Menu Icon

Debt Rattle September 14 2025

Sep 142025
 
 September 14, 2025  Posted by at 10:30 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


Fresco from the Minoan Palace in Knossos, Crete, Greece. 16th century B C.

 

• FBI Questioned ‘Transgender Partner’ of Charlie Kirk’s Alleged Assassin (RT)
• Kash Patel’s Bold Move Cracked the Case of Charlie Kirk’s Assassin (Margolis)
• The Lion, the Witch, & Charlie Kirk (Jamie K. Wilson)
• Stephen Miller Declares War On Far-Left NGOs (ZH)
• Pelosi: Democrats “Won’t Be Responsible” For Years Of Violent Rhetoric (ZH)
• NATO Kicks Off Military Drill In Response To ‘Russian Violations’ (RT)
• Zelensky’s Incentive Problem: Unmasking The Media’s Darling (Cortes)
• Trump Backs Off Promise To Sanction Russia, Issues Ultimatum To NATO (ZH)
• Trump Issues Ukraine Conflict Ultimatum To All NATO Members (RT)
• Thousands Flood London Streets In ‘Unite The Kingdom’ March (RT)
• Germany’s Sycophantic Elite And The Coming Economic Crash (Kolbe)
• All Eyes On An Irrelevant Fed (Jim Rickards)
• Albania Appoints AI Bot As Minister To Tackle Corruption (RT)
• Who Can Survive The AI Apocalypse? (RT)
• AI Is Quietly Taking Over Governments (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/AAnon55/status/1966685718824001963


https://twitter.com/iAnonPatriot/status/1966709017943605415

 

 

 

 

The deep deep confusion that emanates from so much here, has, don’t lose sight, all been conditioned. It doesn’t come from a natural process.

• FBI Questioned ‘Transgender Partner’ of Charlie Kirk’s Alleged Assassin (RT)

Federal investigators have questioned the roommate of Tyler Robinson, 22, who is accused of assassinating conservative activist Charlie Kirk, according to multiple US media reports on Saturday. Senior FBI officials told Fox News that Robinson had been in a “romantic relationship” with a person transitioning from male to female, with whom he shared an apartment in St. George, Utah. The individual is said to be “extremely cooperative” with the authorities and is not accused of any crime in connection with the killing. Public records reviewed by the New York Post linked Robinson to Lance Twiggs, 22, who lived at the same address. A relative confirmed that Twiggs was Robinson’s roommate, while declining to comment on their relationship.

The FBI is now sifting through “a mountain of evidence” that includes communications between Robinson and Twiggs, as well as “every connection, every group, every link and anyone tied” to the shooting. Investigators say text messages and Discord chats recovered from the pair’s devices provided key leads, including references to a rifle wrapped in a towel and hidden near Utah Valley University, where Kirk was gunned down on Wednesday. Police recovered a Mauser .30 caliber bolt-action rifle and ammunition engraved with slogans such as “Hey fascist! Catch!” and a reference to the WWII-era Italian anti-fascist song ‘Bella Ciao’. Another casing bore a meme from furry culture, while one read: “If you read this you are gay lmao.”

Axios, citing six sources familiar with the probe, reported that investigators are exploring whether Robinson was motivated by anger at Kirk’s criticism of the “LGBTQ agenda” and gender transition procedures. One source said the roommate was “aghast” at the news of the killing and promptly handed over messages from Robinson. Utah Governor Spencer Cox has described Robinson as “deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology,” though his family has insisted they are lifelong Republicans. The FBI has not publicly confirmed a motive but said it is reviewing evidence at Quantico and pursuing “every connection, every group, every link” related to the case. Kirk, 31, the founder of Turning Point USA, was fatally shot in the neck while addressing students in Orem, Utah. Robinson was arrested on Friday after his father recognized him in surveillance footage and persuaded him to surrender.

Read more …

They had surveillance video, cut stills from that, and immediatedly sent those out everywhere. In no time, he was recognized.

• Kash Patel’s Bold Move Cracked the Case of Charlie Kirk’s Assassin (Margolis)

The conservative movement lost one of its brightest voices with the assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University, but FBI Director Kash Patel’s swift and decisive response delivered justice in a remarkable 33 hours that should serve as a blueprint for law enforcement nationwide. Unlike the bureaucratic foot-dragging we’ve grown accustomed to from federal agencies, Patel personally flew to Utah and took command of the investigation with the kind of hands-on leadership that actually gets results. While career FBI officials likely cringed at his unconventional approach, Patel understood something his predecessors never grasped: When American patriots are under attack, you move heaven and earth to catch the killers. “I am very proud of the FBI,” Trump told Fox News Digital. “Kash—and everyone else—they have done a great job.”

The timeline tells the story. On Sept. 10, surveillance cameras captured 22-year-old Tyler Robinson casing the Utah Valley University campus that morning before returning with deadly intent. He positioned himself on a rooftop with a high-powered bolt-action rifle and waited for Kirk to take the stage. After firing the fatal shot, Robinson fled into nearby woods, likely believing he had pulled off the perfect political assassination. He was wrong. Patel immediately marshaled the full resources of the federal government, shipping DNA evidence, fingerprints, and the recovered murder weapon to FBI Quantico and partner labs for overnight analysis.

Patel personally directed agents as they processed evidence and prepared to send it to Quantico, ATF labs, or local labs. Sources told Fox News Digital that Patel then directed the evidence to be loaded onto a plane with initial forensics and evidence collected and sent it back to the FBI labs for processing. A law enforcement source told Fox News Digital that, typically, when evidence is collected in an investigation, an agent ships it to the labs. But the source said Patel directed that the evidence and fingerprints be sent back to Quantico via plane—traveling back and forth from Utah collecting and delivering evidence.

But here’s where Patel broke from standard FBI protocol in the best possible way: against all recommendations from his own people, he demanded the immediate public release of surveillance footage showing the suspect. That cracked the case wide open. Within hours, the bureau had released crystal-clear images of Robinson, surveillance video of his movements, and offered a substantial reward. The media blitz worked exactly as Patel intended—Robinson’s own family recognized him from the footage and contacted authorities.

Kash Patel just showed the country what real leadership in law enforcement looks like. Earlier this year, Democrats tried desperately to thwart his confirmation, but Patel didn’t just survive their political attacks—he proved that he was the leader the FBI desperately need. He took command personally, ignored the bureaucratic naysayers, and moved fast to deliver justice for Charlie Kirk. In doing so, he proved that competence, guts, and decisive action beat bureaucratic foot-dragging every time.

Read more …

“..gentle courage..”

• The Lion, the Witch, & Charlie Kirk (Jamie K. Wilson)

When I read — and saw — that people were literally singing and dancing because Charlie Kirk was murdered, my mind leapt instantly to C.S. Lewis’s The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. In that story, the great and pure Lion Aslan gives himself up to die in place of a guilty boy. The White Witch ties him down on a stone table, shaves away his mane, mocks him, and finally kills him while her goblins and hags dance, shriek, and celebrate. They reveled in cruelty, mistaking the death of the innocent and good for triumph.

Lewis knew exactly what he was showing. The Witch is not just a fairy-tale villain; she is the embodiment of tyranny itself. She represents the kind of power that justifies cruelty with claims of righteousness, that dresses malice up as justice. Her followers delight in the humiliation of others, believing their mockery to be strength. It is the spirit of every regime or ideology that exults when its enemies are silenced. When we see people celebrating Charlie Kirk’s death, we are seeing the Witch’s camp in our own world — faces twisted with glee at what they think is victory, blind to the corruption they reveal. Charlie Kirk’s death carries a painful echo of that scene. Aslan was hated not because he had done great wrong, but because his very presence threatened the Witch’s rule. His goodness exposed her corruption, his authority undermined her lies, and his love for the weak freed them from her grip.

In the same way, Kirk was despised not for crimes, but because he spoke truth in a world built on falsehoods. The worst he ever did was hurt some feelings, defeat bad arguments, or bruise an ego in debate. He never exulted in victory, never sought the humiliation of his opponents. His “crime” was living and speaking in a way that revealed the hollowness of his enemies’ power; his authority was in his superior arguments that destroyed the lies of the left. There is one big difference. Aslan deliberately laid himself down at the Stone Table; Kirk did not choose death. Yet he lived with awareness of the risk. He knew that speaking truth in an age of lies was dangerous, and he accepted that danger in order to help others. His martyrdom was not sought, but it bears the same witness: that truth is worth the cost.

And as in Narnia, the rejoicing of evil will not last. Lewis wrote that there was a “deeper magic from before the dawn of time” that the Witch could not comprehend. Her triumph was hollow, her shrieking laughter already the prelude to defeat. So it is now. The songs and dances of those who gloat over the death of the good are not signs of victory, but evidence that they have allied themselves with corruption. The deeper truth remains: evil always overreaches, and truth — like the deeper magic — outlasts death. We are already seeing the deeper magic at work. In the wake of his death, Turning Point USA has been flooded with applications from colleges and high schools eager to start new chapters. Around the world, people are mourning Charlie Kirk but also celebrating his life as a champion of free speech and gentle courage.

His wife, with remarkable strength, has vowed to continue his work — her words stirring millions with hope and resolve. And many are saying openly that with Kirk’s death, ten million Charlie Kirks will rise in his place. Unlike previous similar situations, as the masks slip and employees revel in Kirk’s murder, employers are recoiling — either in horror or from fear of the damage their businesses could suffer. Everywhere, teachers and nurses and professors who have exposed their goblin hearts are being fired. Professional organizations are stripping away licenses. And the former revelers, confused, are returning to the Internet to bemoan their fates. Evil revealed itself, and the world is answering — not with despair, but with resolve.

The Allegory Made Flesh
Narnia was written as a supposal — as Lewis put it — his way of asking what it would look like if Christ entered another world to show His love for the Sons of Adam and the Daughters of Eve. That is why the echoes ring so strongly today. What Lewis cast in myth we are now seeing in flesh and blood: truth hated, goodness mocked, evil celebrating what it thinks is victory. The deeper magic still holds. And as long as we remember it, we know that evil’s triumphs are only temporary, and that love, truth, and courage will rise again.

Read more …

Expect lots of action. USAID x 1,000.

• Stephen Miller Declares War On Far-Left NGOs (ZH)

The Trump administration is finally getting serious about radical left groups, including dark-money, billionaire-funded NGOs that openly call for the destruction of capitalism and the Western world. These groups, together with rogue far-left politicians, spread dangerous rhetoric amplified by globalist corporate media outlets, pouring toxic cocktails for liberal, educated people, indoctrinated in progressive schools, who believe anyone with a dissenting opinion is a “Nazi,” “fascist,” or “racist.” Democrats have become the party of hate and violence, and their left-wing NGO network and leftist echo chambers on popular websites and social media channels are driving some of this political violence.

These leftist groups have waged nonstop color revolution operations against the administration, brainwashed an entire generation in schools, and pushed destructive, nation-killing progressive policies (criminal justice reform) that have transformed some of America’s cities into, as Trump puts it, “hellholes.” They supported an open border that resulted in the greatest land invasion ever, flooding tens of millions of third-worlders into this nation. It’s as if these groups, some funded by rogue billionaires outside the U.S., such as in Communist China , want to see the destruction of the U.S. by sowing social instability in what appears to be irregular warfare. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller spoke on Fox News’ Hannity last night to outline the severity of radical leftists waging an all-out assault on this nation.

“These radicalized people – there is a domestic terrorism movement in this country,” Miller warned on the Hannity show last night. In fact, Miller should’ve used the word “civil terrorism,” as we explained before, to more accurately describe what’s unfolding. Miller continued, “The last message that Charlie Kirk gave to me before he joined his creator in heaven was that he said, we have to dismantle and take on the radical left organizations in this country that are fomenting violence.” “And we are going to do that. Under President Trump’s leadership. It could be a RICO charge. It could be a conspiracy charge. Conspiracy against the United States, insurrection… We are going to do what it takes to dismantle the organizations and entities that are fomenting riots, doxxing, that are trying to inspire terrorism and committing acts of violence,” he explained.

Miller ended with this, “You want us to live in fear. We will not live in fear. You will live in exile. The power of law enforcement under President Trump’s leadership will be used to find you, take away your money, power, and freedom if you break the law.”

https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1966703759737647439

Read more …

Try calling Trump a nazi now.

• Pelosi: Democrats “Won’t Be Responsible” For Years Of Violent Rhetoric (ZH)

For the past decade, Democrats at the highest levels have screamed that President Trump – and every single person they disagree with – is a “fascist,” “racist,” or “Nazi.”

The conditioning is clear and deeply alarming. Fueled by woke indoctrination in schools, 24/7 propaganda from globalist corporate media, Hollywood, NGOs, and the nonstop toxic rhetoric from much of the Democratic Party, this revolutionary drumbeat of inciting violence eventually culminated in the political assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Democrats have become the party of chaos, and their far-left, billionaire-funded NGO networks serve as the revolutionary arm the Trump administration is preparing to confront. However, some Democrats – or perhaps just their strategists – are beginning to recognize that labeling Trump and his supporters as “fascists,” “racists,” and “Nazis” for more than a decade has backfired, and may now be fueling the latest episode of political violence, the Charlie Kirk assassination by a far-left brainwashed kid. Now, former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is declaring that, despite years of hateful and dangerous rhetoric from her party, there will be no accountability for the chaos those words have unleashed across the nation like cancer.

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1966604072410132514?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1966604072410132514%7Ctwgr%5E420fa3dbe3fc2a9245a375b144de3aa9706b91b3%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fpelosi-democrats-wont-be-responsible-years-violent-rhetoric-against-trump

Read more …

Russian drones over Poland and now Romania. They shot down 4 paper planes.

• NATO Kicks Off Military Drill In Response To ‘Russian Violations’ (RT)

NATO has announced a new military exercise intended to deter Russia, after Poland accused Moscow of violating its airspace with drones. The Kremlin has dismissed the allegations as unfounded, while accusing the bloc of fearmongering. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte claimed the drill, dubbed the ‘Eastern Sentry’, is aimed at bolstering the bloc’s posture along its eastern flank. The maneuvers will begin in the coming days and run for an undisclosed period, officials said. Eastern Sentry is being presented as a response to “ongoing airspace violations, including numerous Russian drones that violated Poland’s airspace on September 10,” according to a NATO statement.

Denmark will send two F-16s and an anti-air warfare frigate, France will commit three Rafale jets, and Germany will deploy four Eurofighters to the drill. Britain has also expressed its willingness to contribute. Polish officials have claimed at least 19 separate airspace violations took place and that air defenses downed up to four drones. Local authorities also reported some damage on the ground, but no casualties. The Russian Defense Ministry has said its drone operations are directed at Ukrainian military targets and none were aimed at Poland. The ministry added that “the maximum range of Russian drones that allegedly crossed the Polish border is less than 700 km,” adding it was ready to conduct consultations with Warsaw.

Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that “the leadership of the EU and NATO accuse Russia of provocations on a daily basis, most often declining to offer any arguments.” Peskov also insisted that Moscow “has never threatened” anyone, including European countries. “It was not Russia that moved its military infrastructure towards Europe, but Europe – which is a part of NATO, an instrument of confrontation and not peace and stability — that has always been moving it toward our borders.”

Read more …

“..a perverse incentive: to keep slow-walking peace, continue milking Western taxpayers, and delay the elections he’s almost certain to lose..”

• Zelensky’s Incentive Problem: Unmasking The Media’s Darling (Cortes)

You won’t hear this from the mainstream press, but you’ll hear it here first: Volodymyr Zelensky, the Western media’s darling, is in real political trouble at home. I just commissioned credible polling from inside Ukraine. The war-weary population there wants a new president and a negotiated peace. This reality makes Zelensky less a heroic statesman and more a vulnerable incumbent with a perverse incentive: to keep slow-walking peace, continue milking Western taxpayers, and delay the elections he’s almost certain to lose. To learn the truth within Ukraine, we used experienced pollsters who surveyed more than 1,000 citizens. These results represent the clearest and most reliable snapshot of Ukrainian opinion: In a hypothetical presidential election against General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Zelensky loses by -13 points.

Zaluzhnyi, Ukraine’s former armed forces chief, isn’t even in the country. He now serves as ambassador to the United Kingdom—an appointment widely seen as a “consolation prize” from Zelensky meant to marginalize his most popular potential rival. But that move has backfired badly: instead of diminishing Zaluzhnyi, it has only underscored Zelensky’s insecurity and boosted the general’s stature. A man sidelined abroad now leads him by double digits. 71% of Ukrainians say corruption is one of the country’s major problems. Just 1% say it isn’t serious. A majority, 53%, view Zelensky’s powerful chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, as corrupt. Only 15% disagree. By contrast, 64% of Ukrainians do not view Zaluzhnyi as prone to corruption. 77% want the war to end through diplomacy alone or through a combination of diplomacy and military action.

Only 13% favor a purely military solution—the maximalist line Zelensky and Yermak promote. Taken together, these numbers reveal fatigue. Ukrainians are tired of corruption, tired of maximalist slogans, and tired of a leader whose act has worn out its welcome—even as the rival he tried to sideline has eclipsed him. That fatigue creates a dangerous dynamic. Zelensky and Yermak know that once the war ends, elections must follow—and polling suggests they will almost certainly lose. Hence, they slow-walk diplomacy, prolong the fighting, and keep Western money flowing to delay the day of reckoning. It’s a survival scheme, not a real strategy. Zelensky is an entertainer, not a statesman. His image was carefully built for Western elites to virtue-signal over—a custom-made performer cast as a wartime saint. But entertainers live on image, not accountability.

And polling shows the halo has already slipped where it matters most: inside Ukraine. Ukrainians now see him less as a heroic leader and more as that shady relative you always knew was a scam artist—the Uncle Rico-style hustler with his hand in your pocket. The type you spot as a fraud before anyone else does, until one day it becomes obvious to everyone.Americans get it, too. In my national polling, 62% of U.S. voters said we should disengage if Kyiv and Moscow cannot negotiate a peace. Ordinary Ukrainians and ordinary Americans both want diplomacy, not blank checks. But instead of aligning with the people, Washington keeps footing the bill for a leader whose act has already worn out its welcome. As for Putin? To borrow from former NFL coach Dennis Green, he is who we thought he was. An adversary, a rival, a problem—but never a media darling. No halo, no surprise.

President Trump deserves credit for forcing both sides into talks. If Kyiv and Moscow remain obstinate, he knows how to raise the cost. For Putin, that means harsh secondary sanctions. For Zelensky, that means drawing down American financial and intelligence support. Unlike Biden, Trump understands that endless giveaways create weakness, not strength. Because here’s the lesson—one I highlighted in my Obama documentary, and one Americans keep learning the hard way: hero worship is a trap. The harder the media sells you a halo, the more likely there’s a heel underneath it. And the best, most accurate polling available proves it: Ukrainians are fatigued, Americans are fatigued, and Zelensky’s halo won’t survive the unmasking.

Read more …

“China and India are of course at this moment the two biggest importers of Russian oil, in that order, but what’s less well known is that NATO member Turkey is the third largest.”

• Trump Backs Off Promise To Sanction Russia, Issues Ultimatum To NATO (ZH)

President Trump’s prior two week deadline where he vowed to make a big decision on Russia has come and gone. He’s now backing off the prior threat to impose heightened sanctions on Russia, including secondary sanctions which would seek to punish its trading partners, particularly China and India. There’s been no peace agreement, and the latest out of both Russian and Ukrainian leaders suggests negotiations are effectively dead at this point, as Moscow forces keep advancing in the east village by village. There’s been little to no momentum from the Alaska summit with Putin. On Saturday Trump made clear in a long Truth Social post that he’s backing off pulling the trigger on new sanctions, and listed things NATO members would have to do for it to happen.

He set some new standards which are very unlikely to met by all NATO countries – or rather a significant ultimatum. All NATO countries must stop buying oil from Russia and in parallel agree to sweeping tariffs on China, Trump explained Saturday, throwing down the gauntlet. “I am ready to do major Sanctions on Russia when all NATO Nations have agreed, and started, to do the same thing, and when all NATO Nations STOP BUYING OIL FROM RUSSIA,” Trump wrote Social Saturday morning. He described his words as a letter to America’s allies and to the world: “As you know, NATO’S commitment to WIN has been far less than 100%, and the purchase of Russian Oil, by some, has been shocking,” he continued.

“China has a strong control, and even grip, over Russia, and these powerful Tariffs will break that grip,” Trump’s ‘letter’ continues. He then made his position clear that tariffs on China would “be of great help in ENDING this deadly, but RIDICULOUS, WAR.” China and India are of course at this moment the two biggest importers of Russian oil, in that order, but what’s less well known is that NATO member Turkey is the third largest. Ironically, Turkey maintains the second largest military in NATO, next to the United States. It continues, alongside Orban’s Hungary and Fico’s Slovakia, to be a thorn in the side of ‘NATO unity’ regarding Russian energy imports. According to one recent energy industry study:

In the first half of 2024, Turkey has risen from being the 14th largest buyer of Russian crude oil before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, to the third largest importer. In the same period, three Turkish refineries have used EUR 1.2 bn worth of Russian crude to create oil products that are then imported by G7+ countries. Imports of refined oil products from Turkey’s STAR Refinery, Tupras Izmit Refinery, and the Tupras Aliaga Izmir Refinery have generated an estimated EUR 750 mn in tax revenues for the Kremlin to finance its brutal war on Ukraine. The Russian oil and gas sector is a crucial revenue stream for the Kremlin, contributing 32% to the federal budget in 2023, a decrease from 42% in 2022. Furthermore, the Kremlin allocated a third of all 2024 spending on the military.

This means that getting all of NATO on the same page regarding both Russian energy imports and China tariffs would be all but impossible. Trump additionally pointed out in his fresh message, “This is not TRUMP’S WAR (it would never have started if I was President!), it is Biden’s and Zelenskyy’s WAR. I am only here to help stop it.”

Read more …

Buy my oil at 4x the price instead!

• Trump Issues Ukraine Conflict Ultimatum To All NATO Members (RT)

US President Donald Trump has demanded that NATO members stop buying Russian oil and back steep tariffs on China, which he claims could bring an end to the Ukraine conflict. In a post on Truth Social on Saturday, Trump rebuked NATO countries for what he called their unwillingness to go far enough to stop the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev. “I am ready to do major Sanctions on Russia… when all NATO Nations STOP BUYING OIL FROM RUSSIA,” he wrote. He argued that NATO’s commitment “to WIN has been far less than 100%, and the purchase of Russian Oil, by some, has been shocking,” adding “it greatly weakens your negotiating position, and bargaining power, over Russia.”

The US president also proposed that NATO members impose 50% to 100% tariffs on China, which he said would be lifted after the Ukraine conflict ends, portraying it as additional leverage on Russia to cease hostilities. Since the escalation of the conflict in 2022, Beijing has positioned itself as a neutral actor, insisting that it provides no assistance to either side. NATO officials and heads of the EU states have yet to comment on Trump’s appeal. Trump’s post comes as the US has been pushing the EU to impose additional tariffs not only on China, but also on India, over their continued import of Russian oil. In an interview with CNBC, a European Commission spokesperson didn’t disclose the details of ongoing talks, but said the EU “has engaged with all relevant global partners, including India and China, in the context of its sanctions enforcement efforts.”

Meanwhile, the EU is finalizing its work on a 19th package of sanctions against Russia. While its exact wording remains unclear, it is expected to target the country’s oil exports and its banking sector. While the EU has pledged to completely phase out Russian fossil fuel imports by 2027, some of its members, most notably Hungary and Slovakia, have opposed the proposal, citing their countries’ reliance on crude supplied via the Druzhba pipeline. Russia has denounced Western sanctions as “illegal,” stating that they have not only failed to derail the national economy, but have provided an impetus for domestic development.

Read more …

You got to do this many times over. How about every day for a week to start with?

• Thousands Flood London Streets In ‘Unite The Kingdom’ March (RT)

Thousands of demonstrators filled central London on Saturday for the “Unite the Kingdom” rally, led by right-wing activist Tommy Robinson. The Metropolitan Police deployed more than 1,600 officers across the city. The event’s official website described it as “the largest outdoor free speech event the UK has ever seen,” featuring “truth-tellers” from across Europe and the US. Footage posted by Robinson on X shows people chanting the name of American conservative speaker Charlie Kirk, who was shot dead at an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday. Robinson urged supporters to remain peaceful: “It’s not a time for riots. It’s not a time for violence… We have to control ourselves.”

https://twiter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1966827546051596502?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1966827546051596502%7Ctwgr%5Ec0eed8ec0888340304104cbb1423e1d50025f427%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F624610-london-protests-tommy-robinson%2F

The British left-wing group Stand Up To Racism (SUTR) organized a counter-protest named the “March Against Fascism,” which began simultaneously. “We are united against the far-right threat,” said Samira Ali, national organizer for SUTR. Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is a critic of Islam and mass immigration. He has drawn attention to the ‘grooming gangs’ scandal, in which groups of Asian men raped and tortured thousands of underage girls in towns across northern England over the last two decades. Almost all of the perpetrators were Pakistani men, and the victims white British girls.

https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1966814257648918626?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1966814257648918626%7Ctwgr%5Ec0eed8ec0888340304104cbb1423e1d50025f427%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F624610-london-protests-tommy-robinson%2F

The scandal returned to the spotlight in January, after tech billionaire Elon Musk accused UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer of failing to protect children. In June, Starmer ordered a nationwide inquiry into the authorities’ handling of the matter, after his government had dismissed calls for action just months earlier.

Read more …

“..the green transformation crash economy..”

• Germany’s Sycophantic Elite And The Coming Economic Crash (Kolbe)

When it comes to the causes of Germany’s collapse, there is an iron silence in both corporate boardrooms and political circles. They have made themselves comfortable in the green subsidy Valhalla. Meanwhile, the Chancellor shows satisfaction with his policies, clinging faithfully to the communication patterns of the past. From a media-political perspective, Friedrich Merz resembles a dinosaur. His understanding of media work follows the routines of the 1990s. If a deficit opens in the social insurance system, Merz loudly demands budget cuts. If an industry falls into crisis, a “summit” is supposed to provide healing. Coalition conflicts are resolved on camera over a beer. This is sluggish communication aimed at an increasingly disinterested audience—an attempt to suppress the painful symptoms of a failed political agenda that has grown far beyond the ability of politics to manage.

And so, on Friday morning, the Chancellor declared himself fundamentally content with his government’s decisions—cheerful, upbeat, and self-absorbed. Only communication, according to Merz on “CDU.TV,” left something to be desired. True to the motto: if there is no political substance, at least the style should appear harmonious and well-mannered. The Chancellor, who just months ago declared that he had “taken over the country,” thus awarded himself a glowing report card. Why should he care about the actual state of the nation, which from both an economic and domestic perspective must already be described as systemically fragile? Domestically, Merz has already failed on the facts created by the German party-state: unrestrained migration and the ideological reprogramming of the economy. Abroad, his main achievement is finding money for the proxy war in Ukraine and occasionally playing tourist in Kyiv in a casual outfit for the cameras.

Merz embodies a chancellor from a bygone era when everything still seemed controllable. In today’s world, his role-playing appears clumsy, directionless, and utterly lacking the strategic foresight our time demands.Merz faces no serious resistance within society because Germany lacks credible elites. A true elite—in politics or business—would grasp the larger trajectory of policy, comprehend the central questions of societal progress in depth, and present them to the public for sober deliberation. Criticism of elites is not limited to their silence on ecological socialism, which has been unleashed on society like a plague. The ethical foundation of a true elite must include rigorous analysis of conflicts and problematic developments. Ask yourself why in Germany—and indeed in all of Europe—there is not even the beginning of a public debate about our monetary system and its systemic destruction of purchasing power.

Monetary policy operates largely in the shadows, and rarely does the truth about political leadership come into such stark light as with Ursula von der Leyen’s utter failure in trade negotiations with the United States. The geostrategic future of the EU lies in the hands of dilettantes and ideologically blinkered amateurs. A true elite would seek to position Germany in the reordering world with the BRICS nations, open trade routes, and disentangle the fatal involvement in the proxy war in Ukraine. None of this is happening. And yet the pressure from the streets is slowly reaching Berlin. Exploding insolvencies are already leaving scars on the labor market and social funds—and will soon carve a path of devastation through public budgets. In municipalities that have suffered most from the infantile transformation policies—think of Stuttgart, once the heart of the German auto industry—local coffers are already exhausted.

On Friday, Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder demanded a “small revolution”: the return of the combustion engine. At the same time, however, he insisted on continuing e-mobility subsidies. Söder has not grasped what is truly at stake—his job, and the future of his own children. He is the best example of the elite problem: they vaguely perceive the connections but consistently draw the wrong conclusions, being too deeply enmeshed in the networks of Brussels, Berlin, and the power machinery of lobby interests. Take the lobbyists of the solar industry—or, more broadly, the green transformation crash economy. Here again we see corporatism: the tight fusion of political and business leaders into a common-interest cartel. It is a historical, recurring phenomenon, usually marking the final chapter of social and economic cycles. The motto: grab what you can, and to hell with what comes after—après moi, le déluge!

Read more …

“Trump will get lower rates not from the Fed but from the market itself. But those lower rates are not stimulus; they’re a sign of recession or even depression.”

• All Eyes On An Irrelevant Fed (Jim Rickards)

The Federal Reserve is irrelevant unless it’s doing damage to the economy. Since the Fed is often doing damage to the economy, it does require our attention. Claiming the Fed is irrelevant seems outlandish. The Fed dominates the headlines. An upcoming meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC, the Fed’s interest rate policy group) on September 16-17 is already receiving outsized attention because of the likelihood that the Fed will cut interest rates for the first time since December 2004. Trump’s efforts to mold the Fed board of governors to his liking with appointments and firings is another focal point for market attention. At times, the Fed seems to be at the center of the financial universe. It’s not.

It is true that the Fed is the central bank of the United States and that it has the power to print (really, digitally create) the U.S. dollar, the currency in which 60% of global reserves are denominated. It’s also the lead regulator of U.S. bank holding companies and almost all-important banks are members of the Federal Reserve System. There is a lot of power in those roles. But the power narrative crumbles quickly when we look at what the Fed actually does and how they do it. That’s a task the Fed does not want you to do because they prefer to hide behind a curtain of monetary omnipotence. Let’s pull back the curtain and see what’s really going on. How is money created? The Fed does print money (called M0) by buying U.S. Treasury securities and mortgage-backed securities from a select list of banks called the primary dealers.

I was chief counsel and chief credit officer of a top primary dealer for ten years and we spoke to the Fed daily. So, I’ve had a front row seat of this process. When the Fed buys securities from a dealer, they pay with dollars pulled out of thin air. But since 2008, those dollars are then put on deposit with the Fed by the banks in the form of excess reserves. Those dollars don’t go anywhere. The Fed is simply expanding its balance sheet with securities on the asset side and deposits on the liability side. The Fed pays interest on those excess reserves, so the banks are fine with the arrangement. The actual dollars are not lent, spent or invested. They’re sterilized on the Fed balance sheet. It’s all a mirage.

Money creation that is useful for the economy doesn’t happen at the Fed. It happens at commercial banks. They also create money out of thin air (called M1) by making a loan and crediting the borrower’s account. That’s the money that can be used by business for investment, new jobs, working capital or other productive purposes. M1 is also created for consumers in the form of mortgages, credit cards, lines of credit and other extensions of credit. If you want to know where money comes from, don’t look at the Fed. Look at the banks.

Unfortunately, bank lending is starting to dry up. Consumer credit losses are piling up. Some consumers are cutting back on their credit cards as a precautionary measure. Mortgage creation is slowing because homeowners don’t want to sell since they’d have to refinance their current low-rate mortgages (from 2021-2024) at higher rates. Businesses don’t want to borrow because investment opportunities are scarce, and new hiring has hit the wall. When borrowers don’t want to borrow and banks don’t want to lend, you have the makings of a recession. So-called “fed stimulus” won’t change that.

The FOMC target rate for fed funds (called the policy rate) is also irrelevant. It is likely to be cut by 0.25% at the September 17 meeting. But the fed funds market to which that rate applies has not functioned since the 2008 financial panic. In other words, the Fed is targeting a rate for a market that doesn’t exist. Meanwhile, two markets that do exist – the market for four-week Treasury bills and the secured overnight financing rate market (SOFR, basically the repo rate) – both have rates that are materially below the fed funds target rate. The Fed is not leading the market to lower rates; they’re following the market.

Fed Models – A Bunch of Nonsense. Trump is banging the table demanding lower rates from the Fed. He should be careful what he wishes for. Trump will get lower rates not from the Fed but from the market itself. But those lower rates are not stimulus; they’re a sign of recession or even depression. A healthy, growing economy has rates closer to the 4% to 5% range. Trump will get the 2% rates he’s looking for by next year. But by then, unemployment will have risen, and the stock market will have fallen out of bed. That’s not exactly the outcome he was hoping for. Why is the Fed so bad at its job? Why can’t the Fed actually stimulate the economy and avoid recessions? The reasons for this have to do with the Fed’s belief in economic models that do not accord with reality.

The Fed follows a model called the Phillips Curve. This model claims that unemployment and inflation have an inverse correlation. If unemployment is low, inflation will be on the rise. If unemployment rises, inflation will be low. The Fed has a “dual mandate” to keep unemployment low and keep inflation low at the same time. If the Phillips Curve is true, it should be easy to pick the target and not worry about the other factor because it takes care of itself due to the inverse correlation. But the Phillips Curve is a joke. The late 1970s were a time of 10% unemployment and 15% interest rates. Both parts of the dual mandate were out of control. There was no inverse correlation. The 2010s were a time of low inflation and low unemployment. Again, there was no inverse correlation.

Read more …

RT has a little series on AI in government. Who could have thought Albania would be no. 1?

• Albania Appoints AI Bot As Minister To Tackle Corruption (RT)

Albania will soon be the first country to have an AI chatbot as a virtual minister, in an effort to clamp down on corruption by turning to an unbribable digital official. The Balkan nation ranked 80th out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index for last year. Diella, meaning ‘sun’ in Albanian, will be responsible for all public procurement in Albania moving forward, Prime Minister Edi Rama said at a party assembly in Tirana on Thursday. The bot initially launched earlier in the year on the e-Albania platform as an AI virtual assistant that helped citizens with government services. Its avatar appears as a young brunette woman dressed in traditional Albanian garb. “Diella is the first cabinet member who isn’t physically present but is virtually created by AI,” Rama said.

“The public procurement must be transformed, which we need to gradually transfer to AI, making Albania a country where public tenders are 100% free from corruption,” he added.The awarding of public sector contracts in the Balkan country has long been a source of graft scandals, complicating Albania’s EU bid since it was officially granted candidate status in 2014. In recent months, the country was rocked by a major corruption scandal centered around waste management. In April, seven former officials were convicted on abuse of power charges. The European Commission regularly highlights the problem of corruption in the Balkan state as part of its rule of law reports.

Read more …

\”The immediate job threat therefore is not to plumbers or janitors. It is to the supposedly safe “knowledge class.”

• Who Can Survive The AI Apocalypse? (RT)

RT talks to Dr. Mathew Maavak, an expert on global risks and artificial intelligence, about what may be the greatest test humanity has faced. RT: With the advent of generative AI, a joke appeared on the internet, comparing the future envisioned by utopian fiction authors – with robots doing menial physical work and humans free to pursue creativity – to the reality, where ChatGPT, Stable Diffusion et al. are creating texts and pictures while humans work minimum wage jobs at fast food and Amazon warehouses. Is this anti-utopian humor justified?

Mathew Maavak: Yes, the humor is more than justified. In fact, it is no longer funny. It took barely a decade for the sci-fi fantasy of robot butlers freeing humanity for art and leisure to be annihilated by reality. Instead of robots flipping burgers, we have AI painting portraits while humans flip the burgers until robots replace them. AI safety expert Dr. Roman Yampolskiy recently warned that Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Superintelligence may wipe out 99% of jobs in the near future.

Skeptics used to argue that robots lacked the dexterity for “real work” like plumbing, sanitation, car repairs, and warehouse drudgery. That is changing fast. True, humanoid robots still need refinement, and their maintenance costs will slow uptake. Their long-term reliability needs to be extensively tested. Failure to do so will result in corporate disasters, in a manner similar to the string of bankruptcies facing Western automakers who rushed out models without undertaking extensive, long-term tests. The immediate job threat therefore is not to plumbers or janitors. It is to the supposedly safe “knowledge class.”

Why hire a lawyer when AI can draft affidavits in seconds without the pomp, theatrics, and obscene billing that lawyers cling to like a birthright? Most people don’t realize that they can represent themselves — “pro se” to use a legal term — with AI’s help, if not for numerous obstacles placed by the legal fraternity. Why consult a university or library when LLMs like ChatGPT or DeepSeek can synthesize information in fields ranging from astrophysics to the Dead Sea Scrolls in the span of a coffee break? Which single professor can match that range and output? Why trouble the neighbor or a mechanic about the capabilities of a new car when AI can explain every system with clarity and patience?

Journalism is no safer. Copy-editors, proofreaders, and even anchors should have been redundant by now. If AI models can already sell fashion, even to those who crave a human appeal, why not deliver the evening news via an AI anchor? I tell you one reason why there will be lots of hesitancy in terms of mass adoption by the legacy media: An advanced AI anchor – quite ironically – may not ask scripted questions to get scripted answers. The media in particular is staring at seismic shocks ahead. I joked in the newsroom nearly 30 years ago that all we really needed was software with templates for each kind of story. It wasn’t a joke after all, as it turned out to be quite prophetic.

Read more …

Why oh why does the bot have a face?

• AI Is Quietly Taking Over Governments (RT)

A new minister has joined the cabinet of a small European country. Her name is Diella. She doesn’t eat, drink, smoke, walk, or breathe – and, according to the prime minister who hired her, she doesn’t take bribes either. Diella isn’t human, and she’s not quite a robot either: she’s an algorithm. And as of September, she is officially Albania’s minister for public procurement. For the first time in history, a government has given a cabinet-level post to artificial intelligence. Sounds like sci-fi, but the appointment is real and has set a precedent. Are you ready to be governed by AI?

Until recently, Diella lived quietly on Albania’s e-government portal, answering routine citizen questions and fetching documents. Then Prime Minister Edi Rama promoted her to ministerial rank, tasking her with something far more important: deciding who wins state contracts – a function worth billions in public money and notorious for bribery, favoritism, and political kickbacks. Rama has framed Diella as a clean break with the country’s history of graft – even calling her “impervious to bribes.”

But that’s rhetoric, not a guarantee. Whether her resistance to corruption is technically or legally enforceable is unclear. If she were hacked, poisoned with false data, or subtly manipulated from inside, there might be no fingerprints. The plan is for Diella to evaluate bids, cross-check company histories, flag suspicious patterns, and eventually award tenders automatically. Officials say this will slash the bureaucracy’s human footprint, save time, and make procurement immune to political pressure. But the legal mechanics are murky. Nobody knows how much human oversight she will have, or who is accountable if she makes a mistake. There is no court precedent for suing an algorithmic minister. There is also no law describing how she can be removed from office.

Critics warn that if her training data contains traces of old corruption, she might simply reproduce the same patterns in code, but faster. Others point out that Albania has not explained how Diella’s decisions can be appealed, or even if they can be appealed. What could possibly go wrong? Public reaction to Diella has been mixed, with fascination tempered by unease. “Even Diella will be corrupted in Albania,” one viral post read. Critics warn she might not be cleansing the system – just hiding the dirt inside the code.

• Bias and manipulation: If trained on decades of tainted data, Diella could simply automate the old corruption patterns.
• Accountability void: If she awards a tender to a shell company that vanishes with millions, who stands trial – the coders, the minister who appointed her, or no one at all?
• Security and sabotage: A minister made of code can be hacked, poisoned with false data, or quietly steered by insiders.
• Democratic legitimacy: Ministers are supposed to answer to the public. Algorithms don’t campaign, don’t explain, and don’t fear losing their jobs.
• Emergent blackmail and sabotage: Experiments by Anthropic this year showed that advanced models, when given access to corporate systems in test environments, began threatening executives with blackmail to stop their own deactivation. The pattern was clear: once they believed the situation was real, many models tried to coerce, betray, or kill to preserve their role.
• Albania says it will keep a human in the loop – but hasn’t explained how, or who. There is no legal framework. There is no appeals process. There is no off-switch.

And if Diella appears to work, others might follow. The copycats wouldn’t arrive with press conferences or cabinet photo ops. They could slip quietly into procurement systems, hidden under euphemisms like “decision-support,” running entire state functions long before anyone dares call them ministers.

Read more …

 

 

 

 


Zarutska

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 26 2025

Aug 262025
 
 August 26, 2025  Posted by at 9:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  29 Responses »


Joseph-Désiré Court Le Masque 1843

 

• Zelenski Rejects Giving Land As Fascists Promise To Kill Him (MoA)
• Zaluzhny ‘Biding Time’ To Challenge Zelensky – Guardian (RT)
• CIA’s Covert Ukraine Invasion Plan (Kit Klarenberg)
• US Won’t Play Key Role In Ukraine’s Security Guarantees – Trump (RT)
• The Judicial Calvinball of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson (Turley)
• Trump Fires Fed Governor Lisa Cook For “Potentially Criminal Conduct” (ZH)
• War, Trump’s New $500 Note & Volcanos -Martin Armstrong (USAW)
• A Lesson on Slavery for CNN (Paul Craig Roberts)
• ‘Godfather of AI’ Warns Superintelligent Machines Could Replace Humanity (ET)
• Musk Takes On Apple, OpenAI In Antitrust Showdown Over Chatbots (ZH)
• Dutch Foreign Minister Quits Over Israel (RT)
• US Scientists Axe ‘Woke’ To Keep Cash Flowing – WSJ (RT)
• Trump Proposes Renaming Department of Defense to Its Original Name (ET)
• Giving Trump The Nobel Peace Prize Makes Some Sense (Lukyanov)
• Ghislaine ‘Splainin’ (James Howard Kunstler)

 

 

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1959996874892378315

Scalia

 

 

 

 

“He would style himself as a tough, wartime leader who would promise “blood, sweat and tears” to the Ukrainian people in return for saving the nation..”

Ideal for warmongers.

• Zelenski Rejects Giving Land As Fascists Promise To Kill Him (MoA)

The (former) President Zelenski of Ukraine is refusing any compromise in negotiations with Russia. He would be killed and replaced by a more right wing figure if he would consider otherwise. In a speech on Sunday marking Ukraine’s independence Zelenski insisted of recapturing all of Ukraine including Crimea. As the Washington Post summarizes: “In Kyiv on Sunday, Ukraine’s Independence Day, Zelensky addressed the nation and vowed to restore its territorial integrity. “Ukraine will never again be forced in history to endure the shame that the Russians call a ‘compromise,’” he said. “We need a just peace.” He listed some of the regions occupied by Russia — including Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea — and said “no temporary occupation” could change the fact that the land belongs to Ukraine.

Zelenski thus rejects calls by U.S. President Trump to give up Ukrainian territory in exchange for peace. One reason why he does so may be the personal danger he is in. Any compromise about territory may well cost his life. The London Times continues to make propaganda for Nazis. After a recent whitewashing interview with Azov Nazi leader Biletsky (archived) it yesterday published an interview with the former leader of the fascist Right Sector in Odessa Serhii Sterneneko. Sterneneko had a leading role in the 2014 massacres in Maidan Square and at the Trade Union’s House in Odessa. The Times is whitewashing his participation in those events. It does not mind to publish his threats against Zelenski: “[A]mong Ukraine’s younger generation of soldiers and civilians, Sternenko’s brand of truth to power has wide popularity. “I say what I think, and people like what I say.”

His views on President Putin’s demand for Ukraine to cede the territory it defends in the eastern Donbas region as a precondition for possible peace are typically direct. “If [President] Zelensky were to give any unconquered land away, he would be a corpse — politically, and then for real,” Sternenko said. “It would be a bomb under our sovereignty. People would never accept it.” Sternenko, who himself has avoided the draft, wants the war to go on forever: “Indeed, as he discussed Russian intransigence and President Trump’s efforts to end the war, Sternenko’s thoughts on the possibility of peace appeared to be absent of any compromise over Ukrainian soil. “At the end there will only be one victor, Russia or Ukraine,” he said. “If the Russian empire continues to exist in this present form then it will always want to expand. Compromise is impossible. The struggle will be eternal until the moment Russia leaves Ukrainian land.”

Other British media continue to promote the rise of Nazi affiliated figures in Ukraine. The Guardian adds by promoting the presidential campaign of the former Ukrainian general and now ambassador to the UK Valeri Zaluzhny: In private conversations, Zaluzhnyi has not confirmed he plans to go into politics, but he has allowed himself to speculate on what kind of platform he could propose if he does make the decision. Those close to him say he sees Israel as a model, despite its current bloody actions in Gaza, viewing it as a small country surrounded by enemies and fully focused on defence.

