become real different. Mourning, in its optimal form, binds people together. And if you can’t, or don’t mourn all deaths, it has lost that form. It has become as divisive as the initial cause of all the dying.

Does any American think that whoever killed 3,000 people in New York, should want or expect 2-3-4 million people to die in retribution over the following 20 years? Do you even have a right to mourn your own lost innocent lives if you neglect all other lost innocent lives?

I remember watching a video with Larry Silverstein, who had bought all -or most- of the WTC complex just 3 months before 9/11 (always found that a weird detail), saying at some point during 9/11 the fire department decided to “pull the building”. The video is still up. And I thought: you can only “pull” a building if you loaded it up with explosives first, which for a building the size of WTC7 takes days. Why on earth would you have done that in early September or before??

That’s when I stopped reading 9/11 stories, and trying to figure out what really happened, because it was too clear that we would never find out. It is JFK’s murder all over again. Lots of speculation, but never an answer. Just an endless barrage of deceit.

 

And lo and behold, we appear to be walking into exactly the same kind of barrage again, eyes wide open. This one has made, at last count, some 655,000 victims in the US alone over the past 20 months. As the country mourns 3,000 victims from 20 years ago. And while the last great deceit led to revenge on people half a world away, this time the target is “our own people”.

Dr. Robert Malone yesterday said: “I have seen reliable estimates that there have been 450,000 excess US deaths attributable to USG blocking early use of ivermectin and HCQ.” Other sources claim some 200,000 have died from the vaccines (and many more will follow). You keeping track of the numbers? We’re at 650,000 out of 655,000 already. And there’s more (or less, if you want). “Covid cases in UK are 26 times higher than a year go. ”

Does the virus even really exist? 7 Laboratories in US Can’t Find COVID-19 in One of 1,500 Positive Tests. It doesn’t even appear to have been isolated either. Just people with influenza A or B jotted down as covid.

And even if the coronavirus exists, how dangerous is it? More and more claim that the Delta variant, which is said to be almost all virus left, is fictitious, and merely a term used as a way to cover up vaccine deaths.

Meanwhile, Moderna is rushing to get a vaccine approved for 5-11 year olds, and working on one for 6 months old and up. Because they might infect their grandparents, or something. Case fatality rates of these kids are infinitesimal, much lower than the risks of the vaccines for them, but The Science has been abandoned by those who claim to represent it. And the grandparents might think: better me dead than my grandchild, but octogenarian Fauci sure ain’t going to ask them what they think.

That the vaccinated are doing much better than the unvaccinated, either in infections or in transmission, is a long dead mantra. But the idea that the vaccines prevent severe disease or death, is also rapidly vanishing. You’ve been spritzed with something that will be a threat for the rest of your life, and your best defense is to get fit and spruce up your immune system as best you can. Take vit. D, zinc and ivermectin, if you can still get it.

What remains is the deceit, from 9/11 to Covid, the government lies that by now should be expected, and the media lies that.. well, should also. Maybe that’s why we have the interwebs, so we can go out and find a kernel of truth in between the deceit. Even if 95% of people use it to do the exact opposite.

 

Time to start mourning the people who die of or with Covid, and who die of the vaccines, once you’re done with 9/11. And see that they didn’t have to die, that it was a political choice. You may be able to use that grief, and your nascent understanding of why they died, to make sure not more others die of fully preventable causes. Any Americans -and Europeans- who die from now on in will be like the Afghans and Iraqis and Syrians etc. who died post-9/11. Victims of failed -or worse- policy.

 

 

 

We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site. Thank you for your support.

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in virustime. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.

 

Debt Rattle February 16 2021

Feb 162021
 
 February 16, 2021  Posted by at 10:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  31 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Snowy landscape with Arles in the background 1888

 

• How to Make COVID Vaccines More Effective: Vitamin and Mineral Supplements (NC)
• Aiming For Zero Covid-19: Europe Needs To Take Action (Rep.)
• Millions of Texans Left Shivering In Arctic Cold Without Power (NBC)
• “Unity” (Jim Kunstler)
• Cuomo Blames ‘Politics,’ Fails To Address Nursing Home Cover-Up (NYP)
• Democrats Slam ‘Lying’ Cuomo Over COVID-19 Nursing Home ‘Cover-Up’ (NYP)
• Bipartisan Support For 9/11-Style Commission To Investigate Capitol Riot (PFW)
• How Trump’s Trial Became A Tale Of Constitutional Noir (Turley)
• What Comes Next in HNA Group’s Bankruptcy in China (Barron’s)
• Fauci Awarded $1m Israeli Prize For ‘Speaking Truth To Power’ (Ind.)
• WHO Adviser: Wuhan Lab Probe Was Conducted By ‘Chinese Authorities’ (SAC)
• Cancel Culture, Where Liberalism Goes to Die (Chris Hedges)

 

 

CNN is trying to compete with The Onion.

 

 

The obvious.

• How to Make COVID Vaccines More Effective: Vitamin and Mineral Supplements (NC)

If we’re going to rely on COVID-19 vaccines to bring an end to the pandemic, we need to maximise their effects. But one thing that risks undermining their protectiveness is nutritional deficiency, particularly in the elderly. Older people have weaker immune responses and are known to respond less well than younger adults to many vaccines, including the seasonal influenza vaccine. This is partly down to frailty, which cannot be easily remedied, but can also be due to deficiencies in vitamins and minerals – known as micronutrients. For the immune system to fight off infection or generate good protection against a disease following vaccination, it needs a variety of micronutrients. This is likely to be just as true for COVID-19 as for other diseases. Given that malnutrition is common among elderly people, raising their vitamin and mineral levels before they get vaccinated could be a way of boosting the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.

As the European Food Safety Authority notes, the vitamins A, B6, B9, B12, C and D and the minerals zinc, selenium, iron and copper are all needed for the immune system to function as it should. Each of these micronutrients – as well as vitamin E – has been shown to play multiple roles in supporting immune function and reducing the risk of infection. Research has found a link between having an impaired immune system and having low amounts of many vitamins and minerals. When the immune system isn’t properly fuelled and is impaired, this can then lead to poor vaccine responses. For example, a review of nine studies – together involving 2,367 people – found that individuals deficient in vitamin D were less well protected against two strains of flu after having been vaccinated compared to those who had adequate vitamin D levels.

By contrast, randomised controlled trials of micronutrient supplements (such as vitamin B6, vitamin E, zinc and selenium) in older people have been shown to increase the ability of the immune system to respond to challenges. Furthermore, it appears that to work at its best the immune system needs vitamins C, D and E together with zinc and selenium in excess of amounts that can usually be achieved through diet alone. For example, selenium levels above those typically regarded as optimal have been associated with a better cure rate for COVID-19. Trials in older people have also shown that responses to vaccination are better after actions are taken to improve nutrition.

Read more …

Letter published in several European newspapers.

For me, personally, three pillars: “Vaccination, green zones, and test, trace and isolate strategies”, is not enough. Not without boosting people’s health.

• Aiming For Zero Covid-19: Europe Needs To Take Action (Rep.)

Vaccination is a critical element for our way out of the pandemic. But the hope to reach herd immunity in Europe by the end of the summer is fading, as the roll-out of vaccines proves to be a major challenge. In addition, the emergence of new variants from Brazil, the UK, and South Africa is a warning signal that we may be confronted with lower protection from vaccines. Furthermore, history demonstrates that vaccination cannot single-handedly control a virus: it needs concerted efforts and a combination of public health measures. A global exit from the Covid-19 pandemic in 2021 seems unlikely if not impossible. To avoid lockdown cycles as experienced over the past and present year, we need to curb the spread of the virus as soon as possible, and choose the path of sustainable recovery.

The European strategy needs to markedly shift its focus from long-term and nationwide lockdowns due to high numbers of non-traceable community transmission and high death tolls, to having the virus under control. We thus call on politicians and the public to jointly commit to a European elimination strategy that builds on three pillars: Vaccination, green zones, and test, trace and isolate strategies. Importantly, this needs to be accompanied by clear, coherent and transparent communication. We are part of a group of international scientists ranging from epidemiologists, virologists, and mathematicians, to political scientists, and economists who support the strategy, some of whom have recently signed a call in The Lancet. In addition, No Covid – an approach suggested by a group of German scientists – is actively developing tools to render elimination successful.

While controlling the virus across Europe seems to be a daunting task, it can be achieved by defining common public health measures and standards that aim at achieving and then protecting green zones. The smaller the zones and the less mobility between them, the faster the exit can be reached and worst-in-class measures avoided. However, as the zoning needs to be politically and socially acceptable, and locally enforceable, each country should make its own pragmatic choice. For example, Italy could opt for regions, Germany could opt for Landkreise or Länder, and a small country like Lithuania could opt to be considered as one zone. Even more granularly, single cities could be considered a zone if feasible.