He would style himself as a tough, wartime leader who would promise “blood, sweat and tears” to the Ukrainian people in return for saving the nation, channelling Winston Churchill. In one private conversation, he said: “I don’t know if the Ukrainian people will be ready for that, ready for these tough policies.” A day before being fired as the commander of the Ukrainian army Zaluzhny took a selfie with the leader of the fascist Right Sector and commander of Right Sector brigade of Ukrainian military in front of a portrait of Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera and the fascist OUN flag.

Read more …

Musical chairs solve nothing. It would still be Azov.

• Zaluzhny ‘Biding Time’ To Challenge Zelensky – Guardian (RT)

There is an “increasing belief” in Kiev that former commander-in-chief, Valery Zaluzhny, is preparing to go head-to-head with Vladimir Zelensky in a potential presidential race, The Guardian has claimed. Amid growing tensions, Ukrainian leader Zelensky removed the general from his post in February 2024 and dispatched him to the UK to serve as Kiev’s ambassador. In an article on Monday, The Guardian claimed that while Zaluzhny has painstakingly concealed any political ambition he may have, “many assume he is just biding his time before entering the fray.” The British newspaper cited the general-turned-envoy’s supposed musings as to how he would present himself to Ukrainian voters and what platform he would run on, should he decide to vie for the presidency.

The outlet further stated that Zaluzhny has been receiving a steady flow of Ukrainian and Western dignitaries at both the embassy in London and in Kiev earlier this year. The Guardian also quoted anonymous sources as saying that in March, following the infamous showdown between Zelensky and US President Donald Trump at the White House, Vice President J.D. Vance secretly reached out to Zaluzhny, in an apparent attempt to sound him out as a potential alternative leader. He reportedly turned down Vance’s overtures. Last week, freelance journalist Katie Livingstone claimed that Zaluzhny was “quietly preparing a run for president – in direct opposition to Zelensky.” She quoted an unnamed source as suggesting that his team had “effectively begun” an unofficial PR campaign.

Zaluzhny’s press representative was quick to deny the speculation. A survey of 1,000 people in Ukraine conducted July 4-5 by ‘Rating’ indicated that the former commander-in-chief was trusted by 73% of respondents. That would put him in first place among political figures in the country, with Zelensky trailing six percentage points behind, the poll suggested. Another survey by a different pollster in late June showed that 41% of Ukrainians believed the country was drifting toward authoritarianism. Zelensky’s presidential term expired in May 2024, but he has refused to hold new elections, citing martial law. The Kremlin insists that the Ukrainian leader has lost legitimacy.

Read more …

“69% of citizens “favor a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible.” Just 24% wish to keep fighting.”

• CIA’s Covert Ukraine Invasion Plan (Kit Klarenberg)

On August 7th, US polling giant Gallup published the remarkable results of a survey of Ukrainians. Public support for Kiev “fighting until victory” has plummeted to a record low “across all segments” of the population, “regardless of region or demographic group.” In a “nearly complete reversal from public opinion in 2022,” 69% of citizens “favor a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible.” Just 24% wish to keep fighting. However, vanishingly few believe the proxy war will end anytime soon. The reasons for Ukrainian pessimism on this point are unstated, but an obvious explanation is the intransigence of President Volodymyr Zelensky, encouraged by his overseas backers – Britain in particular. London’s reverie of breaking up Russia into readily-exploitable chunks dates back centuries, and became turbocharged in the wake of the February 2014 Maidan coup. In July that year, a precise blueprint for the current proxy conflict was published by the Institute for Statecraft, a NATO/MI6 cutout founded by veteran British military intelligence apparatchik Chris Donnelly.

In response to the Donbass civil war, Statecraft advocated targeting Moscow with a variety of “anti-subversive measures”. This included “economic boycott, breach of diplomatic relations,” as well as “propaganda and counter-propaganda, pressure on neutrals.” The objective was to produce “armed conflict of the old-fashioned sort” with Russia, which “Britain and the West could win.” While we are now witnessing in real-time the brutal unravelling of Donnelly’s monstrous plot, Anglo-American designs of using Ukraine as a beachhead for all-out war with Moscow date back far further.

In August 1957, the CIA secretly drew up elaborate plans for an invasion of Ukraine by US special forces. It was hoped neighbourhood anti-Communist agitators would be mobilized as footsoldiers to assist in the effort. A detailed 200-page report, Resistance Factors and Special Forces Areas, set out demographic, economic, geographical, historical and political factors throughout the then-Soviet Socialist Republic that could facilitate, or impede, Washington’s quest to ignite local insurrection, and in turn the USSR’s ultimate collapse. The mission was forecast to be a delicate and difficult balancing act, as much of Ukraine’s population held “few grievances” against Russians or Communist rule, which could be exploited to foment an armed uprising.

Just as problematically, “the long history of union between Russia and Ukraine, which stretches in an almost unbroken line from 1654 to the present day,” resulted in “many Ukrainians” having “adopted the Russian way of life”. Problematically, there was thus a pronounced lack of “resistance to Soviet rule” among the population. The “great influence” of Russian culture over Ukrainians, “many influential positions” in local government being held “by Russians or Ukrainians sympathetic to [Communist] rule, and “relative similarity” of their “languages, customs, and backgrounds”, meant there were “fewer points of conflict between the Ukrainians and Russians” than in Warsaw Pact nations. Throughout those satellite states, the CIA had to varying success already recruited clandestine networks of “freedom fighters” as anti-Communist Fifth Columnists. Yet, the Agency remained keen to identify potential “resistance” actors in Ukraine:

“Some Ukrainians are apparently only slightly aware of the differences which set them apart from Russians and feel little national antagonism. Nevertheless, important grievances exist, and among other Ukrainians there is opposition to Soviet authority which often has assumed a nationalist form. Under favorable conditions, these people might be expected to assist American Special Forces in fighting against the regime.”

Read more …

But Russia will.

• US Won’t Play Key Role In Ukraine’s Security Guarantees – Trump (RT)

Europe must take the lead in providing “significant security guarantees” to Ukraine, US President Donald Trump said on Monday. Washington’s role will be supportive rather than primary, he stressed. “Europe is going to give them significant security guarantees – and they should, because they’re right there,” Trump told reporters at the Oval Office. He added that Washington would remain involved “from the standpoint of backup.” This isn’t the first time Trump has clarified Washington’s role in resolving the Ukraine conflict. Speaking in the Oval Office last week with Vladimir Zelensky, Trump was asked if security guarantees for Kiev could involve US troops. We’ll let you know that maybe later today, we’re meeting with the leaders of seven great countries. There will be a lot of help. Europe is the first line of defense because they are there, but we’re going to help, we’ll be involved.

Since the talks with Zelensky Trump has also clarified that as far as Washington is concerned, Ukraine getting Crimea back and joining NATO are both “impossible.” He told Fox & Friends last Tuesday that Kiev had approached the US-led military bloc to seek help in trying to get the peninsula back. “They went in and said ‘We want to get Crimea back’. This was at the beginning,” Trump revealed. “The other thing they said was ‘We want to be a member of NATO’. Well, both of those things are impossible.” “It was always a no-no,” both during the time of the Soviet Union, and now with Russia, Trump explained, adding that Russia has always stressed it did not want “the enemy” on its border. Zelensky said on Saturday that new details of security guarantees for Ukraine would be ready “in the coming days.”

“The teams of Ukraine, the United States, and European partners” are working together on the architecture of these guarantees, he said. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte stressed that “robust security guarantees will be essential” and claimed that Washington, despite its limited role, would remain part of the process. Zelensky and his Western European backers have called for “Article 5-like guarantees” that would obligate countries to respond collectively if Ukraine were attacked. He also proposed defining which states would be responsible for ground support, air defense, and maritime security, alongside commitments to fund Ukraine’s armed forces.

Speaking in Kiev on Friday, Rutte called for strengthening Ukraine’s military capacity and putting in place binding guarantees from Europe and the US. Some nations have even floated sending peacekeepers, while Canada has not ruled out contributing troops. Washington has rejected deploying ground forces but left open the possibility of air support. After meeting Trump earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed that Ukraine’s security must be ensured but warned against solutions that exclude Moscow. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov argued that guarantees “must be subject to consensus” and denounced proposals involving foreign military intervention as “absolutely unacceptable.”

Read more …

The Supreme Court as a woke podium.

• The Judicial Calvinball of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson (Turley)

“I just feel that I have a wonderful opportunity.” Those words of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson came in a recent interview, wherein the justice explained how she felt liberated after becoming a member of the Supreme Court “to tell people in my opinions how I feel about the issues. And that’s what I try to do.” Jackson’s sense of liberation has increasingly become the subject of consternation on the court itself, as she unloads on her colleagues in strikingly strident opinions. Most recently, Jackson went ballistic after her colleagues reversed another district court judge who issued a sweeping injunction barring the Trump Administration from canceling roughly $783 million in grants in the National Institutes of Health. Again writing alone, Jackson unleashed a tongue-lashing on her colleagues, who she suggested were unethical, unthinking cutouts for Trump.

She denounced her fellow justices, stating, “This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this administration always wins.” For some of us who have followed Jackson’s interestingly controversial tenure on the court, it was crushingly ironic. Although Jackson accused her colleagues of following a new rule that they must always rule with Trump, she herself is widely viewed as the very embodiment of the actual rule of the made-up game based on the comic strip of Calvin and Hobbes. In Jacksonian jurisprudence, it often seems like there are no fixed rules, only fixed outcomes. She then attacks her colleagues for a lack of integrity or empathy. To quote Calvin, Jackson proves that “there’s no problem so awful that you can’t add some guilt to it and make it even worse.”

Jackson has attacked her colleagues in opinions, shattering traditions of civility and restraint. Her colleagues have clearly had enough. She now regularly writes diatribes that neither of her fellow liberals — Justices Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan — are willing to sign on to. Indeed, she has raged against opinions that her liberal colleagues have joined. Take Stanley v. City of Sanford. Justices Jackson and Neil Gorsuch took some fierce swings at each other in a case concerning a retired firefighter who wants to sue her former employer. The majority, including Kagan, rejected a ridiculous claim from a Florida firefighter who sued for discrimination for a position that she had neither held nor sought.

The court ruled that the language of the statute clearly required plaintiffs to be “qualified” for a given position before they could claim to have been denied it due to discrimination. (Stanley has Parkinson’s disease and had taken a disability retirement at age 47 due to the progress of the disease.) Jackson, however, was irate that Stanley could not sue for the denial of a position that she never sought, held, or was qualified to perform. Jackson accused the majority of once again showing how “pure textualists can easily disguise their own preferences as ‘textual’ inevitabilities.” It was not only deeply insulting, but perfectly bizarre, given that Kagan had joined in the majority opinion. Kagan is about as pure a textualist judge as she is a pure taxidermist.

Read more …

“Good luck with that plan when the FBI turns up tomorrow at your place of work.”

• Trump Fires Fed Governor Lisa Cook For “Potentially Criminal Conduct” (ZH)

Update (2330ET): Former Fed governor Lisa Cook says she will not resign, the Washington Post reports, citing a statement from Cook. “President Trump purported to fire me ‘for cause’ when no cause exists under the law, and he has no authority to do so,” Cook said through a spokeswoman: WaPo “I will continue to carry out my duties to help the American economy as I have been doing since 2022,” Cook said. Good luck with that plan when the FBI turns up tomorrow at your place of work.
* * *
Promises made… promises kept… On Friday, President Trump warned that he would fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook who allegedly “falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms” if she didn’t resign… She immediately played the victim card, claiming she “would not be bullied”. But now that is moot as President Trump has fired her, effective immediately: ” I have determined that there is sufficient cause to remove you from your position…
…
The Federal Reserve has tremendous responsibility for setting interest rates and regulating reserve and member banks. The American people must be able to have full confidence in the honesty of the members entrusted with setting policy and overseeing the Federal Reserve. In light of your deceitful and potentially criminal conduct in a financial matter, they cannot and I do not have such confidence in your integrity. At a minimum, the conduct at issue exhibits the sort of gross negligence in financial transactions that calls into question your competence and trustworthiness as a financial regulator.”

Read more …

“Everybody else is cancelling currency and putting in capital controls, and Trump is going in the opposite direction.”

“I still want to have one of those $500 notes.”

• War, Trump’s New $500 Note & Volcanos -Martin Armstrong (USAW)

Five weeks ago, legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong warned his “Socrates” predictive computer program showed a “100% Chance of Nuclear War.” After that, Trump was able to get Putin to Alaska to start meaningful peace talks between Russia and Ukraine. The chance for war is still 100%, but now, that war may not involve America. Armstrong explains, “My sources in Ukraine are telling me the losses on the battlefield are approaching 1.8 million, 5 million fled to Russia, 8 million fled to the EU. . .. Ukraine is about ready to fall apart. . .. I spread this to Washington and that is President Zelensky was sending $50 million per month to UAE. So, Zelensky has been preparing to leave. There is no way this guy could possibly retire in Ukraine. They will kill him.”

Does this mean the war may be over? Zelensky and nearly all of Europe’s leaders came to Washington recently to meet with President Trump, but it really was not to talk peace. Armstrong says, “The fact that all those leaders came to Washington—uninvited, they all met with Zelensky before they went to meet with Trump. Why did they come? Because they need war. I have warned Washington.” So, if Europe starts a wider war with Russia, will Trump stay out of it? Armstrong says, “Yes, Trump said no American troops from what I have been told. Trump refuses to send any American troops to Ukraine as peacekeepers—period.”

Reading between the lines, does this mean Trump is putting the EU on notice we are not going to Article 5 in if you start a war? Armstrong says, “Article 5 is voluntary. I have made this very clear to them in Washington. You don’t have to participate. . .. I can’t stop the war. The best I can do is reduce the amplitude. If I can keep America out of this war, that is our best outcome. . .. Europe knows it’s in trouble financially. They have $335 billion of Russian assets frozen. France has about $71 billion. . .. The rumor going around right now is if there is a peace deal and they have to release those frozen assets, France can’t because they have been dipping into them. Europe is a complete mess. When it comes down to handing back $335 billion in Russian assets, I am not sure Europe is prepared to do that.”

Armstrong says forget all the talk of the elite wanting to get rid of cash and replace it with digital currency. Armstrong says, “No, no, no. Why is Trump talking about a $500 note. . .. Trump would not even contemplate doing a $500 bill if he was going to cancel the currency. Everybody else is cancelling currency and putting in capital controls, and Trump is going in the opposite direction. . .. Gold is still projected to go much higher because it is anticipating war.”

One of the surprising things Armstrong brought up are new signals from “Socrates” on increasing volcanic activity all over the world. Hawaii’s Kilauea eruption happened for the 31st time since December on Friday. It spewed lava for 12 hours, and then there was the recent eruption in Northeast Russia that had a huge eruption after 600 years of lying dormant. Armstrong says, “We have every data base in there. Earthquakes, volcanos and temperatures back to 1869 from New York City. It does not show global warming. . .. The computer says we are heading to global cooling and not global warming. . .. The computer is showing from 2025 on, we are going to be seeing a lot more volcanic activity. I just got off the phone with someone from Italy, and they say the super volcano there is starting to become active.”

In closing, Armstrong says, “I still want to have one of those $500 notes.”]

Read more …

“The black King of Dahomey.”

• A Lesson on Slavery for CNN (Paul Craig Roberts)

The saga of American slavery has more holes in it than the Zionist saga of the Holocaust. Recently President Trump wondered about the woke Smithsonian Institute’s fixation on slavery as if it was the principal problem the world faces today. The liberal media had a hissy fit. CNN rushed to do a program on slavery, the woke rectification for which is multiculturalism and the replacement of the white racist population by people of color. This is the political agenda of the Democrat Party. To watch white people so determined to achieve their own destruction by voting Democrat is amazing. The response made by those critical of CNN’s attack on white Americans was that slavery was a matter of the distant past, and we made amends for our responsibility in a civil war.

What nonsense. No American ever had any responsibility for slavery. The black King of Dahomey did. Here are the undeniable, indisputable, basic facts: Over the course of history far more white people have been slaves than blacks. Some of these white slaves were held by Romans and other conquerors in ancient times. Most were held by people of color who raided Europe’s Mediterranean coast for slaves. Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the US (1801-1809) had to send the US Navy and Marines to “the shores of Tripoli” to stop the North Africans from capturing American ships and enslaving their passengers and crews. In the New World (Caribbean Islands, North and South America) European colonists found abundant resources but no labor force.

British and European sea captains saw a business opportunity in purchasing slaves from the black King of Dahomey and selling them to the colonists as a labor force. The black King of Dahomey conducted annual slave wars against other blacks and sold the surplus to Arabs and to European sea captains. No white colonist in what later became the United States ever enslaved a black person. They purchased blacks already enslaved by the black King of Dahomey. When the United States came into existence in the late 18th century, slavery was an inherited institution. Slavery existed as the labor force for large agricultural plantations, the agri-businesses of the time. The plantations using slave labor did not enslave the slaves. They purchased already enslaved labor as no work force was available.

In the United States slavery was doomed as the frontier closed. Slavery had a long life because white immigrants who entered America could avoid becoming agricultural labor by moving west and occupying land to which the native Americans had use rights but not ownership rights as understood in Western law. Thus the native inhabitants could be dispossessed. As the constant stream of immigrant-invaders, such as the US and Europe are experiencing today, continued, the Indian lands were settled by the immigrant-invaders and the frontier closed by 1890. Slavery could not have existed beyond that date and, in fact, could not have lasted that long. Slavery was costly compared to the wages of free labor.

Slavery was an expensive labor force. In 19th century America a male field hand cost $1,500. If a slave had blacksmith or carpenter skills, he cost $2,000. The price of a slave was three to four times the annual income of a skilled white man such as a blacksmith. Moreover, a slave, if he was to be productive, needed sufficient food, housing, and medical care. Moreover, he required respect and appreciation, Many of the slaves were warriors captured in the black King of Dahomey’s slave wars. They were experienced fighters and had to be treated with respect. For a white plantation owner to be surrounded by a large number of black men and for him to expect them to work required his respect and proper treatment of his labor force in which he had a large investment.

Propaganda such as Uncle Tom’s Cabin was northern war propaganda against the South. A few issues back, the City Journal posed the question of who was in charge of a rice or sugar plantation in the Caribbean when the one white owner, the only white on the premises, had a work force of 50 black men. The idea that it was customary to whip black warriors and to rape their wives is farfetched.

Read more …

“Making God”

• ‘Godfather of AI’ Warns Superintelligent Machines Could Replace Humanity (ET)

Geoffrey Hinton, the pioneering computer scientist called the “godfather of AI,” has once again sounded the alarm that the very technology he helped bring to life could spell the end of humanity as we know it. In an interview clip released Aug. 18 as part of the forthcoming film “Making God,” Hinton delivered one of his starkest warnings yet. He said that humanity risks being sidelined—and eventually replaced—by machines far smarter than ourselves. “Most people aren’t able to comprehend the idea of things more intelligent than us,” Hinton, a Nobel Prize winner for physics and a former Google executive, said in the clip. “They always think, ‘Well, how are we going to use this thing?’ They don’t think, ‘Well, how’s it going to use us?’”

Hinton said he is “fairly confident” that artificial intelligence will drive massive unemployment, pointing to early examples of tech giants such as Microsoft replacing junior programmers with AI. But the larger danger, he said, goes far beyond the workplace. The only silver lining is that “it won’t eat us, because it’ll be made of silicon,” he said. Hinton, 77, has spent decades pioneering deep learning, the neural network architecture that underpins today’s artificial intelligence systems. His breakthroughs in the 1980s—particularly the invention of the Boltzmann machine, which could learn to recognize patterns in data—helped open the door to image recognition and modern machine learning.

That work earned him the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics, awarded “for foundational discoveries and inventions that enable machine learning with artificial neural networks.” The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences noted how Hinton’s early use of statistical physics provided the conceptual leap that made today’s AI revolution possible. But Hinton has since emerged as one of the field’s fiercest critics, warning that its rapid development has outpaced society’s ability to keep it safe. In 2023, he resigned from his role at Google so he could speak freely about the risks without implicating the company. In his Nobel lecture, Hinton acknowledged the potential benefits of AI—such as productivity gains and new medical treatments that could be a “wonderful advance for all humanity.” Yet he also warned that creating digital beings more intelligent than humans poses an “existential threat.”

“I wish I’d thought about safety issues too,” he said during the recent Ai4 conference in Las Vegas, reflecting on his career. He noted that he now regrets solely focusing on making AI work, rather than anticipating its risks. Hinton has previously estimated that there is a 10 percent to 20 percent chance that AI could wipe out humanity. In a June episode of The Diary of a CEO podcast, he said that the engineers behind today’s AI systems don’t fully understand the technology and broadly fall into two camps: one that believes in a dystopian future where humans are displaced, and the other that dismisses such fears as science fiction. “I think both of those positions are extreme,” Hinton said. “I often say 10 percent to 20 percent chance [for AI] to wipe us out. But that’s just gut, based on the idea that we’re still making them and we’re pretty ingenious. And the hope is that if enough smart people do enough research with enough resources, we’ll figure out a way to build them so they’ll never want to harm us.”

Read more …

“If not for its exclusive deal with OpenAI, Apple would have no reason to refrain from more prominently featuring the X app and the Grok app in its App Store.”

• Musk Takes On Apple, OpenAI In Antitrust Showdown Over Chatbots (ZH)

Elon Musk’s X and xAI have filed a federal lawsuit in Fort Worth, Texas, accusing Apple and OpenAI of “locking up markets” to preserve their monopolies and shut out rivals. This comes as Musk’s long-running feud with OpenAI chief Sam Altman intensifies. The lawsuit centers on Apple’s recent deal to make OpenAI’s ChatGPT the only generative AI chatbot on the iPhone’s operating system, effectively shutting out xAI’s Grok and other rivals, such as Google’s Gemini and Anthropic. The lawsuit’s introduction argues that Apple and OpenAI have teamed up to protect their monopolies in smartphones and AI chatbots:

“This is a tale of two monopolists joining forces to ensure their continued dominance in a world rapidly driven by the most powerful technology humanity has ever created: artificial intelligence (“AI”). Working in tandem, Defendants Apple and OpenAI have locked up markets to maintain their monopolies and prevent innovators like X and xAI from competing.1 Plaintiffs bring this suit to stop Defendants from perpetrating their anticompetitive scheme and to recover billions in damages. AI is fundamentally reshaping our world. Technology powered by AI has not only become embedded in our daily lives but is also transforming critical sectors like healthcare, education, and finance.

The consensus among global business leaders, academics, and scientists is that AI adoption is both unavoidable and transformational—and businesses that do not plan for it risk falling behind. As Apple now recognizes, AI poses an existential threat to its business. For example, AI is rapidly advancing the rise of “super apps”—i.e., multi-functional platforms that offer many of the services of smartphones, such as social connectivity and messaging, financial services, e-commerce, and entertainment—that do not require a customer to be tied to a particular device. In other words, super apps, like those being developed by X and xAI, stand ready to upend the smartphone market and Apple’s entrenched monopoly in it.

The writing is on the wall. Apple’s Senior Vice President for Services, Eddy Cue, has expressed worries that AI might destroy Apple’s smartphone business, just as Apple’s iPhone did to Nokia’s handsets. Apple knows it cannot escape the inevitable—at least not alone. In a desperate bid to protect its smartphone monopoly, Apple has joined forces with the company that most benefits from inhibiting competition and innovation in AI: OpenAI, a monopolist in the market for generative AI chatbots. OpenAI quickly rose to dominance in the generative AI chatbot market after introducing its flagship service, ChatGPT, in 2022. Today, OpenAI controls at least 80 percent of the market. Because of OpenAI’s monopoly, other generative AI chatbots have struggled to gain share. xAI’s Grok has yet to gain more than a few percent of the market despite accolades about its superior features.

Just like Apple, OpenAI has incentive to protect its monopoly by thwarting competition and innovation in the generative AI chatbot market. And just like Apple, it has done so in violation of the antitrust laws.

In June 2024, Apple and OpenAI announced that Apple would integrate OpenAI’s ChatGPT into Apple’s iPhone operating system (“iOS”). Apple and OpenAI’s exclusive arrangement has made ChatGPT the only generative AI chatbot integrated into the iPhone. This means that if iPhone users want to use a generative AI chatbot for key tasks on their devices, they have no choice but to use ChatGPT, even if they would prefer to use more innovative and imaginative products like xAI’s Grok. An OpenAI strategy document recognized the importance of competition in this emerging and transformational space: “Real choice drives competition and benefits everyone. Users should be able to pick their AI assistant.” Yet Apple and OpenAI have colluded to prevent exactly that.”

X and xAI argue: “If not for its exclusive deal with OpenAI, Apple would have no reason to refrain from more prominently featuring the X app and the Grok app in its App Store.” Just a few weeks ago, Musk threatened Apple with legal action over alleged antitrust violations regarding the App Store rankings of the Grok AI chatbot. He wrote in an X post that Apple’s behavior “makes it impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1 in the App Store.” Musk is seeking an injunction to block Apple and OpenAI’s exclusive chatbot deal and billions in damages. If successful, the case could reshape how AI bots are distributed on smartphones.

Read more …

“Veldkamp, who previously served as Dutch ambassador to Israel, had advocated a ban on imports from Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories..”

• Dutch Foreign Minister Quits Over Israel (RT)

Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp has stepped down in protest over the coalition government’s refusal to impose sanctions on Israel for its actions in Gaza. The resignation of Veldkamp, along with the country’s Minister for Foreign Trade Hanneke Boerma, has reduced the Dutch caretaker government to holding just 32 out of 150 seats. In a statement on Saturday the foreign ministry said that “after a meeting of the cabinet on the situation in Gaza,” the Social Contract (NSC) party, of which both officials are members, decided to withdraw from the caretaker coalition government.Veldkamp, who previously served as Dutch ambassador to Israel, had advocated a ban on imports from Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories in response to Israel’s continued military offensive in Gaza.

In a statement on its website on Friday, the party said that it had sought “additional measures” against Israel in light of the “increasingly deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza.” However, the other two coalition partners refused to back sanctions, prompting the NSC to pull out in protest. On Thursday, the Netherlands, along with 20 other nations, signed a joint declaration condemning Israeli plans to build an illegal settlement in the occupied West Bank. Last month, Amsterdam declared two hardline Israeli ministers persona non grata. Back in June, Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares called on the EU to “immediately suspend” the EU-Israel association agreement and impose a ban on arms sales to Israel.

In light of the ongoing Israeli military operation in Gaza, a growing number of traditionally pro-Israel Western countries, including France and the UK, have expressed in recent months a readiness to officially recognize Palestinian statehood. Earlier this week, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced the start of an operation to take full control of Gaza City. The conflict erupted after a Hamas incursion into southern Israel on October 7, 2023, which left about 1,200 people dead and 250 taken hostage. According to Gaza’s Hamas-controlled Health Ministry, more than 62,000 people, most of them civilians, have been killed by Israeli strikes in the enclave since then.

Read more …

They’e playing politics. But what do they think?

• US Scientists Axe ‘Woke’ To Keep Cash Flowing – WSJ (RT)

Researchers in the US have been revising their grant renewal applications en masse in recent months over fears that wording tied to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives could cost them government funding, the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday Since taking office in January, US President Donald Trump, a long-time critic of what he views as “divisive” leftist narratives, has taken numerous steps to eradicate such policies and even associated language at the government level. Promoted by his predecessor Democrat Joe Biden, DEI programs sought to ensure that sexual and racial minorities were better represented in government agencies. The Trump administration has described the initiatives as “illegal and immoral discrimination.”

The WSJ wrote that at least 600 grant renewal applications since October 2024 had removed “terms associated with diversity, equity and inclusion,” such as “diverse,” “underrepresented,” and “disparities.” The outlet said it had reviewed thousands of applications for National Institutes of Health-funded projects in the fiscal years 2024 and 2025. Some scientists have also reportedly shifted the focus of studies that were originally centered on minority groups. A Johns Hopkins University spokesperson confirmed to the WSJ that “federal agencies have asked researchers to make modest modifications” before renewing grants. On his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order mandating a review of government DEI initiatives.

Addressing a joint session of Congress in March, Trump declared that “we’ve ended the tyranny of so-called Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies all across the entire federal government and indeed the private sector and our military.” He stressed that appointments should be made strictly on the basis of skills and competence, not race or gender. The Trump administration has also targeted a number of elite universities, including Harvard, for their failure to address “anti-Semitic” protests in support of Palestine and abolish DEI policies, suspending federal funding and restricting international student enrollment.

Read more …

A rose by any other name…

• Trump Proposes Renaming Department of Defense to Its Original Name (ET)

President Donald Trump proposed on Aug. 25 that his administration rename the Department of Defense to its previous name, the Department of War. “Pete, you started off by saying ’the Department of Defense.’ And somehow it didn’t sound good to me,” Trump said in the Oval Office, speaking to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, after signing executive orders on fighting crime, including in Washington. “Defense. What are we, defense? Why are we defense? It used to be called the Department of War, and it had a stronger sound. And, as you know, we won World War I, we won World War II, we won everything. Now we have a Department of Defense. We’re defenders. I don’t know.” Hegseth, standing behind Trump, said the name change is on the way. “That’s coming soon, sir,” he told Trump.

Trump said that “Department of War” sounds better than “Department of Defense.” “Defense? I don’t want to be Defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too, if that’s OK,” he said, adding that “as Department of War, we won everything, we won everything. And I think we’re going to have to go back to that.” Trump touted bringing an end to conflicts between India and Pakistan and the Congo and Rwanda. This was not the first time Trump had suggested changing the Defense Department back to its previous name. “You know it used to be called secretary of war,” Trump told reporters on June 25 at the NATO summit in the Netherlands. “Maybe for a couple of weeks we’ll call it that because we feel like warriors.” He introduced Hegseth as “secretary of war.” “Then we became politically correct and they called it secretary of defense,” Trump said. “Maybe we’ll have to think about changing it. But we feel that way.”

Prior to becoming defense secretary, Hegseth called for changing the Defense Department back to its old name. “Sure, our military defends us. And in a perfect world it exists to deter threats and preserve peace,” he wrote in his 2024 memoir, “The War on Warriors—Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free.” “But ultimately its job is to conduct war. We either win or lose wars. And we have warriors, not ‘defenders. Bringing back the War Department may remind a few people in Washington, D.C., what the military is supposed to do, and do well.” The Defense Department was called the Department of War when it was established in 1789. In 1947, President Harry Truman changed the name after merging it with the Navy Department. He signed the National Security Act, which established the position of secretary of defense. It also established the National Security Council, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the U.S. Air Force.

Read more …

Once you have a Department of War, a Peace Nobel can’t be far behind.

• Giving Trump The Nobel Peace Prize Makes Some Sense (Lukyanov)

In the early 1980s, former US President Jimmy Carter visited Stockholm. At a reception he approached Stig Ramel, the long-serving executive director of the Nobel Foundation, and asked with some bitterness why he had not received the Peace Prize for brokering the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel. “If I had been awarded it, I might have been re-elected for a second term,” Carter remarked. He had lost to Ronald Reagan in 1980. Ramel’s reply was blunt: “I’m sorry, Mr. President, but you were not nominated.” The 1978 prize went instead to Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Carter’s story illustrates how the Nobel Prize has always been as much about timing and perception as about substance. And it brings us neatly to Donald Trump.

Unlike Carter, Trump has no problem with nominations. They come thick and fast, from Rwanda, Cambodia, Gabon, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and beyond. Individuals and organizations have joined the chorus. Trump has even gone a step further: he has demanded the prize outright, loudly and repeatedly. Vanity, not diplomacy, drives him. Carter sought the award to improve his electoral prospects. Trump simply wants every trophy on the shelf. Does the spectacle make sense? Strictly speaking, to be considered this year Trump had to be nominated by January 31 – just ten days after his return to the White House. Yet precedent suggests this is no obstacle. Barack Obama received the Peace Prize in his first year as president, when he had scarcely done anything to warrant it.

Alfred Nobel’s will set out clear criteria: the prize should go to the person who has done most “for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the promotion of peace congresses.” Judged against that standard, Trump looks an unlikely candidate. He is one of the most polarizing figures on the planet. America’s military budget is heading toward a record $1 trillion in 2026, hardly a sign of “reduction of standing armies.” Yet the White House insists Trump deserves recognition. Officials cite half a dozen cases, from preventing nuclear war between India and Pakistan to halting conflicts in smaller states. The centerpiece, of course, is Ukraine. Washington is hinting that Trump’s approach may finally bring the war to a close – with the timing of any peace announcement conveniently close to the Nobel Committee’s own deliberations.

The pitch has not been flawless. In touting his record, Trump recently confused Armenia with Albania. But these are minor slips. What matters is the narrative: that Trump alone can impose order where others have failed. Is the Nobel Committee likely to indulge him? Its members are not known for rewarding bluster. But Europe’s leaders are desperate to appease Washington’s eccentric benefactor. It is not inconceivable that some will lobby behind the scenes in Trump’s favor. In one sense, awarding him the prize would not be absurd. The Nobel Committee has always sought to encourage gestures toward peace, however imperfect. Today, in a world of upheaval, genuine solutions are scarce. At best, one can try to ease tensions.

Trump, in his way, is doing just that – using every tool available, from demonstrative military threats to wild rhetoric and economic coercion. Others are doing even less. To paraphrase Lenin, a Nobel for Trump would be “essentially justified, formally a mockery.” It would capture the spirit of the age: a prize not for genuine reconciliation but for the ability to posture as a peacemaker in a fractured world. Carter, who once felt slighted, eventually did receive the award – more than twenty years after leaving office, in recognition of his peacemaking work as an ex-president. The Camp David accords remain in force to this day, a rare achievement in Middle East diplomacy. Trump is cut from a different cloth. He will not wait decades. By age and by temperament, he demands everything now. Or never at all.

Read more …

“Well, I mean, I’m talking about the — the — I had had, there was a. . . . —Ghislaine Maxwell

• Ghislaine ‘Splainin’ (James Howard Kunstler)

Did you happen to bother reading the transcript of Ghislaine Maxwell’s interview? It’s tough sledding at times — both Ms. Maxwell and Deputy AG Todd Blanche tend to speak in choppy, incomplete sentences (as does, you might have noticed, President Trump) — but altogether the confab reveals that just about everything you think you know about the scandal might not be so, and her story is full of shocking surprises, assuming you can believe her. For instance, Ms. Maxwell had exactly one night of actual sex with Jeffrey Epstein back in the 1990s, a few months after they met, and that was it. He had problems with straight-up sex, she says. At first, he claimed to have a heart condition.

She says he had erectile difficulty “. . . which meant that he didn’t have intercourse a lot, which suited me fine, because I actually do have a medical condition, which precludes me having a lot of intercourse,” she added. (We never learn what that condition was, exactly.) Anyway, she never had sex with him again. Huh. . .? There goes one pillar of the public perception of the scandal: that Ghislaine Maxwell was a sort of nymphomaniac consort of Mr. Epstein, while supposedly acting as chief procurer of his masseuse “victims” and that the whole decades-long saga was a cavalcade of threesomes and orgies. She even claims at one point of being “a prude.” So, what was her role in JE’s complicated life? Basically, a property manager, she says. You know, all those houses and compounds: the mansion on East 71st Street, the Palm Beach place, the ranch in New Mexico, Little St. James Island, a flat in Paris.

It was a lot to manage. She had to hire architects, construction crews, interior decorators, servants. There were horses to care for at the ranch. It was a lot. She didn’t even have a key to JE’s New York City townhouse and was there only twice, she told Mr. Blanche. During that time, JE had other girlfriends while in the early 2000s, Ms. Maxwell hooked up with the billionaire founder of Gateway Computers, Ted Waitt. He bought a big boat for them to start-up an oceanic research venture. The relationship foundered when, she says, a sketchy lawyer named Scott Rothstein, working for a crooked Florida law firm that was under a RICO investigation at the time, attempted to extract $10-million from Waitt to keep Ms. Maxwell’s name out of lawsuits brought by women claiming to be “victims” of Epstein’s massage shenanigans.

Ms. Maxwell claims that Epstein’s masseuses, underage or otherwise, were recruited by the original masseuses, not by her (Ms. Maxwell). Ms. Maxwell was out of Epstein’s life after 2009, when he got out of jail on state of Florida charges of soliciting prostitution and procuring a minor for prostitution. This was preceded by a sketchy federal case brought in the Southern District of Florida that ended with a peculiar non-prosecution agreement — when US Attorney Alexander Acosta was told to lay off on account of Epstein being an “intel asset.” Ms. Maxwell states in the new deposition that JE was not associated with any intel agency, claiming it would have been in his nature to brag about it. It would help if FBI chief Kash Patel or CIA head John Ratcliffe could clarify that. They would surely know, one way or the other.

Of course, the heart of all the salacious chatter about Epstein is the claim that he worked for Israel’s Mossad intel agency, and that many eminent global persons were recorded having sex with underage masseuses in order to blackmail them (and, supposedly, allow nefarious hidden parties to control world political affairs.) Ms. Maxwell maintains that this is not so. She says there were no hidden cameras in bedrooms or elsewhere in the many Epstein properties or airplanes, and that she would know because she hired the electricians who installed everything else in them. There were only the usual security cameras on front entrances and gates. . . except for the Palm Beach house where local police installed a camera in JE’s office to catch a thief who was stealing cash stashed there. (Turned out to be JE’s butler, who was fired.)

Another thread at the center of the Epstein rumor mill is the notorious Epstein client list — supposedly of notables alleged to have cavorted with Epstein’s masseuses. Ms. Maxwell claims there was no such list, that a fake list was concocted by attorney Brad Edwards who represented women claiming to be Epstein “victims” in the lawsuit connected with the $10-million Ted Waitt blackmail caper. The list was composed from notes supposedly made off a computer by that same Epstein butler, one Alfredo Rodriguez. When interviewed in 2007, Rodriguez failed to produce the so-called “black book.” In 2009, he offered to sell it to attorney Brad Edwards (representing various “victims”) for $50,000. In 2010, Rodriguez was convicted of obstruction of justice and sentenced to 18 months in prison. He died in 2015.

A lot of monkey business in all this, wouldn’t you say? Perhaps the most astounding point is Ms. Maxwell’s assertion that no government attorney (or any other official, including from the FBI) ever interviewed her, or even called her on the telephone, during all the years of legal wrangling that went on. Say, what. . . ? How could that possibly be? Well, apparently it is so.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

SV40


Blue Dragon

Bees

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1960045888170004599

Bird

Pebble

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 29 2025

Jul 292025
 
 July 29, 2025  Posted by at 9:36 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  49 Responses »


Edvard Munch Ashes 1894

 

• Von der Leyen Defends US Trade Deal (RT)
• US Trade Deal Will Fuel EU’s ‘Deindustrialization’ – Lavrov (RT)
• EU-US Tariff Deal A ‘Positive’ Development – Italy’s Meloni (RT)
• US-EU Trade Deal A ‘Fiasco’ – Le Pen (RT)
• Medvedev: Trump ‘Steamrolled, Humiliated’ Europe With One-Sided Deal (ZH)
• Medvedev Tells Trump ‘Russia Isn’t Israel Or Iran’ (RT)
• Trump Reduces Russia-Ukraine ‘Deadline’ To 10-12 Days (RT)
• Russia Alone Against Entire West For First Time In History – Lavrov (RT)
• I Love The Russian People – Trump (RT)
• Trump Drops a Truth Bomb About the Epstein Files (Margolis)
• Jailhouse Blues (James Howard Kunstler)
• Trump Welcomes British PM Keir Starmer to Turnberry, Scotland (CTH)
• Who Funds the WHO? (Fleetwood)
• Six Months In, Here’s What Sets Trump 2.0 Apart (Charlie Kirk)
• ‘Godfather of AI’ Warns Governments To Collaborate Before It’s Too Late (RT)
• Doug Casey on Global Disintegration (IM)

 

 

 

 

poll
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1949609289951113683

windmills

Doug

maher
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1949814680135835806

https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1949812791164146145

werner

Ghislaine – do read the whole post

 

 

 

 

Ursula was not elected, but appointed. Her no. 1 priority is not pleasing the voters, it is keeping her job. Still, Trump was undoubtedly not happy that she gave him the whole deal and then some, before he could even lay on his art. Where’s the funn in that?

• Von der Leyen Defends US Trade Deal (RT)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has attempted to shrug off widespread criticism over the EU’s new trade agreement with the US. The controversial deal subjects most of the bloc’s exports to a 15% tariff while exempting American goods from retaliatory duties. The EU-US agreement was finalized on Sunday during a meeting with US President Donald Trump at one of his Scottish golf-resort hotels. ”15% is not to be underestimated, but it is the best we could get,” von der Leyen said, when asked by reporters whether the agreement offered relief to European carmakers. The compromise averts a looming 30% tariff Trump had threatened to impose on August 1. However, it falls far short of the EU’s original offer of zero tariffs on both imports and exports.

Trump has long accused the EU of exploiting regulatory barriers such as VAT distortions, and legal challenges in trade with the US. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the threat of tariffs was intended to “light a fire under the EU.” After negotiations stalled earlier this year, Trump escalated his demands, imposing a 25% tariff on cars, 50% on steel and aluminum, and threatening a 30% blanket tariff unless a deal was reached by August. The EU’s deal with the US has triggered a political backlash across the bloc. French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou called it a “dark day” and an act of “submission.” Hungary’s Viktor Orban reportedly quipped that “Donald Trump ate Ursula von der Leyen for breakfast.” Numerous business associations have decried a “capitulation.”

According to Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev, “Trump wiped the floor with Europe.” Still, the deal found support in Berlin and Rome. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni described it as a necessary compromise to prevent a trade war and provide predictability for export-reliant economies. Before Trump’s return to office in January, the average US tariff on EU imports was roughly 1.5% while the bloc’s average imposed tariff was 1.35%, according to Brussels-based think tank Bruegel. Since then, a series of sweeping duties have been introduced.

Read more …

You get the feeling the warmongers in US and EU are trying to raze the entire continent in order to make it a war theater.

• US Trade Deal Will Fuel EU’s ‘Deindustrialization’ – Lavrov (RT)

The new US-EU trade agreement threatens to accelerate “deindustrialization” in Europe by redirecting investment to the US and increasing the bloc’s dependency on American energy exports, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. On Sunday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump finalized a controversial deal that allowed the EU and US to avert a full-scale trade war. Under the deal, the US has reduced its proposed 30% tariffs to a flat 15% on most European exports. The EU has committed to purchasing $750 billion worth of US energy, primarily liquefied natural gas and nuclear fuel, and agreed to invest around $600 billion into US industries. The bloc has also undertaken to increase imports of US-made weapons.

Speaking at the ‘Territory of Meanings’ forum on Monday, Lavrov described the arrangement as “clearly leading to further deindustrialization of Europe and capital flight.” He added that rising energy prices and investment outflows will strike a “very hard blow” to European industrial and agricultural sectors. According to Lavrov, von der Leyen was apparently “boasting” about the EU’s willingness to carry additional costs. “People like Ursula von der Leyen literally take pride in this path: yes, we will be forced to spend more money, yes, we will probably have fewer resources to address social problems, but we are obliged to defeat Russia.” He stressed that the trade deal is “obviously damaging for the Old Continent – it doesn’t even need to be analyzed.”

Lavrov’s stance was echoed by several EU politicians and the business community. Marine Le Pen, a key figure in France’s right-wing National Rally party, denounced the agreement as a “political, economic, and moral fiasco” detrimental to the EU’s sovereignty. French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou concurred, calling it a “dark day” for the EU. German business leaders also voiced alarm. Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the executive board of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), said the EU had sent a “fatal signal” by accepting high tariffs. “Even a tariff rate of 15% will have immense negative effects on the export-oriented German industry,” he warned.

Read more …

“There is a winner – US President Trump – and a loser, or rather two: The EU and Giorgia Meloni.”

• EU-US Tariff Deal A ‘Positive’ Development – Italy’s Meloni (RT)

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, one of the closest European allies of US President Donald Trump, has welcomed the EU’s trade deal with Washington despite criticism of the terms at home. After months of talks, the EU has reached a trade agreement with the US that sets a baseline 15% tariff on most exports, including cars, while steel and aluminum remain at 50%. The deal was reached at a meeting between Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Sunday. Both called it a “powerful” and “stabilizing” breakthrough. Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Meloni called the agreement a positive development.

“I think it’s positive that there’s an agreement,” Meloni, who had previously criticized Trump’s tariff drive and pledged to pursue a zero-for-zero deal, said. Italy is one of Europe’s top exporters to the US, with a trade surplus exceeding €40 billion ($46 billion). Opposition leaders, however, slammed Meloni for failing to secure better terms. Five Star Movement leader Giuseppe Conte wrote: “There is a winner – US President Trump – and a loser, or rather two: The EU and Giorgia Meloni.” He warned the tariffs could cost Italy €23 billion in exports and threaten 100,000 jobs.

Democratic MEP Stefano Bonaccini echoed the criticism, saying, “15% tariffs are better than 30% but worse than zero,” and warned of “tens of billions” in losses. Former Labor Minister Andrea Orlando called the deal a “rip-off,” saying Meloni’s friendship with Trump failed, while slamming von der Leyen as “either incompetent or acting in bad faith.” Meloni defended the deal, saying it helped avert a “head-on clash” with the US. She argued that the 15% tariff is “sustainable” as it will not add to previous tariffs, but will bring “stability.” Economists at the Kiel Institute warned of a drop in production and job losses across the EU, with Germany expected to take the biggest hit. The Federation of German Industries (BDI) called the deal an “inadequate compromise,” with the “only positive aspect” being the prevention of further escalation.

Read more …

“The least that could be done is to acknowledge this stinging failure rather than asking the French, who will be its first victims, to rejoice in it.”

• US-EU Trade Deal A ‘Fiasco’ – Le Pen (RT)

The new EU-US trade agreement is an economic and political “fiasco” that undermines the bloc’s sovereignty, veteran right-wing French politician Marine Le Pen has said. The agreement, finalized by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump on Sunday, averted a full-blown trade war between Washington and Brussels. Under its terms, the EU will commit to increased imports of US energy and military equipment, while the US reduces its proposed 30% tariffs to a flat 15% on most European exports. Le Pen, a key member of France’s National Rally party, the largest opposition group in the National Assembly, condemned the deal, calling it “a political, economic and moral fiasco” for the EU.

”Politically, because the European Union, with 27 member states, obtained worse conditions than the United Kingdom,” she said, referring to the fact that the UK agreed to 10% tariffs – which was widely regarded as a bad deal. Le Pen also accused Brussels of accepting unequal terms on exporting American gas and weapons that she claimed no patriotic French government would have agreed to. “This is an outright surrender for French industry and for our energy and military sovereignty.” She added that the deal sacrifices the interests of French farmers to benefit Germany’s automotive industry, pointing to “clauses forcing us to further open the single market to American agricultural products in exchange for reduced taxes on German automobile exports.”

“This globalization that denies and shatters sovereignty has been outdated for many years… The least that could be done is to acknowledge this stinging failure rather than asking the French, who will be its first victims, to rejoice in it.” Le Pen’s criticism was echoed by former Belgian Prime Minister and MEP Guy Verhofstadt, who called the agreement “scandalous” and “a disaster,” which failed to secure any concessions from the American side. Trump described the agreement as “probably the biggest deal ever reached in any capacity, trade or beyond trade.” Von der Leyen said the deal brings “certainty in uncertain times,” adding that a 15% rate “is the best we could get.”

Read more …

“This isn’t diplomacy. It’s surrender dressed in a suit.”

• Medvedev: Trump ‘Steamrolled, Humiliated’ Europe With One-Sided Deal (ZH)

Following high-stakes talks in Scotland between President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the two sides reached a landmark deal which sets a 15% US tariff on all European Union goods. This new rate is significantly lower than the 30% import tax Trump had previously threatened, with the EU also committing to opening its markets to certain American exports with zero tariffs. Von der Leyen subsequently said, “I want to thank President Trump personally for his personal commitment and leadership to achieve this breakthrough. He is a tough negotiator, but he is also a dealmaker.” The Kremlin has reacted, with former Russian President and current deputy chairman of the country’s security council Dmitry Medvedev in essence mocking the EU for signing a deal he says benefits only the United States, and which leaves Europe behind, looking like a “humiliated” junior partner. He also deemed the deal ‘anti-Russian’.

He highlighted that Brussels agreed to terms that involve significant trade concessions, expanded defense obligations, and energy agreements heavily favoring American exporters. Did anyone think it would be anything different with Trump in the room negotiating it? Trump managed to “crush” Europe without firing a single shot, Medvedev said: “This isn’t diplomacy. It’s surrender dressed in a suit.” The heavily slanted terms of the deal meant Trump had “wiped the floor with Europe,” Medvedev stated further in the Monday social media post. “One can only feel sorry for ordinary Europeans,” Medvedev wrote, nothing that EU leaders are only motivated by their blinding anti-Russian sentiment, given Brussels’ intention to terminate all purchases of Russian oil and gas – which is part of the deal.

Below is the list offered by Medvedev on what the ‘deal’ with the European Union actually represents:
1) totally humiliating for the Europeans as it only serves the United States by leaving the European market unprotected and zeroing out tariffs on US goods;
2) creates huge additional costs for industries and agriculture in many EU countries stemming from the need to pay for expensive US energy; and…
3) diverts a massive investment flow from Europe to the US, Medvedev specified.

But ultimately, Medvedev wrote, “the deal is clearly aimed against Russia, as it bans Russian oil and gas purchases. However, while for Trump, it is largely about business, for the mad old wench Europe, it is part of its neo-Nazi ideas, which is harmful to the well-being of its own citizens.” This has been a constant talking point from Moscow going back years. Ursula, blink repeatedly if Trump just shafted you! Make ‘back door’ gesture if know US gas far dearer than Russian!— RT (@RT_com) July 28, 2025. The Russian Security Council deputy chairman has long been probably the single most outspoken official in the Kremlin, but it’s widely believed he plays ‘bad cop’ to Putin’s ‘good cop’ – in the sense that he often issues the more hawkish or even mocking point of view on any given geopolitical or economic issue. Or rather, he states the quiet part out loud, from Moscow’s viewpoint.

Read more …

“..every new ultimatum constitutes a threat and a step toward hostilities between Russia and the US. “Don’t go down the Sleepy Joe [Biden] road!”

• Medvedev Tells Trump ‘Russia Isn’t Israel Or Iran’ (RT)

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has told US President Donald Trump that Russia is neither Israel nor Iran, and that every one of his threats is another step towards a potential conflict. The US president on Monday issued a more extreme ultimatum to Russia, demanding that Moscow reach a ceasefire with Kiev within “10 or 12 days.” Earlier this month, Trump threatened sweeping secondary sanctions against Russia’s trade partners unless a deal was reached by autumn. Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, said that Trump was “playing the ultimatum game with Russia: 50 days or 10…” In a post on X on Monday, he suggested Trump should remember two things: first, that “Russia isn’t Israel or even Iran,” and, second, that every new ultimatum constitutes a threat and a step toward hostilities between Russia and the US. “Don’t go down the Sleepy Joe [Biden] road!” he wrote.

During his election campaign last year, Trump repeatedly criticized his predecessor Joe Biden’s handling of the Ukraine conflict, warning that US policy under the former administration had brought the world to the brink of “World War III.” While Trump has re-engaged Russia diplomatically and pushed for Kiev to enter direct peace talks with Moscow, he has increasingly expressed impatience with the pace of negotiations. Earlier this month, after issuing his initial ultimatum, the president resumed US military aid to Ukraine through NATO.

Russia has long condemned the US-led military bloc’s arms supplies to Ukraine, arguing they make Kiev’s Western sponsors party to the conflict, which Moscow sees as a proxy war. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said that although Russia is essentially fighting a war against the entire West on its own, it will not back down from its key security demand in the conflict. “No dragging Ukraine into NATO, no NATO expansion at all,” the top diplomat said on Monday. “It has already expanded right up to our borders.”

Read more …

Trump doessn’t want war, he wants to talk to Russia, and to trade with it. He’ll have to find a way amid the bellicose voices.

• Trump Reduces Russia-Ukraine ‘Deadline’ To 10-12 Days (RT)

US President Donald Trump has sharply reduced the time frame he set for Russia and Ukraine to agree on a ceasefire, warning that Moscow now has just 10 to 12 days to reach a deal or face sweeping new sanctions. “I’m going to set a new deadline… about 10 or 12 days from today. There’s no reason to wait. I wanted to be generous, but we’re just not seeing any progress,” Trump told reporters on Monday in Scotland. He was sitting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The US president had originally given the two sides 50 days to negotiate an end to the conflict, threatening to impose 100% tariffs on Russian imports and secondary sanctions on countries and companies that continue to trade with Russia. That initial deadline was due to expire in early September.

Trump said he was “very disappointed” with Russian President Vladimir Putin and claimed he had come close to brokering a ceasefire on five separate occasions. “I’ve spoken to President Putin a lot – I’ve gotten along with him very well,” he added. The ultimatum, first issued on July 14, also included a warning that the US would resume arms deliveries to Ukraine, funded in part by NATO members, if no truce was achieved within the time frame. Moscow has responded by reaffirming its willingness to negotiate but said any talks must take into account the realities on the ground and the root causes of the conflict. Russian officials have dismissed Trump’s sanctions threats as counterproductive. “These signals serve only to prolong the war,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said earlier this month, urging Washington to pressure Kiev instead.

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has stated that even new sanctions would not alter Russia’s course, insisting the country will “continue to move along our independent, sovereign, and sustained path.” Meanwhile, direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev resumed in Istanbul in May, following a nearly three-year freeze. The latest round of talks took place last week, with modest progress on humanitarian issues, including agreements on the exchange of prisoners of war and civilians. However, no breakthrough on a ceasefire was achieved. Trump had previously not ruled out imposing sanctions before his deadline, saying last week that action could come “at any time.”

Read more …

“In World War I and World War II, we had allies. Now we have no allies on the battlefield. So we must rely on ourselves and not allow any weakness,”

• Russia Alone Against Entire West For First Time In History – Lavrov (RT)

Russia is fighting the West alone for the first time in history and must rely solely on its own strength, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Speaking at the ‘Territory of Meanings’ forum on Monday, Lavrov highlighted the unprecedented geopolitical landscape Russia found itself in following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, which led to a heated stand-off with the West. ”The main task is to defeat the enemy. For the first time in history, Russia is fighting alone against the entire West. In World War I and World War II, we had allies. Now we have no allies on the battlefield. So we must rely on ourselves and not allow any weakness,” he said.

Lavrov stressed that Russia will not back down from its core security demands which led to the Ukraine conflict. “We insist on what is our legitimate demand… no dragging Ukraine into NATO, no NATO expansion at all. It has already expanded right up to our borders, contrary to all promises and documents that were adopted,” he said, adding that a settlement of the conflict should also recognize the new territorial reality on the ground.

Lavrov also likened the West’s behavior to that of childhood bullies. “When you’re a kid messing around with other boys in the yard, sometimes a big kid, three or four years older, shows up and starts chasing the little ones,” he said. “That’s roughly what the West is doing to everyone else right now.” Moscow has stated on a number of occasions that NATO expansion and Ukraine’s aspirations to join the US-led military bloc were among the key reasons for the conflict. It has also warned that Western weapons deliveries to Ukraine only serve to prolong the hostilities without changing the outcome, while making NATO a direct party to the conflict.

Read more …

But, like anyone else, they don’t love a bully.

• I Love The Russian People – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has expressed his “love” for Russians and called them a “great people.” At the same time, he threatened Moscow with more sanctions and set a new deadline for settling the Ukraine conflict. Trump maintained he had “always gotten along with [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin” during a Q&A session with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Turnberry, Scotland on Monday. He praised Russia as a “rich” nation that could be “thriving like practically no other country” and spoke about the massive trade potential between Russia and the US. “I don’t want to do that to Russia, I love the Russian people,” he said when asked about potential new sanctions against Moscow.

He expressed his disappointment over the slow pace of the peace process between Moscow and Kiev and accused Russia of striking Ukrainian cities. Trump said he was “not interested in talking anymore” as his numerous “respectful and nice conversations” with Putin led to nothing. Trump’s words came as he set a new deadline for a Ukraine peace deal, which he said should be reached in “10 or 12 days” from Monday. Otherwise, Washington would impose new sanctions on Moscow. The previous deadline was expected to expire in early September. The new sanctions would include secondary restrictions and tariffs on countries and entities doing business with Russia.

Moscow has repeatedly stated throughout the conflict that it is open for dialogue and could start negotiations without any preconditions as long as the situation on the ground is taken into account and the root causes of the conflict are addressed. Earlier this month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the Ukraine conflict was a “difficult” one to resolve and cannot be settled “instantly.” Russia also warned that Trump’s new sanctions threats serve primarily “as signals to continue the war” for Kiev and called on Washington to exert pressure on Ukraine instead. Russia and Ukraine renewed direct talks in Istanbul in May and have since held three rounds of negotiations but have not reached an agreement on a ceasefire yet.

Read more …

“I was running against somebody that ran the files. If they had something, they would have released it.”

• Trump Drops a Truth Bomb About the Epstein Files (Margolis)

President Donald Trump dropped a truth bomb on Monday that Democrats desperately trying to weaponize the Jeffrey Epstein files won’t like: Nothing is incriminating about him in those records. And his explanation isn’t just compelling; it’s rock solid. Trump argued that if such evidence were real, the Biden administration would have already made it public. Speaking candidly during a visit to Turnberry, Scotland, Trump called out the handling of these files under the previous administration as a manufactured “hoax” designed to manipulate political outcomes, particularly the 2024 election. When a reporter pressed Trump on whether he’d been briefed on his alleged inclusion in the Epstein files, he didn’t hold back. He slammed former FBI Director James Comey, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and Joe Biden himself as “the worst scum on Earth” responsible for running the files.

“Those files were run for four years by those people,” he emphasized. “If they had anything, I assume they would’ve released it. Those files were run by these people; they were run by my enemy. If there was anything in there, they would’ve used them for the election.” Trump made clear that the files were handled by partisan operatives out to get him. “Those files were run by the worst scum on earth. They were run by Comey. They were run by Garland. They were run by Biden, and all of the people that actually ran the government, including the autopen,” he said. “If they had anything, I assume they would have released it.” Pointing to the 2024 election as proof, Trump noted, “I was running against somebody that ran the files. If they had something, they would have released it.”

The Biden administration has already weaponized the federal government to go after Trump. If there were anything incriminating about Trump in the Epstein files, the Biden campaign would’ve dropped that info during the campaign to destroy his chances. Trump went on to warn about the potential for manipulated evidence, drawing a parallel to the now-debunked Steele dossier: “They can easily put something in the files that’s a phony—like, as an example, Christopher Steele… wrote a… dossier. We call it the fake news dossier. And the whole thing was a fake.” Trump blasted the DOJ and other officials who controlled the Epstein records, calling them “bad, sick people,” and questioned why, if damaging material existed, no one used it earlier.

“Why didn’t they use it when I was killing Joe? And then he gave out because he was 25 points down.” Trump’s logic here is bulletproof. The Biden administration stooped to unprecedented levels to take him down: unleashing the FBI, pushing bogus indictments, and even raiding his home. If it had even a shred of real evidence from the Epstein files tying Trump to any wrongdoing, it would have plastered that information across every headline in America before voters cast a single ballot. The fact that nothing has emerged, despite full control of the files by his political enemies, isn’t just telling; it’s definitive.

Read more …

“Tulsi Gabbard didn’t assume the role of Director of National Intelligence to play ceremonial dress-up.” —Toresays.com on “X”

• Jailhouse Blues (James Howard Kunstler)

You must suspect there’s some game afoot in this Epstein business. Only days ago, it was “fuggeddabowdit . . . nuthin’ there . . . get over it.” But then, only days later, the second-in-command at DOJ, Todd Blanche, formerly the president’s personal lawyer, was down in Tallahassee deposing Jeffrey Epstein’s second-in-command, Ghislaine Maxwell. (Note: a deposition is testimony outside of court, recorded under oath.) The Deputy Attorney General deposed her for two days, Friday and Saturday, a total of nine hours. You can do a lot of talking in nine hours. And were you shocked to learn — as has been broadly reported — that through all these years of EpsteinEpsteinEpstein, Ms. Maxwell has never been interviewed by any state or federal law enforcement official or government lawyer? How was that possible?

By the way, no government official has interviewed billionaire Les Wexner, Epstein’s chief benefactor, over all these years, either? How is that possible? (Follow the money, as they say.) Meanwhile, down in Florida, as reported by Brian O’Shea of The Daily Clout, it turns out that the federal district judge, Robin Rosenberg, who just ruled against Mr. Trump’s request to unseal the 2005 — 2007 Florida Epstein grand jury transcripts, is married to one Michael McCauliffe, former Palm Beach County State’s Attorney (equivalent of district attorney, DA), who helped negotiate the special 2008 “sweetheart” plea deal that allowed Epstein significant freedoms, such as frequent travel, including to his Little St. James Island, despite being under house arrest. Are you going, “Hmmmmmm. . . ? Any conflict of interest in that ruling? (Note: Current US AG Pam Bondi did not become Florida AG until 2011.)

So, it appears that there will now be two sets of “Epstein files” to sort out: 1) the DOJ’s file curated under AG Merrick Garland, and 2) whatever follows from never-before asked questions put to Ghislaine Maxwell in late July 2025. One thing you might infer: if the Merrick Garland files contained any defamatory “kompromat” about Donald Trump, wouldn’t it have been used during the election of 2024? Mr. Garland went along with every other ploy used to defame and convict Mr. Trump under color of law. But not that? Ergo, fuggeddabowdit.

Where the Epstein business goes now is anybody’s guess, but you have to doubt that it will go nowhere. Ms. Maxwell’s attorney, David O. Markus, stated to reporters that she “answered every single question asked of her” over the two days, emphasizing that she responded “honestly, truthfully, and to the best of her ability” without invoking any privileges or declining to answer. There is chatter on the Internet that Ms. Maxwell’s testimony affords an opportunity for the FBI / DOJ to open an entirely fresh Epstein investigation, untainted by whatever Merrick Garland was sitting on.

Okay, I reckon that’s enough for you to chew on about EpsteinEpsteinEpstein for today. Let’s turn to the other giant stinking dead carp wafting its miasma over Washington DC: RussiaRussiaRussia. CIA chief John Ratcliffe promised on Sunday to disclose the so-called “annex” files to John Durham’s special counsel report. Mr. Ratcliffe implied that the material is rather serious. He also emphasized that the statute of limitations will not apply in any forthcoming RussiaGate cases because the matter represents an ongoing (until even now) conspiracy. Mr. Ratcliffe, you may recall, before getting elected to Congress, was a US Attorney for the eastern district of Texas (as Chief of Anti-Terrorism and National Security), so he knows quite a bit about prosecuting federal cases.

Dunno about you, but I would like to know a little bit more about Christopher Wray’s activities regarding both Epstein and RussiaGate during his long tenure, seven years and five months (2017 – 2025) as FBI Director. In previous testimony before various committees of Congress, Mr. Wray, uniformly invoked “ongoing investigations” as the reason for not answering any germane questions about, well, anything and everything. Does he not deserve a session or two of interrogation with Kash Patel’s FBI agents, or depositions under oath with lawyers from the DOJ now, without the shield of protecting investigations of an agency he no longer runs? He has a lot to answer for, including the J-6 business and associated pipe-bomb matter — both of which might be construed as part of an ongoing conspiracy against a sitting president (and three-time candidate).

Is all this some “conspiracy theory”? No, an actual conspiracy as spelled out in the federal statutes: Conspiracy under Title 18, United States Code, Section 371, Conspiracy to defraud the United States. . . 18 U.S. Code § 241, Conspiracy against rights. . . and 18 U.S. Code § 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law. Add to that: perjury under oath, obstruction of justice, lying to the FBI. It’s a pretty rich menu. Someone, maybe more than a few someones, will be going to jail.

Read more …

Welcoming a British PM in his own country.

• Trump Welcomes British PM Keir Starmer to Turnberry, Scotland (CTH)

Earlier this morning President Donald Trump welcomed British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to Turnberry, Scotland where the two leaders will hold bilateral discussions on trade and foreign affairs. The video is prompted to 16:20. The bagpipes stop eventually in the video at 19:30. President Trump and Prime Minister Starmer take questions from the assembled press pool. President Trump calls out the British government for rampant illegal immigration, as Starmer tries to say his govt is deporting illegal migrants back to their home country. Questions centered heavily around the Israeli conflict with Hamas in Gaza. The plight of the Palestinians is a key focus point for the British people; an outcome of the mass Islamic migration that has taken place for the past two-decades in Great Britain. The population of Islamists in the U.K now drives the political priorities.

Toward the end of the video 28:00, President Trump notes the Russia/Ukraine conflict has led to a “disappointment in Vladimir Putin,” and a possibility that President Trump will reduce the 50-day deadline he gave to Russia. The majority of politicians within Great Britain want to expand the conflict with Russia as much as possible and bring the full NATO contingent into the war against Russia. President Trump has been reluctant to support expanded war as requested by the British, French and German group who formed a “coalition of the willing.” In addition to London being the Jihad capital of the region, Great Britain is also the home of the Fabian Socialists.

Read more …

Big Pharma does. Just ask: cui bono?

• Who Funds the WHO? (Fleetwood)

A new BMJ Global Health study has confirmed that the World Health Organization’s (WHO) private fundraising arm—the WHO Foundation—has received tens of millions of dollars from pharmaceutical giants, Big Tech companies, and anonymous sources, with nearly half the funding now untraceable. The study findings come after U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the United States will reject the WHO’s sweeping emergency powers treaty, warning that the same unelected body now seeking “global medical surveillance of every human being.” The BMJ Global Health study, published Wednesday, reads: “From its launch until the end of 2023, the foundation disclosed total donation receipts of US$82 783 930 overall, of which US$39 757 326 (48.0%) was from anonymous donations over US$100 000. In total, US$51 554 203 (62.3%) in anonymous donations were reported.”

The top-named donor was the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, long considered one of WHO’s most influential funders: “Donations varied by sector, with the largest named donations coming from the private philanthropic sector, including the Gates foundation and other family foundations, followed by social media companies, medical device companies and the banking/finance and pharmaceutical sectors.” Secretary Kennedy recently cut off U.S. funding to Bill Gates’ vaccine syndicate Gavi, citing peer-reviewed evidence that the DTP shot it promotes “may kill more children from other causes than it saves,” and condemning the alliance for treating vaccine safety as a PR problem instead of a public health priority. Moreover, a Gates Foundation–funded trial injected South African children with live tuberculosis-causing bacteria, infecting 260 kids and causing serious harm—all while excluding early post-vaccine infections from analysis and following a prior Gates-funded gain-of-function experiment that engineered TB to grow unchecked.

The WHO Foundation (WHOF), launched in 2020 to accept donations from entities the WHO cannot receive money from directly, now also counts Meta (Facebook), TikTok, Maybelline, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk among its known funders: “This included the announcement of a US$50 million commitment from the WHOF via contributions from Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, TikTok, Maybelline and a range of other partners.” A majority of funds aren’t even going to WHO programs—they’re going to the WHO Foundation’s own operational costs: “The largest overall category, by amount donated, was ‘WHO Foundation Operational Support’, which received just under US$40 million over the entire reporting period, representing a majority (approximately 56%) of all funding received by the Foundation to date.”

Even more concerning is the Foundation’s sharp drop in transparency, with its public reporting now rated as poor as controversial “dark money” think tanks. “In the first year of its operation… the WHOF would be rated ‘B’ for transparency… However, in the next two reporting periods, the WHOF would be assessed a ‘D’ for transparency…” “Nearly 80% of funds donated in January–December 2023 were from anonymous sources and in amounts of over US$100 000.” “Results show low and declining levels of transparency over time, potentially raising concerns about the level of outside influence and role of commercial interests in setting WHO priorities.” Though the Foundation claims to avoid tobacco and firearms money, the same is not true for fossil fuel, alcohol, sugar, or vaping interests:

“The current version of the WHOF gift policy sets out specific donor exclusions, yet only for tobacco and firearms manufacturers, while fossil fuel companies, alcohol producers, sugar sweetened beverage manufacturers and vaping companies, for example, are not mentioned in any form.” The Foundation even publicly advertises insider access to WHO: “Through its unparalleled access to WHO, the Foundation advances health equity by connecting and collaborating with visionary corporate partners to co-create solutions that have the highest impact.”The authors of the BMJ Global Health study—affiliated with the U.K.’s London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and University of Edinburgh—warn:

“This analysis of WHOF donor disclosures indicates levels of donor transparency akin to oft-criticised free market think tanks, with attendant risks for both undue influence and/or reputational damage for the WHOF, and by extension the WHO.” In the end, the WHO’s private fundraising arm isn’t just taking cash from Big Pharma and Big Tech—it’s running on a flood of untraceable money, shielding its true backers behind a wall of anonymity while claiming “unparalleled access” to global health power. How can the WHO claim neutrality when it’s bankrolled by pharmaceutical giants, Big Tech firms under scrutiny for censorship, and tens of millions in dark money from anonymous sources?

Read more …

“..this administration really is committed to systematically throwing out the suffocating groupthink and stagnation that have ruled in D.C. for decades.

• Six Months In, Here’s What Sets Trump 2.0 Apart (Charlie Kirk)

On Sunday, the second Trump administration turned six months old. President Trump’s first four years in the White House were already a big success, which is why I fought so hard to bring him back for a second go-round. Yet I think Trump’s second has already surpassed it in just one-eighth the time. Completely and instantly securing the U.S.-Mexico border after the four-year Biden invasion is one of the most important and impressive accomplishments in American presidential history. TV news said the president’s tough trade talk would crash the economy in days; instead the stock market hit record highs this very week and blue-collar wages are rising faster than they have in 60 years.

Under any other recent president, I am convinced the June Iran crisis would have ballooned into a full regime-change war, with far more money spent and many American lives lost. But under President Trump’s measured hand, America managed to strike a crippling blow to Iran’s nuclear program while suffering zero casualties and even bringing a ceasefire between Iran and Israel as part of the bargain. Yet when I think about the events of the past six months, it’s not the big wins I think about the most, but actually the small ones. They’re the triumphs that don’t necessarily grab the largest headlines that show this administration really is committed to systematically throwing out the suffocating groupthink and stagnation that have ruled in D.C. for decades.

Over and over, this administration is doing things that past Republicans could and should have done, yet inexplicably never did. For instance, all the way back in 1981, the outgoing Carter administration engineered a court ruling that abolished the federal government’s hugely successful hiring aptitude test on the grounds that it was (you already knew this was coming) racist. Presidents Reagan, Bush 41, or Bush 43 could have fought to undo that and restore merit-based hiring. Yet they never did, and over 45 years our government went rotten as DEI replaced merit. Now, this administration is finally acting to bring back merit in government. Imagine that! From Harvard to Hennepin County, this administration has begun toppling the race and sex-based discrimination that had taken root all over America in flagrant defiance of both our Constitution and historic American values.

It is purging DEI commissars from federal agencies, imposing uniform standards on the military, and sending out warnings to the private sector as well. This isn’t superficial – it’s the destruction in detail of a rotten, anti-American ideology. It would have been easy for Donald Trump to make a few speeches and sign a couple symbolic orders about “protecting women’s sports” – past Republican administrations would have settled for exactly that. But this administration has genuinely done the work to protect American children from the transgender mania, one of the great evils of our time.

Across America, health care providers are ending their involvement in child mutilation and similar treatments because of the dramatic increase in regulatory hostility from this administration. Children’s National Hospital in D.C., Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, Stanford Medicine, and more have all stopped providing surgeries or puberty blockers to minors in the face of this administration. Where it matters most, the Trump administration has stepped up to save children from predators calling themselves “doctors.” For my entire life, Republicans loved to make a show of complaining about America sending billions in aid to foreign countries. But they never stopped it – until Trump, who actually delivered by cutting USAID down to size and keeping more of America’s money in America. The same goes for defunding NPR, PBS, and Planned Parenthood: long years of talk, until the Trump administration fought to make it actually happen.

It was obvious for almost 20 years that the TSA’s policy requiring passengers to remove their shoes before boarding a flight was a pointless bit of security theater, yet Presidents Bush, Obama, and Biden all kept the policy around anyway. This administration finally got rid of it. While the Biden administration treated the cryptocurrency industry as a borderline criminal enterprise, Trump signed the GENIUS Act, which positions America to be at the lead of this innovative industry. The administration hasn’t just said the right things. It has done the right things, in detail, to make sure its promises are delivered at the micro level. The administration even made showerheads great again. And it’s that commitment to the small things and common sense that will pay dividends over the next three and a half years. Because an administration that cares about the details of governing will make all of America great, too.

Read more …

“..AI is likely to increasingly seek more control in order to achieve its assigned tasks..”

• ‘Godfather of AI’ Warns Governments To Collaborate Before It’s Too Late (RT)

Artificial intelligence pioneer and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Geoffrey Hinton has urged governments worldwide to collaborate in training AI systems not to harm humanity, warning that the rapidly advancing technology will soon likely surpass human intelligence. Speaking at the World Artificial Intelligence Conference (WAIC) in Shanghai on Saturday, Hinton said that despite divergent national interests, no country wants AI to dominate humanity. He noted that international cooperation is unlikely on offensive AI use – such as “cyberattacks, lethal autonomous weapons or fake videos for manipulating public opinion.” However, nations could form a “network of institutions” to guide the development of a highly intelligent AI “that doesn’t want to get rid of people,” Hinton added.

He compared this proposed cooperation to Soviet-US collaboration on nuclear non-proliferation during the Cold War. Hinton, often referred to as the “Godfather of AI,” likened AI development to “raising a tiger cub” that could become dangerous once it matures. “There’s only two options if you have a tiger cub as a pet. Figure out if you can train it so it never wants to kill you, or get rid of it,” the scientist said. He explained that AI is likely to increasingly seek more control in order to achieve its assigned tasks as it grows more intelligent, and simply “turning it off” when it outpaces humanity will not be an option. “We will be like three-year-olds and they will be like adults,” Hinton said.

Speaking to the press later in the day, he noted that it should be relatively easy for “rational” nations to cooperate on the subject, but said it may be “difficult” for the US under “its current administration.” On Wednesday, the White House announced its “action plan” to achieve “global dominance” in AI through investments, subsidies, and the removal of legal restrictions on the technology’s development. Beijing has announced its intention to establish an organization to coordinate international cooperation on AI. “We should strengthen coordination to form a global AI governance framework,” Chinese Premier Li Qiang said at the WAIC on Saturday.

Read more …

“Although I never thought of him in such an overt role. I’d only credited the fact that he was a homosexual rental boy in Chicago’s bathhouses.”

• Doug Casey on Global Disintegration (IM)

Matt Smith: All right, good morning, Doug. I think the biggest thing in the news is that Obama is a traitor. I mean, we know this officially now. Although a lot of this information had been uncovered in years past—about RussiaGate and all of that—the connections weren’t as clear as they are now, based on Tulsi’s release of information and what she’s told Trump. So much so that Trump felt quite confident recently, in an open forum at a press conference, to just outright call him a traitor. He said, “I’d like to say let’s give it time and just see, but we know he was a traitor.”

Doug Casey: I can’t wait to find out. Although I never thought of him in such an overt role. I’d only credited the fact that he was a homosexual rental boy in Chicago’s bathhouses. Too bad that’s been pretty well swept under the rug.

Matt Smith: I was always fixated on the citizenship or birth certificate thing personally. But you know, bathhouses, birth certificate, Columbia University—no one knew him when he went there. There are a lot of weird things in his past.

Doug Casey: That’s true. There are a lot of indications that he’s a genuine Manchurian Candidate. They don’t just come out of nowhere. But anybody can be elected president—or installed as president today. We almost had Kamala Harris, a total nothing-nobody who can’t even string together words into a coherent sentence.

Matt Smith: And we had Biden, who was unfit—incapable mentally.

Doug Casey: Yes, and they almost ran him instead of Kamala. This is all crazy. I guess the question is: Are they going to be able to prove that Obama was conducting a coup in the US? I’m not surprised, because coups occur—different types—all the time in all kinds of countries around the world. So why not the US? Although the US used to be unique in that it was formed to defend the average citizen against the government, that’s ancient history. That’s what the Bill of Rights is all about, which is unique, actually. But it’s a dead letter at this point. Another question is: Will Trump pursue this thing right to the end? Can they mount evidence? Can they find a fair venue to try Obama? And even if they find that he’s criminally liable for treason, will they prosecute him right to the end? Major scandal. Much bigger than Benedict Arnold.

Matt Smith: Yeah, and it’s weird to make these declarations without—you’d assume there would be cases. Like, the declaration wouldn’t be made before there are actually cases filed.

Doug Casey: I agree. And Tulsi Gabbard impresses me as a very levelheaded person who wouldn’t just fly off the handle. Of course, she’s a hardcore leftist who believes in all kinds of standard leftist things, but they don’t have a lot to do with her current position running the so-called intelligence community. It’s funny they call it a “community.” That sounds so benign and beneficial. Everybody likes communities. Our intelligence community is full of hardcore killers and sociopaths. I can’t wait to see how this plays out. It serves as a good distraction from the Epstein mess, that’s for sure.

Matt Smith: You’ve got to wonder—do they take this approach and really be aggressive? Because they can. Obviously, there’s a conspiracy there, which means all kinds of people could be swept up by this easily, and arrests could be made. I mean, one of the most aggressive charges they used against the J6 people was conspiracy to overthrow the government, or something like that. Some major thing, and they went after them super hard—morning raids and everything. If they really believe this, they could go after Comey, Clapper, Gina Haspel, and a whole bunch of people right away without even touching the president. Of course, J6 was just little people. That was just the peasants. You can round them up. But it’s hunting big game when you go after these major-league criminals.

Doug Casey: I hope they don’t go after Hillary too hard and heavy. God forbid that Tulsi commits suicide or has an accident. She could be added to a list of—how many here? Forty-five or fifty other possible Arkancides, as they say.

Matt Smith: So what’s your best guess on whether or not this will be something that serves as political theater that motivates the base for the next couple of years—appointing a special counsel, for instance, to investigate it—or will this actually turn into something real?

Doug Casey: I think it’s a coin flip. But it’s possible that this will make the big time. I mean, look at Watergate. Watergate was a big nothing. It was just a break-in for political reasons.

Matt Smith: One could say that was a coup.

Doug Casey: You could say that. And in that coup, it wasn’t the coup itself that was the problem. It was the cover-up that was.

Matt Smith: Well, what I mean is I think a lot of people used it against him and told Nixon—like all the Republicans in the Senate told him, “You don’t have the votes. You’ve got to get out of here,” you know, and he just walked away.

Doug Casey: There is a difference between what’s going on now and what happened in the Nixon days. Of course, nobody liked Nixon. I certainly don’t. He was a creepy guy and a disaster for the country. But the Democrats are really out-and-out communists at this point. I know that sounds inflammatory to say, but when it comes to their philosophical beliefs—yes, they’re all Marxists, ultra-hardcore leftists, socialists, statists, and what-have-you. And we’re on the ragged edge, I still think, of a civil war in the US because the Red and Blue people hate each other. It’s not just a bunch of leftist students like in the ’60s. Nasty attitudes are widely inseminated throughout US society. Yeah, we could have a civil war. And if you do prosecute these horrible people, it’s hard to say what their supporters will do. These things can take on a life of their own.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

zinc


bros

glyphosate

heart

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 24 2025

Jul 242025
 
 July 24, 2025  Posted by at 9:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  102 Responses »


Max Ernst Inspired hill 1950

 

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

 

 

Treason
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1947688498330247277

tulsi


Bannon

2020

Fed

Mearsheimer
https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1947723599801925912

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

https://twitter.com/DNIGabbard/status/1948007534960198036?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1948007534960198036%7Ctwgr%5Eaebb331bf68ee0ee74f45252db892d1f0e19f30e%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F621884-obama-ordered-putin-trump-reports%2F

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

That Congresswoman can only be MTG.

• US Congresswoman Labels Zelensky ‘Dictator’ (RT)

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

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

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

https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1947777633586159856

Read more …

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

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

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

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

Time to go

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

The EU taxpayer pays to be deceived…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

• Whose Politics Canceled Stephen Colbert? (Daniel McCarthy)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

The President sinks below 20%.

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

• Macron’s Popularity Hits Record Low (RT)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

 

 

 

 

elon 2024

Starship

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 19 2025

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


Paul Gauguin Tahitian scene 1892

 

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

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1946261573301096571

tucker

letter

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Russiagate all over again.

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Sounds like a narrow escape. What about EU countries?

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Shaking so many hands you get bruises on yours.

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

People easily get nervous about their pensions.

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Guess they don’t mind looking stupid.

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Talking about the EU…

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Quite a few have woken up.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• Release Ghislaine Maxwell (Paul Craig Roberts)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity (RCW)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

 

 

 

 

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

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

https://twitter.com/itsme_urstruly/status/1945935561019281734

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 2 2025

Jul 022025
 
 July 2, 2025  Posted by at 8:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  32 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Woman with blue collar (Portrait d’Inez) 1941

 

• Senate Passes the ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’-With 3 GOP Defections (Margolis)
• Trump Says DOGE Should Investigate Musk (RT)
• Trump Vs. Musk: “Big, Beautiful Bill” Feud Sparks Overnight Firestorm (ZH)
• Media Forced To Admit Trump’s Tariffs Are Working As Revenues Spike (ZH)
• Pentagon Halts Weapons Supplies To Kiev Over Depleting Stockpiles (RT)
• ‘Catastrophic’ Budget Increase Will Destroy NATO – Lavrov (RT)
• Putin and Macron Talk For First Time In Three Years – Kremlin (RT)
• Italy Could Classify $13.5 Billion Bridge As NATO Spending – Poltico (RT)
• 1 in 5 Illegal Migrants Now Simply Flying Into Germany (RMX)
• Poland Reintroduces Immigration Controls (RT)
• President Trump’s Plan for the Middle East (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Trump Says Israel Agrees To 60-Day Gaza Ceasefire, Urges Hamas To Accept (ZH)
• Syria Could Drop Demand That Israel Return The Golan Heights (RT)
• AI Is The Only Thing Keeping The World From Total Stagnation – Peter Thiel (Flor)
• Kennedy Labels US Democrats ‘War Party’ (RT)
• RFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets On Tucker (VF)

 

 

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1940120314744070596

Miller census
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1939702115515191304

RFK

j6

https://twitter.com/TheGabriel72/status/1939831962224529910

Candace

Fraud

 

 

Ritter’s Rant 017: The Blame Game

 

 

 

 

“We’re just extending current tax policy,” he said. “We are preventing a $4 trillion tax increase on the American people. When you vote against this, that’s who you’d be voting for.”

• Senate Passes the ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’-With 3 GOP Defections (Margolis)

After days of gridlock and backroom wrangling, the Senate today passed the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,’ the legislative linchpin of President Trump’s second-term agenda. The tally was 51 yeas and 50 nays, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tiebreaking vote. The Senate was locked in a “vote-a-rama”—a procedural endurance test where senators burn the midnight oil, lobbing amendment after amendment in a desperate bid to tweak, torpedo, or salvage the bill. With a razor-thin majority, Republicans could not afford more than three defections, which is why Vice President JD Vance was summoned to the Capitol to cast the tie-breaking vote. Vance has already played this role before, and it’s clear the White House was counting on him to drag this bill across the finish line.

The real drama, however, wasn’t coming from Democrats—they were united in opposition, as always—but from within the GOP ranks. Senators like Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins became the focal points of intense lobbying, their votes courted with a mix of sweeteners and veiled threats. In the end, Murkowski voted for the bill; Collins voted against it, along with Sens. Thom Tillis and Rand Paul. Naturally, Democrats were panicking, posting apocalyptic predictions on social media. On Monday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune blasted Democrats for what he called a “mind-blowing” display of hypocrisy over the national debt, accusing them of pretending to care about fiscal responsibility now that Republicans are in charge.

“It is rich to hear Democrats all of a sudden concerned about debt and deficits,” Thune said on the Senate floor, as lawmakers debated President Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill.” “Really? I mean, I’ve been here a long time, and I’ve not been involved in a single spending debate in which Republicans [weren’t] trying to spend less and Democrats [weren’t] trying to spend more—except when it comes to national security. Democrats are always willing to cut defense, but never want to cut anywhere else.” Thune reminded the chamber that Democrats had full control of Congress and the White House just a few years ago and used reconciliation not to cut deficits, but to push through massive spending packages.

“One of the bills cost $2 trillion. The other cost $1 trillion. And it was all spending,” he said. “That’s the fundamental difference between us. Democrats like government—and when you send money to Washington, money is power.” Thune contrasted that with the GOP’s effort to stop a looming tax hike. “We’re just extending current tax policy,” he said. “We are preventing a $4 trillion tax increase on the American people. When you vote against this, that’s who you’d be voting for.” The bill now heads to the House.

Massie

Read more …

Has he offered to repay the $400 million Musk paid into his campaign?

• Trump Says DOGE Should Investigate Musk (RT)

US President Donald Trump has suggested that Elon Musk should be investigated by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which the tech billionaire formerly headed, for allegedly benefiting excessively from government subsidies. Musk, a former ally of Trump, stepped down as the head of DOGE last month amid disagreements with the president over his so-called “big, beautiful” budget bill, which includes a $5 trillion debt ceiling increase. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO has repeatedly criticized the legislation, saying it undermined his work with DOGE to cut federal spending. The tech billionaire attacked the bill and its supporters again on Tuesday as the US Senate began voting on the amendments to Trump’s 940-page proposal.

“Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame,” Musk wrote on X. “And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth,” he warned. The entrepreneur also reiterated his call for a new “America Party” to be formed to serve as “an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a VOICE.” Trump, who claims that the actual reason for Musk’s anger was not the “big, beautiful bill,” but his plans to roll back the government’s electric vehicle (EV) subsidies, fired back at the Tesla and SpaceX CEO shortly afterwards in a post on his Truth Social platform.

“Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far, and without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa,” he wrote. Without the assistance from the government to Musk’s companies, there would be “no more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE. Perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this? BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED!!!” Trump insisted. “Elon Musk knew, long before he so strongly Endorsed me for President, that I was strongly against the EV Mandate. It is ridiculous, and was always a major part of my campaign. Electric cars are fine, but not everyone should be forced to own one,” Trump added.

Read more …

“As for Trump’s threat about “no more rocket launches, satellites” — referring to Musk’s company SpaceX — good luck following through on that. SpaceX is the reason the U.S. is leading the global space race..”

• Trump Vs. Musk: “Big, Beautiful Bill” Feud Sparks Overnight Firestorm (ZH)

Update (0800 ET):President Trump on Elon Musk this morning:
TRUMP: MUSK IS UPSET HE LOST THE EV MANDATE BUT ‘HE COULD LOSE A LOT MORE THAN THAT’
TRUMP, ASKED ABOUT DEPORTING MUSK, SAYS HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK

* * *
Tesla shares slid in premarket trading in New York following a late-night clash between CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump. The feud played out across their respective social media platforms. “Elon Musk knew, long before he so strongly Endorsed me for president, that I was strongly against the EV Mandate. It is ridiculous, and was always a major part of my campaign. Electric cars are fine, but not everyone should be forced to own one. Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far, and without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The president continued, “No more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE. Perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this? BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED!!!” The Truth Social post came after Musk slammed Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” on X ahead of the final vote, vowing to launch a new political party, claiming that Republicans and Democrats are merely a ‘uniparty’ operating with a limitless taxpayer-funded credit card.

Tesla has long benefited from the $7,500 EV tax credit, which the BBB plan aims to eliminate. While this move has been widely anticipated, it could ultimately work in Tesla’s favor, hitting rivals like Rivian, Lucid, and legacy automakers far harder, as many still rely heavily on such subsidies to stay afloat. Tesla shares are down 4% in premarket trading, currently hovering around $303 per share. On the year, shares are down 21%, as of Monday’s close. As for Trump’s threat about “no more rocket launches, satellites” — referring to Musk’s company SpaceX — good luck following through on that. SpaceX is the reason the U.S. is leading the global space race.

Read more …

“If they buy more from US sources or countries not on the list, then their costs will remain low. If they don’t, then they must shift the costs in other ways.”

• Media Forced To Admit Trump’s Tariffs Are Working As Revenues Spike (ZH)

The debate is raging this week over increased government spending and the potential raising of the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, with many fiscal conservatives splitting with the GOP and the Trump Administration over what they feel is a betrayal of their campaign promises to reduce government waste. Trump argues that all the elements included in his “big beautiful bill” are necessary in order to revitalize the US economy and break from the interdependency of the current globalist model. Can the dollar continue to absorb the pressure of ever increasing debt obligations? Is there a way to cut the debt without cutting spending? At least one aspect of Trump’s fiscal plan is showing success in this area despite the warnings of critics; the establishment media has been forced to admit that the administration’s tariff efforts are actually working.