A zone is labelled green once the origin of every transmission is known, such that test, trace and isolate strategies can prevent further uncontrolled spreading of the remaining few infections. Green zones can progressively return to normal life: schools, restaurants, tourism and other businesses can fully reopen, and travellers freely move within and between green zones. Once a green zone is established, the priority then shifts from contact-inhibiting measures to avoid the reintroduction of the virus via travel regulations and testing, and the preparedness to implement fast, decisive and targeted containment measures should infections flare up locally again.

Read more …

“Midnight electricity price went up by more than 20000% in the past 4 days in Texas.”

• Millions of Texans Left Shivering In Arctic Cold Without Power (NBC)

As a record winter storm slammed across the country Monday, millions of people in Texas found themselves shivering in the dark. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which manages the power grid for 26 million customers, called for rolling outages to conserve power as arctic weather froze wind turbines, pushed several power plants offline and drove up demand from home heating systems. Outages affecting more than 2 million people were initially expected to be brief, lasting 15 to 20 minutes, but many Texans reported losing power for hours.


“The blackout just kept on going, and as the night progressed, the temperatures just started getting lower,” said Esteban Ramirez, 19, a college student from Del Rio, west of San Antonio, on the Mexican border. He huddled with his mother and his grandparents on a sofa to stay warm after they lost power at 2:30 a.m. At one point, he said, the temperature outside was 6 degrees. “It was scary,” he said. Power was out except for a couple of brief spurts for most of the day. His pipes froze, cutting off running water to the house, and the dim light made it difficult for his grandfather to get his medication, he said. “It was my first time experiencing something like this,” he said. “I was afraid of not making it through the night.”

Read more …

“Address me as Mr. President or President Biden,” Biden said. “I will not, and you can go fuck yourself,” DeSantis said before hanging up.

• “Unity” (Jim Kunstler)

This played out dramatically last week in a telephone parley between Mr. Biden and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis over the governor’s refusal to lockdown his state. The world-famous Dr. Fauci was also on the call, in which Mr. Biden threatened to curtail American citizens travel to Florida by road and air — since an offshoot of Covid-19 policy has been to drive a huge demographic exodus from economically failing states of New York, Illinois, and California down there. He also threatened to withhold federal funding to Florida and deny the state access to Covid-19 vaccines. Dr. Fauci chimed in, “Governor, do you want to be responsible for reinfecting the nation? Truth is, we don’t even know how effective current vaccines are against the UK strain.”

DeSantis told Dr. Fauci he trusted his own state health authorities over financially incentivized federal officials. The conclusion of the conference call went like this: “How much do you stand to earn from these vaccines, Dr. Fauci? And, Joe, if you continue with this course of action, I will authorize the state National Guard to protect the movement of Floridians,” DeSantis said. “Address me as Mr. President or President Biden,” Biden said. “I will not, and you can go fuck yourself,” DeSantis said before hanging up. Hmmm. Now, that got right to the point, didn’t it? And consider this was not just Citizen Joe Blow mouthing off to alleged President Joe B, but the governor of a populous state. And what if it suggests a trend?

Another obvious and disconcerting irony in that affair was, of course, that Mr. Biden seeks to restrict the movement of people across Florida’s borders for fear of spreading new strains of Covid-19, while he insolently authorizes thousands of illegal aliens to cross our border with Mexico daily, with no testing for the virus. Could Mr. Biden’s intentions look any worse?

Read more …

Let him go.

• Cuomo Blames ‘Politics,’ Fails To Address Nursing Home Cover-Up (NYP)

An unapologetic Gov. Cuomo doubled down on a litany of past excuses Monday as he blamed “politics” for the spiraling scandal that’s engulfed his administration since The Post revealed his top aide admitted they hid from elected officials and the public the true number of nursing-home residents killed by COVID-19. During a virtual news conference at which he declined to take a question from The Post, Cuomo claimed that “there’s nothing to investigate” regarding the cover-up to which Secretary to the Governor Melissa DeRosa confessed during a video conference call with Democratic lawmakers last week. Cuomo never directly addressed DeRosa’s recorded remarks in which she admitted “we froze” over whether to come clean to the Legislature — or the public — about nursing home deaths in the face of a Justice Department inquiry.

“Because then we were in a position where we weren’t sure if what we were going to give to the Department of Justice, or what we give to you guys, what we start saying, was going to be used against us while we weren’t sure if there was going to be an investigation,” DeRosa said in the Wednesday evening conference call. Cuomo once again claimed that the state had always reported the number of nursing home residents killed by COVID-19 — even though it only began releasing figures on those who died in hospitals after a damning report last month by state Attorney General Letitia James, a fellow Democrat. As of Saturday, official figures show, 13,407 nursing home residents died of COVID-19, including 4,181 — more than 31 percent — in hospitals. “This past year, there is a toxic political environment and everything is political,” Cuomo said during the news conference in Albany.

[..] Left unsaid was that Cuomo had enough spare time to publish a self-serving memoir, “American Crisis: Leadership Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic,” which made the Times “Best Sellers” list with the help of the self-proclaimed “Cuomosexuals” who turned his daily briefings into must-see TV, also garnering him a special Emmy Award. But Cuomo pushed back against a bipartisan move to strip him of his COVID-19 emergency powers in the wake of DeRosa’s remarks. And Cuomo insisted state pols should have known about the DOJ probe, despite his not telling them, because The Post broke a story about it in October. “Emergency powers have nothing to do with nursing homes,” Cuomo said. Cuomo said legislators “can reverse any action I take.” “They have never reversed a single action,” Cuomo said. “These are public health decisions, not local political decisions.”

Read more …

“She implicated all of us in the cover-up.”

• Democrats Slam ‘Lying’ Cuomo Over COVID-19 Nursing Home ‘Cover-Up’ (NYP)

Fellow Democratic legislators in New York weren’t buying Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s explanation Monday as to why he refused for months to release a true accounting of nursing home residents who died from the coronavirus. Assemblyman Ron Kim (D-Queens), whose uncle died from COVID-19, bluntly said, “all of it is BS” and a cover-up. “They could have given us the information back in May and June of last year. They chose not to,” Kim said, when hearing Cuomo was blaming the DOJ probe for delays in releasing the accurate coronavirus death tally of nursing home residents. Cuomo cited an exclusive Aug.26, 2020 story in The Post that broke the news about the Department of Justice inquiry into his administration’s nursing home admission policy and the undercounting of deaths, claiming Albany legislators should have known about the probe based on that report.


Kim said lawmakers could have passed laws to tighten up accountability and liability in nursing homes to save lives if they had the information sooner. Kim also said Cuomo’s comments Monday don’t square with what top aide Melissa DeRosa told him and other legislators during a private meeting last week, when she said former President Donald Trump made the issue a “political football” and claimed that as an excuse for withholding the nursing home data. The Post first reported on her explosive remarks after obtaining an audio recording of the meeting. “And basically, we froze,” DeRosa said. “She talked about the potential that the information would be weaponized against them. DeRosa needs to be accountable for what she said,” Kim insisted. “She implicated all of us in the cover-up.”

Read more …

It’s all still about Trump.

• Bipartisan Support For 9/11-Style Commission To Investigate Capitol Riot (PFW)

Bipartisan support for a 9/11-style commission to further investigate the Jan. 6 Capitol riot has grown bipartisan support with lawmakers urging such a body to get to the root cause of the events that day. “I’d like to know, did the Capitol Hill police inform the House sergeant at arms and the Senate sergeant at arms the day before the attack that they needed more troops?” Senator Lindsey Graham told Fox News on Sunday after mentioning he believed there was a preplanned element to the highly publicized actions that took place. “We need to look at did Nancy Pelosi know on January 5 that there was a threat to the Capitol… What did President Trump do after the attack… We need a 9/11 commission to find out what happened and make sure it never happens again, and I want to make sure that the Capitol footprint can be better defended next time,” he continued.

Graham would add that the preplanned element had no connection to former president Donald Trump’s speech during a rally earlier that day. Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy, who unlike Graham, voted to convict the former president during the impeachment trial, also called for a 9/11-style commission, telling ABC over the weekend that “there should be a complete investigation about what happened.” “I think there should be a complete investigation about what happened on Jan. 6. Why was there not more law enforcement, National Guard already mobilized, what was known, who knew it, and when they knew it, all that, because that builds the basis so this never happens again in the future,” Cassidy said.

On the other side of the aisle, Democrat Senator Dennis Coons also vocalized support for such a commission, telling ABC “there’s still more evidence that the American people need and deserve to hear.” “A 9/11 commission is a way that we make sure that we secure the Capitol going forward and that we lay bare the record of just how responsible and how abjectly violating of his constitutional oath president Trump really was,” Coons said on Sunday.

Read more …

“We do not afford due process to people simply because we have to. It is like decency, civility and other values. They are not observed because they are mandatory but because they are right.”