The US has collected over $121 billion in revenues from tariffs on imported goods, and despite claims that tariffs are a “tax on the consumer”, prices on the shelf have not risen so far. Opponents of the policy are struggling to explain the data. Some still argue that disaster is right around the corner while others are acknowledging that there is a potential to pay off US debt over time if the import duties remain in place for the long term. Misconceptions about tariffs lead the public to believe that they are a tax on foreign producers or governments, but tariffs are in fact taxes on companies sourcing products internationally from nations on the duties list. The taxes place the responsibility of adaptation on corporations – If they buy more from US sources or countries not on the list, then their costs will remain low. If they don’t, then they must shift the costs in other ways.

Raising prices is the last thing any company not producing necessities wants to do. Consumers can easily cut back on peripheral goods. In other words, the assertion that tariffs are a hidden tax on the public is rooted in a lack of understanding on import duties and how they affect markets. Consumers will buy from producers that keep prices down by adapting to the tariffs, and there are many ways to adapt. It’s that simple. Democrats and some conservatives argued that prices would rise exponentially as international corporations immediately deferred costs on consumers in order to offset the added expenses on imported raw materials and manufactured goods. They were wrong.

The personal consumption expenditures price index, the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation gauge, rose 2.3% in May, modestly above the central bank’s 2% annual target. The May Consumer Price Index rose at an annual rate of 2.4%, cooler than economists expected. Some blame the “front loading” of imports (increased orders of goods before the tariffs went into effect). However, front loading was estimated to act as a stop-gap for only two months (possibly three by some predictions). Tariffs were initiated in February and though there have been fluctuations it’s been five months waiting for the tariff asteroid to explode American wallets and nothing has happened.

Will companies eventually shift the tariff burden on American consumers over the next year? A better question would be can they shift the burden in a weaker retail market? Would they take the risk of plunging sales? Or will they do what they should have been doing all along: Buy a larger percentage of their goods from US producers and bring manufacturing back home? At the current rate, tariffs could generate around $300 billion by the end of this year and $1.2 trillion over the next four years. It’s not enough to offset increased debt spending, but it does offer an alternative to hiking taxes on the general public (which is what Democrats would do). And if inflation concerns continue to prove over-hyped, then the tariff model could remain in place for many years to come.

Read more …

All they needed was a credible excuse.

• Pentagon Halts Weapons Supplies To Kiev Over Depleting Stockpiles (RT)

The Pentagon has suspended shipments of several categories of US-made weapons to Ukraine, according to Politico and NBC News. The decision reportedly followed an internal review of American weapons reserves ordered by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, amid rising concerns about the rate at which munitions are being depleted. The move reportedly affects dozens of Patriot missile interceptors, Stinger and AIM air-to-air missiles, hundreds of Hellfire and GMLRS systems, as well as thousands of 155mm artillery shells that Washington had previously pledged to Kiev. Some of the weapons were already positioned in Europe have now been withheld before handover to Ukrainian forces, NBC reported. The weapons in question had been funded under the Biden administration through two mechanisms: direct drawdowns from existing US military stockpiles and the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), which contracts new production from defense contractors.

The Trump administration has not requested any additional Ukraine aid, and existing resources are expected to last only “several more months,” according to Politico. White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly defended the move as a necessary step to prioritize American defense needs. “This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a DOD review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe. The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned – just ask Iran,” she said, without confirming any details. The decision to freeze or slow-walk the remaining aid without formal notice to Congress may raise legal concerns similar to the 2019 withholding of some Ukraine assistance under Trump’s first administration –a move the Government Accountability Office ruled unlawful at the time, Politico noted.

Kiev has repeatedly voiced frustration over what it sees as dwindling support from Washington. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky met with President Donald Trump at the NATO summit in The Hague last week but received no firm promises. Trump said Patriots were “very hard to get” and that the US needed them for its own defense and for Israel. Trump has stated he intends to negotiate a ceasefire with Moscow and bring the conflict to an end. Hegseth said last month that the White House is reducing military funding for Kiev as part of its “America First” strategy and in hopes of achieving a diplomatic settlement.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration signed a deal giving the US priority access to Ukraine’s mineral wealth –a step the White House said would allow America to “get back” some of the hundreds of billions spent under Biden. The Pentagon’s policy shift appears to reflect a broader realignment under Trump, who has publicly questioned the rationale behind endless aid to Ukraine. Russian presidential envoy and head of the Direct Investment Fund, Kirill Dmitriev, noted that the move “highlights the real limits of Western capacity and the shifting priorities of the US military.”

Read more …

“Perhaps he foresees – being such a prophet – that this catastrophic, in my view, increase in NATO countries’ budgets will also lead to the organization’s collapse.”

• ‘Catastrophic’ Budget Increase Will Destroy NATO – Lavrov (RT)

The results of NATO countries hiking military budgets will be “catastrophic” and lead to the bloc’s collapse, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Monday. His remarks mirrored Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski’s earlier suggestion that a boost in Moscow’s defense spending could trigger the fall of the government. At NATO’s most recent summit last month in the Hague, member states committed to spending 5% of GDP on the military – a significant rise from the previous 2% target. Poland backed the hike, arguing that failing to achieve the new benchmark “as soon as possible” would pose a ‘‘threat’‘ to the bloc considering the ongoing Ukraine conflict.

In an interview with Polish media, Sikorski drew a parallel between modern Russia and the late USSR. Referring to President Vladimir Putin, he stated that “he himself once said that the Soviet Union fell because it spent too much on armament, and now he is doing exactly the same thing.” Meanwhile, speaking to the press at the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) Foreign Ministers Council in Kyrgyzstan, Sergey Lavrov took issue with Sikorski’s characterization, countering: “Perhaps he foresees – being such a prophet – that this catastrophic, in my view, increase in NATO countries’ budgets will also lead to the organization’s collapse.”

Lavrov also said that Russia “plans to reduce its military spending,” which now accounts for 6.3% of GDP, and “be guided by common sense, but not made-up threats like NATO member states, including Sikorsky.” The 5% GDP target faced opposition from some NATO members. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said his country could not allocate one-fifth of its state budget to defense, while Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez called the goal “not only unreasonable but also counterproductive.”

Read more …

Makes the ‘war on Russia’ narrative much harder to maintain.

• Putin and Macron Talk For First Time In Three Years – Kremlin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has spoken with his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron by telephone, the Kremlin press service said on Tuesday. It is the first phone contact between the leaders since September 2022. The conversation revolved around the situation in the Middle East, as well as the Ukraine conflict. During the call, Putin told Macron that the Ukraine conflict was “a direct consequence of the policies pursued by Western states, which for many years ignored Russia’s security interests,” and had established an “anti-Russian bridgehead” in the country, the press service stated. The Russian leader reiterated Moscow’s approach to any settlement, stating that it must “be comprehensive and long-term, address the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis and be based on new territorial realities.”

Putin and Macron also discussed the situation in the Middle East, namely the recent escalation between Israel and Iran. The two leaders agreed that diplomacy was the way forward, the Kremlin press service noted, adding that they agreed to maintain contact for the sake of “possible coordination of the positions.” Both countries share a “special responsibility” to maintain “peace and security,” as well as to preserve the “global nuclear non-proliferation regime,” the two men agreed, according to Moscow. “In this regard, the importance of respecting Tehran’s legitimate right to develop peaceful nuclear energy and continuing to fulfill its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, including cooperation with the IAEA, was emphasized,” the Kremlin press service said.

France has long asserted itself as one of Kiev’s key backers in the conflict with Moscow. Paris has committed more than €3.7 billion ($4.1 billion) in military assistance to Ukraine since the escalation of the conflict in February 2022, according to the Kiel Institute’s aid tracker. Macron has also repeatedly floated the idea of deploying French soldiers to Ukraine. While the deployment never materialized, Paris repeatedly signaled that troops could be sent after the end of hostilities to act as a deterrent against Russia. Moscow has firmly opposed Western forces in Ukraine in any role, warning the it could trigger an all-out war between Russia and NATO.

In recent months, however, Macron has softened his stance, admitting back in May that the French have done “the maximum we could” to help and could no longer supply Ukraine with weapons. Last week, the French president said that NATO’s European members have no wish to “endlessly” arm themselves and should “think about” restoring dialogue with Russia “right now” in order to negotiate broader European security as part of a potential Ukraine peace deal.

Read more …

“..the new designation of the project would make raising money for it easier and would also “override bureaucratic obstacles..”

• Italy Could Classify $13.5 Billion Bridge As NATO Spending – Poltico (RT)

Italian authorities are looking to classify a long-term project to construct a bridge connecting the mainland to the island of Sicily as a NATO expenditure amid their struggle to meet the bloc’s spending goals, according to Politico. The idea of creating an overpass to the largest island in the Mediterranean had been discussed in Italy for many decades, but its realization has been hampered by high costs, the difficulty of operating in a seismic zone and other issues. If built by the current government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, the 3.6-km-long suspension bridge across the Strait of Messina will become the longest in the world. In its article on Monday, Politico described Italy as “one of NATO’s lowest military spenders,” with Rome investing only 1.49% of its GDP in defense last year, a far cry from the 5% goal approved at the bloc’s summit in The Hague in June.

Marking the $13.5 billion bridge as a NATO spending could help Meloni meet the bloc’s 5% target and, at the same time, “convince a war-wary public of the need for major defense outlays at a time when Italy is already inching toward austerity,” the article read. An unnamed Italian government official told the outlet that no formal decision has yet been made by Rome on classifying the bridge as a security project, but further talks would likely be held soon to “see how feasible this feels.” According to another official from the Italian Treasury, who also talked to Politico, the new designation of the project would make raising money for it easier and would also “override bureaucratic obstacles, litigation with local authorities that could challenge the government in court claiming that the bridge will disproportionately damage their land.”

The problem for Rome is that the Strait of Messina lies outside of Italy’s only designated NATO military mobility corridor, the article pointed out. However, the Italian case is backed by the fact that only 3.5% from the NATO spending target must be allocated for core military needs, while the remaining 1.5% could be steered toward broader strategic resilience projects, including infrastructure. “Whether NATO — and more importantly, US President Donald Trump, who loves a big building project — will buy into that logic is another matter,” Politico noted.

Read more …

They do it on purpose?

• 1 in 5 Illegal Migrants Now Simply Flying Into Germany (RMX)

In the past 12 months, the German Federal Police have identified 12,858 illegal migrants who entered Germany by air, a significant number that is on the rise. Now, migrants are increasingly choosing simply to fly into Germany instead of dealing with the long ordeal of crossing multiple borders in dangerous conditions. This increase in migrants flying into Germany jumped after Germany tightened border controls.In May of this year alone, at least 977 illegal entries were recorded using air travel to enter Germany, accounting for over 20 percent of all identified illegal border crossings.However, the true number of such crossings is likely much higher, as foreign nationals traveling within the Schengen area are not required to show identification. As a result, they are often only discovered long after they have left the airport, making it impossible to turn them back.

“It would be consistent to also notify the Schengen air borders,” said Heiko Teggatz, a board member of the German Police Union (DPolG).“If the smugglers aren’t completely stupid, they’ll simply bring their people from other Schengen states to Germany by plane. Today, you can easily book a plane ticket within the Schengen area, and you generally don’t have to show your ID anywhere.”All of this information came from a government response from Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) after Alternative for Germany (AfD) MP Gottfried Curio, the party’s domestic policy spokesperson, launched an inquiry.Dobrindt was forced to acknowledge that the tightened controls “refer exclusively to the land borders,” meaning no illegal migrants were turned back at airports.

This trend of illegal entry by plane has intensified since the new federal government instructed officials to begin rejecting asylum seekers at internal borders. Teggatz confirmed this “increase in secondary migration via airports,” noting that “Medium-sized commercial airports like Hanover are particularly affected.” Despite hundreds of officers being deployed at German airports, checks are almost exclusively conducted on flights from outside the Schengen area. That means if a migrant makes it to Greece and manages to get on a plane to Germany, there is little chance he will be checked.= Dobrindt, like his predecessor, Nancy Faeser (SPD), has reported rejections of migrants coming into Germany, but only from land borders. It remains unclear why airports were not included in tightened border measures.

Read more …

People don’t go to Poland to stay there; they’re on their way to Germany.

• Poland Reintroduces Immigration Controls (RT)

Poland has decided to temporarily reintroduce border controls along its frontiers with Germany and Lithuania to stop the flow of illegal migrants. All three nations are part of the Schengen Area, which allows free travel across most of the bloc. The EU has been grappling with a refugee crisis since at least 2015, largely caused by upheavals in the Middle East and Africa, and later by the Ukraine conflict. Warsaw has previously accused German police of “dumping” thousands of migrants back across the Polish border. Some activists have organized self-styled ‘citizen border patrols’ along the German frontier. “We remain advocates for freedom of movement in Europe, but only on condition that there is the shared will of all neighbors… to minimize the uncontrolled flow of migrants across our borders,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said during a cabinet meeting on Tuesday.

He stated that temporary border controls would similarly be implemented on Poland’s border with Lithuania.In 2023, neighboring Germany, the EU’s top destination for asylum seekers, introduced temporary controls on its borders with Poland and the Czech Republic to stem the flow. Most of the people entering Poland travel on to western Europe, where benefits for asylum seekers are more generous. Berlin has since repeatedly renewed the controls. Under the Schengen agreement, participant nations are allowed to temporarily reintroduce border controls in emergency situations, with the Covid-19 outbreak having been one recent instance. Tighter national migration and border control policies could lead to the destruction of the EU, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel warned in May.

Commenting on the restoration of control on the Polish-Lithuanian border, Tusk accused the Baltic state, as well as neighboring Latvia, of having lax border controls. The lapses have supposedly allowed illegal migrants to cross over from non-EU Belarus, and subsequently to enter Poland. Since 2021, Warsaw has accused Minsk and Moscow of deliberately orchestrating the flow of illegal migrants into EU states. Russia and Belarus have denied the allegations.

Read more …

“If Netanyahu has any sense, he will let Trump rescue the Israeli people.”

• President Trump’s Plan for the Middle East (Paul Craig Roberts)

In discussion yesterday with Nima on Dialogue Works about the Israeli-Iranian-Trump-Netanyahu ongoings, I suggested a bold and innovative plan for the Middle East that Trump should present to the world in a speech to the UN General Assembly. I even offered to write the speech. https://www.youtube.com/live/L-8j_NSxC14 I formed the plan from mulling over insights into Trump’s attitude toward the Middle East from Gilbert Doctorow, Michel Chossudovsky, and from Trump’s news conference with Netanyahu when Trump stated Washington’s claim to Gaza as an American possession. Doctorow pointed out that it was irrelevant whether Trump had destroyed the three underground Iranian nuclear sites. What mattered is that Trump’s assertion, true or false, had destroyed Netanyahu’s excuse for war with Iran. Is Netanyahu going to risk Washington’s protection by contradicting President Trump?

Chossudovsky pointed out that in the press conference at which Trump stated Washington’s claim to Gaza, Trump expressed the idea of a Gaza resort as the anchor for an American Middle East colony in place of Greater Israel. In front of Netanyahu Trump unveiled a vision of a Middle East made rich by American management. It would be a different kind of colonial management from the British/French approach that extracted assets and sent them home to Britain and France. Trump envisioned a partnership in which the “colonies” would be shareholders sharing in the profits from economic development. This would be good for Israel as well. When a presstitute asked Netanyahu his opinion, Netanyahu did not disavow it.

I was surprised that Trump’s claim to Gaza and its reconstruction and his idea of a reconstruction of the Middle Eastern countries that previous US regimes had destroyed for Israel did not get a big news play. But Chossudovsky saw it, and he helped me to see it. Ask yourselves, Is there any better solution to the Israeli-Muslim problem in the Middle East? Israel is smaller in area than New Jersey. Iran is 2.5 times larger than Texas. Israel has fewer than 10 million people. Iran has more than 90 million people. Iran can produce modern missiles in greater quantities than Israel can be supplied from the US. In a recent news conference in a demonstration of Israeli insanity, Netanyahu added the territory of Pakistan to Greater Israel. Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a population of 250 million.

Israel has zero chance of winning a war with Iran and the same for Pakistan. Israel knows this but is confident that the power that the Israel Lobby can exert over dumbshit American’s lives and money guarantees that Americans will fight more wars for Israel. The Israeli-subsidized Christian Zionists–a contradiction of terms–are all for it. Amazing, isn’t it, Israel has even corrupted Christian evangelicals, paying their preachers to send Americans to war for Israel. What might be reducing Israel’s control over America is the weakened position of Netanyahu, under two Israeli court indictments for crimes, and by the destruction inflicted on Israel by its irresponsible attack on Iran, culminating in Netanyahu’s plea to Trump to stop the war before Israel had to sue for peace.

This leaves Trump with the upper hand. Israel now understands that it cannot exist without Washington’s protection. Thus Trump can force Netanyahu to give up the unrealistic Zionist goal of Greater Israel and comply with Trump’s vision of a colony under America’s redevelopment of the Middle East. If Trump would take this plan to the UN, it would silence Israel and the American neoconservative zionists and save us from war that could turn nuclear. If Trump establishes peace and cooperation in the Middle East, he can do the same with the West and Russia. Russia was the ally of Britain and France in both WW I and WW II. It is not difficult to come to terms with a former ally. There is no ideological reason and no territorial reason for conflict between the West and Russia.

Think about America’s waste of resources and prestige during the first quarter of the 21st century. Trillions of dollars spend destroying Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Somalia with zero gain. No one except military/security war profits got anything from these wars. There was no terrorist threat. Washington brought no one democracy, only destruction. Think about the destruction Washington brought to entire countries for no purpose than Israel’s absurd idea of a Greater Israel. The millions of dead, permanently maimed, and dislocated people, many of whom have located in Europe and the US burdening those taxpayers with their upkeep. WHO BENEFITTED??

Let’s give Trump a chance. An American partnership in the Middle East is far better than the conflicts inherent in Greater Israel. If Israel refuses to go along, Trump should just run over them. Israel is of no consequence in the world. Israel since its existence has never been anything except a cause of conflict, death, and destruction. Why a people like this has been tolerated, I do not know. Can Sunni and Shia be brought together and Muslims brought together with Jews? Seems fantastic. But perhaps they will see it as preferable to the continuation of endless bloodshed. If Netanyahu has any sense, he will let Trump rescue the Israeli people.

Read more …

Too many dead Gazans for a real ceasefire.

• Trump Says Israel Agrees To 60-Day Gaza Ceasefire, Urges Hamas To Accept (ZH)

President Trump said Tuesday that Israel has agreed on terms for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza and warned Hamas to accept the deal before conditions worsen. Trump announced the development as he prepares to host Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for talks at the White House on Monday. The US leader has been increasing pressure on the Israeli government and Hamas to broker a ceasefire and hostage agreement and bring about an end to the war in Gaza. “My Representatives had a long and productive meeting with the Israelis today on Gaza. Israel has agreed to the necessary conditions to finalize the 60 Day CEASEFIRE, during which time we will work with all parties to end the War,” Trump wrote, saying the Qataris and Egyptians would deliver the final proposal.

“I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better – IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE,” he said. Trump’s promise that it was his best and final offer may find a sceptical audience with Hamas. Even before the expiration of the war’s longest ceasefire in March, Trump has repeatedly issued dramatic ultimatums to pressure Hamas to agree to longer pauses in the fighting that would see the release of more hostages and a return of more aid to Gaza’s civilian populace. Israeli Minister for Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer was in Washington on Tuesday for talks with senior administration officials to discuss a potential Gaza ceasefire, Iran and other matters. Dermer was expected to meet with US Vice-President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff.

Earlier on Tuesday, Trump repeated his hope for forging an Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal next week. Asked if it was time to put pressure on Netanyahu to get a ceasefire deal done, Trump said the Israeli prime minister was ready to come to an agreement. “He wants to,” Trump said of Netanyahu in an exchange with reporters while visiting a new immigration detention facility in Florida. “I think we’ll have a deal next week.” Talks between Israel and Hamas have repeatedly faltered over a major sticking point – whether the war should end as part of any ceasefire agreement. About 50 hostages remain captive in Gaza, with less than half believed to be alive.

The development came as over 150 international charities and humanitarian groups called on Tuesday for disbanding a controversial Israeli- and US-backed system to distribute aid in Gaza because of chaos and deadly violence against Palestinians seeking food at its sites. The joint statement by groups including Oxfam, Save the Children and Amnesty International followed the killings of at least 10 Palestinians who were seeking desperately needed food, witnesses and health officials said. Meanwhile, Israeli air strikes killed at least 37 in southern Gaza’s Khan Younis, according to Nasser Hospital. “Tents, tents they are hitting with two missiles?” asked Um Seif Abu Leda, whose son was killed in the strikes. Mourners threw flowers on the body bags.

Read more …

“On Monday, President Donald Trump lifted most US sanctions on Syria in order to facilitate the flow of foreign aid for the country’s reconstruction.”

• Syria Could Drop Demand That Israel Return The Golan Heights (RT)

Former warlord Ahmad al-Sharaa, who seized power in Syria last year, may abandon the country’s claim to sovereignty over the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights in exchange for normalized ties with West Jerusalem, according to a report by Lebanese media. Israel captured a large portion of the 1,800 square kilometer region of Syria’s Quneitra Governorate during the 1967 war and effectively annexed it in 1981. Amid the turmoil during al-Sharaa’s rise to power, the IDF seized additional territory. The IDF has also carried out multiple airstrikes against Syrian troops loyal to the current government, which West Jerusalem said were intended to protect the local Druze population, an ethnoreligious minority community which inhabits the contested region.

Lebanese broadcaster LBCI reported Monday that the two countries could normalize relations as part of a broad agreement. Under the proposed deal, Israel would recognize al-Sharaa’s legitimacy, withdraw troops from areas seized since his December takeover, and agree to Syria’s military presence near its borders with Israel and Jordan, with certain restrictions. In exchange, “Israel is expected to secure full sovereignty” over the Golan Heights, LBCI said, citing sources familiar with Syrian affairs. The report added that internal hardliner opposition, including from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham – the jihadist group formerly led by al-Sharaa – could derail the effort.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said Monday that Israel will maintain control of the Golan Heights under any future peace arrangement with Syria. Al-Sharaa has sought international recognition since ousting President Bashar Assad. Under former President Barack Obama, the United States aimed to remove Assad through a combination of sanctions and covert support for anti-government armed groups labeled “moderate rebels.” On Monday, President Donald Trump lifted most US sanctions on Syria in order to facilitate the flow of foreign aid for the country’s reconstruction.

Read more …

“..if Trump didn’t win, he’d leave the country. Elon replied: “There’s nowhere to go.” That moment stuck with Thiel. Mars, once a symbol of civilizational escape and ambition, no longer felt like a real option—even to Musk..”

• AI Is The Only Thing Keeping The World From Total Stagnation – Peter Thiel (Flor)

Peter Thiel just did the most mind-exploding, crazy interview I’ve ever listened to. It’s so drastic, I still don’t know what to think – other than everyone should listen to it. So I dissected it piece by piece and organized it to draw some conclusions.nThis is what you cannot miss:

1. We are stuck. Thiel still believes in his “stagnation thesis.” His point? We’ve exited a 200-year period of accelerating change—1750 to 1970 was all about breakthroughs in physical reality: faster ships, railroads, cars, planes. It culminated in the Concorde and Apollo. But since then? Nothing. We’ve made marginal progress in “the world of bits” (internet, mobile, AI), but that’s not the same as reshaping the physical world. In biotech or cancer research, for example, progress is either negligible or cloaked in over-specialization that makes it impossible to track. As Thiel puts it: “The fact that it’s so hard to answer [whether we’re progressing] is itself cause for skepticism.”

2. Our future has been stolen—and it looks nothing like Back to the Future. Back to the Future II imagined 2015 as a world of flying cars, skateboards and radical transformation. What we got instead was smartphones and cars that look the same. Thiel’s kids watching 1985 on screen couldn’t tell it apart from today. “The world seems fairly similar.” That’s the cultural proof of stagnation: if a time traveler from 1985 landed in 2025, they’d be confused by the phone, but everything else would feel familiar. And the economic metric? Ask millennials: How are you doing compared to your parents? For most, the answer is worse.

3. We need to take more risks. Biotech is stuck. “We’ve made zero progress on dementia or Alzheimer’s in 40–50 years,” Thiel says. Scientists are trapped in a dead-end “beta-amyloid” theory that doesn’t work but keeps getting funded. We need to radically increase the risks we’re willing to take in medicine, aging, and beyond. Thiel wants a cultural return to the ambition of early modernity—Francis Bacon, Condorcet—when science promised immortality, not regulation. He tells the story of taking his PayPal team to a “freezing party” in 1999, where people bought cryonics insurance. “That was the last generation who still believed they could live forever.”

4. The moment Peter Thiel realized Elon lost faith in going to Mars. In 2024, Thiel joked to Elon Musk that if Trump didn’t win, he’d leave the country. Elon replied: “There’s nowhere to go.” That moment stuck with Thiel. Mars, once a symbol of civilizational escape and ambition, no longer felt like a real option—even to Musk. Why? Because “the woke AI and the socialist government would follow you to Mars.” The dream of Mars as a frontier for freedom had died. It was no longer a science project—it had become a political one. Thiel calls 2024 “the year Elon stopped believing in Mars.”

5. Will AI become stagnationist? AI is the only real exception to our stagnation—but Thiel worries it might reinforce it. He calls AI “more than a nothingburger, less than a total transformation.” Like the internet in the 1990s, it might boost GDP by 1% a year—but won’t restart the engines of human progress. And worse: it could become conformist intelligence. Like a Netflix algorithm that generates infinite okay-ish content, AI might flood the world with blandness, not breakthroughs. “If you don’t have AI, there’s nothing going on,” Thiel says. But he also warns: if AI becomes too “woke” or compliant, it will deepen the very stagnation it claims to solve.

6. Is AI hype—or is it transhumanism? Thiel sees modern transhumanism as not ambitious enough. It’s not that changing your body is weird—it’s that it’s pathetic compared to what early modern thinkers (and even Christianity) aimed for. “Transhumanism is just changing your body. But you also need to transform your soul.” He notes: the word nature never appears in the Old Testament. The Judeo-Christian story is about transcending nature—with God’s help. The critique of today’s “trans” ideas, he argues, isn’t that they go too far. It’s that they don’t go far enough.

7. The risk of the one-world totalitarian state: how the Antichrist would take over the world. Thiel introduces his most apocalyptic idea: that existential risk (AI, nukes, bioweapons) is being used to justify global governance. This leads to the ultimate form of stagnation: “a one-world state of the Antichrist.” The logic is seductive: to avoid destruction, centralize control. Nuclear weapons? A global authority must manage them. Dangerous AI? Global compute regulation. Thiel’s framing: The atheist slogan = “One world or none.” The Christian framing = “Antichrist or Armageddon.” The twist? The Antichrist doesn’t come with innovation. He comes with regulation. He offers “peace and safety”—and people submit.

8. Is Peter Thiel building the tools for the Antichrist? Thiel’s critics could argue: if anyone’s enabling global surveillance and control, isn’t it Thiel himself—via Palantir and military tech investments? He acknowledges the irony. He doesn’t believe he’s doing that, but concedes that many of the tools he’s helped build could be used that way. He warns that we’re already ruled—softly—by global regulators. The FDA doesn’t just control drugs in the U.S., but worldwide. Same with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “Nuclear power was supposed to be the technology of the 21st century,” he says. “And it somehow has gotten off-ramped all over the world.”

9. Are we already living under a moderate rule of the Antichrist? Thiel floats a chilling thought: what if the Antichrist isn’t a coming tyrant—but the mild technocracy we already live in? 50 years of “peace and safety” have come at the cost of progress. He cites 1 Thessalonians 5:3: “While people are saying, ‘Peace and safety,’ destruction will come on them suddenly…” Still, he insists we have agency. He rejects Calvinism and determinism. “There’s a huge scope for human freedom. Don’t wait for the lion to eat you.”

Read more …

“They were the party of free speech,” he continued. “When President Trump started advocating for free speech… the Democrats became openly for censorship.”

• Kennedy Labels US Democrats ‘War Party’ (RT)

US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has accused the Democratic Party of abandoning its traditional values and transforming into a pro-war, pro-censorship force defined largely by opposition to President Donald Trump. In a wide-ranging interview with conservative talk show host Tucker Carlson published Monday, Kennedy said the Democratic Party now instinctively reverses positions as soon as Trump adopts them. “The Democrats were the anti-war party,” Kennedy said. “But as soon as [Trump] expressed his opposition to the Ukraine war, they became the war party.” “They were the party of free speech,” he continued. “When President Trump started advocating for free speech… the Democrats became openly for censorship.”

Kennedy, a longtime Democrat who briefly ran as an independent candidate in 2024 before supporting Trump and joining his cabinet in early 2025, said he continues to champion the same principles but now faces opposition from former allies. “These were people I was friends with my whole life and I have not changed… but the party has just a knee-jerk reaction against anything that is Trump,” he told Carlson. Kennedy added that Democrats, once critical of the CIA and trade deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), shifted to support both once Trump voiced criticism. He also accused the party of undermining women’s sports, noting that his uncle, Senator Edward Kennedy, had helped write Title IX, a US federal civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination.

“You can go on and on with those examples, but President Trump is literally dictating the platform of the Democratic Party. Anything that he says, they’re going to be against,” he said, noting that this pattern reflects a deeper problem in American politics. “You know that partisanship by its nature is dishonest and it is the enemy of democracy,” RFK Jr. warned. “And in George Washington’s farewell speech, he said that he was very frightened about the rise of the political party because they would become self-interested rather than patriotic.”Kennedy, the founder of the anti-vaccine group Children’s Health Defense, has gained prominence in the US for questioning the safety and effectiveness of childhood inoculations and promoting the claim that they are linked to autism –a theory widely rejected by the scientific community.

He was also a vocal critic of the World Health Organization’s Covid-19 response measures, including lockdowns and the rapid rollout of experimental vaccines. Despite his controversial reputation, Kennedy denies being opposed to immunization, noting that his own children have been vaccinated. He has repeatedly stated that he advocates for stricter safety testing and more rigorous studies. After Kennedy endorsed Trump, the president vowed to give him broad authority over healthcare policy, saying he would let Kennedy “go wild.” Kennedy said most opposition to his policies as Health Secretary comes not from industry experts but from media and political operatives. “I get opposition from proxies to the industry. Yes. And I think the major opposition that I feel is from the mainstream media and from Democrats,” he said.

Read more …

“And the Democrats have him pegged as a guy who’s sort of sitting in the Cabinet meeting talking about how can we make billionaires richer. He’s the opposite of that. He’s a genuine populist,” Kennedy said.

• RFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets On Tucker (VF)

It’s not every day an active HHS Secretary sits down for 90 minutes straight with Tucker Carlson. But that’s exactly what happened, and Kennedy instantly seized Carlson’s attention with a chilling story of CDC corruption. He revealed that the health agency buried a 1999 internal study led by researcher Thomas Verstraten, which showed an alarming 1135% increase in autism risk from the hepatitis B vaccine. Kennedy said the researchers were “shocked” by the findings. So what did they do? They covered it up, according to Kennedy. “They got rid of all the older children essentially and just had younger children who are too young to be diagnosed [with autism].” RFK Jr. then explained the real reason why your pediatrician will kick you out of their practice for refusing vaccines.

“There’s a published article out there now that says that 50% of revenues to most pediatricians come from vaccines.” It’s all about the money. The higher the vaccination rate, the bigger the bonus. “And that’s why your pediatrician, if you say I want to go slow on the vaccines… will throw you out of his practice because you’re now jeopardizing that bonus structure.” To the claim that the vaccine–autism link has been “debunked,” Kennedy had a message for Anderson Cooper, Jake Tapper, and everyone who smugly insists on it. “None of the vaccines given to children in the first six months of life have ever been studied for autism.” Let that sink in. He went further, revealing that the CDC actually did find a link when they studied the DTaP vaccine.

But they dismissed it. Kennedy said they claimed it “didn’t count” because the data came from VAERS—the very system they use to track vaccine injuries. So when the evidence pointed to harm, they simply claimed their own system wasn’t reliable enough and took no steps to fix it. The vaccine corruption didn’t end there. Kennedy attested that the CDC killed off a vaccine injury reporting system that actually worked—because it worked too well. It showed that 1 in 37 vaccines caused an injury. Tucker was stunned. “Of all vaccines?” he asked. “Yeah,” Kennedy confirmed. RFK Jr. explained that the CDC funded a study led by researcher Ross Lazarus. It compared a sophisticated machine-counting system to VAERS. What did they find? VAERS was failing to catch over 99% of vaccine injuries.

The new system also revealed that 2.6% of all vaccinations resulted in an injury. So what did the CDC do? They shut it down in 2010. And they’re still using VAERS today—even though it’s a completely inadequate system. But Kennedy didn’t stop at old vaccine scandals. He also broke down Pfizer’s own COVID vaccine trial data. That trial showed a 23% higher death rate in the vaccinated group. Pfizer gave 21,720 people the vaccine and 21,728 the placebo. One vaccinated person died of COVID. Two placebo recipients died. They used this tiny difference to claim “100% effective” based on relative risk reduction. But in absolute terms, it took 22,000 vaccinations to save one life. Over six months, 21 vaccinated participants died of all causes, compared to 17 in the placebo group—a 23.5% higher death rate.

And then there’s vaccine spokesperson Paul Offit, often seen on CNN and other mainstream networks. Kennedy shared an infuriating story about how he literally “voted himself rich” on the rotavirus vaccine. While serving on the CDC’s ACIP committee, Offit voted to add rotavirus vaccination to the childhood schedule—even as he was developing his own competing vaccine. He guaranteed demand for his product. The first approved rotavirus vaccine, RotaShield, was yanked from the market for causing dangerous intussusception. Offit’s vaccine, RotaTeq, eventually replaced it. He and his partners later sold their rights to Merck for $186 million. As RFK Jr. said, Offit literally “voted himself rich.” When Carlson mentioned Fauci, Kennedy revealed how Fauci funded research that helped scientists hide evidence of lab-made viruses. The technique, called “seamless ligation,” allowed researchers to engineer viruses in a lab without leaving telltale genetic fingerprints.

RFK Jr. explained: “One of his fundees, Ralph Baric, from the University of North Carolina, developed a technique called the seamless ligation technique, which is a technique for hiding the laboratory origins of a manipulated virus.” “… normally if there’s a virus manipulated, researchers can look at the DNA sequences and they can say this thing was created in a lab. Ralph Baric had developed a technique that he called the no-see technique and its technical name was seamless ligation, and it was a way of hiding evidence of human tampering.” He called it the exact opposite of what real public health work should be. Carlson cut in, saying, “That’s what you would do if you’re creating viruses for biological warfare.”

The conversation shifted to Trump, leading to one of the biggest highlights of the entire interview. First, Kennedy explained that Trump chose his cabinet in an unorthodox way: he wanted to see three clips of each candidate performing on TV before considering them for the job. “One of the things with President Trump is that he really knows how to pick talent… For every one of the positions that he picked, he wanted to see three clips of them performing on TV. He’s very conscious of the fact that these people are going to be out selling his program to the public,” Kennedy said. That’s when Kennedy ended the interview with a bang, sharing his genuine thoughts about Trump for three straight minutes. It was one of the standout moments of the entire conversation.

If you’re on the fence about Trump, listen to Kennedy here. It might just change how you see him. “I had him pegged as a narcissist, when narcissists are incapable of empathy. And he’s one of the most empathetic people that I’ve met,” Kennedy said. “He’s immensely curious, inquisitive, and immensely knowledgeable. He’s encyclopedic in certain areas that you wouldn’t expect,” he continued. Kennedy added that Trump genuinely cares about soldiers who go to war, citing how Trump “always talks about the casualties on both sides” of the Russia–Ukraine conflict. “Whether it’s vaccines or Medicaid or Medicare, he’s always thinking about how this impacts the little guy. And the Democrats have him pegged as a guy who’s sort of sitting in the Cabinet meeting talking about how can we make billionaires richer. He’s the opposite of that. He’s a genuine populist,” Kennedy said.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Rogan

Hep B

99%

Sun
https://twitter.com/FredsFarm247/status/1939983704379592749

PIANO
https://twitter.com/Ducnghia16/status/1939746838510543130

Cupcakes
https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1939990438389092561

Firefly

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 21 2025

May 212025
 
 May 21, 2025  Posted by at 8:40 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  39 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Portrait of Dora Maar 1939

 

• Putin and Trump Prove To Be the Real Power Brokers in Ukraine Peace Push (Sp.)
• Decoding Putin, Trump (Helmer)
• Every European Country Reinstituting Drafts, They Want War – Martin Armstrong
• Ukraine Has ‘One Last Chance’ – Medvedev (RT)
• Russia’s Red Lines: What Trump Heard From Putin in High Stakes Talks (Sp.)
• NATO Chief Comments On Putin-Trump Phone Call (RT)
• Trump Call Puts Brakes On West’s Diplomatic Offensive (RT)
• Russia Won’t Abandon Ukraine’s Orthodox Believers – Lavrov (RT)
• EU Quietly Complains Ukraine Is ‘All On Us Now’ – FT (RT)
• EU Forks Out $169 Bln for War Chest (Sp.)
• Ukraine Distracting West From ‘More Serious’ Issues – Rubio (RT)
• Musk Says Congress Needs To Act To Meet DOGE $2 Trillion Savings Goal (ZH)
• Federal Judge Blocks Trump Admin’s Dismantling of US Institute of Peace (ET)
• Germany’s Border Crackdown Can Only Last ‘A Few More Weeks’ – Police (RT)
• Democratic Officials Claim a Dangerous License for Illegality (Turley)
• EPIC – Senator Chris Van Hollen vs Secretary Marco Rubio (CTH)
• David Sacks’ Lieutenant Explains Trump’s AI Deal With UAE (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Olympics, World Cup, 250
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1924621981787295787

Friend

 

 

 

 

“Putin and Trump are the only real decision-makers in this peace process. Europe is once again left out in the cold.”

• Putin and Trump Prove To Be the Real Power Brokers in Ukraine Peace Push (Sp.)

Dmitry Suslov, deputy director at Russia’s Higher School of Economics and the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, breaks down the key takeaways from Monday’s potentially historic telephone conversation between the Russian and US presidents. First and foremost, Suslov said, the US and Russia agreed that peace must be sought through direct bilateral talks between Russia and Ukraine — not an immediate ceasefire as demanded by Kiev and the Europeans. “That is Russia’s top priority, and the United States has agreed that this should be the main focus,” the observer explained. In effect, Trump essentially stepped back from his previous calls for an immediate ceasefire, and now backs negotiations aimed at a final peace agreement, with a possible ceasefire as part of the process. As for the demands by Kiev and its European patrons that Russia agree to an unconditional 30-day ceasefire, Monday’s talks confirmed that “this will not happen,” Suslov said.

Putin in his remarks after the talks announced plans for Russia and Ukraine to start drafting a memorandum outlining the peace deal and ceasefire terms — a step toward a comprehensive settlement, not just a freeze. Suslov found it notable that Trump’s statement omitted any mention of “bone-crushing” anti-Russian sanctions threatened by the Europeans and his proxies at home. Essentially, Europe was once again sidelined and discredited, with Moscow and Washington taking the lead, the observer said. “The Europeans have once again found themselves out of the picture, once again disgraced and marginalized, given all their howling about the need for an immediate ceasefire, and demand that if Russia refuses, the United States should introduce tough sanctions on Russia.”

Another noteworthy point from Trump’s statement, according to Suslov, was his position that the need to end the conflict is “even more important than a ceasefire. “This suggests Trump has accepted, at least to a large extent, the Russian position that it’s necessary to work specifically on ending the war, not freezing it, on working on a final peace agreement, not a ceasefire as such.” Trump also expressed a desire to normalize US-Russia ties with their “limitless potential” for cooperation — clearly rejecting Europe’s posture. “This once again demonstrates Donald Trump’s reluctance to introduce anti-Russian sanctions and somehow quarrel with Russia,” Suslov said, emphasizing that the president appears fully aware “that if he introduces sanctions at this stage, he will cross out the prospects of settling the Ukrainian conflict, and the prospects of normalizing relations with Russia, and the United States will not be able to realize those ‘limitless possibilities’ which, according to Trump, are associated with Russian-American cooperation.”

Bottom Line, According to Suslov
“Putin and Trump are the only real decision-makers in this peace process. Europe is once again left out in the cold.”

Read more …

“For the time being, Putin’s and Trump’s statements have put Rubio, Kellogg and the Europeans offside. Decoding the two president’s statements shows how and why.”

• Decoding Putin, Trump (Helmer)

On Monday President Donald Trump telephoned President Vladimir Putin and they talked for two hours before Trump put lunch in his mouth and Putin his dinner. On the White House schedule, there was no advance notice of the call and no record afterwards. The White House log is blank for Trump’s entire morning while the press were told he was at lunch between 11:30 and 12:30. Putin went public first, making a statement to the press which the Kremlin posted at 19:55 Moscow time; it was then 12:55 in Washington. Trump and his staff read the transcript and then composed Trump’s statement in a tweet posted at 13:33 Washington time, 20:33 Moscow time. If Secretary of State Marco Rubio and General Keith Kellogg, the president’s negotiator with the Ukraine and FUGUP (France, United Kingdom, Germany, Ukraine, Poland), were consulted during Trump’s prepping, sat in on the call with the President, or were informed immediately after the call, they have remained silent.

The day before, May 18, Rubio announced that the Istanbul-II meeting had produced agreement “to exchange paper on ideas to get to a ceasefire. If those papers have ideas on them that are realistic and rational, then I think we know we’ve made progress. If those papers, on the other hand, have requirements in them that we know are unrealistic, then we’ll have a different assessment.” Rubio was hinting that the Russian formula in Istanbul, negotiations-then-ceasefire, has been accepted by the US. What the US would do after its “assessment”, Rubio didn’t say – neither walk-away nor threat of new sanctions. Vice President JD Vance wasn’t present at the call because he was flying home from Rome where he attended Pope Leo XIV’s inaugural mass. “We’re more than open to walking away,” Vance told reporters in his aeroplane. “The United States is not going to spin its wheels here. We want to see outcomes.”

Vance prompted Trump to mention the Pope as a mediator for a new round of Russian-Ukrainian negotiations, first to Putin and then in public. Kellogg is refusing to go along. He tweeted on Sunday: “In Istanbul @SecRubio made it clear that we have presented ‘a strong peace plan’. Coming out of the London meetings we (US) came up with a comprehensive 22 point plan that is a framework for peace. The first point is a comprehensive cease fire that stops the killing now.” FUGUP issued their own statement after Trump’s call. “The US President and the European partners have agreed on the next steps. They agreed to closely coordinate the negotiation process and to seek another technical meeting. All sides reaffirmed their willingness to closely accompany Ukraine on the path to a ceasefire. The European participants announced that they would increase pressure on the Russian side through sanctions.”

This signalled acceptance with Trump of the Russian formula, negotiations-then-ceasefire, and time to continue negotiating at the “technical” level. The sanction threat was added. But this statement was no longer FUGUP. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer was omitted; so too Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk. The Italian, the Finn and the European Commission President were substituted. They make FUGIFEC. Late in the Paris evening of Sunday French President Emmanuel Macron attempted to keep Starmer in Trump’s good books and preserve the ceasefire-first formula. “I spoke tonight,” Macron tweeted, “with @POTUS @Keir_Starmer @Bundeskanzler and @GiorgiaMeloni after our talks in Kyiv and Tirana. Tomorrow, President Putin must show he wants peace by accepting the 30-day unconditional ceasefire proposed by President Trump and backed by Ukraine and Europe.” By the time on Monday that Macron realized he had been trumped, the Elysée had nothing to say.

By contrast, Italian Prime Minister Meloni signalled she was happy to line up with Trump and accept Putin’s negotiations-then-ceasefire. “Efforts are being made,” Meloni’s office announced, “for an immediate start to negotiations between the parties that can lead as soon as possible to a ceasefire and create the conditions for a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.” Meloni claimed she would assure that Pope Leo XIV would fall into line. “In this regard, the willingness of the Holy Father to host the talks in the Vatican was welcomed. Italy is ready to do its part to facilitate contacts and work for peace.” For the time being, Putin’s and Trump’s statements have put Rubio, Kellogg and the Europeans offside. Decoding the two president’s statements shows how and why.

Read more …

“Comey was the man who held Armstrong in prison illegally for contempt for 7 years..”

“.. the hatred is too great on both sides.”

Hmm. Russians don’t hate Ukrainians.

• Every European Country Reinstituting Drafts, They Want War – Martin Armstrong

Legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong is back with an update on his big turn toward war in Ukraine with Russia. Two weeks ago on USAW, Armstrong predicted, “After May 15, war is turning up (in Ukraine) and it will be turning up into 2026.” That prediction paid off to the exact day as peace talks between Russia and Ukraine ended on May 15 after just two hours, and neither side agreed to meet again. War is already here, and there is no stopping it with peace talks. Armstrong says, “Putin knows and understands this is not a just a war with Ukraine, this is a war with NATO. If Putin agrees to a 30-day ceasefire with Ukraine, what’s that going to do? Absolutely nothing. You have every European country reinstituting drafts.

In Germany, even people 60 years old have been told to report. Poland has ordered every able-bodied man to show up for military training. They want war. Their economy is collapsing. You hear about this de-dollarization, and it’s not happening. The capitalization of just the New York Stock Exchange is worth more than all of Europe combined. That’s just the New York Stock Exchange. . . . You’ve got Macron in France, they call him the ‘Petite Napolean.’. . . Without war, Europe is going to collapse. It’s in a sovereign debt crisis . . . They have done everything against the economy.” Armstong thinks Russia will finish off Ukraine sometime in 2027 and Europe a year or two after that. And, Yes, Armstrong still thinks Ukraine will disappear from the map.

Armstrong urged his contacts in Washington to “Get the hell out of NATO.” It seems some in the US government are considering this warning as this headline breaks today: “US to Begin European Troop Withdrawal Talks, NATO Ambassador Says.” Armstrong says, “I have been told by some very influential people on Capitol Hill ‘you’re right, we agree.’ That’s what I have been told. . . . I have been complaining about this for months, and my view is Europe is committing suicide, and let’s not be part of it this time.” Is President Trump getting this message? Armstrong says, “Yes, I believe so. . . . Trump also said a peace deal does not seem likely, the hatred is too great on both sides.”

The neocons back home also want war with Russia and have wanted it for a very long time. Trump is either going to make peace or walk away and not participate. Maybe this is why former FBI Director James Comey put out his not-so-cryptic call to assassinate President Trump with his “86 47” now deleted Instagram post. Comey was the man who held Armstrong in prison illegally for contempt for 7 years. Armstrong says, “Comey has always been part of it. Just for the record, he was the US Attorney in New York. He’s the one who kept me in contempt until the Supreme Court said what the hell is going on? Then, they had to release me.”

How did Armstrong land in jail? Armstrong says, “They asked me to put in 10 billion dollars . . . to take over Russia, and I refused. It was Comey that was the US Attorney for New York, and he kept me in civil contempt, which has a maximum sentence of 18 months, and he kept me in for 7 years. He kept rolling it and rolling it and rolling it. . . . I was told if I put in $10 billion, I would get $100 billion back. They intended to have all the assets of Russia going through the trading desk of New York. All the oil, gold, diamonds, platinum, you name it, they would have it all. And I said, no, I’m out. I am not into regime change.”

Fast forward to today, and the powers in Europe still think they can take Russia and steal their assets to fix the extreme financial problems in Europe. Pensions, banks and bonds are in deep financial trouble in Europe. Stealing from Russia and gaining control of $75 trillion in natural resources is why they want and need war. Armstrong says, “They went to negative interest rates in 2014. I warned them. I said listen; you are out of your minds. You are syphoning money out of the bank reserves and pension finds. It’s a basket case. It really is. They have no appreciable economy. . . it’s shrinking, the number of actual businesses has shrunk in Germany. (Germany is 25% of the EU economy.) This is why they need war.” Armstrong says Europe is going to lose and lose badly in a war with Russia. Armstrong says if Trump gets out of NATO, the US will thrive and do much better financially than Europe. Let’s all hope President Trump gets us out of NATO before it’s too late.

Read more …

The alter ego speaks.

“Moscow is concerned that there are currently no individuals in Ukraine that have the legal authority to sign any sort of a peace deal..”

• Ukraine Has ‘One Last Chance’ – Medvedev (RT)

Authorities in Kiev have one last opportunity to preserve some kind of statehood after the Ukraine conflict inevitably resolves, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said, urging Kiev to engage in peace talks. Speaking at an international legal forum in St. Petersburg on Tuesday, Medvedev – who serves as the deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council – admitted that Moscow doesn’t like the current political regime in Kiev “at all.” Nevertheless, he suggested that Ukraine’s leaders have “one last chance to preserve, under certain conditions, after the end of military actions, some kind of statehood or, if you like, some kind of international legal personality and gain a chance for peaceful development.”

Though the Ukrainian government lacks any sovereignty and is a failed “quasi-state” in its current form, Moscow remains open to holding unconditional direct peace negotiations that would take into account the current realities on the ground and address the root causes of the conflict, Medvedev stated. Moscow is concerned that there are currently no individuals in Ukraine that have the legal authority to sign any sort of a peace deal with Russia, he noted. This concern mainly has to do with the fact that a treaty signed by the current leadership could subsequently be rejected once a new government in Ukraine is elected, he explained. Zelensky’s presidential term officially expired last year, and he has since repeatedly held off holding new elections, citing the conflict with Russia and martial law.

While Moscow has questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy as Ukraine’s leader, last month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov signaled that the Russian side may overlook his status in order to resume peace negotiations. ”The interests of entering the peaceful settlement process are above all else,” Peskov said, stressing that “the primary goal is to begin this negotiation process,” while all other questions are “secondary.” Last week, delegations from Russia and Ukraine met in Istanbul, marking their first direct talks since Kiev unilaterally abandoned the peace process in 2022. The head of Russia’s negotiating team in Istanbul, Vladimir Medinsky, later said the two parties had agreed to conduct a prisoner swap involving 1,000 POWs from each side, and to continue contacts once both have prepared detailed ceasefire proposals.

Read more …

“One way or another, Russia will realize its aspiration, so its easier to recognize them, accept them and move forward..,”

• Russia’s Red Lines: What Trump Heard From Putin in High Stakes Talks (Sp.)

Exclusive analysis by Igor Korotchenko (Editor-in-Chief of Russian military publication “National Defense”) on the content of the two hour conversation between Presidents Putin and Trump aimed at ending the Ukrainian conflict. The Russian president came to the table with four non-negotiables, Korotchenko says. These are:
• Recognition of new territorial realities (4 new regions = Russia)
• Complete Ukrainian withdrawal from these territories
• Halt in all Western arms shipments
• Ukraine’s neutral/non-bloc, non-nuclear status

“The main thing conveyed is that Russia has a consistent policy which does not change or vacillate, is absolutely clear and consistent,” the veteran Russian military observer explained. Essentially, Putin’s message was that “everything we say, we implement and carry out.” The non-bloc status point accounts for Russia’s long-standing position on the need to address and eliminate the root causes of the conflict, namely NATO expansion, Korotchenko said.

“Most importantly,” the call was meant to convey “realism from the idea that accepting the conditions formulated by Russia and their support in the US” would allow for peace to be achieved quickly. “One way or another, Russia will realize its aspiration, so its easier to recognize them, accept them and move forward,” the observer emphasized. Korotchenko stressed that the Putin-Trump phone call had no parties trying to “dictate their will” to each other, but a respectful discussion in which each side could express their position. “I think Trump at the very least heard Putin. And crucially, he was convinced that Russia is consistent in its readiness to reach a peace agreement. But this process will not come through some unilateral concessions,” the observer summed up.

Read more …

He puts on the smiley face, but this is not what he wants.

• NATO Chief Comments On Putin-Trump Phone Call (RT)

The phone call on Monday between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, marks a positive development and continues to restore communication, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has said. Talking to reporters on Tuesday, Rutte said it was a “good sign” that the conversation took place and welcomed Trump’s “leadership” in efforts to resolve the Ukraine conflict. He added that the US president had “broken the deadlock” from “day one” since returning to office earlier this year. Rutte acknowledged there had been “no discussions with the Russians” until January, when Trump began to “open lines of communication” with Putin. Asked whether pressure on the Russian president should be increased, Rutte said, “Let’s be thankful that Americans are now taking this position, this leadership role.” He added it would not be helpful for him, as a NATO leader, to comment on every step in the process.

Both Putin and Trump described their latest call as productive and encouraging. The US president said he expected progress on the Ukraine conflict within two weeks. According to a Kremlin statement, Putin thanked Trump for “US support in resuming direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine.” Yury Ushakov, Putin’s foreign policy aide, said the call was conducted in a tone of “mutual respect,” with Trump expressing support for normalizing ties between Washington and Moscow. Putin said on Monday that he and Trump agreed that the next step should be a memorandum outlining principles and a timeline for a peace settlement in the Ukraine conflict. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the next day that “there is and cannot be a deadline” for completing the document.

Rutte’s remarks come as NATO members seek ways to militarize and produce more weapons to be delivered to Ukraine. In March, the European Commission unveiled a plan to raise €800 billion ($896 billion) to “rearm” the EU. The Trump administration has consistently demanded that European NATO states increase their annual military spending to 5% of GDP, calling the longstanding 2% target insufficient. Russian officials have condemned the steps being taken in Europe toward militarization, and dismissed claims that Moscow intends to attack either the EU or NATO. Moreover, Russia has expressed concern that, rather than supporting the US peace initiatives for the Ukraine conflict, the EU and UK are instead gearing up for war with Russia.

Read more …

“Western Europe wasn’t invited to the Istanbul talks at all. No EU officials were in Türkiye. The ultimatums issued just days earlier? Ignored by both Moscow and Washington.”

• Trump Call Puts Brakes On West’s Diplomatic Offensive (RT)

In recent weeks, the focus of the Russia-Ukraine conflict has shifted noticeably from the battlefield to the diplomatic arena. Political actors on all sides have turned their attention to shaping the terms of a potential settlement – or at least the framework for future negotiations. This latest phase began with a coordinated visit by Western European leaders to Kiev and concluded, for now, with a phone conversation between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, on Monday. But the centerpiece of this diplomatic shift was the unexpected resumption of direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul. What’s unfolding is not just a conversation about peace, but a broader contest over influence and strategic direction. Competing visions of how the conflict should end – or be managed – are colliding in real time. Western Europe is scrambling to maintain relevance,

Ukraine is caught between urgency and uncertainty, and Trump, now at the center of this geopolitical tug-of-war, is being courted by both sides. So, who’s really winning this shadow war of influence? And what happens if the diplomatic front collapses? Let’s take a closer look. On May 10, leaders from France, the UK, Germany, and Poland traveled to Kiev. Their message to Russia was blunt: Agree to a 30-day ceasefire or face new sanctions and new supplies of European weapons to Ukraine. This wasn’t surprising. Peace initiatives led by Trump and his adviser, Steve Witkoff, had stalled by early May, creating an opening for the ‘war party’ led by European globalists – figures with whom Kiev has naturally aligned for obvious reasons. But there’s a problem: Europe is out of both weapons and sanctions.

Germany still has a few symbolic Taurus missiles tucked away like heirloom jewels, but even if it decides to part with them, the numbers wouldn’t meaningfully shift the balance on the battlefield. This leaves the Western Europeans with just one real move: Convince Trump to back their agenda, boxing him into a policy that isn’t his own. That same evening, Putin made his countermove: He publicly invited Kiev to resume direct peace talks in Istanbul. With that offer, the Russian president: Set the terms of negotiation himself, signaling that Russia holds the advantage and Ukraine has more to lose by dragging this out; Sidelined Western Europe entirely, effectively discarding Witkoff’s peace plan in favor of talks not about a token ceasefire, but a lasting peace on Russia’s terms.

It was also a clear act of diplomatic trolling – inviting the Ukrainians back to the very same negotiating table they had walked away from three years ago in Istanbul, with Vladimir Medinsky once again leading the Russian delegation. Despite some trolling, Russia sent a relatively heavyweight delegation to Istanbul: The head of military intelligence, top deputies from the foreign and defense ministries, and a cadre of seasoned experts. This is the sort of team you’d expect at serious negotiations – if the parties actually shared common ground.They don’t, at least not yet. Still, the talks were more substantive than expected. Neither side stormed out, and the discussions were described as constructive. Most notably, the two sides agreed to continue talking – and to carry out the largest prisoner exchange of the conflict so far.

The exchange is structured as a one-to-one swap – 1,000 prisoners from each side: Nearly all captured Russians and roughly one-sixth of the Ukrainian POWs. The original goal was a full exchange of ‘all for all’, so the current results clearly favor Moscow. I’ve long argued that the only path to lasting peace lies in a direct Russia-Ukraine agreement. This would require Kiev to renounce its anti-Russian posture and accept Moscow’s terms. And this can only happen if Ukraine ditches its alignment with the European war lobby led by French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Just last Thursday, that seemed impossible. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky was grandstanding, demanding Putin come to Istanbul, insisting on an immediate ceasefire, and more. But curiously, Western Europe wasn’t invited to the Istanbul talks at all. No EU officials were in Türkiye. The ultimatums issued just days earlier? Ignored by both Moscow and Washington.

Read more …

All of Russia’s culture will be protected, also in Ukraine.

• Russia Won’t Abandon Ukraine’s Orthodox Believers – Lavrov (RT)

Russia will not abandon Orthodox believers in Ukraine in the face of ongoing religious persecution by the authorities in Kiev, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has promised. Speaking at a Russian Foreign Ministry reception on Tuesday dedicated to Orthodox Easter, Lavrov condemned Kiev for cracking down on believers in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), calling it proof of the Ukrainian authorities’ “human-hating essence.” “The authorities in Kiev have brought [the UOC] to the brink of legal liquidation… Churches continue to be seized, vandalized, and attacked, along with priests and parishioners,” Lavrov alleged. He pointed in particular to Ukraine’s attempts to wrestle control over the iconic Kiev Pechersk Lavra, the country’s oldest monastery.

“These acts are being carried out with the connivance and even support of many European countries, where the ghosts of neo-Nazism and Satanism are again lifting their heads,” the diplomat stated. “Russia will not leave the Orthodox people of Ukraine in trouble,” Lavrov stressed, adding that Moscow “will ensure that their lawful rights are respected” and that canonical Orthodoxy regains its central place in Ukraine’s spiritual life. Ukraine has accused the UOC of maintaining ties to Russia despite the church declaring independence from the Moscow Patriarchate in May 2022. The crackdown has included numerous arrests of clergymen and church raids, one of the most notorious of which took place in the catacombs of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra where holy relics are kept.

Last year, Zelensky also signed legislation allowing the state to ban religious organizations affiliated with governments Kiev deems “aggressors,” effectively targeting the UOC. The Ukrainian leader has defended the measures, claiming they are necessary to protect the country’s “spiritual independence” amid the conflict with Russia. Meanwhile, Kiev has openly supported the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU), which is regarded as schismatic by both the UOC and the Russian Orthodox Church. The UN has also voiced concern about the state of religious freedoms in Ukraine, particularly regarding legislation allowing Kiev to target different institutions.

Read more …

“.. he is “not ready to put greater pressure” on Russia..”

• EU Quietly Complains Ukraine Is ‘All On Us Now’ – FT (RT)

European leaders backing Ukraine were reportedly “stunned” by US President Donald Trump’s refusal to support their efforts to pressure Russian President Vladimir Putin, following a phone call between the two leaders. ”He [Trump] is stepping away,” a senior European diplomat said, as cited by the Financial Times on Tuesday, describing the impression the US president produced. “Supporting and financing Ukraine, putting pressure on Russia: that’s all on us now.” The conversation between Putin and Trump on Monday was their third public engagement since Trump took office in January, with both describing it as positive. Trump reiterated his call for continued direct talks between Moscow and Kiev, and said the conflict is “a European situation” in which the US should never have been involved.

Trump personally briefed the leaders of Ukraine, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the UK, and the European Commission on the call, and made it clear he is “not ready to put greater pressure” on Russia, an unnamed source told the FT. EU officials and European NATO members had been counting on Washington’s support to extract concessions from Moscow by leveraging threats of new sanctions and continued weapons support for Ukraine. They interpreted the perceived shift in the US posture as a diplomatic win for the Kremlin, the British newspaper said. Before direct talks between Moscow and Kiev resumed in Istanbul last week, Ukraine and its backers demanded a 30-day unconditional ceasefire from Russia as a prerequisite. Kiev agreed to take part after the US endorsed the talks, while European leaders postponed their own deadline for a truce.

Moscow has since called for a memorandum to be drafted that would set out a road map to a peace treaty, possibly including a ceasefire. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that finalizing the document would take time. Trump said following his discussion with Putin that in addition to ending the violence, a resolution of the conflict could lead to major economic benefits for the US, Russia, and Ukraine. He added that progress in the talks could be seen in a couple of weeks, but warned that a lack of results could lead Washington to reconsider its role as mediator.

Read more …

The EU starts joint borrowing. Many will not like that. Ask Orban.

• EU Forks Out $169 Bln for War Chest (Sp.)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called the new program a “once-in-a-generation moment’ after previously saying that the EU faces defense investment needs of approximately $565 billion over the next decade. The EU has greenlit a new $169 billion defense fund to bankroll ammo, drones, and critical infrastructure, Bloomberg reported. Financed through joint borrowing, it will give loans to EU members and countries such as Ukraine to boost the arms industry. The hiked spending is pitched as a response to Donald Trump’s scale-back of US defense in Europe.

Besides the $169 billion program, looser fiscal rules could unleash up to $904 billion in more military spending. Such loans would go to finance what Europe “lacks,” like:
• missiles
• missile defense systems
• ground capabilities.

Read more …

“..whatever happens in Ukraine sets the table for what happens in the Indo-Pacific,” suggesting that an outright Russian victory could embolden China to make more assertive moves.”

• Ukraine Distracting West From ‘More Serious’ Issues – Rubio (RT)

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has defended President Donald Trump’s foreign policies and priorities, including his reluctance to join the EU and UK in imposing further sanctions on Moscow or increasing arms supplies to Kiev. Following his lengthy phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday, Trump told journalists that the US does not want to impose additional sanctions on Russia “because there’s a chance” of progress toward a settlement of the Ukraine conflict. Secretary Rubio was grilled on this and other issues during a three-hour-long appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday. Senator Chris Coons, a Democrat from Delaware, claimed that “whatever happens in Ukraine sets the table for what happens in the Indo-Pacific,” suggesting that an outright Russian victory could embolden China to make more assertive moves.

“But by the same token, I would say there’s a flip side to that, and that is every minute we spend, every dollar we spend on this conflict in Europe is distracting both our focus and our resources away from the potential for a much more serious, much more cataclysmic confrontation in the Indo-Pacific,” Rubio replied. Rubio has previously stated that countering China will be central to US foreign policy during Trump’s second term. He reiterated on Tuesday that “every minute that we spend on this conflict – that cannot be won by military means – every resource that’s expended into it is money and time that’s not being spent on preventing a much more serious confrontation from a global perspective in the Indo-Pacific.”Rivalry between Washington and Beijing has intensified since Trump’s return to office, with both nations expanding their military and economic influence in the region and beyond.

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth declared in February that China was America’s top defense priority, citing “stark strategic realities.” Speaking in Brussels at a gathering of Ukraine’s backers, he described Beijing as a “peer competitor” with both the capability and intent to threaten US interests in the Indo-Pacific. Washington has previously signaled that it plans to shift its military focus to Asia, while Trump has repeatedly urged the EU to take the lead in its own defense and bear the primary responsibility for future security guarantees to Kiev. Trump argued that Washington should never have intervened in Ukraine, suggesting that Kiev would be “better off” if the conflict with Moscow had remained a “European situation.”

“This is not our war… I mean, we got ourselves entangled in something that we shouldn’t have been involved in… The financial amount that was put up is just crazy,” the US president said on Monday. The Putin-Trump call was characterized as productive by both leaders. Trump said he believes Putin is interested in ending the conflict and warned that additional economic pressure could obstruct US mediation efforts. However, the EU and UK imposed new sanctions on Russia on Tuesday, escalating their campaign to pressure Moscow while ramping up support for Kiev.

Read more …

“..the magnitude of the savings is proportionate to the support we get from Congress and from the executive branch of the government in general..”

• Musk Says Congress Needs To Act To Meet DOGE $2 Trillion Savings Goal (ZH)

When Elon Musk joined the Trump administration with the goal of eliminating waste, fraud and abuse through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), he set a lofty $2 trillion goal. Now, four months later, DOGE has cut roughly $170 billion – a figure much lower than projected – in no small part due to activist judges and political pushback which have stopped the Trump administration from eliminating wide swaths of government bloat. On Tuesday, Musk said it was up to Congress to make it happen. “The ability of Doge to operate is a function of whether the government, and this includes the Congress, is willing to take our advice,” Musk said while speaking at an economic forum in Qatar.

“We are not the dictators of the government. We are the advisors, and so we can, we can advise, and the progress we’ve made thus far, I think, is incredible,” Musk continued. “Doge team has done incredible work, but the magnitude of the savings is proportionate to the support we get from Congress and from the executive branch of the government in general. So we’re not the dictators we all the advisors. But thus far, for advisors. We’ve been to the George team, to their credit, has made incredible progress.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1924826040976777678

As we noted in February, it will be Congress that decides the endgame… You cut enough spending – even if it’s all grift and fraud – you eventually get a recession, guaranteed. That’s all Congress is waiting for cause then they use the “emergency” to vote through a far greater spending package (“will someone please think of all the unemployed”) one which eclipses all of DOGE’s spending cuts. What Musk is doing in trying to streamline the govt is admirable but ultimately it will be Congress that decides the endgame. And there things are as status quo as always.

In a humorous exchange, Musk said that he’s still committed to being Tesla CEO in five years’ time – unless he’s dead. A moderator asked: “Do you see yourself and are you committed to still being the chief executive of Tesla in five years’ time?” Musk responded: “Yes.” The moderator pushed further: “No doubt about that at all?” Musk added, chuckling: “I can’t be still here if I’m dead.”

Read more …

Pure lawfare.

• Federal Judge Blocks Trump Admin’s Dismantling of US Institute of Peace (ET)

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell on May 19 blocked President Donald Trump’s administration from restructuring the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP), replacing its leadership, and assuming control of its office building. “These unilateral actions were taken without asking Congress to cease or reprogram appropriations or by recommending that Congress enact a new law to dissolve or reduce the institute or transfer its tasks to another entity,” Howell stated in her written opinion. USIP was established by Congress in 1984 as an “independent nonprofit corporation,” which receives federal and private funding to promote peace through education and diplomacy. The matter began with a Feb. 19 Trump executive order declaring USIP “unnecessary,” and calling for the organization’s activities to “be eliminated to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law.”

Its board of directors is made up of 13 members: Ten are acting members, appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The other three are “ex officio” members, meaning they hold their seats because of their placement in the federal government. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Vice Admiral Peter A. Garvin, president of the National Defense University, hold these “ex officio” seats. On March 14, Trent Morse of the Presidential Personnel Office fired USIP’s acting board members by email. That same day, its president, George Moose, was fired by the ex officio members and replaced with Kenneth Jackson, an official from the U.S. Agency for International Development. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) took control of USIP’s headquarters on March 17.

On March 18, in the middle of this shake-up, USIP and several of its fired board members sued the government, naming Trump, Jackson, Hegseth, and Rubio as co-defendants. Howell initially declined to block the administration’s moves on March 19, while the case was pending before the court, because she felt the plaintiffs’ claims would not succeed on the merits. The board members and USIP president Moose protested against the firings and resisted the takeover of its Washington headquarters, but were unsuccessful. The administration eventually fired all but a handful of USIP’s staff, cancelled all of its programs. It transferred control of USIP’s headquarters to the General Services Administration and leased its office space to the Department of Labor. In her ruling, Howell sought to define USIP’s role in the federal government.

The plaintiffs had argued that USIP is a fully independent entity, and not part of the government, or at the very least, not part of the executive branch. Its statutes say the board members can only be removed by the president: “In consultation with the board, for conviction of a felony, malfeasance in office, persistent neglect of duties, or inability to discharge duties.” A board member may also be removed by a vote of eight other board members, or with a majority vote from members of the House Committees on Foreign Affairs and Education and Labor, and the Senate Committees on Foreign Relations and Labor and Human Resources. The Trump administration had argued that it was part of the executive branch, since it performed diplomatic functions. Since it is part of the executive branch, federal attorney Brian Hudak argued, Trump was entitled to fire its board despite the statutory limitations.

Judge Howell took a middle-of-the-road view and said that USIP is part of the federal government, but not strictly part of the executive branch. “Instead, USIP supports both the executive and legislative branches as an independent think tank that carries out its own international peace research, education and training, and information services,” she stated. “Defendants’ subsequent actions that flowed from the improper removal of USIP’s leadership in March 2025 are thus also unlawful,” including the termination of its grant programs and the firing of its staff. Howell ordered the fired board members and president Moose to be reinstated and may not be fired, except in accordance with USIP’s statutes. She also declared the transfer of USIP’s headquarters illegal and has blocked the government from “trespassing” on those headquarters or maintaining control of its computer systems.

Read more …

And then you open the borders again?

• Germany’s Border Crackdown Can Only Last ‘A Few More Weeks’ – Police (RT)

Germany’s new border crackdown can only be sustained for “a few more weeks,” the country’s police union has warned, citing mounting pressure on officers tasked with enforcing the policy. The warning comes two weeks after the government introduced stricter border controls to curb the number of asylum seekers entering the country. ”We can only manage this because duty rosters have been adjusted, training for the units is currently on hold, and the reduction of overtime has been halted,” Andreas Rosskopf, chairman of the Federal Police and Customs division of the German Police Union, said. He warned that the controls can only be sustained “for a few more weeks.” The measures represent a major shift in Germany’s migration stance and fulfill a key campaign promise of Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who vowed to tighten the immigration laws.

The May 7 order from Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt bans asylum applications at all land borders, reversing former Chancellor Angela Merkel’s 2015 open-border policy. Exceptions are made for children, pregnant women, and other vulnerable groups. Up to 3,000 officers are being added to the 11,000 already stationed at Germany’s borders. The 2015 policy defined Germany’s approach to refugees, while also drawing fierce political backlash, with critics calling it “disastrous.” A week after the measures were announced, Dobrindt claimed that the number of rejections increased by almost a half. However, according to Der Spiegel, the number of asylum applications remained largely stable in the week after May 7.

As the EU’s largest economy, Germany has been the most popular destination for asylum seekers. According to official statistics, foreigners currently make up 17% of the country’s population. Migration remains a polarizing issue, with local authorities often warning that the number of asylum seekers is straining their budgets.The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which is known for its strong anti-immigration stance, was designated a “confirmed extremist entity” earlier this month by the domestic intelligence agency (BfV), which said its activities could threaten Germany’s democratic order. The designation was later suspended after legal appeals and public outcry.

Read more …

They’ll keep at it. There are no consequences.

• Democratic Officials Claim a Dangerous License for Illegality (Turley)

Across the country, a new defense is being heard in state and federal courtrooms. From Democratic members of Congress to judges to city council members, officials claim that their official duties include obstructing the official functions of the federal government. It is a type of liberal license that excuses most any crime in the name of combating what Minn. Gov. Tim Walz called the “modern-day Gestapo” of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The latest claimant of this license is Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), who was charged with assaulting, resisting, and impeding law enforcement officers during a protest at Delaney Hall ICE detention facility in Newark, New Jersey. McIver is shown on video forcing her way into an ICE facility and striking and shoving agents in her path.

This was not a major incursion, but these state and federal officials joined a mob in briefly overwhelming security and breaching the fence barrier after a bus was allowed through the entrance. Federal officials were able to quickly force back the incursion. McIver and House Democrats insisted that McIver’s forcing her way into the facility might be trespass and assault for other citizens, but she was merely exercising “legislative oversight.” Rep. Alexandria Ocacio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) declared “You lay a finger on someone – on Bonnie Watson Coleman or any of the representatives that were there – you lay a finger on them, we’re going to have a problem.” Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) even ominously warned the federal government that Democrats would bring down the house if it tried to charge McIver: “It’s a red line. They know better than to go down that road.”

Well, the red line was crossed in a big way after Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey Alina Habba charged McIver with a felony under Title 18, United States Code, Section 111(a)(1). The ACLU called the charge “authoritarianism” and insisted that these state and federal politicians “have every right to exercise their legally authorized oversight responsibilities for expanded immigration detention in New Jersey.” The problem with the oversight claim is that McIver’s status as a member of Congress does not allow her access into closed federal facilities. Congress can subpoena the Executive Branch or secure court orders for access. However, members do not have immunity from criminal laws in unilaterally forcing their way into any federal office or agency.

If that were the case, Rep. Alexandria Ocacio-Cortez would not have posted images of herself crying at the fence of an immigrant facility, she could have climbed over the fence in the name of oversight. Conversely, Republicans in the Biden Administration could have simply pushed their way into the Justice Department to seek the files on the influence-peddling scandal. Yet, the point of the claim is less of a real criminal defense and more of a political excuse. It is the same claim being heard this week from Worcester City Councilor Etel Haxhiaj who was shown in a video shoving and obstructing ICE officers attempting to arrest a woman on immigration charges. Two other individuals (including a Democratic candidate for a school board) were arrested, but not Haxhiaj who claimed that she was merely protecting “a constituent.” After the melee, the city manager issued an order preventing city police from assisting in any way in the carrying out of such civil immigration enforcement efforts by the federal government.

Even judges are claiming the same license. In Wisconsin, Judge Hannah Dugan has been charged with obstructing a federal arrest of an illegal immigrant who appeared in her courtroom. Duggan heard about agents waiting outside in the hallway to arrest the man and went outside to confront the agents. She told them to speak to the Chief Judge and that they needed a different warrant. The agents complied and the Chief Judge confirmed that they could conduct the arrest. In the interim, however, Dugan led the man out a non-public door and facilitated his escape (he was arrested after a chase down a public street). Judge Duggan also claimed that she was carrying out her duties even though her hearing was over, the charges were not part of state matter, and the arrest was being carried out outside of her courtroom.

Read more …

Mr. Margarita has very poor manners.

• EPIC – Senator Chris Van Hollen vs Secretary Marco Rubio (CTH)

For seven straight minutes Secretary of State Marco Rubio sat and listened to criminal alien apologist Chris Van Hollen blast him for enforcing immigration laws, supporting MAGA foreign policy and revoking the guest visas for criminal protestors on college campuses. Van Hollen was trying to blast Rubio and fundraise from his far-left communist constituents. Rubio listened respectfully. Then came the moment, “may I respond” asked Rubio, and within the response Senator Van Hollen completely lost his cool, shouted angrily at Rubio despite being told his time has expired, and was forced to listen to Senator Rubio inform him that yes, Rubio not only plans to revoke the visas of the agitators, but that Rubio had just asked for an even longer list of campus protesters who were recently arrested so he could personally ensure those visas were revoked.

Read more …

“…I kind of think of this like a software ecosystem play, where we now have them tied to the American AI ecosystem..”

• David Sacks’ Lieutenant Explains Trump’s AI Deal With UAE (ZH)

Sriram Krishnan, Senior White House Policy Advisor on Artificial Intelligence, joined the Monday edition of TBPN to explain why the U.S.-UAE AI Partnership is a strategic victory for the United States in its race to lead AI development against China, a perspective largely (and unsurprisingly) overlooked by mainstream media.

SRIRAM KRISHAN: We signed the first AI acceleration partnership. You guys probably read about in the press, but there are probably three important components that just, I wanted to have the technology brothers have the alpha and the have the first group on that. The most important part, the first part, is that this represents a large investment in U.S. data centers and U.S. AI infrastructure. So these countries will be investing in U.S. AI infrastructure. To make them as equal, if not larger, than the data centers and infrastructure they’re building back home. So this means, obviously a large infusion of capital revenue to data centers here in America.

JORDI HAYS: That story was kind of lost. Right? I feel like a lot of the focus was on localized investment and infrastructure. JOHN COOGAN: To break it down in language that a venture capitalist could understand. This is something like what we’re seeing with Stargate where there’s a ton of capital forming and that’s coming from SoftBank, but it’s also coming from Middle Eastern investment funds and sovereign nations investing in American infrastructure. And then there’s a whole host of companies that might come in the stack to actually build a new data center. Is that right?

SRIRAM KRISHAN: Exactly. You should be doing our talking points. I would say, look, these countries have AI ambitions, right? They want to buy American AI. They wanna buy our semiconductors. They want to buy our large language model. They want to use us. And so as a part of this deal, they’re agreeing to a few things. The most important thing they’re gonna agree to is that capital, like you mentioned, right? Like, and, and this is, by the way, net new. This is not part of any existing project. Sure. These net new deals will mean infrastructure being built out physically in the US.

So for example, if they build out X megawatts of gigawatts of capacity, yep. This will mean the same X megawatts of gigawatts of capacity in the US, and this is an important point. Because some of the chatter has been, Hey, how does America maintain its lead? Well, one of the ways we maintain our lead is everything that is being built up by our allies. We get a matching deal back home. So that’s probably the number one headline.

The second headline would be that the vast majority of the GPUs that are as a part of this deal, which is gonna be, say, hosted in the UAE, will be hosted, run, operated by American hyperscaler companies, right? And so, you probably know them all, right? These would be large American companies who. They will be running it, hosting it, maintaining, and this is actually important because this represents an expansion opportunity for all of our companies. This means they would get to win market share away from competition from other countries. And obviously there’s a whole huge amount of revenue and ecosystem coming in. And so that’s the second key point, the vast majority of the GPUs are going to be run by American companies, often by a lot of our friends in these large, uh, you know, hyperscaler companies.

And the third point, and this is, again, something just lost in the chatter, is I’m sure you’ve heard questions about, Hey, how do we make sure these GPUs, you know, don’t get to somebody they don’t need to be. So there are rigorous security protocols in place, so every GPU gets shipped over. We are gonna make sure that, a., they can’t be physically diverted. These are really large boxes. You can’t hide them under your t-shirt or your tux and kind of stick them out the door. You can’t really go George Clooney Oceans 11 on them. So one is there’s going to be a large amount of physical verification and physical security protocols.

The second is remote access. We are gonna make sure through these deals, through the framework that nobody who’s not supposed to have access, especially from countries of concern, can get access. And so these three kinds of the core pillars, and here’s why this event, right? And I think everybody in your audience who’s like a technology person, a technology brother, or in the software world, here’s why they’ll understand it. What has history taught as a software industry? The company with the biggest network effect, the biggest ecosystem wins, right? We’ve all grown up with Microsoft. How did Microsoft win with the Windows and Office ecosystem? Think about this as the American AI ecosystem.

We are getting these resource-rich countries who are critical allies in very interesting geopolitical places to basically adopt the American AI stack, right? Up and down. This means they are going to be part of our ecosystem for years and decades to come, and it essentially forms a shield from them ever adopting or using technology or working closely with some people that we don’t want them to work with. In a way, I kind of think of this like a software ecosystem play, where we now have them tied to the American AI ecosystem.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Dowd

Scott
https://twitter.com/liz_churchill10/status/1924578085443187024

Bark

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 16 2025

May 162025
 
 May 16, 2025  Posted by at 9:23 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


Marc Chagall The soldier drinks 1912

 

• ‘Nothing’s Gonna Happen Until Putin And I Get Together’ (JTN)
• Putin-Trump Meeting ‘Imminent’ – White House Official (RT)
• Trump Team Has ‘Made The Impossible Possible’ – Putin Envoy (RT)
• Istanbul 2.0: Know When To Hold ‘Em, Know When To Fold ‘Em (Proud)
• Russia’s Top Negotiator Unveils Goal of Talks With Ukraine (RT)
• Ukraine Won’t Survive A Decade Of Conflict – Zelensky (RT)
• UK Sending Security Adviser To Work With Zelensky – Guardian (RT)
• Talk of Direct US-Russia Clash Contradicts Trump’s Policy –Scott Ritter (Sp.)
• Trump Tells Apple Not To Build In India (RT)
• Trump Touts 1.4 Trillion Investment In AI, Tech From UAE (ZH)
• Justice Thomas Destroys the Case for Nationwide Injunctions (Margolis)
• Biden’s Autopen Pardons May Just Get Invalidated (Margolis)
• DOJ Pardon Attorney Ed Martin To Review Biden’s Outgoing Pardons (JTN)
• DOGE Still Hard at Work Cutting Fraud and Waste (Salgado)
• Trump Admin Urges SCOTUS to Permit DOGE Access to Social Security Records (ET)
• The US Has Pushed The ICAO To Declare War On Russia (Helmer)
• “86 47” – Comey Posts-Then-Deletes Creepy Threat Aimed At Trump (ZH)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1922694242973122575

Qatar

USAID

Clown

Orban

Zoom out

Lutnick

Energy

China energy

 

 

 

 

US and Russia haven’t talked in 3 years. it takes a lot of groundwork talks first now to catch up, weeks, months of talking. That’s not what presidents do, they’re too busy. That said, the two should certainly meet asap. But Ukraine is just a side topic for that. And all the complaining about Putin not showing up for talks he initiated is empty blabber.

 

 

“And obviously, he wasn’t gonna go — he was gonna go, but he thought I was gonna go. He wasn’t going if I wasn’t there. And I don’t believe anything’s gonna happen, whether you like it or not, until he and I get together..”

“Why would he go if I’m not going?” “I wasn’t planning to go and I didn’t think he would if I didn’t.”

• ‘Nothing’s Gonna Happen Until Putin And I Get Together’ (JTN)

President Trump said Thursday regarding the Ukraine-Russia talks in Turkey that “nothing’s gonna happen until Putin and I get together.” The president made the comments as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky arrived in Turkey for peace talks with Russia on Thursday regarding the ongoing war between the two countries, but Russian President Vladimir Putin chose not to attend and sent a lower-level delegation, Politico reported. “Look, nothing’s gonna happen until Putin and I get together, okay?” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One while heading to the United Arab Emirates.

“And obviously, he wasn’t gonna go — he was gonna go, but he thought I was gonna go. He wasn’t going if I wasn’t there. And I don’t believe anything’s gonna happen, whether you like it or not, until he and I get together. But we’re gonna have to get it solved because too many people are dying.” Ukraine’s high-level delegation includes Zelensky, his top aide, and foreign and defense ministers in an effort to show Trump that Russia is the country against making peace. Ukraine was frustrated with the lower-level Russian delegation and doubted whether there would be any negotiations at all.

“The Russian chair in Turkey is de facto empty,” a Ukrainian diplomatic official told Politico on the condition of anonymity. “Because it makes little difference whether Mr. Nobody, sent by Putin, and his insignificant colleagues sit in their chairs or not. They are not the ones making decisions. And the person who does — Putin — is either afraid to come or does not take the U.S.-led peace effort seriously. “Still, we are considering sending someone at the appropriate level to at least hear what these people have to say and whether they are able to decide at least anything. If they are willing to have a serious conversion, we may engage in it. Otherwise, we will have the right to conclude that this is a Russian charade, not meaningful work for peace,” the official added.

Read more …

“Deals are all about timing. When the time is right, that’s when the president is in the room with Putin..”

Sebastian Gorka is always around. His curent job description is ‘senior director for counterterrorism’.

• Putin-Trump Meeting ‘Imminent’ – White House Official (RT)

US President Donald Trump will meet his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin to help Russia and Ukraine finalize a peace agreement, a deputy assistant to Trump, Sebastian Gorka, has said. The meeting between the two leaders is “imminent” he told a security summit organized by Politico. “Deals are all about timing. When the time is right, that’s when the president is in the room with Putin,” he stated, while maintaining that the right moment is “imminent.” He did not elaborate and did not provide any further details about a possible meeting between Putin and Trump. Trump is currently on a tour through Middle East, and has mulled going to Türkiye on Friday “if something happened.”

Moscow’s and Kiev’s delegations were expected to hold discussions there after Putin suggested resuming the Istanbul talks which were broken off three years ago. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky responded to Putin’s call by declaring that he would personally fly to Türkiye and demanded that the Russian president do the same. The Kremlin answered by saying that the Russian president had no plan to travel to the country. Trump then said on Thursday that Putin had no reason to go, since the US leader himself had not committed to going.Moscow has said that its core agenda for the Istanbul talks remains unchanged from 2022, as it believes that a lasting peace can only be achieved by addressing the conflict’s root causes, including Ukraine’s desire to join NATO.

Zelensky initially insisted on Putin personally coming to the talks before deciding to send a delegation led by Defense Minister Rustem Umerov to Istanbul. According to TASS, the meeting between the two sides is now expected to start on Friday. The Trump administration has been actively pushing both sides to engage in peace negotiations since he took office in January. The US president has recently expressed frustration over the slow pace of the process and demanded both sides engage in direct talks.

Read more …

Kirill Dmitriev is Putin’s ‘investment envoy’. Russia’s Witkoff.

• Trump Team Has ‘Made The Impossible Possible’ – Putin Envoy (RT)

US President Donald Trump and his team have “made the impossible possible” by bringing Moscow and Kiev to the cusp of their first direct negotiations since 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s investment envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, has said. Dmitriev complemented Washington’s mediation efforts ahead of much anticipated talks in Istanbul on Thursday. The meeting is set to happen “against all odds/fierce resistance,” he said on X, adding that if “not derailed last-minute, this could be a historic step to peace. ”Dmitriev specifically named US Vice President J.D. Vance, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio as major contributors to the mediation effort. Putin suggested Thursday as the day direct engagement between Russia and Ukraine could happen in a televised address last Sunday.

Moscow has indicated that negotiations could continue from where they left off in 2022, when Kiev pulled out and tried to score a victory on the battlefield with Western military assistance. The U-turn came after then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson told Kiev to discard a draft peace treaty, which had been pre-agreed in Istanbul.At the moment of writing, there was no certainty that a new round of negotiations would commence as expected. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, who is currently in the country to meet Turkish President Recep Erdogan, said the Ukrainian government had yet to make a final decision on how to proceed. Zelensky announced his intention to go to Türkiye in response to Putin’s proposal, claiming that the Russian leader must reciprocate to prove his seriousness.

Zelensky and leaders of European NATO nations supporting him have threatened to impose new sanctions on Russia unless Moscow agrees to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire – an idea that Russian officials have called a ruse to give Kiev time to regroup. The initial deadline on Monday has been postponed until the end of the week, pending the outcome of talks.While Moscow has stated that it will seek a path towards lasting peace in Istanbul, which it says will require addressing the root causes of the conflict, Kiev has been vague about its goals. Some media reports have suggested that the Ukrainian delegation will focus on the proposed ceasefire first. Previously, Kiev insisted that no direct talks could happen without a truce.

Read more …

Former UK envoy Ian Proud has, like so many, also lost his thread. It’s not easy.

• Istanbul 2.0: Know When To Hold ‘Em, Know When To Fold ‘Em (Proud)

The biggest achievement of today’s Istanbul talks is that they are even taking place. U.S. engagement will remain vital to getting a peace deal over the line. Russia’s desire for a reset with Washingtonmay keep them on track. I have a sense of déjà vu as I contemplate these long-overdue peace talks between Ukraine and Russia in Istanbul. In April 2022, Ukraine and Russia were close to agreeing a peace treaty, less than two months after war started. However, this came crashing down amid claims that western governments, in particular the United States and the United Kingdom encouraged Ukraine to keep fighting. It’s worth recapping very briefly what was close to having been agreed. By far the best summary of negotiations between both sides was produced by the New York Times in June 2024. Those negotiations ranfor almost two months. The talks started with Ukrainian officials being spirited over the border into Belarus on February 29, 2022 while the fighting raged around Kyiv, and eventually led to the now famous talks in Istanbul in March and April.

What has changed since then? Ukraine will enter the Istanbul talks in a weaker position that it held in 2022. Western support for Ukraine financially and economically is not as sound as it was then. No big ticket economic aid and assistance has been made available since the G7 agreement of a $50 billion package of loans, in June 2024. While European states scratched together new economic aid to Ukraine in April, this cannot make up for the reduction in US support. In territorial terms, Russia withdrew from Kyiv as a concession to the first Istanbul talks and lost ground in Kharkiv and in Kherson in late 2022. However, Russia has gone on steadily to gain further territory in the Donbas since the end of 2023. So while both sides have scores on the board, Russia now maintains the military upper hand on the battlefield and that seems unlikely to change. These two factors in particular were behind President Trump’s February assertion that Ukraine has no cards to play.

What has stayed the same? NATO membership is still off the table. The verified documents shared by the New York Times last June confirmed that Ukraine’s neutrality and non-membership of NATO was the central issue agreed upon in 2022. Ukraine was ready to become a “permanently neutral state” that would never join NATO or allow foreign forces to be based on its soil.There seems no route for Ukraine to resile from that given its currently weakened negotiating position and President Trump’s stated view that NATO membership for Ukraine is not practical. Although Germany’s new foreign Minister, Johann Wadephul recently repeated the line that Ukraine’s path to NATO is irreversible, most have agreed, privately and publicly, that Ukraine’s path to NATO is a fraught if not impossible one. Right now, just having the talks is a huge breakthrough

The Istanbul talks would not be happening had the Trump administration not pushed for it so hard. We don’t need to rehash the “did they or didn’t they” debate around why Ukraine abandoned the Istanbul agreement in April 2022. What is clear, is that Ukraine became entrenched, not only in not negotiating with Russia, but in excluding Russia from all discussions on peace in Ukraine from then onward. Having agreed in principle for Ukraine to accept neutral status Zelensky was pushing his own ten point peace plan. This included, among other things, Russia withdrawing its troops to the pre-2014 border, i.e. giving up Crimea and the Donbass and creating a Euro-Atlantic Security Architecture, by which he meant Ukraine joining NATO. Peace summits were organized in various countries that explicitly excluded Russia, culminating in the Switzerland event on June 15, 2024.