• How Trump’s Trial Became A Tale Of Constitutional Noir (Turley)

In the 1946 movie “Gilda,” Rita Hayworth delivered perhaps the ultimate film noir line. Looking at her former lover, she declared, “I hate you so much that I would destroy myself to take you down with me.” Hayworth made self-destruction sound positively alluring. That line came to mind as I watched House impeachment managers and Democratic senators systematically discard basic values that once defined fair trials — and American values — under the Constitution. When Donald Trump’s defense counsel objected that he was not afforded due process in the House, the managers shrugged and said due process was not required. When the defense objected that Trump’s Jan. 6 speech was protected under the First Amendment, the House scoffed that free speech is not only inapplicable but “frivolous” in an impeachment.

Nothing, it seems, is so sacred that it cannot be discarded in pursuit of Trump. Over and over, it was made clear that his trial is about the verdict, not about our constitutional values. Even with acquittal all but ensured, there was no room for constitutional niceties like free speech or due process. There was only one issue — the same one that has driven our media and politics for four years: Trump. Through that time, some of us have objected that extreme legal interpretations and biased coverage destroy our legal and journalistic values. It was not done out of love for Trump: I voted against him in two elections and have regularly denounced his actions and rhetoric, including his Jan. 6 speech. However, I cherish our values more than I dislike him.

That is why the second Trump impeachment trial played out with a film noir flourish, featuring the same “lost innocence,” “hard-edged cynicism” and “desperate desire” of that movie genre — most obviously when House managers dismissed any due process in an impeachment proceeding. Indisputably, the House could have held at least a couple days of hearings and still impeached Trump before he left office. It knew the Senate would not hold a trial before the end of his term, so it had until Jan. 20 to impeach him. It did so on Jan. 13. A hearing would have given Trump a formal opportunity to respond to the allegation against him; no one has ever been impeached without such an opportunity. It would have allowed witnesses to be called (including many who already were speaking publicly), to create even a minimal record for the trial.

Yet the House refused, and then declined for more than four weeks to call a dozen witnesses with direct evidence to create a record even after its snap impeachment. So the House could have afforded basic due process but chose not to do so simply because it does not have to. When confronted about this in the Senate, one House manager scoffed at the notion that Trump should be afforded more due process. Representative Ted Lieu said, “Trump is receiving any and all process that he is due.” A chilling answer, since Trump received none in the House. There was a time when denying due process would have been shocking. Even if you believe that due process is not required in an impeachment, it is expected. We do not afford due process to people simply because we have to. It is like decency, civility and other values. They are not observed because they are mandatory but because they are right.

Read more …

It’s Xi’s casino now.

• What Comes Next in HNA Group’s Bankruptcy in China (Barron’s)

Conglomerate HNA Group encapsulates at least three facets that have defined many overly-acquisitive Chinese firms in recent years. Those include origins in a defined sector with attempts to become a player in dozens of unrelated areas; an appetite for loose credit that backfired when Beijing decided too much was too much; and a meteoric rise and fall from a lack of discipline. Between 2015 and 2017 the then-airline firm’s $40 billion acquisition spree included stakes in the Hilton hotel chain and Deutsche Bank, bringing its total assets to more than $150 billion. It spent $6 billion to acquire California-based electronics firm Ingram Micro.

But debt piled up faster, and creditors and Beijing swooped in, demanding accountability, and forcing a massive asset selloff to pay down its arrears—which as of its last filing, in 2019, were roughly $109 billion. The saga seemed all but over after the Hainan provincial government last year essentially took control of the indebted behemoth, with plans for further asset sales and restructuring. But more bad news came crashing in. The Hainan government investigation concluded some 500 companies connected to HNA may be forced into bankruptcy restructuring, Chinese media outlet Caixin reported. Creditors then filed for HNA itself to be placed into bankruptcy and restructuring.

“HNA Group will comply with the court’s instructions of judicial review in accordance with law, promote the debts disposition actively, support the court to protect the legal rights and interests of creditors in accordance with law, and safeguard our normal business to be operated successfully,” the company said in a statement. HNA’s main creditor and head of the creditor committee is China Development Bank, one of the country’s three cabinet-led policy lenders. The head of the bank from 2013 to 2018, Hu Huaibang, led numerous underwritings for HNA acquisitions during its meteoric rise. Last year, Hu was arrested and charged with “suspected serious violations of discipline”—meaning corruption. How much of that, if any, is related to HNA deals is unclear.

Read more …

Yeah, give him another million.

• Fauci Awarded $1m Israeli Prize For ‘Speaking Truth To Power’ (Ind.)

Dr Anthony Fauci was among recipients of the Dan David Prize, recognising his career in public health and “speaking truth to power” during the coronavirus pandemic, according to the awards organisation. The director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the US National Institutes of Health “is the consummate model of leadership and impact in public health,” the awards committee said in a statement. The prize, associated with Tel Aviv University, awards three $1 million prizes for “achievements having an outstanding scientific, technological, cultural or social impact on our world.” Ten per cent of the prize money is set aside for academic scholarships in each winner’s field. [..]


The nation’s leading infectious disease expert emerged as a face of the US response to the public health crisis amid a turbulent and insufficient federal effort under Donald Trump’s administration. After the former president sidelined or removed him from the foreground of the federal response in the final months of his administration, Dr Fauci has returned to the White House under President Joe Biden, who enlisted him as a chief medical adviser. Within hours of the president’s inauguration, Dr Fauci addressed the World Health Organisation to assure the agency that the US will honour its partnership and funding commitments, after Mr Trump antagonised the United Nations group and pledged to isolate the US from its global health efforts.

Read more …

This son’t make the WHO happy.

• WHO Adviser: Wuhan Lab Probe Was Conducted By ‘Chinese Authorities’ (SAC)

World Health Organization adviser Jamie Metzl revealed that the WHO’s investigation into the Wuhan Institute of Virology was conducted “by Chinese autorities,” during an interview Wednesday night on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle.” The WHO announced earlier this week that the investigation had ended because investigators had found it a “very unlikely” source of the COVID-19 virus. It has been alleged that the virus may have leaked from the lab. Such accidents, however, were dismissed by the WHO as “extremely rare.” It is the global organization’s belief that the virus was first transmitted from animal to human. “Well, the investigation itself was very short. It was two weeks of quarantine and two weeks of meetings, but the actual investigation was done by Chinese authorities.

And so, the W.H.O. investigators were basically receiving reports from the Chinese officials,” Metzl told Ingraham. “And as I see it, the big failure is that they outlined four possible ways that COVID could have begun. One was direct bat to human. Second, bat through an animal intermediate host. Third, through shipping or some kind of frozen food from somewhere else. And four, the accidental lab leak. As you know, Laura, for more than a year, I’ve been one of the leading advocates saying we have to look very, very seriously at option four.”

“But rather than saying, alright, let’s look more deeply at all of those possibilities, the W.H.O. investigators said we should look at the first three, but not at the accidental lab leak,” Metzl said. “And I’m just miffed that this has happened and I think it’s really terrible.” The U.S. State Department in January detailed that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was conducting dangerous research on coronaviruses and couldn’t be ruled out completely as a possible source of the virus outbreak. In fact, the report mentioned that in the fall of 2019, researchers at the lab became sick and exhibited COVID-19-like symptoms. Further, the State Department said the lab was being operated by the Chinese military.

Read more …

The Rev. Will Campbell was a wise man.

• Cancel Culture, Where Liberalism Goes to Die (Chris Hedges)

The Rev. Will Campbell was forced out of his position as director of religious life at the University of Mississippi in 1956 because of his calls for integration. He escorted Black children through a hostile mob in 1957 to integrate Little Rock’s Central High School. He was the only white person that was invited to be part of the group that founded Martin Luther King Jr.’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference. He helped integrate Nashville’s lunch counters and organize the Freedom Rides. But Campbell was also, despite a slew of death threats he received from white segregationists, an unofficial chaplain to the local chapter of the Ku Klux Klan.

He denounced and publicly fought the Klan’s racism, acts of terror and violence and marched with Black civil rights protestors in his native Mississippi, but he steadfastly refused to “cancel” white racists out of his life. He refused to demonize them as less than human. He insisted that this form of racism, while evil, was not as insidious as a capitalist system that perpetuated the economic misery and instability that pushed whites into the ranks of violent, racist organizations. “During the civil rights movement, when we were developing strategies, someone usually said, ‘Call Will Campbell. Check with Will,’” Rep. John Lewis wrote in the introduction to the new edition of Campbell’s memoir Brother to a Dragonfly, one of the most important books I read as a seminarian.

“Will knew that the tragedy of Southern history had fallen on our opponents as well as our allies … on George Wallace and Bull Connor as well as Rosa Parks and Fred Shuttlesworth. He saw that it had created the Ku Klux Klan as well as the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. That insight led Will to see racial healing and equity, pursued through courage, love, and faith as the path to spiritual liberation for all.” Jimmy Carter wrote of Campbell that he “tore down the walls that separated white and black Southerners.” And because the Black Panther organizer Fred Hampton was doing the same thing in Chicago, the FBI — which, along with the CIA, is the de facto ally of the liberal elites in their war against Trump and his supporters — assassinated him.

When the town Campbell lived in decided the Klan should not be permitted to have a float in the Fourth of July parade Campbell did not object, as long as the gas and electric company was also barred. It was not only white racists who inflicted suffering on the innocent and the vulnerable, but institutions that place the sanctity of profit before human life. “People can’t pay their gas and electric bills, the heat gets turned off and they freeze and sometimes die, especially if they are elderly,” he said. “This, too, is an act of terrorism.” “Theirs you could see and deal with, and if they broke the law, you could punish them,” he said of the Klan. “But the larger culture that was, and still is, racist to the core is much more difficult to deal with and has a more sinister influence.”

Read more …

 

 

We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site. Thank you for your support.

 

 

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in 2021. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.

 

Debt Rattle February 16 2019

Feb 162019
 
 February 16, 2019  Posted by at 11:46 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  9 Responses »


Marcel Duchamp The king and queen surrounded by swift nudes 1912

 

• Over 60% Of All New Debt Created Globally In Past Decade Was In China (NYFed)
• Worms Turning (Jim Kunstler)
• FBI Created, Covered Up “Chart” Of Potential Hillary Clinton Crimes (ZH)
• Mueller Discloses Evidence Roger Stone Communicated With Wikileaks (G.)
• Are Russian Trolls Saving Measles From Extinction? (RFE)
• Democrats’ Coveted 2020 Prize? An Endorsement From Ocasio-Cortez (G.)
• The Green New Deal, Capitalism and the State (CP)
• Corbyn To Hold Brexit Talks With EU’s Barnier And Verhofstadt (G.)
• When The Swabian Hausfrau Saves (Steve Keen)
• 9/11 Fund Running Out Of Money For Those With Illnesses (AP)
• Subsidies to Amazon Are Uneconomical, Un-American, and Unconstitutional (PM)

 

 

As Trump flunks his emergency, Xi flunks his economy. I’ll wait for the shouting match over the first to settle over the weekend.

This is from the New York Fed’s Liberty Street Economics. The second graph is not from their piece, but very much to the point. After all that new debt, China’s transition to a consumer economy is faltering. So people are clamoring for rate cuts and more stimulus. But do they realize how much stimulus China has already neede to get where it is today?

• Over 60% Of All New Debt Created Globally In Past Decade Was In China (NYFed)

Although there has been a notable deceleration in the pace of credit growth recently, the run-up in debt in China has been eye-popping, accounting for more than 60 percent of all new credit created globally over the past ten years. Rising nonfinancial sector debt was driven initially by an increase in corporate borrowing, which surged in 2009 in response to the global financial crisis. The most recent leg of China’s credit boom has been due to an important shift toward household lending. To better understand the rise in household debt in China and its implications for financial stability and China’s economic performance, it is important to examine the expansion in household credit, how the rise in debt compares to international experience, and the associated risks.

The growth of China’s household debt reflects a natural evolution in financial sector deepening and has grown in two waves. The first occurred during the late-1990s following major financial reforms and the privatization of China’s housing stock. The second wave began in the wake of the global financial crisis and has witnessed much more rapid growth, with debt increasing by nearly $5.7 trillion, or nearly 30 percent of China’s GDP. In fact, household lending overtook corporate borrowing in early 2018 to become the largest driver of aggregate loan growth in China. New household lending now accounts for roughly half of new loans.

Read more …

Glad someone’s keeping count.

• Worms Turning (Jim Kunstler)

[..] late this week, William Barr was confirmed as a new Attorney General, meaning the extreme case of bureaucratic constipation in that department may be resolving in a shitstorm of counter-revelations and prosecutions in what amounted to an attempted coup d’etat. A lot of the evidence for that is already public and overwhelming. It includes:

• Using FBI counter-intelligence assets improperly and illegally.
• Using fabricated “opposition research” provided by Mrs. Clinton to obtain warrants to spy on her election opponent, and failing to verify it as evidence (according to strict “Woods” procedures) submitted to FISA court judges.
• Recruiting Britain’s MI6 to spy on US citizens as a work-around from US laws prohibiting US Intel from spying on Americans.
• Setting up the notorious Trump Tower meeting to entrap Donald Trump Jr., using a Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, in the employ of Fusion GPS, Mrs. Clintons oppo research contractor.
• Orchestrating leaks of secret FBI proceedings to the news media to feed a Russia collusion hysteria.
• Malicious prosecutions by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and egregious political conflicts-of-interest among Mr. Mueller’s team of prosecutors.
• Coverup of the Uranium One scheme facilitated by Robert Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
• A scheme to surreptitiously and illegally record conversations with Mr. Trump once he became president.
• Conspiring to bury multiple inquires into illegal conduct of Mrs. Clinton, her employees and associates by failing to obtain evidence and allowing it to be destroyed.
• Misconduct in office by former CIA chief John Brennan, former National Security Director James Clapper, former AG Loretta Lynch, and members of President Obama’s White House inner circle.

Read more …

Tie in this one with Jim Kunstler’s list above.

• FBI Created, Covered Up “Chart” Of Potential Hillary Clinton Crimes (ZH)

The top brass of the Obama FBI went to great lengths to justify their decision not to recommend charges against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information, according to Judicial Watch, which obtained evidence that the agency created a ‘chart’ of Clinton’s offenses. The newly obtained emails came in response to a court ordered Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that the DOJ had previously ignored. Via Judicial Watch: “Three days after then-FBI Director James Comey’s press conference announcing that he would not recommend a prosecution of Mrs. Clinton, a July 8, 2016 email chain shows that, the Special Counsel to the FBI’s executive assistant director in charge of the National Security Branch, whose name is redacted, wrote to Strzok and others that he was producing a “chart of the statutory violations considered during the investigation [of Clinton’s server], and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute…”

[..] On May 15, 2016, James Rybicki, former chief of staff to Comey, sends FBI General Counsel James Baker; Bill Priestap, former assistant director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division; McCabe; Page; and others an email with the subject line “Request from the Director.” Rybicki writes: By NLT [no later than] next Monday, the Director would like to see a list of all cases charged in the last 20 years where the gravamen of the charge was mishandling classified information. It should be in chart form with: (1) case name, (2) a short summary for content (3) charges brought, and (4) charge of conviction. If need be, we can get it from NSD [National Security Division] and let them know that the Director asked for this personally. Please let me know who can take the lead on this. Thanks! Jim

Page forwards to Strzok: FYSA [For your situational awareness] Strzok replies to Page: I’ll take the lead, of course – sounds like an espionage section question… Or do you think OGC [Office of the General Counsel] should? And the more reason for us to get feedback to Rybicki, as we all identified this as an issue/question over a week ago. Page replies: I was going to reply to Jim [Rybicki] and tell him I can talked [sic] to you about this already. Do you want me to?

Read more …

Mueller gets nuttier, and the Guardian gladly collaborates. On nothing new. We already knew WikiLeaks told Stone to take a hike. Most importantly, Mueller continues his cowardice vs Assange, because without his empty accusations of Assange, he really has nothing left on collusion. And if Assange could talk, he’d have even less left. And people tell me he’s not a coward.

Under US law, people have the right to defend themselves. Under Robert Mueller’s law, Julian Assange does not. Is that stating it clear enough?

As for Stone, Aaron Maté tweeted about this article: “LOL. The “communications of Roger Stone with Wikileaks” were revealed a year ago. They show WL urging Stone to stop making “false claims of association” between them.”

• Mueller Discloses Evidence Roger Stone Communicated With Wikileaks (G.)

The US Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, disclosed for the first time on Friday that his office has evidence of communications between Roger Stone, a longtime adviser to President Donald Trump, and WikiLeaks related to the release of hacked Democratic party emails. In a court filing on Friday, Mueller’s office said it had gathered that evidence in a separate probe into Russian intelligence officers who were charged by Mueller with hacking the emails during the 2016 US presidential campaign and staging their release. In an email criticising media coverage of Mueller’s filing on Friday, Stone said the evidence was “innocuous Twitter direct messages” that have already been disclosed to the House Intelligence Committee and “prove absolutely nothing”.

Also on Friday, a federal judge placed some limits on what Stone and his lawyers can say publicly about his criminal case brought by the special counsel in the Russia investigation. But the US district judge, Amy Berman Jackson, stopped short of imposing a broad ban on public comments by the outspoken political operative, issuing a limited gag order she said was necessary to ensure Stone’s right to a fair trial and “to maintain the dignity and seriousness of the courthouse and these proceedings”. Stone was indicted last month for lying to Congress about his communications with others about the hacked emails. Mueller did not say at the time that he had evidence of communications with WikiLeaks. Stone, an ally of Trump for 40 years, has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Stone has previously acknowledged brief exchanges with both WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 but maintains he never had advance knowledge about the release of hacked emails. But Friday marked the first time Mueller indicated he had obtained related evidence, although it remained unclear if the evidence is more substantial than what is publicly known. “The government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release,” Mueller’s team wrote in a filing to the US district court in Washington DC. “Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1.”