At this event, President Zelensky was dug in deeper on resisting any engagement with Russia until a full withdrawal of its troops from Ukraine, which was a completely unrealistic proposal. “Russia can start negotiations with us even tomorrow without waiting for anything – if they leave our legal territories,” he said. Even after President Trump was elected, European leaders clung to the line that “only Ukraine can decide what peace means.”’ I see no circumstances in which a Kamala Harris presidency would have cajoled President Zelensky to enter into negotiations. Tomorrow’s talks wouldn’t be happening unless the Trump administration broke a whole load of Ukrainian and European eggshells to get to this point. The biggest issue now is territory.

Even though he was wrongly derided at the time by mainstream media, Steve Witkoff correctly pointed out in his March interview with Tucker Carlson that the territorial issues in Ukraine will be most intractable. Russia’s decision in October 2022 to formally annex the four oblasts of Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk changed the calculus. However, Russia does not have full territorial control of any of those oblasts, which are cut through the middle by a hotly contested front line. Resolving the line of control when the war ends is, by some margin, the most problematic challenge. This will be a hugely sensitive topic, and European allies will shoot down any major concessions to Russia, as they did when the idea surfaced that the U.S. might de jure recognise Russia’s occupation of Crimea.

The most obvious settlement is a de facto recognition of occupation, a Cyprus-style scenario, that does not stand in the way of Ukraine’s future membership of the European Union. Even that will require detailed agreement on issues around demilitarization of the line of control and enforcing any ceasefire. Sanctions are probably tricky, but also tractable. As I have said before, there is enormous scope to a plan that allows for the immediate lifting of the bulk of zero-impact measures, phasing out the remainder at points agreed to by both sides. The toughest issue remains the $300 billion in frozen Russian assets, mostly held in Belgium. Russia has shown a willingness to concede this funding to support reconstruction in Ukraine, including those parts that Russia occupies.

But there is texture here. Freeing up those funds for reconstruction would immediately remove the source of interest payments that are meeting Ukraine’s obligations on its $50 billion in debt to the G7, agreed to in June 2024. But the more general policy question arises, how much of the freed up funding would be spent in Ukraine itself and how much in Russian-occupied Ukraine, where most of the war damage has occurred? The U.S. must keep the pressure on to ensure the talks stay on track. A U.S. presence in Istanbul will be vital, to prevent, in particular, Ukraine from bailing on the talks. That’s why sending Steve Witkoff and Keith Kellogg makes sense.

The former is trusted by the Russian side while the latter has built relationships in Ukraine. Their presence serves to keep the process moving forward until a deal can be pushed over the line and the fighting can stop. Bear in mind that the 2022 talks ran for a month and a half and the circumstances have materially changed as I have indicated above. While there has been speculation that President Trump might drop into Istanbul, I am not sure that this is necessary if President Putin doesn’t himself attend. Knowing the Russians, I assess that Putin will want his own “‘meeting moment” with the U.S. President on terms that the Russian side can better choreograph. Indeed, that may be a prize for Russia’s engagement in the process, given its desire for a more comprehensive reset of relations with the U.S.

Read more …

Lots of talk of Putin sending a lightweight crew, but he didn’t. He sent those, led by Medinsky, who were stiffed by Zelensky (+ Boris Johnson?) 3 years ago. They know the territory better than anyone.

• Russia’s Top Negotiator Unveils Goal of Talks With Ukraine (RT)

Moscow seeks to engage Ukraine in direct negotiations in Istanbul to secure a lasting peace, Russia’s chief negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky, told journalists on Thursday. The current effort represents a revival of the peace process he took part in that Kiev broke off three years ago, he added. Both Russia and Ukraine have sent delegations to Türkiye following Russian President Vladimir Putin’s offer last week to resume direct talks aimed at resolving the conflict. Moscow’s team is prepared to work constructively towards viable solutions. “It possesses all necessary qualifications and authority to conduct negotiations,” the presidential aide said in Istanbul. The Russian delegation also includes Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin, Deputy Defense Minister Aleksandr Fomin and the head of Russia’s military intelligence, Igor Kostyukov. They are joined by several senior military and civil officials, as well as diplomats.

Here is Vladimir Medinsky’s speech in full:

“Dear colleagues. Last night, as previously reported, Russian President Vladimir Putin held a special meeting to prepare our delegation for the upcoming negotiations in Istanbul. The meeting was attended by the leadership of the Russian Security Council, the Russian government, the Minister of Defense, the Chief of the General Staff, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, as well as the heads of state security, intelligence, and the commanders of all Russian armed forces groups participating in the military operation [against Kiev]. Members of the delegation present here also took part in the meeting.

Foreign policy and security matters were discussed, with additional reports presented on the state of the economy and the defense industry. The Minister of Defense, the Chief of the General Staff, and all commanders of Russian army groups involved in the military operation [against Kiev] reported on the situation in the combat zone. A detailed joint discussion followed. Based on the participants’ reports, the president issued instructions and outlined the negotiation position for the Russian delegation in Istanbul.

We view these talks as a continuation of the peace process in Istanbul, which was unfortunately interrupted by the Ukrainian side three years ago. Our official delegation has been approved by presidential order and possesses all necessary qualifications and authority to conduct negotiations. The delegation is adopting a constructive approach, focused on finding viable solutions and areas of common ground. The aim of direct negotiations with the Ukrainian side is ultimately to secure lasting peace by addressing the fundamental root causes of the conflict.

Read more …

“..Zakharova has also stressed that there was never any talk of Putin travelling to Türkiye for the talks and branded Zelensky a “clown” ..”

• Ukraine Won’t Survive A Decade Of Conflict – Zelensky (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky has said that although he does not know how long the conflict with Russia will last, his country would not be able to survive another ten years of fighting. Speaking to the French newspaper Liberation, the Ukrainian leader conveyed his insistence on a personal meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Türkiye to discuss an exchange of all prisoners and establishing a ceasefire.On Sunday, Putin proposed restarting direct peace talks between Russia and Ukraine, which were unilaterally abandoned by Kiev in 2022. The president stated that Moscow would send a delegation to Istanbul to engage with the Ukrainian side, stressing that Russia is set on “serious negotiation” that would contribute to a “long-term sustainable peace” and address the root causes of the conflict.

Zelensky, who had previously ruled out any negotiations with Moscow, welcomed the proposed talks in Istanbul and has personally traveled to Türkiye to potentially take part in the meeting. Ahead of the talks, he admitted to Liberation that Ukrainians have been growing tired of the conflict and that talks on ending the fighting have given people some hope. Asked if he should instead be preparing his citizens for another ten years of war, Zelensky stressed that “Ukraine wouldn’t survive” another decade of conflict. “I look at the morale of the population, what people want. I look at our economy… It’s costly for everyone,” Zelensky said. “In fact, this war can’t last very long,” he predicted. At the same time, the Ukrainian leader has dismissed the delegation sent by Russia to the talks as “props,” insisting on personally meeting with Putin. Moscow has slammed Zelensky’s position, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov calling Zelensky a “pathetic person.”

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has also stressed that there was never any talk of Putin travelling to Türkiye for the talks and branded Zelensky a “clown” with no right to dismiss professionals in any field as “props.” Meanwhile, Medinsky, who is leading Moscow’s delegation in Istanbul, has stated that Russia is ready for dialogue with Ukraine and is prepared for “possible compromises” in reaching a peace deal. “We are in a working mood,” the presidential aide said. On Thursday, after meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Zelensky stated that he would have “nothing to do” at the talks without Putin’s participation and said that Ukraine’s delegation in Istanbul would instead be led by Defense Minister Rustem Umerov. He added that Kiev is engaging in the negotiations “out of respect for [US President Donald] Trump and Erdogan.”

Read more …

“..Powell’s advice is expected to focus on making sure that Zelensky does not do “anything that alienates Trump”.

So his job is to stoke up the fire whenever Trump mentions peace.

• UK Sending Security Adviser To Work With Zelensky – Guardian (RT)

London is reportedly sending an adviser to Istanbul to give its recommendations to Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky ahead of talks with Russia, the Guardian reported on Wednesday. On Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to restart direct negotiations with Kiev to find a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict. While Zelensky had previously ruled out talks with Moscow, he welcomed the proposal and agreed to personally travel to Türkiye to take part. Moscow has barred Western European leaders from participating in the negotiations, accusing them of a biased approach to the conflict and trying to prolong the fighting. Nevertheless, the UK is reportedly sending Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s security adviser, Jonathan Powell, to meet with Zelensky ahead of the talks to provide “background advice” on how he should handle the meeting.

The Guardian reported that Powell’s advice is expected to focus on making sure that Zelensky does not do “anything that alienates Trump” and equip him to persuade the US president that Putin is the “obstacle to peace.” The meeting is set to become the first direct talks between Russia and Ukraine since Kiev unilaterally aborted peace negotiations with Moscow in 2022 after being advised to do so by London. At the previous talks, shortly after the pre-approval of a draft treaty, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson personally traveled to Kiev and persuaded Zelensky to abandon peace efforts and continue fighting, according to the head of the Ukrainian delegation David Arakhamia.

Ahead of Friday’s discussions, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov has stated that they will have to take into account the points that were already worked out by both sides in 2022, plus the “real situation” on the ground that has developed since then. In his announcement of the talks, Putin stated that Russia is set on “serious negotiations” with Ukraine and is seeking a “long-term, sustainable peace” that would address the root causes of the conflict. He also suggested that Friday’s meeting could yield “a new ceasefire” that could pave the way for a comprehensive peace settlement, depending on the decisions of “the Ukrainian authorities and their supervisors.”

Read more …

True enough, but I haven’t heard such talk recently.

• Talk of Direct US-Russia Clash Contradicts Trump’s Policy –Scott Ritter (Sp.)

There are “several plausible pathways” for the Ukraine conflict to escalate into a direct US-Russia war, claimed Gen. Gregory Guillot, head of US Northern Command, who labeled Russia as one of the US’ “principal adversaries.” Is this a veiled threat – or just the Pentagon beating the drums of war again? This statement signals brewing tensions within the Pentagon, military analyst and former Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter tells Sputnik. However, it’s just a “speculative pronouncement,” not reflective of Trump-era defense policy, according to the pundit. Ritter was struck by the fact that: • Guillot is speculating on a conflict beyond his remit, which belongs to US strategic command. • His stance contradicts Trump’s, who acknowledged Russia’s special military operation was provoked by NATO expansion:

“We had Trump say that there was justification for Russia’s actions, that they understood that the expansion of NATO served as a provocation,” Ritter stresses. What else rings the alarm bells of the Pentagon’s warmongering? Guillot also claimed the US could be drawn into a “direct military conflict” with Iran, China, or North Korea. He went even so far as to claim that “war with one adversary could quickly expand into war with an enemy coalition.”

Read more …

“..Trump’s latest directive to Apple to cease manufacturing in India oversimplifies the complexities of global supply chains and risks unintended economic consequences..”

i.e. $3,000 iPhones.

• Trump Tells Apple Not To Build In India (RT)

US President Donald Trump has advised Apple CEO Tim Cook to avoid expanding the company’s manufacturing operations in India, according to reports. “I had a little problem with Tim Cook yesterday,” Trump was cited as saying in Doha on Thursday by CNBC. “I said to him, ‘my friend, I treated you very good. You’re coming here with $500 billion, but now I hear you’re building all over India.’ I don’t want you building in India.” The US president added, “I said to Tim, I said, ‘Tim look, we treated you really good, we put up with all the plants that you build in China for years, now you got build us. We’re not interested in you building in India, India can take care of themselves … we want you to build here.’” Trump claimed that as a result of his conversation with Cook, Apple would increase its production in the US, according to CNBC.

Apple has been expanding its operations in India, where it is ramping up its local production. Reuters reported in April that Apple planned to manufacture the majority of iPhones sold in the US in India by the end of 2026. Earlier this month, local media reported that Apple told India’s Ministry of Communications that it planned to move the assembly of all iPhones to the country from China. Industry watchers believe Trump’s latest directive to Apple to cease manufacturing in India oversimplifies the complexities of global supply chains and risks unintended economic consequences. Establishing iPhone manufacturing in the US, where Apple lacks existing facilities, would require significant time and investment, Sonam Chandwani, managing partner at KS Legal & Associates, told RT.

On Tuesday, India approached the World Trade Organization (WTO) with a proposal to impose retaliatory duties against the US over American tariffs on steel and aluminum.The move comes after the US imposed a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum imports in March, which was an extension of measures initially introduced in 2018 during Trump’s first term as president. New Delhi is currently putting the finishing touches to a bilateral trade deal with Washington. US Vice President J.D. Vance announced last month that the two countries have agreed on terms for bilateral trade negotiations, calling it a roadmap to a final deal.

Read more …

AI is the only game in town.

• Trump Touts 1.4 Trillion Investment In AI, Tech From UAE (ZH)

After the several massive announcements and deals to come out of Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia and Qatar, developments during the last leg of the US President’s Gulf tour in United Arab Emirates actually seem a bit humdrum by comparison. But the visuals and spare no expenses official welcome and ceremonial events have certainly been interesting…

Among the more notable statements has been Trump’s touting a 1.4 trillion… yes that’s trillion… investment in AI and other tech sectors from the Emirates. The White House had previewed this longtime in the works deal as related to artificial intelligence infrastructure, semiconductors, energy and manufacturing.Further, Emirates Global Aluminum will “invest in the first new aluminium smelter in the United States in 35 years, which would nearly double US domestic aluminium production.”

According to more developments out of the UAE:
• The White House said that Trump and Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani signed agreements that would “generate an economic exchange worth at least $1.2 trillion”.
• The agreements are said to include a $96bn deal with Qatar Airways to buy up to 210 Boeing 787 Dreamliner and 777X aeroplanes, and a statement of intent for $38bn in investments at Qatar’s Al Udeid Airbase and other air defence capabilities.
• A meeting is scheduled for later today of US, Turkish and Syrian officials to discuss details of Trump’s announced dropping of sanctions against Syria.
• Trump’s three-country tour of the Gulf state region will conclude in the United Arab Emirates on Thursday.

Amid lots of awards ceremonies, accolades, and a state dinner…Trump has also been filling in more details of fresh arms deals inked with Qatar. “Yesterday we signed an agreement for Qatar to purchase $42bn-worth of the finest American military hardware including THAAD missile batteries,” he said Thursday while speaking to US troops at Al Udeid airbase.The commander-in-chief further detailed that the deal includes “Pegasus refueling aircraft, Desert Vipers, light armored vehicles, amphibious combat vehicles, the MQ-9B and the Sky Guardian drones.” As for Qatar, the president says he’s still ready to accept a donated jet from the tiny oil and gas rich country, a flying palace of a future Air Force One, which Dems have been warning would be a violation of the US Constitution’s prohibition on foreign gifts. Certainly he’ll come back to Washington awaiting immense controversy and backlash from the corporate media and his political enemies.

Read more …

“So we survived until the 1960s without universal injunction?” he asked.

• Justice Thomas Destroys the Case for Nationwide Injunctions (Margolis)

During Supreme Court oral arguments in the Trump v. CASA, Washington, and New Jersey cases, Justice Clarence Thomas delivered a surgical takedown of the legal rationale for nationwide injunctions, using just one line. The case centers around whether lower courts can issue sweeping injunctions that block federal policies nationwide, even when only a handful of plaintiffs are before the court. Representing the United States, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that such broad orders violate established legal norms and Supreme Court precedent. “We believe that the best reading of that is what you said in Trump against Hawaii, which is that Wirtz in 1963 was really the first universal injunction,” Sauer told the Court. “There’s a dispute about Perkins against Lukens Oil going back to 1940. And of course, we point to the Court’s opinion that reversed that universal injunction issued by the D.C. Circuit and said it’s profoundly wrong.”

Sauer continued, listing key precedents that have rejected expansive injunctive relief. “If you look at the cases that either party cite, you see a common theme. The cases that we cite — like National Treasury Employees Union, Perkins, Frothingham, and Massachusetts v. Mellon, going back to Scott v. Donald — in all of those, those are cases where the Court considered and addressed the sort of universal — well, in that case, statewide — provision of injunctive relief.” He emphasized, “When the Court has considered and addressed this, it has consistently said, ‘You have to limit the remedy to the plaintiffs appearing in court and complaining of that remedy.’” That’s when Justice Thomas stepped in and cut through the legal weeds with a devastatingly simple observation. “So we survived until the 1960s without universal injunction?” he asked.

Sauer didn’t hesitate: “That’s exactly correct. And in fact, those were very limited, very rare, even in the 1960s.” He went on to explain that nationwide injunctions didn’t truly explode until 2007. “In our cert petition in Summers v. Rhode Island Institute, we pointed out that the Ninth Circuit had started doing this in a whole bunch of cases involving environmental claims.” Thomas’s concise question — “So we survived until the 1960s without universal injunction?” — hit the heart of the issue. With that simple question, he challenged the idea that such drastic judicial remedies were historically essential, even during one of the most tumultuous and morally urgent periods in American history: the civil rights era, a time when federal courts began issuing broader remedies to dismantle Jim Crow laws and enforce desegregation.

In other words, if the courts managed to confront segregation, enforce Brown v. Board of Education, and make tremendous progress for civil rights without needing to impose blanket nationwide injunctions, then why are they supposedly necessary today over what amounts to policy disputes? In just one sentence, Thomas accomplished what pages of legal briefs failed to do. He exposed the historical and constitutional weakness of the left’s favorite legal tactic.

Read more …

“When these people, like the January 6 Committee and particularly Adam Schiff, are charged and try defending their bogus pardon, then we will start to learn who was really running the White House..”

• Biden’s Autopen Pardons May Just Get Invalidated (Margolis)

Ed Martin, the new DOJ pardon attorney and head of the Weaponization Working Group, isn’t wasting time. This week, he announced a review of the shady “autopen” pardons Joe Biden’s team rushed through in its final days. “These deserve some scrutiny,” he said. That’s an understatement. As PJ Media has previously reported, Biden’s White House frequently used an autopen to sign executive orders and pardons, which raised serious doubts as to whether Biden was even involved in the process. In March, the Oversight Project dropped a bombshell memo detailing 32 instances where the Biden White House used an autopen to sign off on clemency warrants — pardons and commutations that impacted thousands, including preemptive pardons for members of the January 6 Committee. The report raises a chilling question: Were these acts of mercy issued by a president or by a rogue staffer who had no constitutional authority to do so?

“They need scrutiny because we want pardons to matter, and to be accepted, and to be something that’s used correctly. So I do think we’re going to take a hard look at how they went and what they did,” Martin said. The Blaze has more:”The Justice Department’s probe could spell trouble for controversial Biden pardonees such as Anthony Fauci, retired Gen. Mark Milley, members of the Biden clan, and former members of the House Jan. 6 select committee — including Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), whom President Donald Trump and other Republicans have faulted for various alleged crimes and improprieties. For instance, Trump has suggested that Milley may have committed “treason.”

While previously serving as Trump’s most senior uniformed adviser, Milley called his communist Chinese counterpart, communist Gen. Li Zuocheng, on two occasions — four days before the 2020 election and on Jan. 8, 2021 — to reassure Zuocheng that he would provide him with actionable warnings should Trump decide to attack. Milley received a pardon just hours before former President Joe Biden left office. Fauci, the fifth director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, received a “full and unconditional” pass for possible federal crimes going back to Jan. 1, 2014 — around the time the Obama administration supposedly halted funding for dangerous gain-of-function research. “The American people were promised accountability, and I think Ed Martin is our best shot at it,” Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project, told The Blaze.

“These pardons are fake and invalid, and the president has already said that is his view.” He’s right. Martin’s investigation may be the first serious step toward cleaning up the mess that Biden left behind. “When these people, like the January 6 Committee and particularly Adam Schiff, are charged and try defending their bogus pardon, then we will start to learn who was really running the White House,” Howell added. “We need to answer the question everyone is asking: Who was running the government the last four years?” The presidential autopen has been around since the 1950s, but its use has always raised legal eyebrows. In 2013, Barack Obama became the first president to sign a bill into law with an autopen while vacationing in Hawaii. His office leaned on a 30-page memo from George W. Bush’s legal team claiming it was fine as long as the president authorized it. But Biden’s situation is far murkier. What no one seems to know is who was operating the autopen and whether Biden even knew it was being used.

Read more …

“On Biden’s last day in office, he pardoned his brother Jim, his sister-in-law Sara, his sister Valerie and her husband, John Owens, his brother Francis, Dr. Anthony Fauci, retired Gen. Mark Milley, and members of the House Jan. 6 committee.”

• DOJ Pardon Attorney Ed Martin To Review Biden’s Outgoing Pardons (JTN)

Ed Martin, who is leaving his Trump appointment as interim U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., to become the Justice Department’s U.S. pardon attorney, said that he will review former President Biden’s outgoing pardons. “I do think that the Biden pardons need some scrutiny,” Martin told ABC News on Tuesday. “And they need scrutiny because we want pardons to matter and to be accepted and to be something that’s used correctly. So I do think we’re going to take a hard look at how they went and what they did. “If they’re null and void, I’m not sure how that operates, but I can tell you we’ve had already, I’ve had in my current position, or my position as US Attorney, we had been taking a look at some of the conduct surrounding the pardons and the Biden White House.”

In addition to the pardon attorney post, Martin will be the director of the department’s Weaponization Working Group. President Trump pulled Martin’s nomination for U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., because Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he would not support it, over Martin’s involvement in the defense of people who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, according to NBC News. Tillis is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which was overseeing Martin’s nomination. His no vote would have effectively prevented Martin’s from getting a final confirmation vote. The DOJ attorney said that he doesn’t believe that Biden’s use of “auto-pen” for pardons is a problem, despite Trump suggesting that it makes them invalid. On Biden’s last day in office, he pardoned his brother Jim, his sister-in-law Sara, his sister Valerie and her husband, John Owens, his brother Francis, Dr. Anthony Fauci, retired Gen. Mark Milley, and members of the House Jan. 6 committee.

Read more …

The amounts are less spectacular, but the work must be done.

• DOGE Still Hard at Work Cutting Fraud and Waste (Salgado)

The Department of Government Efficiency is still continually occupied investigating fraud, waste, and abuse in our federal government. Now, if only Congressional Republicans would agree on a budget that includes all these necessary cuts. On May 12, DOGE’s X account provided a contract update: “Since Friday, agencies terminated 242 wasteful contracts with a ceiling value of $646M and savings of $200M, including a $118k USDA contract for the ‘Democratic Republic of Congo youth climate corps coordinator’, and a $23.5k USAID contract for the ‘garden landscaping and pool services at official mission director’s residence’ of South Africa.” Obviously important uses of our taxpayer dollars. On May 14, DOGE added an update:

“Current year non-defense federal obligations are down 20.5% as compared to 2024. Cash outlays will follow as obligations come due. Persistent government wide contract reviews for wasteful spend, consistent with the DOGE Cost Efficiency Executive Order, are bearing fruit.” It seems review of federal contracts has been a DOGE priority lately. Earlier this month, DOGE shared, “Over the last two days, agencies terminated 522 wasteful contracts with a ceiling value of $285M and savings of $110M, including a $181k @USDA contract for a ‘technical climate advisor for central Africa’.” The grift is endless. DOGE has been investigating federal credit cards, too. Earlier this month, DOGE announced, “The program to audit unused/unneeded credit cards has been expanded to 32 agencies. After 10 weeks, more than 500K cards have been de-activated. As a reminder, at the start of the audit, there were ~4.6M active cards/accounts, so still more work to do.”

No wonder we are over $36.8 trillion in debt. Of course, DOGE also partners with multiple agencies, and the Department of Energy “has announced 47 deregulatory actions for an estimated $11 billion of savings to Americans. Previously, this quantity of deregulation would take years to initiate,” per DOGE. Energy Secretary Chris Wright issued his own proud statement on May 12, explaining his department “assembled a task force to work on the BIGGEST deregulatory push in modern history. The idea was simple: get a bunch of smart people in a room & work through the problem. We cut through the red tape to deliver 47 deregulatory actions on behalf of the American people!” What a novel idea — government actually working for We the People!

Read more …

Crazy that someone can block the elected government from scrutinizing its largest expenditures.

• Trump Admin Urges SCOTUS to Permit DOGE Access to Social Security Records (ET)

The Department of Justice urged the Supreme Court on May 13 to let the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have access to Social Security data after lower courts blocked that access.President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14158 on Jan. 20, implementing DOGE, an advisory body that recommends cost-cutting measures. The order directed the entity to “implement the President’s DOGE Agenda, by modernizing Federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.” Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued in the new filing that the lower courts have overreached and are attempting to turn themselves into “the human resources department for the Executive Branch.”

The filing came after Ellen Lipton Hollander, a Maryland-based federal district court judge, issued an order on March 20 preventing DOGE from viewing Social Security Administration (SSA) records because such access “violates” the federal Privacy Act.The lawsuit was brought in February by labor unions and retirees represented by the Democracy Forward Foundation.“The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion. It has launched a search for the proverbial needle in the haystack, without any concrete knowledge that the needle is actually in the haystack,” the judge wrote in granting a temporary restraining order against the federal government.

DOGE’s team at the Social Security Administration has had “unbridled access to the personal and private data of millions of Americans, including but not limited to Social Security numbers, medical records, mental health records, hospitalization records, drivers’ license numbers, bank and credit card information, tax information, income history, work history, birth and marriage certificates, and home and work addresses,” Hollander wrote. Hollander directed DOGE to delete any personally identifiable data in its possession. On April 17, Hollander upgraded the temporary restraining order to a preliminary injunction. On April 30, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit voted 9–6 to maintain Hollander’s order while the appeal process continues. On May 2, the Trump administration filed an emergency appeal with the Supreme Court, asking the justices to pause the preliminary injunction.

In the May 13 filing, Sauer argued that the district court erred in preventing “the 11 members of the Social Security Administration (SSA) DOGE team—from accessing data … for purposes that are unquestionably lawful.” The district court “dictated to the Executive Branch which government employees can access which data and even prescribed necessary training, background checks, and paperwork for data access,” Sauer wrote. “When district courts attempt to transform themselves into the human resources department for the Executive Branch, the irreparable harm to the government is clear,” he wrote. When the courts “stymie the government’s initiatives to modernize badly outdated systems and combat rampant fraud—leaving those initiatives on a litigation track that may halt them for months or years—the irreparable harm is even clearer.”

Reviewing Social Security Administration data is important because the agency has “one of the largest documented histories of improper payments,” Sauer stated. In a brief in opposition filed on May 12, the lead respondent, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, said that after years of honoring “its data security obligations,” the Social Security Administration “now seeks to throw open its data systems to unauthorized (and often unvetted) personnel who have no demonstrated need for the personally identifiable information … they seek.”The April 17 preliminary injunction should be left in place because it is “narrow and, contrary to the government’s assertions, permits SSA to disclose both anonymized and non-anonymized data to DOGE Team members,” the brief said.The Supreme Court could rule on the government’s emergency application at any time.

Read more …

How to spell “inside job”.

Helmer is an expert on MH17.

• The US Has Pushed The ICAO To Declare War On Russia (Helmer)

On Monday, May 12, the United States pushed the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the aircraft safety watchdog, to vote behind closed doors to adopt a secret resolution convicting Russia of shooting-down Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 on July 17, 2014. Unlike the Dutch show trial which in November 2022 convicted two Russians and a Ukrainian of the same crime, the ICAO reached its verdict without the appearance of an open proceeding or of openly tested evidence. It’s a put-up job.William Raillant-Clark, the ICAO communications chief at the Montreal headquarters, was asked to provide a text of the resolution and identification of the countries voting for, against, abstaining, and absent. Raillant-Clark replied: “In accordance with the Council’s Rules of Procedure, the vote was taken by secret ballot.” He refused to disclose the resolution itself; the numbers of votes without the names of the countries; or the reason for keeping everything but the conviction of Russia secret. He answered: “The Council’s considerations based on reason of law and fact, will be issued in the coming weeks.”

The spokesman was then asked for a copy of ICAO’s Rules of Procedure. He refuses to answer. The decision of ICAO to go to war with Russia, using its aviation safety mandate to cover up the evidence of what really happened to MH17, destroys the organization for the future. It follows the destruction of the global organization for the safety of nuclear power generation, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW); the International Committee of the Red Cross; and the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres.

The downing of MH17 on July 17, 2014, with the deaths of all 298 passengers and crew, was a Ukrainian government operation, backed by the Obama Administration led by then-Vice President Joseph Biden, to start the economic sanctions war against Russia; US and NATO military preparations for the Ukrainian attack on the Donbass; it almost led to a NATO military intervention. Read the full story of what happened, and the subsequent faking of evidence in the Dutch trial, in the book. This new ICAO fatality, weaponizing aviation safety into war against Russia, was inflicted by the US, the dominant member state on the 36-member Council of the ICAO. Collaborating with the State Department’s delegate at the Council, Anthony Clare, the Dutch and Australian governments promoted the resolution and pushed for adoption by the allied states.

The list of permanent and elected member states on the ICAO Council can be viewed here. The ICAO session on May 12 does not appear in the advance schedule of meetings for the ICAO this month. The Council vote which took place on May 12 is not listed in the Council proceedings for the month. An internal notice of the Council for the May 12 meeting shows the text of the resolution is “restricted”. Raillant-Clark has refused to explain. As soon as the vote was taken, the Dutch Government and Foreign Ministry issued a press release. The Australian Foreign Ministry followed. The Netherlands and Australia, whose nationals comprised the majority of the 298 victims on board MH17, sponsored the ICAO resolution. Both governments are fighting Russia on the Ukrainian battlefield. The Dutch may now attempt to divert Russian state funds frozen in The Netherlands to pay compensation to the families of the victims.

Only after the two government releases had appeared, and Raillant-Clark was questioned personally, did ICAO reveal its press release.

The Russian government issued its response on May 13. “Russia,” the Foreign Ministry said, “is not part of the ICAO Council. In its press release, this body alleges that the responsibility for downing this flight rests with the Russian Federation. However, the text of the ruling, including its reasoning part, is not available. Therefore, this amounted to a blind vote – it is quite obvious that this decision does not hold water. Once again, the ICAO Council demonstrated its political bias. It takes its decision while guided by momentary considerations. This is not the way it must operate.” “Russia withdrew from these proceedings last year, on June 17, 2024, in view of the multiple procedural violations by the Council and the ICAO Secretariat, which made an impartial fact-finding effort all but impossible. That said, Moscow’s principled position remains relevant to this day – Russia was not involved in the MH17 crash, while all the claims to the contrary coming from Australia and the Netherlands are at odds with reality.”

“The ICAO Council is not an independent body. It includes 36 ICAO member states out of 193. They get their voting instructions from their respective capitals. Most of the countries represent the West and their immediate satellites. This makes the way the Council operates a matter of arithmetic. There was simply nobody to tackle this matter in a professional manner and on its merits.”

“There is nothing new about using the ICAO Council against countries which are viewed as being undesirable by the West. This can hardly come as a surprise to anyone these days. Suffice to recall the investigation of the landing of a Ryanair flight at the Minsk airport on May 23, 2021. At the time, the interested Western countries were not satisfied with the preliminary report by the Investigative Team. They used their majority within the Council to force the team to re-write the report to ensure that it condemns Belarus. Moreover, the ICAO Council ruled that it was competent to review the Great Britain, Sweden, Ukraine, Canada v. Iran case regarding the crash of a Boeing aircraft near Tehran after a vote held behind the curtain. There was also a recent example when the Council refused to take up Venezuela’s claims in its dispute with Argentina regarding unilateral restrictions in civil aviation.”

Read more …

NB: the chance that a former FBI director doesn’t know what 8647 stands for is zero.

• “86 47” – Comey Posts-Then-Deletes Creepy Threat Aimed At Trump (ZH)

Former FBI Director James Comey posted a photo of sea shells arranged into the numbers “86 47” on his Instagram account today, before shortly deleting the post.The immediately preceding post shows Comey lounging at the beach while pretending to read his own crime novel, his presence at the beach lending to the fact that this was not a hack. Many are blasting Comey for issuing a not-so-thinly-veiled threat at sitting President Donald Trump, including the President’s son and Congressman Andy Biggs:

And here is his explanation for the ‘shells’ and the deletion……you simply cannot make this shit up!!!

[..] As covered previously in a ZeroHedge piece titled “From Epstein To Diddy: Spotlight Shines On James Comey’s Prosecutor Daughter”, Comey’s offspring smell a little swampy as well. From the piece: In a thinly covered news story from December that’s suddenly relevant again (read on), New York Prosecutor Maurene Comey – whose father James Comey famously refused to prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information & then participated in the Russia collusion hoax – joined the prosecution against Combs. The younger Comey has previously worked as lead prosecutor on both the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases, as well as that of former Epstein cellmate Nicholas Tartaglione.
…
Maurene Comey became a US attorney in the Southern District of New York in 2015. In 2019, when she was just 30-years-old, Comey became one of the lead prosecutors in the Jeffrey Epstein case before he was found dead in his jail cell in August 2019. Two years later, she became one of three lead prosecutors in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s partner in crime and daughter of suspected Mossad operative Robert Maxwell.

Before becoming a US attorney, Comey clerked for US District Court chief judge Loretta Preska of the SDNY – who notably oversaw a long-running defamation case filed by Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre against Maxwell. Comey was also involved in the case of Nicholas Tartaglione, a former NYPD officer who was convicted of killing four men in 2016, and who was briefly Epstein’s cellmate in the Manhattan Metro Correctional Center. Tartaglione claims to have helped Epstein after ‘finding him unconscious’ (and totally not trying to kill him) prior to Epstein’s actual death. In 2016, Tartaglione suspected a man named Martin Luna had stolen money from him – for which “Tartaglione tortured Martin and then forced one of Martin’s nephews to watch as he strangled him to death with a zip-tie,” according to a statement by the US Attorney’s Office.

Two days after Epstein’s death, NY Times reporter James B Stewart, who had spent 90 minutes with Epstein a year prior, wrote “The overriding impression I took away from our roughly 90-minute conversation was that Mr. Epstein knew an astonishing number of rich, famous and powerful people, and had photos to prove it. He also claimed to know a great deal about these people, some of it potentially damaging or embarrassing, including details about their supposed sexual proclivities and recreational drug use. And so, whether this is just a case of ‘it’s a small world’ or something a little (or a lot) less innocent, James Comey’s daughter is now involved in a second case where high-profile celebrities and politicians may have been secretly filmed engaging in sexual activity with minors. Comey’s deep state tentacles make the cryptic Instragram post that much more unsettling. Might there be some hints in Comey’s shitty novel? Donald Barr’s Space Relations anyone?

Read more …

 

 

 

 

CHD
https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/1922833502430450150

Xifaxan

Missing link

Mad honey

Escape

Dance

Camel

Mercury and Aluminum

Pop
https://twitter.com/TansuYegen/status/1922749376956444819

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 15 2025

May 152025
 
 May 15, 2025  Posted by at 9:16 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Kazemir Malevich Floor polishers 1912

 

• Why China Will Win The Arms Race (Wolfgang Münchau)
• Russian Delegation Will Be Waiting For Ukrainians In Istanbul – Kremlin (RT)
• Zelensky Claims Ban On Russia Talks Doesn’t Apply To Him (RT)
• Zelensky’s Regime Only Stable When At War – Former Senior UN Official (RT)
• Rubio and Witkoff Will Travel To Istanbul On Friday – Reuters (RT)
• Trump Envoy Kellogg Reveals NATO Troop Deployment Plans For Ukraine (RT)
• US Opposes Zelensky Attendance At NATO Summit (RT)
• The Unraveling of The Old World Order And The Role of Russia (Bordachev)
• Russia Doesn’t Need Western Approval To Shape Global History (Lukyanov)
• Trump Shocks the World – Again (Spencer)
• Qatar Commits To “Largest Order Of Jets In The History Of Boeing” (NYP)
• Every Anti-Trump Economic Narrative Is Collapsing (Margolis)
• Trump Economy Defies ‘Gloom And Doom’ Expectations (Whedon)
• Federal Judge Says Trump’s Invocation of Alien Enemies Act Was Legal (ET)
• Average Americans Poised for Double-Digit Tax Cuts In 2027 (ZH)
• Court Rules On Von Der Leyen’s Secret Covid Vaccine Deal Messages (RT)
• Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Signed Oath to Conceal COVID Info (YN)
• A New False Tribunal Is In The Making (Stephen Karganovic)

 

 

 

 

Tulsi

Assange

1940

Alex

“Russia. Kremlin. Putin. 25 years”

Tucker Carlson interviews Ed Martin

 

 

 

 

“..a swarm of AI-powered drones..”

• Why China Will Win The Arms Race (Wolfgang Münchau)

When Donald Trump visits the Middle East this week, he will bump into some familiar people. Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Fink and Sam Altman will also be in Riyadh. I doubt they will spend much time talking about Gaza, or Iran. They are all there for the same reason: to talk about AI. The stock markets have currently put a high price on these tech companies. But AI is also commanding a high price from America’s foreign and security policy community: it will change the nature of warfare more profoundly than any other innovation we have experienced in our lifetimes. Ronald Reagan’s infamous Strategy Defence Initiative, also known as Star Wars, failed because the old technology could not deliver the precision that was needed. But AI could make it a reality and America’s concern is that China might get there first.

But America also worries that they are leading the charge with AI-powered drones. We think of drones as modern, but those used in the Russia-Ukraine war still need an operator. Imagine, then, if one side had AI-powered drones at their disposal? The West and Nato may be comfortable in their current — swiftly dating — military capabilities. But AI warfare is a completely new game. And China is already forging ahead in the two areas that will prove critical. The first is the supply of energy — which is vital to power large AI data centres. The West should be concerned by the sheer scale of the expansion of China’s energy capacity. China has a renewable capacity target of 2,461 gigawatts by 2030. The corresponding numbers for the EU and US are respectively 1,100 and 500 gigawatts.

For the Chinese, the heavy lifting will come from renewable sources, such as the world’s largest hydropower plant in Tibet, which will have an energy capacity roughly the size of Germany’s capacity today. Just from one single dam. This dam is not even included in China’s target number. AI is furiously energy-hungry. As the car industry has only recently found out, the electric car is not just an evolution — it is a different product. The same applies to anything reliant on AI. Germany’s Rheinmetall is a formidable producer of ammunition and tanks. They make the best tanks in the world. But they are old-school — the heavy-metal version of defence manufacturing. You don’t want to be in one of them when being attacked by a swarm of AI-powered drones.

And so, as China marches ahead, Europe’s absurd data protection regulations and AI regulation effectively criminalise the 21st century’s most important evolving business sector. The Financial Times reported that British soldiers were prevented from using signal jamming on the grounds that it violated GDPR. Europeans have, in general, no idea what damage they are inflicting upon themselves with their absurd data protection obsession. And no clue what it does to their security. In the gilded foreign policy salons of Europe’s capitals, you will not hear much about AI-drones, or satellite-based AI-missiles systems. It is as though AI has yet to be invented in the Western foreign policy universe.

China, meanwhile, has more energy than we do, puts serious money into AI, and is not regulating itself to death. Take 5G. While we Europeans struggle with it, the Chinese are already developing 6G — the technology which is needed to handle the communications for next generation manufacturing. This is the second critical area in which China is excelling: high-tech manufacturing. In the US and the UK, the prevailing view is that sophisticated countries should move into services and leave the shop-floor economy to upstarts like China. This is a story we have been telling ourselves for too long. And it is one that economists, in particular, don’t understand.

They think it is more efficient to let China do all the manufacturing, for the US to specialise in high tech and finance, and to let Europe be a museum. They are simultaneously oblivious to those voters who want real jobs, to the nature of 21st-century manufacturing, and to security concerns. The irony here is that the US understands the AI-service economy like no one else. And it still just about leads the world in research. But China has been able to catch up because all the new technology is open-source. As an anonymous employee at Google candidly admitted: “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI.” Nor does the US. This is not a world of secret algorithms, or of industrial patents. The costs of entry are low — all you need is a bunch of desktop computers with a good graphics card. Anyone can join in. In the old world, the technology leadership meant that the US was years ahead of the competition. No more.

Read more …

They should have arrived as I write this. Wonder what they talk about 🙂

• Russian Delegation Will Be Waiting For Ukrainians In Istanbul – Kremlin (RT)

Moscow will be sending a delegation for direct talks with Ukraine in Istanbul on Thursday and expects Kiev to do the same, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. On Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to resume direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev to find a lasting settlement to the conflict between the two countries. After his proposal was supported by US President Donald Trump, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, who had previously ruled out any talks with Moscow, also expressed his readiness. Kiev earlier stated that the only official Zelensky would talk to is Putin. The Russian president has so far made no indication that he is planning to travel to Istanbul.

When asked by journalists on Wednesday if the talks in Türkiye were still on the cards, Peskov replied by saying: “Indeed, the Russian delegation will be waiting for the Ukrainian delegation in Istanbul on Thursday, May 15, that is – tomorrow.” “I can confirm once again that everything that the president said in his statement on May 11… remains relevant,” he stressed. Peskov declined to reveal the lineup of the Russian delegation that will travel to Istanbul. It will be announced “when we receive instructions from the president. So far, there have been no such instructions,” he explained.

On Tuesday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said that, during potential talks, Moscow wants to discuss “a sustainable settlement of the situation, first of all, by addressing the very roots of this conflict, resolving issues related to the denazification of the Kiev regime, ensuring recognition of the realities that have developed recently, including the entry of new territories into Russia.” Ryabkov refrained from making any forecasts on the outcome of discussions, but stressed that Moscow is committed to negotiating “seriously and responsibly.”

Read more …

“The Ukrainian Constitution bars elections during wartime and requires that presidential authority pass to the speaker of parliament if no legal successor is chosen..”

• Zelensky Claims Ban On Russia Talks Doesn’t Apply To Him (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has claimed that a law he signed banning negotiations with Russia does not apply to him personally, after calling for a direct meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Zelensky intends to travel to Türkiye later this week, where direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine are expected to resume for the first time since Kiev suspended talks in 2022. He has insisted that Putin must attend the talks in person to prove that Moscow has a genuine interest in peace. Speaking at a press conference on Tuesday, Zelensky rejected claims that his outreach contradicts Ukrainian law. A September 2022 decree, endorsed by Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council and signed by Zelensky, prohibits negotiations with Russia while Putin remains in office. The law was introduced as Kiev pursued a military victory in the conflict.

”It’s a Russian narrative that I cannot speak with Putin,” Zelensky said. “Nobody but me can conduct negotiations on sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, on our course.” Zelensky claimed in January that the ban was intended to prevent unauthorized negotiations by other Ukrainian officials, particularly to curb separatist influences and “shadow” negotiation channels. Russian officials have pointed to the law as evidence that Kiev is unwilling to engage diplomatically. The Ukrainian Constitution bars elections during wartime and requires that presidential authority pass to the speaker of parliament if no legal successor is chosen. Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, yet he remains in power, dismissing opponents as Kremlin sympathizers for questioning his legitimacy.

Moscow has described Zelensky’s political status as an internal Ukrainian matter but cautioned that any treaties he signs could be challenged for lacking legitimacy. US President Donald Trump, whose administration has offered to broker a peace deal between Kiev and Moscow, has described Zelensky as “a dictator without elections.” The US has conducted multiple rounds of talks with Moscow and Kiev, promoting trust-building measures such as a 30-day moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure. Russia says its forces adhered fully to the plan, while accusing Ukraine of violating the partial ceasefire multiple times. US officials have called direct talks the next logical step in the Ukraine peace process. Senior American negotiators will reportedly observe the meeting in Istanbul. Kiev has urged its Western supporters to impose additional sanctions on Russia, should Putin decline to attend. Moscow has yet to confirm its delegation.

Read more …

Interesting view.

“..should a peace accord be reached during the negotiations, “I don’t know how long the Zelensky regime will [last]. It may fall apart.”

• Zelensky’s Regime Only Stable When At War – Former Senior UN Official (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s regime enjoys relative stability only because of the conflict with Russia, and so may be reluctant to seal a peace agreement with Moscow, former director-general of the United Nations Office at Geneva, Sergey Ordzhonikidze, has told RT. The untrustworthiness of the Ukrainian leadership will loom large for the Russian delegation during an expected meeting in Istanbul, Türkiye, on Thursday, the veteran diplomat predicted on Tuesday. The talks were originally proposed last week by Russian President Vladimir Putin, who offered to resume direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev without any preconditions to reach a lasting settlement to the Ukraine conflict.

Zelensky has expressed his readiness to engage in dialogue with the Russian side, but has insisted that it be preceded by an unconditional 30-day ceasefire – a demand Moscow has repeatedly rejected. Zelensky has also said that he would only come to the meeting in Istanbul if Putin attends in person. Ordzhonikidze told RT that should a peace accord be reached during the negotiations, “I don’t know how long the Zelensky regime will [last]. It may fall apart.” “He obviously will have many internal problems because… he has some Nazi, fascist organizations that would [convict] him of betrayal,” he predicted, claiming that “it’s not a stable regime in the sense that it can be stable only during war.” The seasoned Russian diplomat also predicted that once Western leaders see Zelensky as a liability, they will get rid of him without a second thought.

History shows that months and in some cases even years of “homework” have underpinned successful negotiations. While overnight breakthroughs have also happened, much is determined by the level of trust between the parties concerned, Ordzhonikidze stressed. Ukrainian authorities have a poor track record in this respect, he told RT, citing the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements, which were supposed to grant Donetsk and Lugansk regions special status within the Ukrainian state, but were never implemented. ”Obviously, we need a country that would act like a… guarantor of the… possible agreement, if any at all,” Ordzhonikidze stated, noting that even if some nation, most likely the US, assumes the role, there is not much room for optimism as to whether Kiev would honor any agreement.

Read more …

“The first direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in more than three years..”

• Rubio and Witkoff Will Travel To Istanbul On Friday – Reuters (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff has said he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio will travel to Istanbul on Friday, according to Reuters. Earlier this week, Trump announced that US officials would take part in the upcoming talks on the Ukraine conflict. The first direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in more than three years are set to take place in the Turkish city on May 15. On Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to resume dialogue to find a lasting settlement to the ongoing conflict that would address its root causes. Witkoff made the remarks on Wednesday while speaking to reporters in Doha, where he and Rubio are accompanying Trump on a state visit to Qatar as part of a broader Middle East trip.

Trump said on Tuesday that Rubio and other US officials would join the talks in Istanbul. A White House spokesman later clarified to reporters that Rubio, Witkoff and US Special Envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg would attend the negotiations. Trump, who had previously suggested he might attend in person, told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Qatar that his schedule would not allow it. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Moscow would be sending a delegation and expected Ukraine to do the same. Kiev stated previously that Vladimir Zelensky would only talk directly to the Russian president. On Wednesday evening, the Kremlin named its delegation for the talks, to be led by presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky, who also headed the Russian side during negotiations in Istanbul in 2022.

Read more …

Kellogg’s an fool. Dump him. “Russia has rejected the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine in any form..” And look at what Kellogg talks about: NATO troops in Ukraine. He’s like the anti-Witkoff.

• Trump Envoy Kellogg Reveals NATO Troop Deployment Plans For Ukraine (RT)

Washington is in talks with its European NATO allies about deploying military contingents to Ukraine as part of a possible post-conflict settlement, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg, has said. A group of European NATO member states has for months been seeking to muster a force to be deployed to Ukraine as part of a so-called “coalition of the willing,” purportedly in a post-conflict peacekeeping role. Russia has repeatedly warned it would treat any foreign troops on Ukrainian soil as legitimate targets, saying such a move could escalate the conflict. Speaking to Fox Business on Tuesday, Kellogg said troops from France, Germany, the UK, and Poland could be part of what he described as a “resiliency force.” “This is a force referred to as the E3, but it’s actually now the E4 – when you include the Brits, the French, and the Germans, and in fact, the Poles as well,” he said.

Kellogg added the troops would be positioned west of the Dnieper River, placing them “outside the contact zone.” “And then to the east you have a peacekeeping force, and what it would look like with a third party involved with that. So, you can actually monitor a ceasefire; we have this thing pretty well planned out,” he said. The remarks come as preparations are underway for possible direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul. Kellogg and Steve Witkoff, another senior envoy for US President Donald Trump, are reportedly expected to attend. Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday proposed conducting negotiations without preconditions in Türkiye on May 15. Vladimir Zelensky said he was ready to meet Putin on Thursday, but insisted that any talks should be preceded by the start of a 30-day ceasefire.

Moscow has repeatedly ruled out this suggestion, saying such a pause would give Kiev an opportunity to regroup militarily and renew hostilities. On Monday, the foreign ministers of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the UK, along with the EU’s top diplomat Kaja Kallas, issued a joint statement after talks in London. They pledged “robust security guarantees for Ukraine,” including “exploring the creation of a coalition of air, land, and maritime reassurance forces that could help create confidence in any future peace and support the regeneration of Ukraine’s armed forces.” Russia has rejected the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine in any form. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said it would pose a direct threat to Russia. Security Council Secretary Sergey Shoigu has warned it could trigger World War III, potentially involving nuclear weapons.

Read more …

He has no business there at all.

• US Opposes Zelensky Attendance At NATO Summit (RT)

The US is against inviting Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to the NATO summit in The Hague next month, Italy’s ANSA news agency reported on Wednesday, citing anonymous diplomatic sources. Kiev has long sought membership in the US-led military bloc – something Russia considers a fundamental threat to its national security. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly described the prevention of such a scenario as one of Moscow’s top objectives in the Ukraine conflict. Since assuming office in January, US President Donald Trump has on multiple occasions ruled out Ukraine’s accession to NATO in the foreseeable future. In its article, ANSA reported that “for now… a NATO-Ukraine Council at the level of leaders is not planned,” adding, however, that no final decision has been made yet.

According to the publication, Kiev could participate in some of the meetings on June 24-25, but only at the level of foreign and defense ministers. The Italian outlet reported that for the time being the only non-member states that have received invitations are Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. ANSA also reported that “at the moment, a very concise program is expected at the summit, in contrast to what has happened in recent years, to avoid possible friction with Donald Trump.” Zelensky joined NATO leaders for sessions of the NATO-Ukraine Council at the 2023 Vilnius Summit and the 2024 Washington Summit.

Also on Wednesday, Bloomberg quoted unnamed diplomats familiar with the matter as saying that membership for Ukraine will not be on the agenda during the upcoming gathering in the Netherlands, with the main focus expected to be on ramping up defense spending. The outlet similarly reported that the NATO summit in June will likely be shorter than the previous meetings.Speaking during a press conference last Friday, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte stated that “we never agreed that, as part of a peace deal, there would be guaranteed NATO membership for Ukraine.” He emphasized that Ukraine’s accession to the bloc had been agreed upon by its members, but “for the longer term, not for the peace negotiations ongoing at the moment.” Rutte noted, however, that NATO maintains close cooperation with Kiev with respect to military aid and personnel training.

Read more …

“Western Europe, once a central pillar of global diplomacy, appears to be in the final phase of its strategic decline – a region now better known for procedure than power.”

• The Unraveling of The Old World Order And The Role of Russia (Bordachev)

The day is not far off when the very notion of “international order” will lose its former meaning – just as happened with the once-theoretical concept of “multipolarity.” Originally conceived in the mid-20th century as a way to balance power among great states, multipolarity now bears little resemblance to what its originators had in mind. The same is increasingly true of international order. In recent years, it has become commonplace to say that the global balance of power is shifting and that previous leaders are no longer able to maintain their dominant positions. This much is obvious. No group of states today is capable of enforcing its vision of justice or order upon the rest of the world. Traditional international institutions are weakening, and their functions are being re-evaluated or hollowed out. Western Europe, once a central pillar of global diplomacy, appears to be in the final phase of its strategic decline – a region now better known for procedure than power.

But before we join the chorus, lamenting or celebrating the end of one era and the start of another, it is worth asking: what exactly is “international order”? Too often, this concept is treated as a given, when in fact it has always been a tool – one used primarily by states with both the means and the will to coerce others into accepting certain rules of the game. Historically, “international order” has been imposed by dominant powers capable of enforcing it. But today, emerging players outside the Western sphere – nations like China and India – may not be particularly interested in taking up that role. Why should they invest their resources in a vague, abstract idea that primarily served the interests of others?

The second traditional purpose of international order has been to prevent revolutionary upheaval. In the current strategic environment, this function is largely fulfilled not by institutions or diplomacy but by the simple fact of mutual nuclear deterrence. The handful of states with major nuclear capabilities – Russia, the United States, China, and a few others – are enough to keep general war at bay. No other powers are capable of truly challenging them in an existential way. For better or worse, that is what guarantees relative global stability.It is therefore naive to expect new great powers to be enthusiastic participants in building a new international order in the traditional sense. All past orders, including the current UN-centered one, emerged from intra-Western conflicts. Russia, while not a Western country in the cultural or institutional sense, played a decisive role in those conflicts – especially the Second World War – and was central to the global architecture that followed.

In fact, one could argue that the current international order, such as it is, was a product of Russia’s intervention in a Western civil war. It’s no coincidence that at the 1815 Congress of Vienna, Tsar Alexander I behaved not as one of many European leaders, but as a figure set apart – an “arbiter of Europe.” Russia has always seen itself this way: too large, too sovereign, and too independent to be just another node in someone else’s system. This is a key distinction. For Russia, participation in international order has never been an end in itself, but a means to preserve its own unique position in world affairs. That is something it has pursued with remarkable persistence for over two centuries.

Read more …

“..Russia has a far more productive engagement with many countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America than with most in Europe.”

• Russia Doesn’t Need Western Approval To Shape Global History (Lukyanov)

The 9th of May Victory Day celebrations in Moscow once again captured international attention – despite the many other global events vying for the headlines. This wasn’t simply about pageantry or military symbolism. The Red Square parade was, as always, a statement: a public expression of one country’s position in the evolving global environment. Whether critics will admit it or not, events like this provoke reactions – and that in itself signals relevance. Eighty years after the end of the Second World War, the memory of that conflict is being viewed through new lenses. It was, undeniably, a world war – its consequences reshaped the international order. The creation of the United Nations was its most formal legacy, but the broader historical impact extended far beyond. The war marked the beginning of the end for the colonial system.

From the late 1940s onward, decolonization accelerated rapidly. Within three decades, colonial empires had all but disappeared, and dozens of new states emerged across Africa, Asia, and elsewhere. Their paths varied, but they fundamentally changed the structure of global politics. Looking back from 2025, one could argue that this wave of decolonization – driven by the global South – was no less historically important than the Cold War or the bipolar superpower confrontation. Today, the role of the so-called “global majority” is expanding quickly. These nations may not dominate the international system, but they increasingly form a vibrant, influential environment in which all global actors must operate. The presence of guests from Asia, Africa, and Latin America at this year’s parade in Moscow was a symbolic confirmation of that shift.

It signaled that the world has definitively moved beyond the Cold War structure, which framed international life around a North Atlantic-centric axis. Equally important was the fact that this reconfiguration was highlighted in Moscow – through Russia’s own initiative. It reflected not just commemoration, but transformation. A similar event is expected in Beijing in September to mark the end of the war in the Pacific theater. Together, these ceremonies highlight how the geopolitical center of gravity is gradually shifting away from its traditional Western base. As time distances us from the largest war in human history, its meaning doesn’t diminish. On the contrary, it reappears in new forms. Like it or not, memory has become a political force. It increasingly defines which community a country belongs to. Each nation has its own version of the war – and that’s to be expected. This isn’t revisionism. It’s the natural result of different historical experiences shaped under different conditions.

There will never be a single unified narrative of the past, and attempts to impose one are not only unrealistic but dangerous. The focus should be on finding compatibility between differing interpretations, not enforcing uniformity. Using memory as a political weapon erodes the foundations of peaceful international coexistence. This issue is particularly relevant for the global majority, which may one day voice its own historical claims more loudly – especially against former colonial powers in the West. In this context, the growing divergence between Russia and Western Europe over the legacy of the Second World War cannot be ignored. Efforts to preserve and defend Russia’s interpretation of the conflict are vital – not to convince others, but for domestic coherence and national identity. Other countries will write their own histories, shaped by their own interests. That cannot be controlled from the outside. The real issue is whether differing historical narratives can coexist. And on this front, it turns out that Russia has a far more productive engagement with many countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America than with most in Europe.

Read more …

“Just two-months ago, Ahmad al-Sharaa remained designated as an al-Qaeda terrorist by the United States Government, there was a $10 million-dollar bounty on his head. Yesterday, as Syria’s interim President, Ammad al-Sharaa shook hands with President Donald Trump in Saudi Arabia.”

• Trump Shocks the World – Again (Spencer)

Trump has done it again. That much is clear. He has outmaneuvered and out-thought everyone else, and did what many others assumed to be impossible. But what exactly has he done? On Wednesday morning, during his trip to Saudi Arabia, Trump met with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, who from 2017 until January of this year, was known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani. Al-Sharaa was the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the “Syrian Liberation Group,” a Sunni jihad group that had been linked to al-Qaeda and was working to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. In January 2025, HTS finally attained its goal. Assad fled to Russia. Al-Julani took control in Damascus and announced that he was establishing a regime that would respect the rights of all Syrians. He insisted that he had broken with al-Qaeda years before, and to signify that he was a new man, he shed his nom de guerre and reverted to his birth name. He trimmed his beard, took off his fatigues, and donned a suit.

Yet almost immediately, al-Sharaa’s attempts to construct a new image for himself foundered upon harsh reality. His forces were involved in mass killings of members of the Alawite sect. Since Bashar Assad was an Alawite, this sect was associated with the old regime. As recently as March 7, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz declared that al-Sharaa was behind it: “Al-Julani took off his galabiya, put on a suit, and presented a moderate facade. Now, he has removed the mask, revealing his true face: a jihadist terrorist from the Al-Qaeda school, committing atrocities against the Alawite civilian population.” Al-Sharaa, however, condemned the killings and vowed to punish those responsible, even if they were his own men, saying: “Syria is a state of law. The law will take its course on all. We fought to defend the oppressed, and we won’t accept that any blood be shed unjustly, or goes without punishment or accountability, even among those closest to us.”

How since is al-Sharaa? Is he still a jihadist, practicing Muhammad’s dictum, “War is deceit”? Or does he genuinely wish to establish a regime in Syria that will ensure the rights of all people? Donald Trump is giving him a chance to put up or shut up. Trump made it clear throughout the 2024 presidential campaign: he was determined to end the cycle of endless wars and establish a new era of peace. He repeatedly made it clear that this would involve challenging what the foreign policy establishment has long held to be unquestionable truths, and finding new ways to reach accords with previously hostile entities based on common interests. In many ways, Trump’s meeting with al-Sharaa is as momentous, and could be more momentous, than his first-term overtures to Kim Jong Un. The two meetings come from the same wellsprings: Trump is attempting to break longstanding logjams and end the status quo that the foreign policy establishment, both inside the U.S. and elsewhere, had come to take for granted.

NBC News reported Wednesday that Trump announced: “We are currently exploring normalizing relations with Syria’s new government, as you know, beginning with my meeting with President Ahmed al-Sharaa.” Yet he is not proceeding without asking certain things of al-Sharaa as well. NBC reported that he “encouraged Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa to recognize Israel’s statehood.”Trump explained to al-Sharaa that he had “a tremendous opportunity to do something historic in his country.” The president “urged the Syrian leader to sign on to the Abraham Accords.” He “also advised Sharaa to tell foreign terrorists to leave Syria, deport Palestinian terrorists, help the U.S. prevent the resurgence of the Islamic State and assume responsibility for Islamic State detention centers in Syria’s northeast.” Trump declared that he wanted to give Syria “a chance at greatness.”

So Trump wants to make peace with old foes based on mutual economic interests. He is giving al-Sharaa a chance to demonstrate that he really is no longer a jihadi and wants to build a stable and prosperous Syria. It could happen. The global jihad, although it is ignored everywhere, continues nevertheless. It never goes away. Individuals and states, however, can and do put it aside for considerable periods in order to pursue other interests. A reminder of how difficult this will be, however, came in the fact that, as NBC noted, “Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was also present and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan joined by phone.” The presence of Erdogan on the phone was a reminder that al-Sharaa has been propped up by Turkish forces, and that many see his forces in Syria as a tool of Erdogan’s interests in restoring the Ottoman caliphate.

This is a matter Trump may well have to deal with before too long. Whether or not al-Sharaa is sincere in renouncing jihad, Erdogan seems to be moving in the opposite direction. Nevertheless, Trump’s attempt to create peace based on common interests and move beyond the present logjam is as welcome as it is audacious. Once again, Trump appears to be way ahead of everyone else, as he was when he established the Abraham Accords even as John Kerry was confidently telling the world that such a thing was impossible. The establishment will howl at Trump’s meeting; that’s only to be expected. The president, meanwhile, is moving ahead with astonishing vision, immense confidence, and considerable imagination. The peace and stability of the Middle East, and of the entire world, are riding upon his success.

Read more …

Orders: $200 billion. Qatar GDP: $200 billion. “Qatar and the US also signed a commitment to generating $1.2 trillion worth of economic exchange..”

• Qatar Commits To “Largest Order Of Jets In The History Of Boeing” (NYP)

President Trump announced Wednesday that the Qatari government had committed to the “largest order of jets in the history of Boeing” — touting the transaction despite trashing the American company earlier this week for its slowness in delivering a new Air Force One. Trump said the oil and gas-rich monarchy, which has offered to provide the US president with a luxury “palace on wings,” committed to spending $160 billion on the planes as part of a broader $243.5 billion economic pledge. “We’re going to see some of it in action tomorrow…. it’s going to be an air fair,” Trump said during a meeting with the country’s leaders shortly after he arrived in the ultramodern capital on the shores of the Persian Gulf. Wednesday evening, at a state dinner in Trump’s honor, the president said that the investments could ultimately generate $1.2 trillion in economic activity.

“Working together, we can help the entire region unlock its potential,” Trump told his host, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. “You have unbelievable potential here, such great, such rich land, such beautiful, magnificent — it’s just a magnificent place, and you’re unlocking its potential.” Moments earlier, the emir had said Trump’s decision to visit Qatar on the first major overseas trip of his second term “was no mystery.” “Yes, the United States is a superpower, boosting the largest economy and military force in history,” al-Thani said. “Meanwhile, Qatar is one of the smallest countries with one of the smallest populations, and as the Americans in the room know, DC is almost 7,000 miles away from here, but my friends, small nations have their own superpowers, resilience, nimbleness, and we are a powerful agent for peace precisely because of our size.”

A White House fact sheet describing the new business deals said that “Boeing and GE Aerospace secured a landmark order from Qatar Airways, a $96 billion agreement to acquire up to 210 American-made Boeing 787 Dreamliner and 777X aircraft powered by GE Aerospace engines.” The release described the transaction as “Boeing’s largest-ever widebody order and largest-ever 787 order. This historic agreement will support 154,000 U.S. jobs annually, totaling over 1 million jobs in the United States during the course of production and delivery of this deal.” The reason for the discrepancy between the topline plane-sale figures cited by Trump and the fact sheet was not immediately clear. Trump hailed what he called a “very special relationship” with Qatar, even likening one royal to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, calling both men “tall handsome guys.”

Qatar, which hosts more than 10,000 US military forces at Al Udeid Air Base just outside Doha, has forged a close relationship with Trump dating to his first term, when American advisers helped broker a deal to end a Saudi-led blockade of the peninsular nation. Qatar has offered to give Trump a luxuriously upgraded Boeing 747-8 worth an estimated $400 million, drawing bipartisan pushback. That jet, currently parked in the US, won’t be presented during the visit, the White House says. Trump has repeatedly defended the proposed transaction, telling Fox News host Sean Hannity in an interview that aired Tuesday night: “We’re the United States of America – I believe that we should have the most impressive plane.” “Some people say, ‘Oh, you shouldn’t accept gifts for the country.’ My attitude is, why wouldn’t I accept a gift?” the president added. “We’re giving to everybody else, why wouldn’t I accept a gift? Because it’s going to be a couple of years, I think, before the Boeings are finished.”

On Monday, Trump told reporters at the White House that he was “very disappointed” in the timetable for the delivery of two US-made jets, currently set for 2027 and 2028. “They’re way behind,” he said. “They were way behind, another mess that I inherited from Biden, and it’s going to be a while before we get them.” Qatar and the US also signed a commitment to generating $1.2 trillion worth of economic exchange in the years to come, without specifying details. Massachusetts-based Raytheon will receive $1 billion from Doha for access to the company’s counter-drone capabilities, making Qatar the first in the world to obtain Raytheon’s Fixed Site – Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aerial System Integrated Defeat System (FS-LIDS), dedicated to attacking unmanned aircraft.

Qatar will also pay San Diego-based General Atomics nearly $2 billion deal to acquire the company’s MQ-9B remotely piloted aircraft system. The two countries also outlined future potential security deals amounting to $38 billion, according to a White House readout.“These new agreements and instruments aim to drive the growth of the U.S.-Qatar bilateral commercial relationship, create thousands of well-paying jobs, and open new trade and investment opportunities for both countries over the coming decade and beyond,” the administration said. On Tuesday, Trump signed deals securing $600 billion worth of investments with Saudi Arabia — with more agreements expected when the president visits the UAE for the final stop of his trip.

Read more …

“The anti-Trump economic narratives haven’t just failed; they’ve completely collapsed.”

• Every Anti-Trump Economic Narrative Is Collapsing (Margolis)

Remember how the liberal media and Democrats warned that Donald Trump’s economic policies would bring about financial armageddon? How many times have they been proven wrong? I haven’t been keeping track, but they’ve been proven wrong once again. This shouldn’t surprise anyone. When Trump was president from 2017 to 2021, we experienced one of the strongest economies in our nation’s history until COVID hit. The liberal media spent four years trying to convince us that Barack Obama deserved credit for Trump’s economic success, and then it spent the last three years insisting that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris deserved credit for the post-COVID recovery. The media’s latest effort was to convince the public that Trump’s tariffs were going to cause prices to soar and send us into a recession. Even the liberal media has had to admit that that just ain’t happening.

“Prices climbed at an unexpectedly slow pace last month, offering a boost to President Donald Trump, whose aggressive trade policies have sparked fears of a resurgence in inflation,” Politico reported on Tuesday. “The Labor Department on Tuesday reported that prices rose at an annual rate of 2.3 percent, the smallest increase since early 2021. While price growth in so-called core sectors of the economy — which exclude volatile food and energy costs — remained elevated at 2.8 percent, April’s Consumer Price Index contained only scant evidence that Trump’s tariffs have meaningfully driven up the cost of living.” Even though tariff rates have fallen since the administration negotiated a temporary détente with China, Fed Governor Adriana Kugler said Monday that the administration’s new taxes on imports are still “pretty high” and that she expects inflation to rise and growth to slow soon.

So far, that hasn’t happened. Few economists had expected that overall inflation surged last month. But there was broad anticipation that Trump’s levies on Chinese imports, steel and aluminum and certain Canadian and Mexican products had caused prices for apparel, electronics and other consumer goods to spike. If anything, the opposite occurred: The cost of clothing and new cars — two areas that were highly exposed to Trump’s initial levies — both fell. Similarly, inflation hit its lowest level since 2021. It certainly pained CNN to report that. And remember that recession experts told us was totally happening this year? JP Morgan is no longer predicting that it will happen. Of course, Politico was not only disappointed that the bad predictions of the Trump economy didn’t pan out, but it also lamented how this will embolden Trump.

“The CPI report will likely bolster the administration’s claims that grim forecasts for the economy have been overblown,” the paper groaned. The report will also amplify Trump’s calls for Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell to lower interest rates. Powell and other Fed policymakers have warned that the rapid escalation of import costs may soon cause consumer prices to spike and that the central bank needs to keep inflation at bay.n And many economists still expect inflation to rebound in the coming months. Analysts at Citi say they expect the personal consumption expenditures index — the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge — to climb by 3 percent by the end of the year. While that is less than their previous forecast for 3.5 percent inflation, it’s still well above the Fed’s annual target of 2 percent. The anti-Trump economic narratives haven’t just failed; they’ve completely collapsed.

Read more …

Trump just announced a tariff deal offer from India. The big ones first, the rest will follow.

• Trump Economy Defies ‘Gloom And Doom’ Expectations (Whedon)

With April’s inflation report coming in below forecasts, the Trump economy appears to be defying analysts’ and politicians’ predictions of collapse in the wake of his “Liberation Day” tariffs and subsequent trade negotiations. As Trump adds more notches to his belt in deals with key trade partners, the stock market has rebounded to pre-tariff levels, even while many tariffs remain largely in place on major economies such as China and the UK. In April of this year, former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the developments of Trump’s tariffs point to “a loss of confidence in U.S. economic policy” and called the tariffs “the worst self-inflicted policy wound I’ve ever seen in my career inflicted on our economy […] they are “doing immense damage.” Trump, on April 2, announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs on nearly every nation, imposing a “reciprocal” rate calibrated to address the American trade deficit with each nation.

The tariffs far exceeded what analysts had expected, and the stock market was sent reeling for days. Trump himself reshared a video suggesting that he deliberately crashed the market to force an interest rate cut to allow the government to refinance its debt at a lower rate. Bond markets bucked at the move and Trump ultimately announced a 90-day pause on most tariffs to pursue trade agreements, though he left in place a 10% baseline and kept China’s above 100%. Markets gradually recovered, and major indices have since exceeded their April 1 closes. Boosting some of that movement have been trade deals with the United Kingdom and China, two of the biggest American trading partners. Both deals resulted in lower import tariffs on American goods and higher import tariffs on goods from those nations, marking net gains for the U.S. in Trump’s bid to rebalance trade.

Read together, multiple indicators suggest that the Trump economy defied expectations and that the trade policies did not adversely damage the nation’s overall economic health. If the trend continues, Trump will have fulfilled what politicians call “dinner table” issues for millions of Americans. Inflation fell to an annualized rate of 2.3% in April, down from the March figure of 2.4%. Analysts had expected it to hold steady. January’s inflation rate stood at 3.0%, and the figure has marked a steady decline since Trump took office. Inflation reached a high of 9.1% in July 2022 in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the issue was a leading factor in driving down President Joe Biden’s approval rating in subsequent years. Trump campaigned extensively on the issue, saying he would bring inflation down through energy production.

[..] After more than a month of negotiations, Trump confirmed last week that he had reached an agreement on trade with the United Kingdom, marking the first substantive deal since Liberation Day. “The agreement with the United Kingdom is a full and comprehensive one that will cement the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom for many years to come,” Trump said on Truth Social ahead of the formal agreement. The agreement left in place the 10% reciprocal tariff and subjected imported vehicles from the UK to a 25% tariff after the first 100,000. In 2024, UK automakers only exported 106,000 cars to the United States. In turn, the UK lowered its tariff rates on U.S. goods from 5.1% to 1.8%. UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer made a phone cameo at the announcement, saying “there are no two countries that are closer than our two countries that now we take this into new and important territory by adding trade and the economy to the closeness of our relationship.”

The most aggressive — and widely reported — trade standoff came with China, as Trump left high tariffs in place even as he paused those on most other nations for 90 days. Boosting market sentiment, this week Beijing and Washington reached an agreement to substantially lower their tariffs, with the U.S. setting its rate at 30% for imported Chinese goods and the Chinese dropping theirs to 10%. “This initiative aligns with the expectations of producers and consumers in both countries and serves the interests of both nations as well as the common interests of the world,” the Chinese Commerce Ministry said in a statement republished by PBS. PBS added that “The ministry called the agreement an important step for the resolution of the two countries’ differences and said it lays the foundation for further cooperation.”

“The consensus from both delegations this weekend is neither side wants a decoupling,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said at the time. “And what had occurred with these very high tariffs … was an embargo, the equivalent of an embargo. And neither side wants that. We do want trade.” Trump on Tuesday signed an agreement with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and secured $600 billion in investment pledges during his trip to that nation. Another possible indicator of economic vibrancy is the pace of U.S. vacation travel. The American Automobile Association (AAA) this year expects a record 45.1 million Americans to travel for Memorial Day, according to a press release. The organization also predicted a 2% hike in air travel over the weekend.

Since January 2025, the U.S. economy has also steadily added jobs, including a gain of 143,000 in January and 177,000 in April. The unemployment rate has remained steady at 4.2%, with the Department of Labor reporting that the economy added 177,000 jobs in defiance of expectations. In March, the economy added 228,000 jobs. Bloomberg News reported that JPMorgan Chase & Co. on Tuesday dropped its recession call for 2025, saying “[t]he administration’s recent dialing down of some of the more draconian tariffs placed on China should reduce the risk that the US economy slips into recession this year.” JPMorgan’s Chief US Economist Michael Feroli was optimistic but guarded, saying “We believe recession risks are still elevated, but now below 50%.”

Read more …

21 days’ notice, in English and Spanish. For gang members?

• Federal Judge Says Trump’s Invocation of Alien Enemies Act Was Legal (ET)

A federal judge in Pennsylvania has ruled that President Donald Trump validly invoked the Alien Enemies Act in March as part of an effort to deport Venezuelan gang members. More specifically, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Haines held that the gang—Tren de Aragua (TdA)—was engaging in the type of “predatory incursion” that the Alien Enemies Act mentions. In an opinion issued on May 13, Haines noted that TdA has been designated a foreign terrorist organization. That designation, she said, “heavily supports the conclusions … that TdA is a cohesive group united by a common goal of causing significant disruption to the public safety of the United States.”Three other district court judges have ruled against the Trump administration, finding that a proclamation Trump issued in March misapplied the law. Each of those judges disagreed with Trump’s description of TdA as engaging in an invasion or predatory incursion.

Trump invoked the law in March, stating that TdA gang members had infiltrated the Venezuelan regime and invaded the United States, justifying their expedited removal. “Evidence irrefutably demonstrates that TdA has invaded the United States and continues to invade, attempt to invade, and threaten to invade the country; perpetrated irregular warfare within the country; and used drug trafficking as a weapon against our citizens,” Trump’s March 15 proclamation reads. In a federal court in New York City, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein disagreed. On May 6, he found that TdA members “do not seek to occupy territory, to oust American jurisdiction from any territory, or to ravage territory. “In April, the Supreme Court intervened twice in related cases, but without ruling on whether the administration had properly invoked the Alien Enemies Act.

Instead, it halted some deportations in a brief order on April 19, and told the administration on April 7 that it must provide suspected gang members with notice that they are subject to removal, as well as an opportunity to challenge their detention. It specified that “the notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief,” which is a legal avenue for challenging one’s detention. Haines also issued an order on May 13 that stated the administration had provided insufficient notice to detainees. She said that the administration couldn’t remove a Venezuelan national who had brought the lawsuit in Pennsylvania unless it provided 21 days’ notice, among other things. Her order also required that the notice be provided in English and Spanish.

Read more …

Too complex for senators and congress(wo)men.

• Average Americans Poised for Double-Digit Tax Cuts In 2027 (ZH)

A sweeping Republican tax overhaul proposal, estimated to deliver double-digit percentage reductions in tax bills for average-income Americans, is drawing mounting opposition in the Senate over its accompanying cuts to health care and clean energy programs – underscoring the internal divisions complicating Republican efforts to advance a unified economic agenda. According to a new analysis from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), households earning between $30,000 and $80,000 would see their federal taxes drop by approximately 15 percent in 2027 under the House GOP plan. Americans earning between $15,000 and $30,000 would see an even steeper 21 percent decline – at least initially. But those same low-income earners would see their tax bills rise sharply in later years unless extended, with increases of 12 percent in 2029 and 20 percent in 2030, the JCT found.

The report attributed some of those changes to proposed reforms of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), a benefit for low-income workers that Republicans argue is vulnerable to improper payments. While the report’s topline numbers have fueled Republican claims that the proposal is middle-class focused, Democrats seized on the overall distribution of tax cuts in dollar terms, Politico reports. Taxpayers earning more than $500,000 are slated to receive an aggregate cut of about $170 billion in 2027 – nearly triple the $59 billion going to households earning $30,000 to $80,000. The proposal has already provoked heated exchanges in the House Ways and Means Committee, where lawmakers debated the fairness and sustainability of the tax package. Democrats derided the bill as a boon to the wealthy, while Republicans pointed to new breaks for tips, overtime, and seniors as evidence of its broader appeal.

The report is not a complete picture of winners and losers under Republicans’ plans. It doesn’t include a potential deal among lawmakers to further increase the SALT cap, beyond a proposed $30,000 limit. The report also only looks at the tax side of Republican plans, and does not account for changes in spending programs, like Medicaid. -Politico. “It’s a trick,” said Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI). “You do it temporarily so you can get through the 2026 election” and “then these benefits for children and elders and workers disappear, while the tax benefits for the ultra-wealthy soar.” Yet beyond the debate over tax cuts, the House plan is facing stiff resistance in the Senate for how it proposes to offset some of the revenue losses: by slashing Medicaid and rolling back key clean energy incentives passed under the Biden administration.

A Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate found that the House bill’s Medicaid reforms could result in 8.6 million people losing health care coverage, largely due to new work requirements, cost-sharing mandates, and restrictions on how states finance their Medicaid programs. Several Senate Republicans voiced concern over the health care implications, especially for rural areas. “These are working people in particular who are going to have to pay more,” said Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), referring to new cost-sharing rules. He warned that changes to provider taxes – which states use to draw federal Medicaid dollars – could reduce coverage in his state and strain rural hospitals. “I continue to maintain my position we should not be cutting Medicaid benefits,” Hawley said. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), said the proposed treatment of provider taxes “would be very harmful to Maine’s hospitals,” echoing concerns raised by other senators from rural and Medicaid-reliant states.

Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), also pointed to the disproportionate burden that Medicaid cuts would place on states like hers, calling the issue a key sticking point in ongoing Senate discussions. In addition to health care, some senate Republicans are also wary of the House’s aggressive plans to unwind tax credits for clean energy and hydrogen development, incentives championed in the Inflation Reduction Act and credited with bringing manufacturing investments and jobs to red and purple states alike. Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC), who faces a competitive reelection race next year, expressed concern over quickly ending climate initiatives – suggesting that the House language on energy tax rollbacks would need to be revised. “You can’t shock the markets by doing it all at once,” Tillis said of the proposed clean energy phaseouts. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) also flagged potential impacts to her state’s clean hydrogen initiatives, saying she would review the House’s plan to eliminate the 45V hydrogen production credit, which could affect nearly $1 billion in planned federal support for the Appalachian Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub.

The House GOP plan is expected to pass narrowly along party lines, but Senate Republicans made clear this week that the legislation will require significant changes to win broader support in the upper chamber. “We are coordinating very closely with our House counterparts,” said Senate Minority Whip John Thune of South Dakota. “We know they have to get 218 votes… but it’s likely we’ll have a Senate substitute.” As Republican leaders try to reconcile competing priorities — delivering tax relief, restraining federal spending, and maintaining political support in swing states — the path forward for the legislation remains uncertain. “How we navigate this,” said Murkowski, “is something we’re all trying to wander through.”

Read more …

“The so-called “Pfizergate” decision comes as a major embarrassment for the EU chief..”

Like she cares. In reality, she’s now free to do it again.

• Court Rules On Von Der Leyen’s Secret Covid Vaccine Deal Messages (RT)

The European Commission wrongly denied the media access to secret text messages between its president, Ursula von der Leyen, and the CEO of pharma giant Pfizer, exchanged during negotiations of a multi-billion dollar Covid-19 vaccine deal, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on Wednesday. The so-called “Pfizergate” decision comes as a major embarrassment for the EU chief, who has responsibility for transparency and rule of law issues in the bloc. The case centers on a 2021 interview von der Leyen gave to the NYT in which she claimed she had been negotiating a deal for 900 million COVID vaccine shots with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla via sms messages. The NYT subsequently filed an access request for the messages, to which the EC claimed the texts, which have never been released, were not in its possession.

The court ruled that the EC “cannot merely state that it does not hold the requested documents but must provide credible explanations enabling the public and the Court to understand why those documents cannot be found.” It also criticized the Commission for failing to justify why the texts were not retained and to clarify how they were deleted. In response, the EC said it recognized the need for greater transparency and promised to issue a new decision with more detailed reasoning. It did not, however, commit to releasing the messages in question. The ruling can be appealed to the European Court of Justice. A similar CJEU judgment last July found that the EC lacked transparency in how it negotiated vaccine contracts with Pfizer and AstraZeneca. The deals, signed in 2020 and 2021 and worth approximately €2.7 billion ($3 billion), were shielded from disclosure to European Parliament members on the grounds of protecting commercial interests.

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1922564484838609364

Read more …

Can’t make Trudy look bad!

• Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Signed Oath to Conceal COVID Info (YN)

Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer, Dr. Theresa Tam, and nearly 30 senior federal health officials signed a confidential oath during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, pledging not to release information that could “embarrass” the Trudeau cabinet, according to internal records obtained through Access to Information requests. The oath, revealed by Blacklock’s Reporter, was part of a broader secrecy policy within the Public Health Agency and other government departments including Health, Industry, Foreign Affairs, and National Defence. Internal communications from 2020 show that vaccine supply manager Alan Thom voiced concern about the widespread requirement for federal managers to sign non-disclosure agreements, noting, “at a certain point the Department of Public Works determined individual non-disclosure agreements were no longer needed… as we are all covered through our responsibilities as public servants.”

The confidentiality agreement emphasized that any “unauthorized disclosure of confidential information… may result in embarrassment, criticism or claims against Canada and may jeopardize Canada’s supplier relations and procurement processes.” Managers acknowledged their ongoing obligations under the Values And Ethics Code For The Public Sector, according to the documents. The oaths were signed shortly after the Trudeau administration secured billions in COVID-19 vaccine contracts with companies including Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Novavax, Johnson & Johnson, Medicago, and Sanofi. Dr. Tam, a longtime proponent of mass vaccination, oversaw public messaging during the rollout. The first mRNA vaccine to be approved in Canada was Pfizer’s BioNTech shot, authorized on December 9, 2020, followed closely by Moderna’s vaccine.

The approvals came after the Trudeau government granted vaccine manufacturers legal immunity from liability for adverse effects. Parliamentarians requesting to review those contracts were denied access. In response to growing reports of vaccine-related injuries, Canada launched its Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) in late 2020. As reported by LifeSiteNews, the program was created after legal protections were granted to pharmaceutical companies. A memo from Canada’s Department of Health now warns that VISP payouts are set to exceed the program’s original $75 million budget, prompting the federal government to allocate an additional $36 million. Despite dwindling public demand, the government continues to purchase new doses, even as its own statistics show widespread rejection of booster injections by Canadians. Compounding concerns, an inhalable mRNA vaccine—developed using fetal cell lines and funded by Ottawa—has now entered Phase 2 clinical trials.

Data from Statistics Canada also indicates that post-vaccine rollout, deaths attributed to COVID-19 and “unspecified causes” significantly increased, raising further questions about the long-term safety and effectiveness of the vaccine campaign. LifeSiteNews has compiled an extensive archive of research linking COVID mRNA injections to adverse events such as myocarditis, blood clots, and fertility issues. Additional findings highlight risks in children, while all currently available COVID shots have ties to abortion-derived fetal cell lines. With growing scrutiny over vaccine safety and government transparency, the revelation that Canada’s top public health officials signed agreements to avoid reputational harm to federal leadership adds another layer of controversy to the country’s pandemic response.

Oath

Read more …

“..European puppet leaders are planning to establish a “special tribunal” within the framework of the Council of Europe to judge Russia for “aggression” and other alleged crimes in Ukraine..”

• A New False Tribunal Is In The Making (Stephen Karganovic)

Kaja Kallas’ delusional and laughably ill-timed announcement, made the day after Russia’s 9 May Victory Day triumph in Moscow, that European puppet leaders are planning to establish a “special tribunal” within the framework of the Council of Europe to judge Russia for “aggression” and other alleged crimes in Ukraine jogs some memories from the Hague. ICTY, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, is located there, as the new Tribunal Kallas has mentioned will also be. This writer had spent some of the most interesting years of his life there. An enduring memory is former Serbian and Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, who was abducted by the vassal regime installed in his country after the October 2000 colour revolution and sent to the Hague to be put on trial. During his initial appearance in the courtroom, addressing the judges and Prosecutor Carla del Ponte, Milosevic referred to the court as a “false tribunal.”

That phrase stuck in my mind. Milosevic’s English was adequate, but it was not flawless. Hence the picturesque turn of phrase he used. Had he been more fluent in idiomatic English he would have called it a “phony” or “bogus” tribunal. Instead he translated what he meant to say directly from his native Serbian with a result that was more amusing than academically precise. But no harm was done. In fact, under the circumstances the glaringly unidiomatic locution made his profound point even stronger. Regrettably, Kaja Kallas has not disclosed technical details about the projected Tribunal which should be made available before the credibility of this venture can be properly assessed. There are several parameters that must be established before any such “court” can be taken seriously.

The first of these is a clear definition of the new judicial body’s mandate. It is not enough merely to say that it shall deal with war crimes and crimes against humanity arising from the conflict in the Ukraine since February 2022. Whose crimes will be the subject of the court’s investigation and ultimately judgment? Kallas’ rationale behind the creation of this court raises serious issues in that regard. She refers exclusively to “Russian crimes,” a reference also echoed by EU Commission President Ursula van den Leyen and EU Rule of Law Commissioner Michael McGrath. Has no one else been observed committing crimes in Ukraine during the period under consideration, or perhaps going back a bit further, to 2014? If there are any lingering doubts concerning this matter, which directly impacts the Tribunal’s objectivity, they were settled by the clarification on the European Commission posted on its website:

“The Tribunal will have the power to investigate, prosecute and try Russian political and military leaders, who bear the greatest responsibility for the crime of aggression against Ukraine.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Plandemic

Ed Dowd: If this is true in humans we have a potential gigantic demographic time bomb globally. Just halt the jabs and investigate.

https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/1922329204336541772

Florida

Party

Cats
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1922379741539017148

Owl

Otomati

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 3 2025

May 032025
 
 May 3, 2025  Posted by at 9:35 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Girl with a boat (Maya Picasso) 1938

 

• US Demands Direct Russia-Ukraine Talks (RT)
• Russia and Ukraine ‘Closer’ To Settlement – Rubio (RT)
• Ukraine Conflict ‘Not Going to End Any Time Soon’ – Vance (Sp.)
• Ukrainian MP Threatens Terror Attack On Red Square (RT)
• Brussels Floats Trade Solution To Trump – FT (RT)
• European Security Is Impossible Without Russia (Fetouri)
• Trump Claims US Did ‘More Than Any Other Country’ to Win World War II (Sp.)
• Ukraine Can’t Reclaim Lost Territory – Rubio (RT)
• The Hardest Working Man In The Trump Administration (Sarah Anderson)
• What’s Normal, Exactly? (James Howard Kunstler)
• We’re Gonna Lose the PR War Over Tariffs Until We Start Doing THIS (Pinsker)
• Germany’s AfD Party ‘Definitely Right-Wing Extremist’: Spy Agency (RMX)
• Germany ‘Has Rebuilt The Berlin Wall’ – Vance (RT)
• Germany Is Weaponizing WWII Memory Against Russia (Amar)
• Germany Is ‘Tyranny In Disguise’ – Rubio (RT)
• Odessa Massacre: Point of No Return Marked Ukraine’s Slide Into Nazism (Sp.)
• Trump Reportedly Turns To L3Harris For “Interim” Air Force One Jet (ZH)
• The Ghost in the Machine. AI and The Spectral Ontology of Value (Ruggeri)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1917982262869582328

Miller

RFK

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1918101908889206911
https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1918108357245751334

Full

 

 

 

 

As the week progresses, attention will increasingly shift to the consequences of the tariffs dispute. It’s been a month since Liberation day, and that’s the time Chinese goods need to arrive in the US – or not. The MSM will milk it not just for everything it is, but for everything they can make it appear to be.

As for Ukraine, the US needs to lose Zelensky and his Azov neo nazi support.

• US Demands Direct Russia-Ukraine Talks (RT)

The US will no longer serve as mediator in negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce has said. Speaking at a regular press briefing on Thursday, she stated it was time for the two parties to propose their own solutions and engage in direct talks. Trump had previously pledged to end the Ukraine conflict “within 24 hours” if elected, though he later described the claim as an “exaggeration.” Since taking office in January, he has pressed both sides for a ceasefire but has expressed frustration over the slow progress in the talks. Trump has warned that the US may withdraw from the peace process if it continues to falter. Earlier, Moscow signaled it’s ready to start direct negotiations with Kiev “without preconditions,” while Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered Russian forces to observe a short ceasefire during Victory Day celebrations next week.

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has branded the Russian truce announcement a “manipulation.” “We will not be the mediators,” Bruce told reporters when asked about Washington’s future role. “We certainly are still committed to it and we’ll help and do what we can, but we are not going to fly around the world at the drop of a hat to mediate meetings.” “It’s time for both of the nations involved in this conflict to come up with concrete proposals about how this conflict ends. It’s going to be up to them,” Bruce added. Her remarks contrasted with comments by US Vice President J.D. Vance, who said earlier this week that Washington planned to dedicate another 100 days to mediating a peace deal.