[..] WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 each published emails and other documents from the Democratic party in 2016 in an operation that Mueller alleges was part of a Kremlin-backed effort to tip the election in favour of then Republican nominee, Donald Trump.

Read more …

Radio Free Europe presents Russiaphobia on steroids.

Let’s ask Mueller what he thinks.

• Are Russian Trolls Saving Measles From Extinction? (RFE)

Scientific researchers say Russian social-media trolls who spread discord before the 2016 U.S. presidential election may also have played an unintended role in a developing global health crisis. They say the trolls may have contributed to the 2018 outbreak of measles in Europe that killed 72 people and infected more than 82,000 — mostly in Eastern and Southeastern European countries known to have been targeted by Russia-based disinformation campaigns. Experts in the United States and Europe are now working on ways to gauge the impact that Russian troll and bot campaigns have had on the spread of the disease by distributing medical misinformation and raising public doubts about vaccinations.

Studies have already documented how cybercampaigns by the Internet Research Agency – a St. Petersburg “troll farm” that has been accused of meddling in the U.S. 2016 presidential election – artificially bolstered debate on social media about vaccines since 2014 in a way that eroded public trust in vaccinations. Now, the World Health Organization (WHO) is warning that “vaccination hesitancy” has become one of the top threats to global health. It notes a 30 percent rise in measles globally and a resurgence of measles in countries that had once been close to eradicating the disease.

Read more …

You heard it here first in The Great Discontent.

A communications director says: “She’s built a profile with a savvy way beyond her years..”, but it’s the other way around. Anyone older can not build a profile the way she has because she’s 29 and grew up with social media; it’s not an acquired taste for her.

• Democrats’ Coveted 2020 Prize? An Endorsement From Ocasio-Cortez (G.)

Welcome to the AOC primary. At 29 years old, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – already known as “AOC” for short – is too young to be eligible to run for US president. But her phenomenal impact on American politics means that she could play an outsized role in deciding who does. As her fellow Democrats jostle for position ahead of the 2020 primary elections, an endorsement from Ocasio-Cortez is likely to be a widely coveted prize, a guaranteed shot of adrenaline sure to energise her army of millennial voters. But it could also come with perils in the later presidential contest, especially for so-called “centrist” candidates hoping to draw independents and moderate Republicans away from Donald Trump.

In little more than a month, Ocasio-Cortez, whose New York district includes parts of the Bronx and Queens, has taken Washington by storm, overshadowing career politicians who have spent years labouring in the 435-member House of Representatives. Her proposals – among them a Green New Deal to combat climate change and a 70% tax rate on earnings over $10m to tackle economic inequality – have reset terms of debate in the early stages of the Democratic contest. “This is a race to the left,” said Dave Handy, a New York-based political consultant and organiser. “Even if people don’t like her or her policies, they will be racing to get her endorsement because it’s a progressive check mark. She embodies the general direction the party is going in.”

[..] Ocasio-Cortez is also a social media sensation. She has in excess of 3 million followers on Twitter with more engagement than Donald Trump, Barack Obama or Vermont senator Bernie Sanders. Last week a video clip in which she quizzed ethics experts about government corruption became the most watched political video ever posted on Twitter with 37.5m views. It was another demonstration of astonishing clout. Neil Sroka, communications director of the progressive group Democracy for America, said: “She’s built a profile with a savvy way beyond her years, but she also has an agenda that feels right for the moment. AOC does not exist without the bold, inclusive, populist agenda she’s pushing. The vitriol she has inspired speaks to how afraid everyone is; Republicans see her as representing a country they don’t even know how to speak to.”

Read more …

“The American plan is to burn the oil. All of it.”

• The Green New Deal, Capitalism and the State (CP)

Unbeknownst to most Americans, the nation’s forests were clear-cut from coast to coast in the mid-late nineteenth century. Photographs from the era show denuded landscapes— no trees, no animals, and streams still poisoned from the runoff in the present, for as far as the eye can see. The scars from nineteenth and twentieth century strip mining in Pennsylvania draw direct geographical and historical lines to the mountaintop removal that is taking place in West Virginia today. These natural resources produced the bounty of American capitalism every bit as much as the manufacturing prowess of the Second Industrial Revolution. In turn, this combination of low-cost resources, manufacturing prowess and natural borders (the oceans) produced the military might that defines America in the present.

The logic of weapons and weaponry pervades American capitalism. Death and destruction, domination and control, are what America does. The thought that these resources were ever ‘free’ illustrates the power of ideology. With a body count of at least one-hundred million human beings— including genocide against the indigenous population, murdered slaves, coal miners in Appalachia who died from black lung disease, mill workers in Massachusetts and North and South Carolina who died from inhaling cotton fibers, and those killed in American wars for resources, the human toll of American capitalism is staggering.

[..] In the present, the introduction of a Green New Deal as a nonbinding resolution, rather than the creation of a select congressional committee, clarifies the political form of official resistance to environmental resolution. The public pronouncement itself is a call to arms, implying both that the need for environmental resolution is urgent and that it won’t be led from above. Its authors were right to take their case to the people, from whom something akin to a revolutionary movement is required. Complaints over its limited scope miss that until there is such a movement, little progress toward environmental resolution will be made. Current bipartisan American machinations toward Venezuela illustrate the conundrum. Venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves in the world. The U.S. is using state power to ‘liberate’ this oil for the benefit of nominally private multinational oil corporations. The American plan is to burn the oil. All of it.

Read more …

And why not? It must get messier still.

• Corbyn To Hold Brexit Talks With EU’s Barnier And Verhofstadt (G.)

Jeremy Corbyn will hold talks in Brussels next week with Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, as he seeks to break the Brexit impasse and persuade Theresa May to sign up to a customs union. The visit is likely to be highly unwelcome in Downing Street, and risks accusations that Labour is pursuing its own shadow negotiations, undermining the prime minister’s hopes of fresh EU concessions. May will be in Brussels in the same week to meet the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker. The UK attorney-general, Geoffrey Cox, is expected to travel with her. During a whistle-stop tour of the central figures in the Brexit talks on Thursday, Corbyn is also due to meet the European parliament’s Brexit coordinator, Guy Verhofstadt.

He will also hold talks with senior figures in the socialist group in the European parliament, including Labour MEPs. EU sources said Corbyn was expected to provide further details on his recent conditional offer of support for the prime minister’s deal along with an update on the cross-party talks. Earlier this month, the Labour leader said his party would back the withdrawal agreement, containing the Irish backstop, if May renegotiated the accompanying political declaration on the future relationship. Labour is seeking a permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union, a close alignment with the single market and protection for standards and workers’ rights.

Read more …

Steve wants to abolish the word ‘savings’ with regards to a government. It makes no sense at all.

• When The Swabian Hausfrau Saves (Steve Keen)

Savings is promoted as a private virtue that should be practiced at a national and international level as well. What happens to the economy when it is implemented? Keen explains one of the great economic fallacies: that a government needs to manage its finances like a household, and if the government consistently spends more than it receives in income, the nation’s debt will ultimately become unsustainable, and the nation will go broke. Furthermore he will address why the predominant Neoclassical economic model of banking is dangerously misleading as a guide to how a capitalist economy actually works and was thus incapable of predicting the Great Financial Crisis of 2007.

Read more …

Hoe much more American does it get?

• 9/11 Fund Running Out Of Money For Those With Illnesses (AP)

The compensation fund for victims of 9/11 is running out of money and will cut future payments by 50 to 70 percent, officials announced Friday. September 11th Victim Compensation Fund special master Rupa Bhattacharyya said she was “painfully aware of the inequity of the situation” but stressed that awarding some funds for every valid claim would be preferable to sending some legitimate claimants away empty-handed. “I could not abide a plan that would at the end of the day leave some claimants uncompensated,” Bhattacharyya said.

Nearly 40,000 people have applied to the federal fund for people with illnesses potentially related to being at the World Trade Center site, the Pentagon or Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after the 2001 terror attacks there, and about 19,000 of those claims are pending. Nearly $5 billion in benefits have been awarded out of the $7.3 billion fund. Bhattacharyya said fund officials estimate it would take another $5 billion to pay pending claims and the claims that officials anticipate will be submitted before the fund’s December 2020 deadline. Absent that funding, officials determined that pending claims submitted by Feb. 1 would be paid at 50 percent of their prior value. Valid claims received after that date will be paid at just 30 percent.

Read more …

Idea is good, argumentation less so. You can’t expect to be taken too seriously when you write lines like this one: A recent paper shows that companies are more likely to receive subsidies when they make financial contributions to political candidates in the state.

• Subsidies to Amazon Are Uneconomical, Un-American, and Unconstitutional (PM)

Corporate subsidies are a negative-sum game. They foster crony capitalism, hurt productivity growth and inflict great harm on product market competition.

As soon as Amazon announced the location of its new headquarters, an intense media battle started on the rationality of the fiscal subsidies offered by the two chosen states to attract the new headquarters. Was it a good idea for New York and Virginia to offer $1.5 billion and $573 million respectively to stir Amazon’s decision? In each of the two chosen locations Amazon was to invest billions in infrastructure, employ as many as 25,000 people directly (and many more indirectly), and bring billions in new tax revenues. Even the generous fiscal benefits offered by the two locations seem small vis-à-vis the additional fiscal revenues the winning states will enjoy. After all, had Amazon chosen New Jersey over New York, the Empire State would have lost up to $14 billion in new tax revenues over the next 25 years.

Why shouldn’t a state pay a fraction of these enormous benefits to secure Amazon’s headquarters? While appealing, this argument is flawed and—as it turns out—self-defeating. When companies compete for customers, they have to offer better products or lower prices. They are forced to innovate and improve efficiency in production. In economist lingo, product market competition is not a zero-sum game (my gains are equal to your losses), but a positive-sum game (my gains exceed your losses). By contrast, corporate competition for state subsidies is a zero-sum game. Amazon is not going to be more productive in New York than in New Jersey –it will only pay fewer taxes. If companies are successful in pitting one state against another, they will end up paying no state taxes.

As a result, the economy will not be one iota more efficient, and the rest of us will end up paying more taxes to make up for the revenue shortfall. Competition for subsidies also fosters crony capitalism and hurts productivity growth. It fosters crony capitalism because it favors companies that are well-connected, rather than companies that are more efficient.

Read more …

Debt Rattle July 19 2017

Jul 192017
 
 July 19, 2017  Posted by at 8:47 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  5 Responses »


US photographer Margaret Bourke-White on top of the Chrysler Building, NYC 1931

 

• America Makes China Great Again – People’s Daily (CNBC)
• Pentagon Report Declares US Empire ‘Collapsing’ (Nafeez Ahmed)
• A Government Can Always Afford High-Quality Health Care Provision (BIlbo)
• US Dollar Will Rebound In The Second Half Of 2017 – JPMorgan (CNBC)
• Foreigners Snap Up Record Number Of US Homes (CNBC)
• Big Australian Banks Told To Hold More Capital, On Notice Over Mortgages (R.)
• One Million Homes Left Empty Across Australia (SMH)
• In Urban China, Nobody Uses Cash Or Cards Anymore (NYT)
• Survivors Of 9/11 Urge May To Release Saudi Arabia Terror Report (Ind.)
• West Virginians Are Fighting To Save Their Neighbors From Opioids (NewYorker)
• This Isn’t the First US Opiate-Addiction Crisis (BBG)
• A Despot In Disguise: One Man’s Mission To Rip Up Democracy (Monbiot)
• Italy Mulls Temporary Humanitarian Visas For Migrants, Refugees (G.)

 

 

If I were Beijing, I’d be a tad worried about the implication that Chine needs the US to be great again.

• America Makes China Great Again – People’s Daily (CNBC)

A Communist Party mouthpiece is crowing that malfunctioning U.S. leadership is making China “great again” on the eve of highly anticipated bilateral trade talks between the two countries. The op-ed published in the People’s Daily said the U.S. was in political chaos and suffered from a broken system, which was why Washington couldn’t get anything done. It also claimed the U.S. mess was giving China an opportunity to shine. “U.S. foreign policy is in total disarray, and world regard for the U.S. has plummeted. Indeed, America is making China ‘great again,'” the op-ed said. “Once the world’s model, the great American meltdown has turned the U.S. into some bizarre soap opera.” This isn’t the first time China has piggybacked off an American saying — remember President Xi Jinping’s “Chinese Dream” slogan?

This time around, the tone is a bit sharper, with Chinese state media not backing down ahead of annual bilateral talks that have been rebranded this year as the U.S.-China Comprehensive Economic Dialogue. Although both Beijing and Washington have indicated they understand the need to play nice, both sides are pushing their own agenda as expected. The U.S. wants to reduce the more than $300 billion trade deficit with China and make good on a campaign promise from President Donald Trump to pressure China on a number of fronts, such as opening up its markets to more foreign participation and to bring jobs back to America. China, on the other hand, has pushed back, saying Chinese investment has helped the U.S. But it’s clear that as the U.S. continues to face political turmoil, China is enjoying its time in the spotlight. That is, Beijing is explicitly seeking to fill the void the U.S. left as it backed out of various multilateral talks and agreements…

Read more …

Got the money? Got the money? Show me the money!

• Pentagon Report Declares US Empire ‘Collapsing’ (Nafeez Ahmed)

An extraordinary new Pentagon study has concluded that the US-backed international order established after World War 2 is “fraying” and may even be “collapsing”, leading the United States to lose its position of “primacy” in world affairs. The solution proposed to protect US power in this new “post-primacy” environment is, however, more of the same: more surveillance, more propaganda (“strategic manipulation of perceptions”) and more military expansionism. The document concludes that the world has entered a fundamentally new phase of transformation in which US power is in decline, international order is unravelling, and the authority of governments everywhere is crumbling. Having lost its past status of “pre-eminence”, the US now inhabits a dangerous, unpredictable “post-primacy” world, whose defining feature is “resistance to authority”.

Danger comes not just from great power rivals like Russia and China, both portrayed as rapidly growing threats to American interests, but also from the increasing risk of “Arab Spring”-style events. These will erupt not just in the Middle East, but all over the world, potentially undermining trust in incumbent governments for the foreseeable future. The report, based on a year-long intensive research process involving consultation with key agencies across the Department of Defense and US Army, calls for the US government to invest in more surveillance, better propaganda through “strategic manipulation” of public opinion, and a “wider and more flexible” US military.

[..] Observing that US officials “naturally feel an obligation to preserve the US global position within a favorable international order,” the report concludes that this “rules-based global order that the United States built and sustained for 7 decades is under enormous stress.” The report provides a detailed breakdown of how the DoD perceives this order to be rapidly unravelling, with the Pentagon being increasingly outpaced by world events. Warning that “global events will happen faster than DoD is currently equipped to handle”, the study concludes that the US “can no longer count on the unassailable position of dominance, supremacy, or pre-eminence it enjoyed for the 20-plus years after the fall of the Soviet Union.” So weakened is US power, that it can no longer even “automatically generate consistent and sustained local military superiority at range.”

Read more …

I can’t really do Bill Mitchell justice in this format, but the health care debate badly needs views such as his.

• A Government Can Always Afford High-Quality Health Care Provision (BIlbo)

The US is the only advanced nation that lacks universal health care. Even though it is the world’s richest nation, millions of US citizens cannot afford to see a doctor much less acquire more complex health care (for example, surgery). It it clear that in seeking private profits, the private health care insurers drive up the cost of health care which means, in nominal terms, the proportion of GDP expenditure devoted to it will rise. It is quite obvious that when private profits are included costs will rise unless efficiency is vastly improved. The ‘free market (not!)’ lobby always appeal to arguments that competitive systems are always more effective. The Commonwealth Report shows emphatically that strong (dare we call them socialist) government-dominated universal care systems like the NHS are vastly more effective than the profit-driven US system.

There also doesn’t seem to be any reason for private insurance in health care at all. And it is here that we enounter the ‘funding’ myths. Too often health care debates get stuck in irrelevant fiscal arguments about whether the government can afford to expand and/or invest in health care. The justification for private insurance is usually predicated on these ‘governments cannot afford’ to pay for the system type arguments. They are fallacious of course. In the pursuit of profits, private health insurance providers have an incentive to move towards the US model where they seek to avoid payment and set up exclusions etc. There is no ‘funding’ reason for the existence of these private insurance providers. The NHS in the UK demonstrates that clearly.

There has clearly been a strong private health industry lobby to privatise as much of the health care system as possible in places like Australia and the UK, where there are good fully-funded public systems of universal health care operating. That lobby has been powerful in the US and continually claims there will be a fiscal blow out and Americans will live in high-taxed penury forever because some latinos or blacks are getting health care for the first time as a result of the Obama changes. From a MMT perspective, the fiscal component of the debate is irrelevant.

The fiscal beat-up is framed in terms of ‘adding heavy costs’ to the ‘budget’ such that their will be soaring deficits, which will penalise future generations etc etc. What is a heavy cost? What is a soaring deficit? These are irrelevant concepts devoid of meaning. Any sophisticated society will deem health care to be a human right. The constitution of the World Health Organisation says: “The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without the distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition.” The hallmark of a sophisticated nation is maximising the potential of its citizens. That must include placing health care under the responsibility of the currency-issuing government.

Read more …

Line of the day: “Some market observers have said that a weaker dollar can help to boost earnings of S&P 500 companies and eventually justify their high valuations.”

• US Dollar Will Rebound In The Second Half Of 2017 – JPMorgan (CNBC)

The current weakness in the U.S. dollar may be short lived, as a pick-up in inflation and expected rate hikes by the Federal Reserve will support the greenback in the coming months, JPMorgan Asset Management said Wednesday. “We’re thinking that the dollar will actually rebound in the second half, and this is mainly as the markets re-price in interest rates hike. We’re of the view that inflation will actually be picking up in the U.S. and currently, markets have only priced in one rate hike now till end-2018,” Jasslyn Yeo, global market strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management, told CNBC’s “Street Signs.” “So, we think (markets) are going to do a bit of re-pricing and that will support a bit of a rebound in the dollar,” she added.

The U.S. dollar tumbled to a 10-month low on Tuesday after the Republican health-care bill aimed at replacing Obamacare failed to get enough backing to proceed to a debate. Some market observers have said that a weaker dollar can help to boost earnings of S&P 500 companies and eventually justify their high valuations. But Yeo said equity markets outside the U.S., such as Europe and Japan, have more upside potential. Yeo noted that margins in Europe are starting to improve and that could translate into stronger earnings growth, while Japan is likely to benefit from a weaker yen versus the U.S. dollar. “We still like certain spots in the U.S. market. Currently we still favor U.S. banks, which we like in terms of rate hike expectations, bond yields moving higher as well as the promise for financial deregulation in the banking system,” she said.

Read more …

Sell it all off, who cares?

• Foreigners Snap Up Record Number Of US Homes (CNBC)

Foreign purchases of U.S. residential real estate surged to the highest level ever in terms of number of homes sold and dollar volume. Foreign buyers closed on $153 billion worth of U.S. residential properties between April 2016 and March 2017, a 49% jump from the period a year earlier, according to the National Association of Realtors. That surpasses the previous high, set in 2015. The jump follows a year-earlier retreat and comes as a surprise, given the current strength of the U.S. dollar against most foreign currencies, which makes U.S. housing even more expensive. Apparently, the value of a financial safe-haven is outweighing the rising costs. Foreign sales accounted for 10% of all existing home sales by dollar volume and 5% by number of properties. In total, foreign buyers purchased 284,455 homes, up 32% from the previous year.

Half of all foreign sales were in just three states: Florida, California and Texas. Chinese buyers led the pack for the fourth straight year, followed by buyers from Canada, the United Kingdom, Mexico and India. Russian buyers made up barely 1% of the purchases. But the biggest overall surge in sales in the last year came from Canadian buyers, who scooped up $19 billion worth of properties, mostly in Florida. They are also spending more, with the average price of a Canadian-bought home nearly doubling to $561,000. “There are more [baby] boomers now than ever before. It’s the demographic,” said Elli Davis, a real estate agent in Toronto who said she is seeing more older buyers downsize their primary home and purchase a second or third home in Florida. “The real estate here is worth so much more money. They all have more money. They’re selling the big city houses that are now $2 million-plus, where they went up so much in the last 10 to 15 years, so they’re cashing in.”

Read more …

Noooo, that’s not late at all…

• Big Australian Banks Told To Hold More Capital, On Notice Over Mortgages (R.)

Australia on Wednesday ordered the country’s biggest banks to raise capital for the second time in two years and signalled further action to shore up their burgeoning mortgage books, potentially squeezing shareholder returns. The banking regulator said it would release a discussion paper later this year to include risk weights on mortgages among other changes, in-line with expected rules due to be finalised by global regulators. The warning on mortgages came as it raised the target for the four major banks’ common equity Tier 1 ratio – a key gauge of a lender’s strength – to at least 10.5%. That translates into an average increase of 100 basis points above the banks’ December 2016 levels. They are expected to meet the new benchmarks by January 2020.

The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has now ordered the big banks to boost capital twice since 2015 as it seeks to make the sector impregnable to global shocks. Australia’s major lenders – Commonwealth Bank of Australia , Westpac Banking Corp, ANZ Banking Group and National Australia Bank – hold combined market share of more than 80%, raising fears their failure could fatally weaken the broader economy. “Capital levels that are unquestionably strong will undoubtedly equip the Australian banking sector to better handle adversity in the future and reduce the need for public sector support,” APRA Chairman Wayne Byres said in a statement.

Read more …

Inevitable result of property bubbles.

• One Million Homes Left Empty Across Australia (SMH)

Australia has 200,000 more homes sitting empty than it had a decade ago, new figures show, despite the country grappling with a housing supply shortage that is pushing the cost of a first home beyond many of its residents. The figures from the 2016 census have been described as “cruel and immoral” by leading UNSW urban policy expert Hal Pawson, who has warned the government must act to stem the growth in unoccupied housing. “There is gross under-occupation across Australia,” Mr Pawson said, adding that there were up to a million homes with three or more extra bedrooms than the owner required. “There is a growing realisation that our housing market is not working well. It doesn’t just create a problem for people on low incomes, it also hurts spending in the economy when housing is overvalued.”

The figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show up to 11.2% of properties are now unoccupied, up from 9.8% in 2006. In the space of two decades Australia has added 2.1 million homes to its property portfolio but an extra 360,000 are being left vacant. Separate analysis by the Grattan Institute, released on Monday, found the number of Australian home owners has been falling for three decades, with the spike in home ownership restricted to baby boomers. “Falling home ownership rates for younger Australians, especially 25 to 34-year-olds where home ownership rates are down 6% in the last decade alone, are just the latest evidence that the traditional Australian dream is slipping out of their reach,” said Grattan Institute fellow Brendan Coates.

[..] “The census showed empty property numbers up by 19% in Melbourne and 15% in Sydney over the past five years alone,” he said. “Considering that thousands of people sleep rough – almost 7000 on census night in 2011, more than 400 per night in Sydney in 2017 and that hundreds of thousands face overcrowded homes or unaffordable rents – these seem like cruel and immoral revelations.”

Read more …

Better not lose your phone. Or the government can’t seeyou anymore.

• In Urban China, Nobody Uses Cash Or Cards Anymore (NYT)

There is an audacious economic experiment happening in China. It has nothing to do with debt, infrastructure spending or the other major economic topics du jour. It has to do with cash – specifically, how China is systematically and rapidly doing away with paper money and coins. Almost everyone in major Chinese cities is using a smartphone to pay for just about everything. At restaurants, a waiter will ask if you want to use WeChat or Alipay – the two smartphone payment options –before bringing up cash as a third, remote possibility. Just as startling is how quickly the transition has happened. Only three years ago there would be no question at all, because everyone was still using cash. “From a tech standpoint, this is probably one of the single most important innovations that has happened first in China, and at the moment it’s only in China,” says Richard Lim, managing director of the venture capital firm GSR Ventures.

There are certain parts of the Chinese internet that have to be seen to be believed. Coming from outside the country, it’s hard to comprehend that Facebook or Google can be completely blocked until you are forced to do without them. It’s tough to fathom how critical the messenger app WeChat is for everyday life until the sixth person of the day asks to scan your QR (quick response) code – a square-shaped barcode – to connect the two of you. What’s happening with cash in China is similar. For the past three years, I have been outside mainland China covering Asian technology from Hong Kong, which has a very different internet culture from the mainland. I knew that smartphone payments were taking over in China, as the statistics were stark: in 2016, China’s mobile payments hit £42 trillion ($5.5tn), roughly 50 times the size of America’s £860bn market, according to consulting firm iResearch.

[..] Some Scandinavian countries have also weaned themselves from cash but still use cards frequently. In China, the change has been to phones. One friend didn’t realise how reliant she had become on mobile payments until her bank called her. She had left her ATM card in the machine three weeks earlier and had not noticed its absence. In practical terms, this means that two Chinese companies – Tencent, which runs WeChat, and Alibaba, whose financial affiliate, Ant Financial, runs Alipay – are sitting atop a goldmine of staggering proportions. Both companies can make money off the transactions, charge other companies to use their payment platforms and all the while collect the payments data to be used in everything from new credit systems to advertising.

Read more …

My wild guess: it’s not going to happen.

• Survivors Of 9/11 Urge May To Release Saudi Arabia Terror Report (Ind.)

Survivors of the 9/11 attacks have written to Prime Minister Theresa May – urging her to make public a British government report into the extent of Saudi Arabia’s funding of Islamist extremism in the UK. The report into the significance of the financing of Islamic extremists in Britain by Saudi Arabia and other nations was commissioned by Ms May’s predecessor, David Cameron, as part of a deal to obtain political support for a parliamentary vote on UK airstrikes on Syria. Last week, British Home Secretary Amber Rudd said the report was not being published “because of the volume of personal information it contains and for national security reasons”. Green Party co-leader Caroline Lucas suggested the refusal to make public the report was linked to a reluctance to criticise the kingdom, with which Britain has long had close strategic and economic ties.

Now, a group representing US survivors of the 9/11 attacks and the relatives of some of the almost 3,000 people who died, has urged Ms May to seize the chance to release the report, even if it is not fully complete. “The UK now has the unique historic opportunity to stop the killing spree of Wahhabism-inspired terrorists by releasing the UK government’s report on terrorism financing in the UK which, according to media reports, places Saudi Arabia at its centre of culpability,” says the letter, signed by 15 people. “The longer Saudi Arabia’s complicity is hidden from sunlight, the longer terrorism will continue. They must be stopped; but who will stop them? We submit that you are uniquely situated to shine the cleansing light of public consciousness.” It adds: “We respectfully urge you to release the report now, finished or unfinished. We ask you to consider all the victims of state-sponsored, Saudi-financed terrorism, their families and their survivors in the UK and all over the world.”

Read more …

Completely insane. Lawless.

• West Virginians Are Fighting To Save Their Neighbors From Opioids (NewYorker)

Michael Barrett and Jenna Mulligan, emergency paramedics in Berkeley County, West Virginia, recently got a call that sent them to the youth softball field in a tiny town called Hedgesville. It was the first practice of the season for the girls’ Little League team, and dusk was descending. Barrett and Mulligan drove past a clubhouse with a blue-and-yellow sign that read “Home of the Lady Eagles,” and stopped near a scrubby set of bleachers, where parents had gathered to watch their daughters bat and field. Two of the parents were lying on the ground, unconscious, several yards apart. As Barrett later recalled, the couple’s thirteen-year-old daughter was sitting behind a chain-link backstop with her teammates, who were hugging her and comforting her.

The couple’s younger children, aged ten and seven, were running back and forth between their parents, screaming, “Wake up! Wake up!” When Barrett and Mulligan knelt down to administer Narcan, a drug that reverses heroin overdoses, some of the other parents got angry. “You know, saying, ‘This is bullcrap,’ ” Barrett told me. “ ‘Why’s my kid gotta see this? Just let ’em lay there.’ After a few minutes, the couple began to groan as they revived. Adults ushered the younger kids away. From the other side of the backstop, the older kids asked Barrett if the parents had overdosed. “I was, like, ‘I’m not gonna say.’ The kids aren’t stupid. They know people don’t just pass out for no reason.” During the chaos, someone made a call to Child Protective Services.

At this stage of the American opioid epidemic, many addicts are collapsing in public—in gas stations, in restaurant bathrooms, in the aisles of big-box stores. Brian Costello, a former Army medic who is the director of the Berkeley County Emergency Medical Services, believes that more overdoses are occurring in this way because users figure that somebody will find them before they die. “To people who don’t have that addiction, that sounds crazy,” he said. “But, from a health-care provider’s standpoint, you say to yourself, ‘No, this is survival to them.’ They’re struggling with using but not wanting to die.”

Read more …

So?

• This Isn’t the First US Opiate-Addiction Crisis (BBG)

The U.S. is in the throes of an “unprecedented opioid epidemic,” reports the Centers for Disease Control. The crisis has spurred calls for action to halt the rising death toll, which has devastated many rural communities. It’s true that there’s an opioid epidemic, a public health disaster. It’s not true that it’s unprecedented. A remarkably similar epidemic beset the U.S. some 150 years ago. The story of that earlier catastrophe offers some sobering lessons as to how to address the problem. Opioids are a broad class of drugs that relieve pain by acting directly on the central nervous system. They include substances such as morphine and its close cousin, heroin, both derived from the opium poppy. There are also synthetic versions, such as fentanyl, and medications that are derived from a mix of natural and synthetic sources, such as oxycodone.

Opioid addiction can take many forms, but the current crisis began with the use and abuse of legal painkillers in the 1990s, and has since metastasized into a larger epidemic, with heroin playing an especially outsized role. All of this is depressingly familiar. The first great U.S. opiate-addiction epidemic began much the same way, with medications handed out by well-meaning doctors who embraced a wondrous new class of drugs as the answer to a wide range of aches and pains. The pharmacologist Nathaniel Chapman, writing in 1817, held up opium as the most useful drug in the physician’s arsenal, arguing that there was “scarcely one morbid affection or disordered condition” that would fail to respond to its wonder-working powers. That same year, chemists devised a process for isolating a key alkaloid compound from raw opium: morphine.

Though there’s some evidence that opiate dependency had become a problem as early as the 1840s, it wasn’t until the 1860s and 1870s that addiction became a widespread phenomenon. The key, according to historian David Courtwright, was the widespread adoption of the hypodermic needle in the 1870s. Prior to this innovation, physicians administered opiates orally. During the Civil War, for example, doctors on the Union side administered 10 million opium pills and nearly three million ounces of opium powders and tinctures. Though some soldiers undoubtedly became junkies in the process, oral administration had all manner of unpleasant gastric side effects, limiting the appeal to potential addicts.

Read more …

The Koch brothers and the Fauxbel for economics.

• A Despot In Disguise: One Man’s Mission To Rip Up Democracy (Monbiot)

In 2013 she stumbled across a deserted clapboard house on the campus of George Mason University in Virginia. It was stuffed with the unsorted archives of a man who had died that year whose name is probably unfamiliar to you: James McGill Buchanan. She says the first thing she picked up was a stack of confidential letters concerning millions of dollars transferred to the university by the billionaire Charles Koch. Her discoveries in that house of horrors reveal how Buchanan, in collaboration with business tycoons and the institutes they founded, developed a hidden programme for suppressing democracy on behalf of the very rich. The programme is now reshaping politics, and not just in the US.

Buchanan was strongly influenced by both the neoliberalism of Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, and the property supremacism of John C Calhoun, who argued in the first half of the 19th century that freedom consists of the absolute right to use your property (including your slaves) however you may wish; any institution that impinges on this right is an agent of oppression, exploiting men of property on behalf of the undeserving masses. James Buchanan brought these influences together to create what he called public choice theory. He argued that a society could not be considered free unless every citizen has the right to veto its decisions. What he meant by this was that no one should be taxed against their will. But the rich were being exploited by people who use their votes to demand money that others have earned, through involuntary taxes to support public spending and welfare.

Allowing workers to form trade unions and imposing graduated income taxes were forms of “differential or discriminatory legislation” against the owners of capital. Any clash between “freedom” (allowing the rich to do as they wish) and democracy should be resolved in favour of freedom. In his book The Limits of Liberty, he noted that “despotism may be the only organisational alternative to the political structure that we observe.” Despotism in defence of freedom. His prescription was a “constitutional revolution”: creating irrevocable restraints to limit democratic choice. Sponsored throughout his working life by wealthy foundations, billionaires and corporations, he developed a theoretical account of what this constitutional revolution would look like, and a strategy for implementing it. He explained how attempts to desegregate schooling in the American south could be frustrated by setting up a network of state-sponsored private schools. It was he who first proposed privatising universities, and imposing full tuition fees on students: his original purpose was to crush student activism.

He urged privatisation of social security and many other functions of the state. He sought to break the links between people and government, and demolish trust in public institutions. He aimed, in short, to save capitalism from democracy. In 1980, he was able to put the programme into action. He was invited to Chile, where he helped the Pinochet dictatorship write a new constitution, which, partly through the clever devices Buchanan proposed, has proved impossible to reverse entirely. Amid the torture and killings, he advised the government to extend programmes of privatisation, austerity, monetary restraint, deregulation and the destruction of trade unions: a package that helped trigger economic collapse in 1982. None of this troubled the Swedish Academy, which through his devotee at Stockholm University Assar Lindbeck in 1986 awarded James Buchanan the Nobel memorial prize for economics. It is one of several decisions that have turned this prize toxic.

Read more …

Well, it would create a ton of chaos…

• Italy Mulls Temporary Humanitarian Visas For Migrants, Refugees (G.)

Italy has confirmed it is considering issuing temporary humanitarian visas that would allow tens of thousands of migrants who have arrived in the country from Libya to travel around the European Union. The move would provoke an immediate Austrian response, including the closure of the border with Italy at the Brenner Pass. The chances of Italy being able legally to grant unilateral humanitarian visas in this way is slight, but the threat is intended to concentrate minds in the EU after Italy failed to win clear practical support from Germany and France to take more people that have been arriving in increasing numbers from Libya.

The refugee crisis is putting growing political domestic pressure on the Democratic party (PD)-led government, with PD mayors refusing to take extra migrants and plans for legislation on citizenship being shelved at the weekend by the Italian prime minister, Paulo Gentiloni. In an interview with Il Manifesto, Mario Giro, the deputy foreign minister, said the government was looking at all options including the granting of temporary visas. Previously he had simply described the idea as speculation, and it had been dismissed by the interior minister. Giro said: “We are in a tug of war.” He said Italy wanted to avoid unilateral gestures, but was against the strict application of EU law which required migrants to remain in their first country of arrival.

“We don’t accept being turned into a European hotspot, or feeling guilty because we rescue people, so deciding what to do with the migrants who arrive is everyone’s responsibility,” he said. On Monday, the Italian foreign minister, Angelino Alfano, said the idea of humanitarian visas was not on the agenda. The EU high commissioner for external affairs, Federica Mogherini, insisted the issue was not discussed at the EU foreign affairs council meeting on Monday in Brussels. But the Italians are examining whether they could invoke the application of directive 2001/55, a measure approved following the Balkan wars, that allows the granting of humanitarian visas. It was too early to say when or how many such permits could be issued, Giro said, adding that the Italian authorities who received asylum requests already had the power to grant them.

Read more …

 Older Entries