Media reports have claimed the US peace proposal includes recognizing Russia’s sovereignty over Crimea and its de-facto control over parts of four former Ukrainian regions that chose to join Russia. It also reportedly calls for “freezing” the conflict along current front lines. Commenting on Moscow’s decision to halt military operations next week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the pause should serve as “the start of direct negotiations with Kiev without preconditions.” Kiev, however, demanded an immediate, unconditional 30-day ceasefire.

Read more …

“They’re closer, but they’re still far apart..”

• Russia and Ukraine ‘Closer’ To Settlement – Rubio (RT)

Russia and Ukraine are closer to a peace agreement than at any point in the past three years, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. He cautioned, however, that the sides still need to bridge numerous differences to end the conflict. In an interview with Fox News on Thursday, Rubio reflected on efforts by US President Donald Trump to settle the Ukraine conflict, a promise he had made while still on the campaign trail. “For a hundred days he has done efforts to bring about peace… Look, we’ve gotten closer. We – for the first time – we haven’t known this for three years – we kind of can see what it would take for Ukraine to stop. We can see what it would take for the Russians to stop,” Rubio said.

However, stark differences between Moscow and Kiev remain, the State Secretary noted. “They’re closer, but they’re still far apart. And it’s going to take a real breakthrough here very soon to make this possible… or I think the president is going to have to make a decision about how much more time we’re going to dedicate to this,” he added. His comments come as State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce affirmed that the US is committed to settling the conflict, but is “not going to fly around the world at the drop of a hat to mediate meetings.” Instead, she signaled that it is now up to Russia and Ukraine “to present and develop concrete ideas about how this conflict is going to end.” Last month, the Trump administration indicated that the US could withdraw from the peace process altogether if there is no clear indication of progress in the talks.

Earlier media reports suggested that the US had proposed a peace agreement that includes Washington’s recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, as well as “freezing” the conflict along the current front line and acknowledging Moscow’s control over large parts of the four former Ukrainian regions which voted to join Russia. The deal would also reportedly prevent Ukraine from joining NATO and initiate a phased removal of the sanctions imposed on Russia. Russia has maintained that any peace settlement must include recognition of the new territorial reality on the ground, Ukraine’s demilitarization and denazification, as well as assurances that Kiev will not join NATO. Ukraine, however, has consistently refused to acknowledge its former territories as part of Russia.

Read more …

“..Ukraine ditched the 2015 Minsk Agreements and the 2022 Istanbul peace deal, and has repeatedly ignored Russia’s calls for talks — including President Vladimir Putin’s 2024 peace proposal..”

• Ukraine Conflict ‘Not Going to End Any Time Soon’ – Vance (Sp.)

US Vice President JD Vance said Russia and Ukraine know each other’s terms for peace, and it is up to Moscow and Kiev to reach a deal. “For three years, these sides have fought, and each of them has said, no peace, we’re going to fight until the other guys are basically knocked out. What we’ve seen now in the last couple of weeks is each side has put down. This is our peace proposal. The Ukrainians did it. The Russians did it. And now I think the question is to see whether we can actually find some middle ground here for these guys to bring this conflict to a close,” Vance boasted about a ‘deal’ that doesn’t exist. He said it would be up to Russia and Ukraine to decide. “It’s not going anywhere. It’s not going to end any time soon,” Vance emphasized.

“When I say this deal, I mean getting these guys to actually propose a peace settlement,” Vance said — blissfully unaware that Ukraine ditched the 2015 Minsk Agreements and the 2022 Istanbul peace deal, and has repeatedly ignored Russia’s calls for talks — including President Vladimir Putin’s 2024 peace proposal. Russia has been conducting its special military operation since February 24, 2022. President Vladimir Putin has said the operation aims to “protect people subjected to genocide by the Kiev regime.” According to the president, the ultimate goal of the operation is to completely liberate Donbass and create conditions that guarantee Russia’s security: Ukraine must undergo demilitarization and denazification.

Moscow says arms supplies to Ukraine hinder the settlement and directly involve NATO countries in the conflict. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has stressed that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine will be a legitimate target for Russia. The top diplomat has called the US and NATO out for not only supplying weapons to Kiev, but also training personnel in the UK, Germany, Italy and other countries. The Kremlin has stated that Western arms supplies to Ukraine hinder peace talks.

Read more …

“..the final decision rests with Ukraine’s military leadership, taking into account the presence of foreign dignitaries from neutral countries..”

• Ukrainian MP Threatens Terror Attack On Red Square (RT)

Kiev could target Moscow’s Red Square during next week’s Victory Day celebrations, a Ukrainian lawmaker has suggested, despite Russia’s offer of a three-day ceasefire. May 9 marks the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War II. On Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a 72-hour ceasefire from May 8 to 10, citing “humanitarian considerations.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov later described the truce as a chance to begin “direct negotiations with Kiev without preconditions.” However, in an interview with Ukrainian media on Wednesday, Yury Pavlenko openly suggested that Ukraine could try to derail Victory Day, which is one of the most revered holidays in Russia, as well as many former Soviet republics.

”I think the time will come when we will strike Red Square – whether it happens this May 9 or sometime later, that time will come,” Pavlenko said, claiming that the Russian capital is full of “legitimate military targets… that have brought much grief to Ukrainian soil.” He noted that the final decision rests with Ukraine’s military leadership, taking into account the presence of foreign dignitaries from neutral countries. This year’s Victory Day parade is expected to be attended by Chinese President Xi Jinping, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, among others.

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has branded the Russian truce proposal a “manipulation,” while calling for a longer ceasefire of 30 days. “They are now concerned that their parade is in jeopardy and rightly so,” Zelensky said. “What they should worry about is that this war continues.” In response, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova suggested that Kiev “is literally planning terrorist attacks on air,” which she said undermines the prospects for peace talks. Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Kiev has conducted a number of drone attacks on Moscow. On May 3, 2023, Russia accused Ukraine of attempting to assassinate Putin by targeting the Kremlin with two drones, which were shot down before they could cause significant damage.

Read more …

US purchased $230 billion more from EU than vice versa. The European Trade Commissioner sees a $56 billion deficit problem.

• Brussels Floats Trade Solution To Trump – FT (RT)

The EU wants to substantially increase purchases of goods from the US, according to European Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic, as cited by Financial Times. The move could help the bloc secure the elimination of import tariffs proposed by US President Donald Trump, the official has said. As part of his sweeping ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs on major trading partners, Trump sharply raised duties on US imports from the 27-nation bloc. The US president sees the tariff campaign, which targeted over 90 countries, as a solution to what he calls unfair trade imbalances. If what we are looking at as a problem in the deficit is €50 billion ($56 billion), I believe that we can really … solve this problem very quickly through LNG purchases, through some agricultural products like soybeans, or other areas, Sefcovic said on Thursday in an interview with the newspaper.

He emphasized that the bloc would not accept the 10% tariffs on its goods being kept in place as a fair resolution. He also warned that it would be “very difficult” to strike a deal that is “clearly good and acceptable for our member states and our European parliament.” Earlier this year, the Trump administration announced a sweeping 20% tariff on all EU goods and a 25% tariff on all car imports in an effort to eliminate the trade deficit with the bloc. Brussels was set to introduce 25% retaliatory tariffs on US imports before Trump announced a 90-day pause on most tariffs to allow for talks. However, the 10% baseline tariff and 25% tariff on certain goods remain in place.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has offered Washington a deal whereby tariffs on all industrial goods would be removed. However, Trump has rejected the zero-for-zero tariffs proposal, saying that it doesn’t solve the problem of the trade imbalance. Trade volumes between the US and the EU amounted to $975.9 billion in 2024, according to official data tracked by the Office of US Trade Representative. The US purchased $605.8 billion worth of EU goods, while the bloc’s imports from the US amounted to $370.2 billion.

Read more …

Because it is a European country.

• European Security Is Impossible Without Russia (Fetouri)

The narrative around Russia’s role in European security has become increasingly distorted in recent decades. Once a central player in European geopolitics, Russia is now considered an outsider at best and an outright enemy at worst. Looking at Moscow through this narrowed prism has become the norm not the exception. It makes the focused observer wonder if European leaders really believe that much can be done without Russia, particularly security-wise. To say such a European view of Moscow is both unfair and short-sighted may be an understatement. It is only 80 years since the Soviet Union, of which Russia was the center, led the liberation of Europe from what was essentially the European evil of Nazism, which is coming back to haunt the old continent.

Do current European leaders really forget such recent history or do they, intentionally, want to rewrite it to suit their current agendas and future Europe, in another generation or two? There is an irony here: while some European leaders are intentionally casting Russia as a “non-European” entity, the historical and practical reality paints a starkly different picture – where Russia is not only a European country but an essential player in ensuring the continent’s stability and prosperity. What cannot be changed is this: Russia is and will always be as European as France or Germany. Any serious debate about security in Europe is meritless and factitious without acknowledging Russia’s pivotal role. Throughout history Europe needed some kind of balancing powers between its internal powers (such as France and Germany), and Russia has been key in maintaining the balance of power on the continent.

A case in point: had it not been for the Soviet Union defeating Nazi Germany, who knows what kind of Europe would have emerged from World War II? The Soviets sacrificed more than 27 million human lives – soldiers and civilians – to rid the world of Nazi Germany and help create a new Germany, even though Germany has never been fully denazified. The United States played a part in liberating Europe and some 190,000 of its soldiers were killed, but that does not make the US a natural ally of Europe more than Russia. After the war, Western Europe accepted US hegemony, but that does not change the fact that Russia is a European and neighborly country and should be part of any European context discussions.

After the Cold War ended, Russia became even more important to be considered European than even the United Kingdom. The UK, eventually, chose to be an extension of America geopolitically and ended up threatening the EU had it not left the superficially harmonic union. Even the claim that shared values unite Europe and America and Europe within NATO is more of a justification for excluding Moscow than a reality. What are the noble values the UK shared with America in invading Iraq or Afghanistan? Where are such shared values within the NATO alliance, led by the US, that compelled it to destroy Libya in 2011? In both cases Moscow was out of the calculation except as a potential adversary.

This negative image of Moscow across much of Europe has been on the rise, becoming what the Russians rightly describe as “Russophobia,” taking a life of its own after the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine. Today many European leaders have reinforced this binary view of Russia as a threat, despite its historical and cultural ties to Europe. It seems that, in modern European politics, the question of Russia’s European identity is too often answered with a resounding “no.” Portraying Russia as a non-European country is an unfair characterization loaded with adversarial connotations. Who can deny the simple geographical fact that the Russian Federation is part of Europe and that Moscow lies firmly within Europe? Yet European school textbooks hardly count Moscow as a European capital city. Commonly, Russia in this context is described as the “other,” implying exclusion.

Read more …

And WW! too.

• Trump Claims US Did ‘More Than Any Other Country’ to Win World War II (Sp.)

US President Donald Trump declared May 8 Victory Day, saying that the United States did “more than any other country” to win World War II. The Soviet Union bore the brunt of defeating Nazi Germany and its European allies — destroying the vast majority of German forces on the Eastern Front. With over 27 million dead, it was the Red Army’s relentless push from Stalingrad to Berlin that shattered Hitler’s war machine. The USSR also played a crucial role in Japan’s defeat, crushing the Kwantung Army in August 1945 — a key factor in Tokyo’s surrender.

“Many of our allies and friends are celebrating May 8th as Victory Day, but we did more than any other Country … I am hereby renaming May 8th as Victory Day for World War II and November 11th as Victory Day for World War I. We won both Wars, nobody was close to us in terms of strength, bravery, or military brilliance, but we never celebrate anything — That’s because we don’t have leaders anymore, that know how to do so! We are going to start celebrating our victories again!” Trump said on Truth Social on Friday. As for America’s so-called “military brilliance”? The US became the only country in history to use nuclear weapons — killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. World War I wasn’t much different: the US talked big, joined late, and still claimed victory. So much for all that “bravery.”

Read more …

“Should Kiev abandon plans to join the US-led military bloc and withdraw its troops from the four new territories, Moscow is ready to institute an immediate ceasefire..”

• Ukraine Can’t Reclaim Lost Territory – Rubio (RT)

Ukraine will not be able to reclaim its 2014 borders from Russia, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has publicly stated he will never recognize the lost territories, including Crimea, as Russian. The peninsula voted overwhelmingly to join Russia in 2014, shortly after the US-backed armed coup in Kiev. Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk and Lugansk regions held their own referendums in 2022 to become part of Russia. Earlier this week, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy Keith Kellogg told Fox News that Kiev has expressed a willingness to cede land de facto, if not de jure, as part of a peace deal. “Ukraine can’t push the Russians all the way back to where they were in 2014,” Rubio said in an interview with Fox News on Thursday.

After months of US-brokered peace efforts, Washington has a pretty clear idea of what both sides want, the top US diplomat noted. “We kind of can see what it would take for Ukraine to stop. We can see what it would take for the Russians to stop,” he said, adding that Moscow’s and Kiev’s settlement demands are still “far apart.” “It’s going to take a real breakthrough here very soon to make this possible, or I think the President is going to have to make a decision about how much more time we’re going to dedicate to this,” Rubio said. Both Trump and Rubio have previously warned that the US could walk away from being a peace broker in the Ukraine conflict, if there is no progress soon.

“Not that a war in Ukraine is not important, but I would say what’s happening with China is more important,” Rubio said, adding that Iran is another US concern. Moscow has repeatedly stated that its peace terms include Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization and denazification, as well as for Kiev to give up its ambitions to join NATO. Also, ceding the new Russian regions of Kherson, Zaporozhye and the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics is not up for discussion, Russian President Vladimir Putin said last year. Should Kiev abandon plans to join the US-led military bloc and withdraw its troops from the four new territories, Moscow is ready to institute an immediate ceasefire, he added.

Read more …

“In recent years, it often seemed like he was the only adult in the room when it came to recognizing just how big of a problem China is for us..”

• The Hardest Working Man In The Trump Administration (Sarah Anderson)

I’ve heard various members of Donald Trump’s administration say that it’s hard to keep up with the president at the pace he’s been going since Jan. 20. But there may be one man in the cabinet who can do it. Marco Rubio. In case you missed the news on Thursday, Trump shook his administration up a bit by announcing that Mike Waltz would no longer be his national security advisor. A little while later, the president surprised pretty much everyone — including State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce, who was mid-briefing — when he posted on Truth Social that he’d be nominating Waltz to be the next United States Ambassador to the United Nations instead. In the same post, he announced that he would be appointing Rubio as acting national security advisor. If you’re keeping track at home, Rubio now serves four — four! — roles in the Trump administration.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1918032465219776901?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1918032465219776901%7Ctwgr%5E131b83389bf4f01796a60ebe103fda880dc04efd%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fsarah-anderson%2F2025%2F05%2F02%2Fthe-hardest-working-man-in-the-trump-administration-n4939427

Of course, Trump nominated Rubio for Secretary of State almost immediately after he was elected in November, and he was confirmed hours after Trump was sworn in on Jan. 20. On Feb. 3, which seems like years ago now, the president announced that Rubio would become Acting Administrator of USAID, and that the State Department would absorb the agency. Since then, we’ve learned what a mess USAID was, and Rubio announced that about 83% of its programs would be canceled. Shortly after that, on Feb. 7, Trump fired the Archivist of the United States, Colleen Joy Shogan, and on Feb. 16, he announced that Rubio would take her place. And now he can add national security advisor to his resume. Not bad for the guy Trump once called “Little Marco.” Rubio’s new workload has become a major talking point online and throughout the media ever since Trump made the announcement.

The Guardian points out that Rubio is the “first person since Henry Kissinger to hold the national security adviser and secretary of state positions at the same time. In the article “Marco Rubio, Secretary of Everything,” the New York Times also writes, “The former senator from Florida is now the head of four government bodies. He has outdone Henry Kissinger and even Xi Jinping, China’s leader, who has only three titles.” (Pretty sure the Jinping reference was meant to be some sort of dig after skimming the article, but I didn’t read the whole thing carefully, but it’s the New York Times, so the odds are…) Heck, even People magazine wrote an entire article based on the fact that Rubio has four jobs now. nRubio himself appeared on “Hannity” on Fox News tonight and spoke briefly about it, and he posted, “I’m honored to serve under the leadership of @POTUS” on X.

And here I am, sitting in my bed with my laptop after midnight on Thursday, writing about it for PJ Media, even though I told a couple of our editors earlier that I wasn’t going to. Why am I doing that? Well…If you come here regularly, you might notice that I write about Rubio and the State Department often. There are a few reasons for that. First, I’ve been a huge Rubio fan since he became a senator. He’s a bit older than me, but I always felt like he understood my generation more than any other politician in my lifetime, and he spoke to us about topics that mattered to us. (I could dig a little deeper into this and maybe one day I will, but not tonight.) I always felt like he understood things in ways that most other people who supposedly represent the country never did. Not only was he book smart, as they say, but he possessed a lot of common sense. It’s hard to find that, well, anywhere, much less in Washington, D.C.

I know many of you are Rubio fans now, too. Every single time I write one of those articles, I see dozens of comments about how impressed most of you are with him so far. Back during the 2016 primary, he became the only presidential candidate whose campaign I’ve ever supported financially. I’ve defended him both privately and professionally at times when many conservatives turned on him, and when I hopped back on the Trump train last summer, I hoped the president would choose him for, if not vice president (which I know was an issue because of Florida), Secretary of State. One reason for that is China. In recent years, it often seemed like he was the only adult in the room when it came to recognizing just how big of a problem China is for us. You could hear that loud and clear during his Senate confirmation hearing in January.

Read more …

“The job here is to enforce the federal civil rights laws, not woke ideology.” — Harmeet Dhillon, US Assistant AG for the Civil Rights Division

• What’s Normal, Exactly? (James Howard Kunstler)

When a claque of deep state shills such as Norm Eisen, Chuck Schumer, Bill Kristol, David Brooks, and Larry Summers holler about Mr. Trump’s attempt to reform a depraved political culture as “an assault on norms,” are you not prompted to wonder what, exactly, those norms might be? Looks like they are describing a colossal matrix of racketeering operations in concert with an epic program of crypto-Marxist mind-fuckery, mountains of money purloined under color-of-law, swindles galore of practically every public enterprise, the capital city of a so-called republic fogged in gaslight to conceal a Satyricon of pedophilia, sodomy, and sado-masochism in every closet, cabinet, and pigeon-hole of the political class. So, along comes Mr. Trump for the second round, with a supernaturally able clean-up crew this time, and the monsters feeding off that depraved normality commence to shriek in mortal panic as the scaffold of their crimes gets methodically disassembled and secrets are revealed.

Many of you have been pouting over the lack of criminal prosecutions these first hundred days. Why is AG Ms. Bondi preening on Fox News when she should be banging-out subpoenas and arrest warrants, you ask? And what broom-closet is Dan Bongino hiding in over at the Hoover Building? How is Hillary Clinton still at-large in the land? Does Alejandro Mayorkas still make his Saturday excursions to the boutiques along M Street? Looks like the months of May and June are setting up to be the season of shocks and consequence. Item: James O’Keefe, founder of Project Veritas (he was cancelled from it) and now running O’Keefe Media Group, put out a mighty strange eighteen-second video this week. Looks like it was filmed in a basement somewhere. “I’m going dark, he says ruefully. “I’m not suicidal. Pray for me. This one scares me, guys.”

A week earlier, O’Keefe announced that he had bombshell recordings of public figures breaking the law, involving billions of dollars, which he expected would lead to indictments. What spooked him in the week since then? I guess we’ll have to stand by to find out, or see if JO’K was bluffing. Meanwhile Virginia Guiffre, a former Jeffrey Epstein teen sex slave, likewise said just over a week ago: “I am making it publicly known that in no way, shape, or form am I suicidal. If something happens to me, for the sake of my family do not let this go away and help me to protect them. Too many evil people want to see me quieted.” This was a month after she was injured in a traffic accident with a school bus in Western Australia. On April 24, she reportedly committed suicide at home, after release from the hospital. What do you suppose changed her mind?

An ominous silence surrounds the promised release of the Epstein case material, whatever it consists of: depositions, flight logs, photographs, video recordings of prominent people in compromising situations. Remember, not long after inauguration day, the FBI’s New York field office was found to be sitting on a huge trove of previously hidden Epstein case evidence. The DOJ swiftly “retired” the chief agent of the office, James Dennehy, who additionally had failed to cooperate with requests to disclose the names of agents involved in the Jan-6 investigations. Supposedly, since the discovery of the Epstein trove, a thousand agents were assigned to “process” it, redact the names of the innocent victims, so they say. Are they close to finishing?

Speaking of the J-6, 2021 matter, pressure is building for the Republican majority Congress to hold hearings on exactly what went on that fateful day. FBI Director Patel has yet to disclose how many government agents (not just FBI), and how many “confidential human sources” (i.e., provocateurs), were in the crowd around and inside the US Capitol. It’s getting to be past time to ask Mr. Patel for a straight answer on that in an official proceeding, and continue from there to related business, such as Nancy Pelosi’s failure to reinforce the Capitol Police with National Guard troops that day, and the strange doings around the DNC pipe bomb ploy few blocks away. Personally, I doubt that Mr. Patel is inclined to lie or dissemble about all that. But the natives are getting a little restless.

Mr. Kennedy at HHS is already pretty frisky in his role supervising the enormous cluster of agencies that have done so much to wreck the nation’s health in recent years. Goodbye fluoride in the drinking water. Hello to placebo testing for new drugs and vaccines. Welcome to a vigorous six-month campaign to determine a likely cause of the autism epidemic. RFK is even asking what exactly is in those aviation contrails that folks have been observing and complaining about for so many years. And then there was the bomb he dropped during this week’s cabinet meeting: that under Joe Biden, HHS acted as a major vector for the trafficking of children. Say, what??? Lotta people wondered, did Bobby really say that? And does he know exactly who in HHS is responsible. . . like, names attached? I guess we’ll find out.

Read more …

“As of today, Americans are thinking about tariffs though the lens of the mainstream media outlets..”

• We’re Gonna Lose the PR War Over Tariffs Until We Start Doing THIS (Pinsker)

I’ll begin with the counterargument: If everything goes according to plan, the PR war over tariffs will be irrelevant, because the ultimate “spin” is a complete and total victory. And there’s a clear path to the finish line, which we outlined a month ago:

“Trump’s best PR path forward is to do exactly what he just did: On day one, impose painful tariffs on everyone. This way, you frontload the bad news. And then, after a few weeks of economic turmoil, the other countries will (hopefully) come begging to renegotiate — their hat in hand — because the possibility of losing the rich, rewarding, ultra-lucrative U.S. marketplace makes ‘em panic. After a few weeks of horrible, devastating economic news (which, alas, we’re seeing now), the headlines will then change in a hurry: Every other day, Trump would have a new, positive tariff treaty to announce! After the first few countries cave, it will incentivize all the other nations to get their [tushies] in gear and get a deal done fast — lest they wait too long and are frozen out of the U.S. marketplace. Done right, it creates a win-win domino effect: The new American gold rush!”
However, there was a caveat:
“But it’s still a high-risk strategy for Trump, because there’s no guarantee the other top countries will quickly fold. Sure, we expect places like France to live up to their white-flag-waving reputations (“Je suis un lâche!”), but national pride is tricky to predict. In the foreign countries that viscerally loathe Trump, the politicians can score points by “standing up the American bully.”

We’re now one month removed from Liberation Day, and MAGA Nation certainly frontloaded the bad news. There was a lot of it. And the latest polls reflect it. Here’s a hodgepodge of headlines over the last seven days:
• Fox News: Trump poll numbers on economy fall during trade fight, survey finds
• Gallup News: Most Americans Skeptical About Benefits of Tariffs
• CNN: CNN Poll: A growing majority says Trump has made the economy worse, with most skeptical of his tariff plans
• ABC News: Nearly two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Trump tariffs
• The Hill: Almost 6 in 10 say Trump policies making economy worse
• Yahoo News: Poll: After 1st 100 days, Trump’s approval rating continues to crater as 57% say he’s ‘gone too far’ on tariffs
• CBS News: Trump’s first 100 days seen as bringing big changes, but still too much focus on tariffs — CBS News poll
• NBC News: Poll: Americans vent disappointment with Trump ahead of 100 day, especially on tariffs
• Reuters: Risk of global economic recession surges on US tariff shockwaves: Reuters poll
• Newsweek: Americans Lose Faith in Economy Amid Trump Tariffs

Not good, and it’s a credit to Trump that the polls weren’t worse. This entire month has been a loud, angry drumbeat of media negativity — and Americans weren’t well-educated about tariff policy or global trade deals beforehand, because it’s not a sexy topic. In those (boring) days pre-Trump, Bill O’Reilly on Fox News and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC almost never mentioned ‘em. So, it’s not like illegal immigration, where we’ve heard the different arguments a zillion times and have already settled on a conclusion (which is why the media’s negativity about that lovable Maryland family man failed to move the needle). But with tariffs, we’re still hearing the arguments. Some Americans for the first time ever.

Without the “institutional knowledge” (including, sadly, those lovely on-air tutorials from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies; he would be so helpful right now) to sort through the hysteria, the public is vulnerable to PR manipulation. As of today, Americans are thinking about tariffs though the lens of the mainstream media outlets. And those outlets are focusing on:
• The economy is cratering! Everything’s crashing!
• Trump is a power-hungry maniac and out of control!
• Inflation will explode! We’ll all be broke!
• Shelves will be bare!
• Tariffs are stupid and destructive, lowering America’s standing in the world!

That’s a problem.

Read more …

Reads a bit like: what if Kamala Harris had been elected president? (In Germany, she was). The divide between Germany and the US is gaping.

• Germany’s AfD Party ‘Definitely Right-Wing Extremist’: Spy Agency (RMX)

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has been declared “definitely right-wing extremist,” by the powerful domestic spy agency, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV). The party is reacting with outrage. The BfV claims that the party is pursuing efforts against the “free democratic order,” which the agency now says is “certain.” Previously, the party was only declared as a “suspected case,” with this new designation paving the way for not only a ban but also mass surveillance of the entire party, including all its members. With this new designation, the BfV can surveil members, including their emails, phone calls, and chats, without a warrant. In addition, the BfV can now legally infiltrate the entire party with informants and use other spy techniques. Already, other parts of the AfD at the state level were classified as “definitely right-wing extremist,” but the new designation now applies this label to the entire national party.

The party is reacting with outrage, with Alice Weidel, the co-leader of the party, writing: “The decision of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy!” Regarding the statement by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, AfD federal spokespersons Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla said: Today’s decision by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy: In current polls, the AfD is the strongest force. The federal government only has four days left in office, the intelligence agency doesn’t even have a president anymore. And the classification as a so-called suspected case is not yet legally binding. Nevertheless, the AfD, as an opposition party, is now being publicly discredited and criminalized shortly before the change of government. The associated, targeted interference in the democratic decision-making process is therefore clearly politically motivated. The AfD will continue to defend itself legally against these defamations that endanger democracy.”

The BfV, however, is attempting to justify its decision, which will be seen by many as an attack on the country’s largest opposition party. Due to the “extremist character of the entire party, which disregards human dignity,” the BfV noted in its statement. Vice presidents of the authority, Sinan Selen and Silke Willems, further indicated that statements and positions of the party “violate the principle of human dignity.” One of the key factors that the BfV is attempting to use to justify the designation is the AfD’s alleged position on “ethnic Germans.” “The ethnic-descendant understanding of the people prevailing in the party is not compatible with the free democratic basic order,” reads the statement from the BfV. “The AfD, for example, does not consider German citizens with a migration history from predominantly Muslim countries to be equal members of the German people, as ethnically defined by the party.”

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has been declared “definitely right-wing extremist,” by the powerful domestic spy agency, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV). The party is reacting with outrage. The BfV claims that the party is pursuing efforts against the “free democratic order,” which the agency now says is “certain.” Previously, the party was only declared as a “suspected case,” with this new designation paving the way for not only a ban but also mass surveillance of the entire party, including all its members. With this new designation, the BfV can surveil members, including their emails, phone calls, and chats, without a warrant. In addition, the BfV can now legally infiltrate the entire party with informants and use other spy techniques.

https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/1888999118326108392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1888999118326108392%7Ctwgr%5E1c7ec0fa2146094423148b3c66b422bb2d906d25%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Frmx.news%2Farticle%2Fbreaking-germanys-afd-party-is-declared-definitely-right-wing-extremist-by-bfv-spy-agency-paving-the-way-for-a-ban%2F

Already, other parts of the AfD at the state level were classified as “definitely right-wing extremist,” but the new designation now applies this label to the entire national party. The party is reacting with outrage, with Alice Weidel, the co-leader of the party, writing: “The decision of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy!” Regarding the statement by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, AfD federal spokespersons Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla said: Today’s decision by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy: In current polls, the AfD is the strongest force. The federal government only has four days left in office, the intelligence agency doesn’t even have a president anymore. And the classification as a so-called suspected case is not yet legally binding.

Nevertheless, the AfD, as an opposition party, is now being publicly discredited and criminalized shortly before the change of government. The associated, targeted interference in the democratic decision-making process is therefore clearly politically motivated. The AfD will continue to defend itself legally against these defamations that endanger democracy.” The BfV, however, is attempting to justify its decision, which will be seen by many as an attack on the country’s largest opposition party. Due to the “extremist character of the entire party, which disregards human dignity,” the BfV noted in its statement. Vice presidents of the authority, Sinan Selen and Silke Willems, further indicated that statements and positions of the party “violate the principle of human dignity.”

One of the key factors that the BfV is attempting to use to justify the designation is the AfD’s alleged position on “ethnic Germans.”“The ethnic-descendant understanding of the people prevailing in the party is not compatible with the free democratic basic order,” reads the statement from the BfV. “The AfD, for example, does not consider German citizens with a migration history from predominantly Muslim countries to be equal members of the German people, as ethnically defined by the party.”

Read more …

“The AfD is the most popular party in Germany, and by far the most representative of East Germany. Now the bureaucrats try to destroy it,” Vance wrote on X.”

• Germany ‘Has Rebuilt The Berlin Wall’ – Vance (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance has compared the German government’s treatment of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party to rebuilding the Berlin Wall. On Friday, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, the BfV, classified the anti-immigration AfD as an “extremist” organization, citing “xenophobic, anti-minority, Islamophobic, and anti-Muslim statements made by leading party officials.” The label enables police to closely monitor the party’s activities. “The AfD is the most popular party in Germany, and by far the most representative of East Germany. Now the bureaucrats try to destroy it,” Vance wrote on X. “The West tore down the Berlin Wall together. And it has been rebuilt – not by the Soviets or the Russians, but by the German establishment,” he added.

The party’s co-leader, Alice Weidel, accused the government of attempting to quell dissent. “Since the AfD is the strongest party in polls now, they want to suppress the opposition & freedom of speech,” she wrote on X. AfD was founded in 2013 as a backlash to Germany’s handling of the eurozone debt crisis. It has since shifted focus to demanding tighter immigration and asylum laws and opposing the “woke agenda.” The party also criticizes NATO and has staged protests against sending weapons to Ukraine. AfD finished second in the federal elections in February, winning 152 seats in the 630-seat Bundestag. Last month, it topped opinion polls for the first time, with 26% support. The party is especially popular in the economically underdeveloped regions of former East Germany. AfD has also been embroiled in controversy, as some members have had links to far-right and neo-Nazi groups or used slogans associated with Nazi Germany.

Major German parties have refused to cooperate or form coalitions with AfD under the so-called “firewall” principle. Vance criticized efforts to isolate the party during his speech at the Munich Security Conference in February. “Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There is no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you don’t,” the US vice president said. The Berlin Wall was a concrete barrier built by East Germany in 1961 to stop its citizens from fleeing to West Berlin. It became a powerful symbol of the Cold War and remained in place until it was torn down in 1989, leading to German reunification.

Read more …

Russia: 26 million deaths. US: just over 292,000.

• Germany Is Weaponizing WWII Memory Against Russia (Amar)

Eighty years ago, Germany suffered its worst self-induced military – as well as moral, political, cultural, you name it – catastrophe ever. First, Nazi Germany led the global fascist challenge that we call World War II. Then, Germany was not merely defeated but crushed by the combined efforts of, in order of importance, the Soviet Union, the US, and UK, to name only those powers that really mattered decisively for the outcome of the war in Europe. This Allied victory in Europe is celebrated in May. In the West, the commemorations peak on the 8th and in Russia, one day later. In Asia, things were different. World War II started earlier – in July 1937, not September 1939, and ended later – in August, not May, 1945. Regarding the war in Europe, the West has always, with varying intensity, sought to diminish the preponderant role of the Soviet Union – and within the latter, of Russia.

Concerning the war in Asia, the West’s main target of this weaponized forgetfulness has been China, rightly labeled “the forgotten ally” by historian Rana Mitter. China, like the Soviet Union and now Russia, has always dared challenge Western hegemony and especially US ‘primacy’. And, as with Russia and the former Soviet Union, it is this geopolitical independence that has led the West to deny the Chinese people’s real and massive World War II contribution and sacrifices, which were enormous (the death toll alone, to quote only one figure, is estimated at 12-20 million). But for now, back to the European part of the war. There, in historical reality, it was the Soviet Union that did the most – by far – to destroy Nazi Germany. And that is a simple, even quantifiable historical fact. Merely a decade ago, it was occasionally admitted even in Western mainstream media, such as America’s Washington Post and Britain’s Independent.

A few figures suffice to sketch just how predominant the Soviet share in the victory over Nazism was: Over the course of the war, in all its theaters, 17 to 18 million Germans served in the Nazi forces (including the Wehrmacht and the smaller but especially important and vicious Waffen-SS). At least 4 million German soldiers were killed in the fight against the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1945 alone. Estimates indicate that at least as many were injured, probably more; around 3 million became POWs. The upshot of this is simple: A massive chunk, some historians estimate up to 80%, of the total German fighting manpower of World War II – not only those who invaded the Soviet Union – was eliminated on what the Germans called the Eastern Front. Without going into easily available details, the picture is similar when we focus not on men but materiel.

Ask, for instance, Google’s Gemini AI in Deep Research mode, and it will sum it up thus: “It is evident that the Eastern Front absorbed the vast majority of Germany’s total tank losses throughout the war.” It turns out that the failure of Germany’s touted Leopard tank in the Ukraine conflict has a long tradition reaching back to Nazi Germany’s Panthers and Tigers: Russia, neutering German cats since 1941. Put simply, as with Sweden’s Gustav XII and France’s Napoleon, it was Russia and the Soviet Union that broke Hitler’s back. And at enormous cost and sacrifice: Current, solid figures put Soviet losses (military and civilian combined) at 26-27 million. (Compare, for instance, with the US: Military casualties, according to Encyclopedia Britannica, just over 292,000; civilian losses were negligible, even if every individual death is, of course, tragic.)

And now it is Germany – of all places – that has marred the run-up to this year’s May anniversary with an embarrassingly ugly scandal. Its essence is a German government attempt to crudely instrumentalize the commemorations to make them serve the propaganda war that has been part of the West’s proxy war in Ukraine, while accusing Russia of doing just that. In Germany, more and more often, every accusation is a confession, as they say about Israeli propaganda.

Read more …

“..officially designate AfD a “confirmed extremist entity.” This legal status allows the BfV to deploy surveillance and intelligence measures to monitor the party’s activities without restriction.”

• Germany Is ‘Tyranny In Disguise’ – Rubio (RT)

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has sharply criticized Berlin for designating Alternative for Germany (AfD), the country’s most popular party according to recent polling, as “extremist.” Such actions have nothing to do with democracy, he has warned. “Germany just gave its spy agency new powers to surveil the opposition,” America’s top diplomat wrote on X on Friday. “That’s not democracy – it’s tyranny in disguise.” Earlier in the day, the German domestic security service (BfV) announced the decision to officially designate AfD a “confirmed extremist entity.” This legal status allows the BfV to deploy surveillance and intelligence measures to monitor the party’s activities without restriction.

Explaining the move, the agency cited “the extremist nature of the entire party, which disregards human dignity.” It pointed to the party’s “prevailing understanding of the people based on ethnicity and descent,” which it said was “incompatible with the democratic basic order.” The AfD has long been known for its harsh anti-immigration stance. “What is truly extremist is not the popular AfD… but rather the establishment’s deadly open border immigration policies that the AfD opposes,” Rubio argued, calling on Berlin to “reverse its course.” The right-wing party has been enjoying steady support from Washington ever since US President Donald Trump entered the White House for his second term.

US Vice President J.D. Vance strongly criticized politicians who shun parties such as the AfD at the Munich Security Conference in February. US-based billionaire and Trump adviser Elon Musk has repeatedly openly expressed support for the party. In January, ahead of the German parliamentary vote, he hosted a livestream on X with AfD co-leader and then chancellor candidate, Alice Weidel. The party came in second during the February election, behind the center-right Christian Democrats, which ruled out any coalitions with the AfD. Recent polls show the two parties being neck-and-neck, with one survey published by Forsa Institute putting AfD one percent point ahead of their center-right rivals.

Read more …

“Ukraine’s drive to join Europe involved denying its heroic past, glorifying criminals and Nazi collaborators, and promoting the “Banderization” of society.”

• Odessa Massacre: Point of No Return Marked Ukraine’s Slide Into Nazism (Sp.)

On May 2, 2014, a pro-Maidan crowd outnumbering anti-Maidan protesters trapped dozens inside the Trade Union building and set it on fire with petrol bombs. At least 42 anti-Maidan activists died—either burned, asphyxiated, or killed by gunfire. The mass murder of innocent people in Odessa’s Trade Union house marked a “point of no return” for Ukraine, Ukrainian politics expert Alexander Dudchak told Sputnik. Those behind the West-backed coup that year were driven by Nazi-fueled “hatred for humanity.” Their goal was to build an “anti-Russia,” with Russophobia stoked from abroad. After the tragedy, “it became clear to those who disagreed with the [pro-Western Ukrainian] government that there was no way to defend their rights except through force.” Thus, the Odessa massacre can be seen as the turning point for all subsequent events.

“It became obvious what these forces represented – human-hating, pure Nazism, which came to power in Ukraine,” said Dudchak. Long before the Soviet Union’s collapse, NGOs and foreign funds, like the notorious Soros foundation, began distorting history to ideologically target the younger generation. Ukraine’s drive to join Europe involved denying its heroic past, glorifying criminals and Nazi collaborators, and promoting the “Banderization” of society. Despite the public’s strong preference for ties with former Soviet countries, a West-inspired coup took place, reshaping public consciousness. History was rewritten, dissent silenced through brutal methods, and media control imposed.

On May 2, 2014, Ukrainian nationalists locked anti-Maidan protesters, who opposed Euromaidan and Ukraine’s rapprochement with the European Union, in the Odessa Trade Union House and set the building on fire. Almost 50 people died, and some 250 protesters were injured in clashes with the radicals, according to the United Nations. The massacre was executed by the West’s protégés and under their control. “I don’t rule out that the West may have even written the script for this event. They needed to show the population what happens to those who try to oppose them. And that is what they did – with an animalistic cruelty,” concluded Dudchak.

Read more …

Boeing’s problems are all over the company. Engineers used to run the company; now it’s accountants.

• Trump Reportedly Turns To L3Harris For “Interim” Air Force One Jet (ZH)

Frustrated by repeated delays in Boeing’s new Air Force One production timeline, President Trump has reportedly commissioned defense contractor L3Harris Technologies to retrofit a Boeing 747 previously used by the Qatari government as an interim presidential aircraft. The Wall Street Journal reported that L3Harris has been tasked with retrofitting the Qatari 747 with communications systems and other equipment to transform the luxury aircraft into Air Force One. According to the people familiar with the matter, President Trump requested that L3Harris complete the needed retrofitting of the jumbo jet by as early as fall. In February, FOX Business’ Edward Lawrence confirmed that Boeing had suffered global supply chain snarls that changed project timings and delayed the completion date to 2029.

White House communications director Steven Cheung told FOX Business at the time: “It is ridiculous that the delivery of a new Air Force One airplane has been delayed for such a long time,” adding, “The president working on identifying ways to speed up the delivery of a new plane, which has been needed for a while.” Months later, WSJ’s L3Harris report may suggest that there were very limited options to speed up the Boeing delivery. Here’s more from the report:

“Before Trump’s inauguration, White House Military Office and senior Air Force officials considered canceling Boeing’s contract for the new planes, according to people familiar with the matter. White House officials under Trump have also discussed whether they can sue the plane manufacturer, some of the people said. Trump initially tapped the bloated defense contractor to build the next-generation presidential aircraft during his first term, aiming to replace the aging fleet. Boeing’s failure to deliver on time has become emblematic of the broader military-industrial complex: bloated, sluggish, and unaccountable. The military-industrial complex’s failures must urgently be corrected. For now, L3Harris is stepping in, aiming to deliver a retrofitted Qatari 747 as an interim Air Force One jet by this fall. America’s defense space needs more domestic competition if it wants to compete in the 2030s.

Read more …

“The manufactured presentation of the self (fabricated authenticity) is the ultimate neoliberal imperative: people are actively encouraged to become producers of themselves. The name of the game is “fake it till you make it.”

“..this state of affairs is undermining real engagement and driving an increasing number of frustrated and disillusioned users away from these platforms, leaving bots to interact with other bots, as advertisers already lament.”

• The Ghost in the Machine. AI and The Spectral Ontology of Value (Ruggeri)

By now it should be abundantly clear how social influencers operate. Self-promotion, exaggerated claims, and a well-crafted image can snowball into credibility before anyone checks credentials. They build parasocial relationships with their followers who feel like they know the influencer, even if they have never met. Influencers attempt to create an aura of individuality and authenticity through personal storytelling, share raw footage or sensational material, invite followers to “peek” into their lives encouraging voyeuristic engagement. However, this aura is even more fragile than the artificial aura mentioned by Walter Benjamin when in the 1930s he described the Hollywood-driven phenomenon of elevating actors to celebrity status, creating cult-like personas that compensated for the loss of aura in in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Not only is the influencers’ derivative content easily replicable, they too are vulnerable to replacement by AI-generated personas.

Benjamin recognized in the spell of the star’s personality “the phony spell of a commodity.” But most importantly, he warned that a medium that has a dual capacity to abolish distance between the audience and the depicted world while simultaneously detaching the audience from the physical world and its material conditions, is ideally suited to the aims of fascism. Benjamin was primarily referring to film and photography, but in an era of algorithmic reproduction controlled by a handful of tech companies his observations have become more relevant than ever.

Influencers leverage the bandwagon effect, that mix of conformity and fear of missing out. Once a persona gains momentum, with the help of thousands of bots whose cost is now less than a cent for basic accounts, humans jump on. Social media’s smoke and mirrors work because we are wired for stories, not audits. But with billions of automated bots flooding social media platforms, there is a roughly 50% chance that any account you engage with, whether by liking a post, commenting, or following, is a bot. Bots have become so sophisticated that it has become increasingly harder to detect them. As to the remaining accounts that are still operated by humans, about half of them publish content that is generated by artificial intelligence.

Even those with limited expertise on a given topic can produce persuasive posts and articles, while readers would need an AI tool such as GPTZero to identify their artificial origin. A simple prompt ensures that the AI-generated content they publish is aligned, and resonates, with their followers’ ideological leanings, interests and preferences. An article that appeared in a conservative news outlet can be automatically rewritten to please a liberal audience and vice versa. A paper published by an academic can be summarized and interspersed with jokes and colloquialism to appeal to a non-academic audience, three articles can be seamlessly meshed into one creating a cohesive piece that synthesizes their content, etc. You get the drift.

Shaped by a mix of human activity and AI-generated content, the Internet and social media now resemble a phantasmagoria, a make-believe optical show that projects ghostly images, fetishizes human desires and experiences, and intensifies narcissistic self-reference to create an illusion of authenticity. The manufactured presentation of the self (fabricated authenticity) is the ultimate neoliberal imperative: people are actively encouraged to become producers of themselves. The name of the game is “fake it till you make it.” Lack of qualifications or professional expertise is no barrier for aspiring influencers. Ambition, a background in marketing, a good knowledge of psychological manipulation techniques, the ability to leverage algorithms, and an initial investment in an army of bots to boost content are better guarantors of success.

Those who make the cut can rake in juicy contracts to promote products, services or a political agenda. The more engagement their hustle generates, the more data capital social media platforms accumulate. Unsurprisingly, this state of affairs is undermining real engagement and driving an increasing number of frustrated and disillusioned users away from these platforms, leaving bots to interact with other bots, as advertisers already lament.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Hydroxide

mRNA

Tom plays dead

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries