Menu Icon

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)

 

 

Miller census

RFK

j6

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

PIANO

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)

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 1 2025

May 012025
 
 May 1, 2025  Posted by at 9:39 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  64 Responses »


Henri Matisse Open window, collioure 1905

 

• ‘We Are Just Getting Started’: Trump Hails His First 100 Days (DS)
• Trump’s Counterrevolution at 100 Days (Stepman)
• The First 100 Days: The Method Behind the Madness in Court Challenges (Turley)
• Trump’s Foreign Policy Is Calculated, Not Chaotic (Trenin)
• Zelensky Pleaded With Trump In Vatican – The Economist (RT)
• Tucker Carlson Accuses Ukrainians of Trying To Kill Trump (RT)
• Zelensky Openly Threatening Victory Day Terrorist Attack – Moscow (RT)
• US Cannot Sign Peace Deal On Behalf of Kiev – Kremlin (RT)
• US and Ukraine Sign Minerals Deal (RT)
• Ukraine Willing To ‘De Facto Give Up’ Land To Russia – Kellogg (RT)
• China Caves to Trump on Tariffs Again (Margolis)
• Democrats’ Radical Changing of the Guard (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Illegal Immigrants in My District Are Constituents: California Democrat (DS)
• Massive Blackouts Is What Green Agenda Gets You (Karin Kneissl)
• The Spanish Power Outage. A Catastrophe Created By Political Design (Lacalle)
• Elon Musk, (Half of) a Grateful Nation Thanks You (Skeet)
• China Steps Up Its Game in the Global AI Race (Pepe Escobar)

 

 

 

 

Tariffs not taxes

Bessent

Woke

ARO

Orban

Meta

FISA
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1917250091213292014

Fed

Fleury


Alberta

Rose

 

 

 

 

Let’s do a few “first 100 days” articles..

• ‘We Are Just Getting Started’: Trump Hails His First 100 Days (DS)

President Donald Trump declared it the “most successful 100 days” in American history. “They all want to come back to Michigan and build cars again. You know why, because of our tax and tariff policy,” Trump said in his remarks at the Macomb County Community College Sports and Expo Center in Warren, Michigan, to mark his 100th day in office. “I’m here in the heartland of our great nation to celebrate the most successful 100 days of any administration in the history of our country, and that’s according to many, many people,” Trump said. “Everyone is saying. We are just getting started.” Trump delivered a wide-ranging speech covering innumerable topics. “We are taking back our jobs and protecting American autoworkers and all of our workers. We are restoring the rule of law,” the president continued.

“We are ending the inflation nightmare, the worst that we’ve had probably in the history of our country,” Trump said. “Getting lunacy and transgender insanity the hell out of our government. We are stopping the indoctrination of our children, slashing billions of dollars in waste, fraud, and abuse. And above all, we’re saving the American dream, we are making America great again, and it’s happening fast.” Trump asserted he is telling “incompetent deep state bureaucrats, ‘You’re fired. Get out of here.’” “We are ushering in the golden age of America,” he said. Trump asserted that border crossings had dropped “99.999%” since he returned to office. “The number of illegal border-crossers released into the United States is down. Listen to this, please: 99.999%,” Trump said, before making a joke about his border czar Tom Homan. “Three people got in. Three. And I got angry as hell at Tom Homan. How did you allow three, Tom?”

Trump issued executive orders to end the “catch and release” of illegal immigrants trying to sneak into the country; reinstated the “Remain in Mexico” policy for those seeking asylum here; designated MS-13, Tren de Aragua, and other gangs as foreign terrorist organizations; and greatly ramped up deportations. “You’ve seen a change at the southern border that Sleepy Joe said couldn’t happen,” Trump said, referring to his predecessor, the 46th president, Joe Biden. “I stand before you today and can report to you that we have achieved the safest border in American history.” Trump asserted if he hadn’t won the 2024 election, Democrats “would have imported the next round” of illegal immigrants. “It would have only been a matter of time before America became a Third World country.” The president also made a comparison to Democrats’ unwillingness to prosecute illegal immigrants, but their enthusiasm to prosecute him.

“They’re claiming that we’re not allowed to deport illegals, and they’re the ones who orchestrated an eight-year campaign to jail their political opponents,” including himself, he said. “That’s all they can do. Jail their political opponents.” Continuing a reference to his predecessor, Trump said, “Whoever operated the autopen was in charge.” Trump was referring to an autopen that appears to have been used by someone other than Biden in the Biden administration to sign off on several executive orders. The Oversight Project, a watchdog group, recently issued a legal memo asserting presidential pardons may be invalid if the president doesn’t sign them himself, since clemency is a responsibility the Constitution only grants to the president. On the economy, Trump also took a verbal swipe at Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell, who the president appointed during his first term.

“Interest rates came down, despite the fact that I have a Fed person who’s not really doing a good job. But I won’t say that,” Trump said. “I want to be very nice. I want to be very nice and respectful to the Fed. You’re not supposed to criticize the Fed. You’re supposed to let him do his own thing. But I know much more than he does about interest rates. Believe me.” Trump said he was the president of “the workers, not the outsourcers,” and the “president for Main Street, not Wall Street.” The president boasted about his tariffs—which have been controversial even among many Republicans. He noted, “In many cases, friends have abused us more than foes on trade.”
However, China is the biggest problem, he said. “China has taken more jobs from us than any country has ever taken from another country,” Trump said.

“That doesn’t mean we’re not going to get along. We’ll get along with China. Their tariff now is at 145%. That’s a big difference between that and zero. I think it’s going to work out. They want to make a deal. We’re going to make a deal. It’s not going to be a deal where we lose $1 trillion a year like they did with Biden.” Trump touted his executive order on election integrity that he signed this month. A U.S. District Court recently blocked part of that executive order. “I also signed an order to require proof of citizenship to vote in American elections. That was easy,” he said. “The Democrats fought me on that. Think of it. Why would they want no voter ID? Because they want to cheat. Why would they want no proof of citizenship? ‘We don’t want it. We trust everybody.’ No, they want to cheat. That’s what they do.”

The Trump administration has also dismantled federal mandates regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI for short. “I banned men from competing in women’s sports. They say that’s an 80-20 issue. No, I’d say it’s about a 97-3 issue,” the president said, referring to his ban on biological males who “identify” as females playing in girls and women’s sports. Trump also said he stopped the spread of DEI in the military academies. “I signed executive orders to abolish critical race theory and transgender insanity from our schools, and from our military,” Trump continued. “We fired the woke boards of visitors at our military academies. We have. We have great people running our military academies now.”

Read more …

“It’s clear that most of the federal apparatus, even including the FBI, is run and operated by partisan Democrats who, in many cases, are willing to use their power to punish or at least impede their domestic political enemies..”

• Trump’s Counterrevolution at 100 Days (Stepman)

The first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s second term have been stunningly transformative, even as the Left has begun to mount some counteroffensives in the judiciary and in the media. For a president to be successful, he must apply principles that one might apply to warfare or sports. The early days of a presidency are about maintaining tempo—about keeping the ball moving on issues that the president was elected to promote. Any kind of slowdown usually means the president’s power to reform the system has come to an end, as this signals the natural shifting of the tide to the out-of-power party. On this end, Trump 2.0 has been one of the most successful early presidencies since FDR. This is Trump’s Dark New Deal, to borrow language from Elon Musk. He’s effectively flooded the zone with dramatic changes in policy that range from immigration to trade to foreign affairs and much more.

Whereas Trump’s predecessor was a virtually comatose upholder of an old regime, one that had become quite radical in its aims and tyrannical in its operation, Trump is a disruptor. He is pushing the envelope to an extent far beyond even his first term in office. This is Trump’s populist counterrevolution. Here’s a quick review of his more significant accomplishments thus far.

Border Secured On the border, the Trump effect has been stunningly effective. By making it known that the law will be enforced and then enforcing those laws, Trump has virtually solved the border problem overnight. Getting control of the border was one of the central planks of Trump’s message since he became active in politics, and he’s succeeded spectacularly. The Trump administration justly spiked the football on this issue Monday.

“Since President Donald J. Trump took office, he and his administration have ushered in the most secure border in modern American history—and he didn’t need legislation to do it,” read a statement from the White House. “President Trump has made good on the promises he made on the campaign trail to usher in an unprecedented era of homeland security.” The problem is now dealing with former President Joe Biden’s mess internally, which was always going to be the greater challenge. The Left’s commitment to open borders won’t abate even as the popular tide has turned against it. The Left has retreated to the dubious position of just wanting “due process” for the millions of people it brought here illegally, but that’s a tough case to make when the previous administration gleefully undermined the U.S. legal process for years to create this crisis.

Deep State Defanged The Trump administration’s actions against the administrative state, or the deep state, have been nothing short of remarkable. From the new Department of Government Efficiency to the State Department to even the departments of Energy and Education, Trump has taken aim at neutering the “fourth” branch of government. This has served two purposes. First, it’s restoring some level of accountability to our federal government that has over time become untethered from any kind of genuine democratic accountability. A mid-level career bureaucrat should not be dictating how the executive branch operates, nor should a government job be treated as an inviolable right. The Trump administration is using every tool it can to change that dynamic.

The second purpose is that by cutting loose large chunks of the administrative state, Trump is also severing the Left’s patronage networks. It’s clear that most of the federal apparatus, even including the FBI, is run and operated by partisan Democrats who, in many cases, are willing to use their power to punish or at least impede their domestic political enemies. To make matters worse, the federal government also distributes countless billions of dollars in grant funding to essentially left-wing activists in badly misnamed nongovernmental organizations. There’s a reason why the Left lost its collective mind when Trump dramatically curtailed the U.S. Agency for International Development, for instance. It knows that this strikes at not only its domestic power but also at its global ability to conduct social engineering.

DEI Regime Crumbling Given everything else that’s happening, Trump has quietly begun the process of dismantling the diversity, equity, and inclusion regime. The Left has essentially warped civil rights law to move away from shared notions of equality under the law. The Biden administration and its elite institutional allies used the prior four years to racialize our government and society based on their notions of who qualifies as an oppressor and who is oppressed. The result has been a massive backlash. Now, Trump is taking aim at DEI, not only eliminating it from federal departments but using civil rights law to ensure that any institution receiving government support will no longer be able to discriminate based on race. He is now using this to push Ivy League schools to drop their DEI programs or else lose billions of dollars in federal funding.

Another example of how Trump is blowing up DEI is his executive order ending “disparate impact” analysis from government policy. The disparate impact theory posited that any example of racial disparity, even unintentional, was assumed to be an example of discrimination. The policy has been used to threaten police departments and schools so that they will abandon good policies out of fear of being sued. Now, it’s the other way around. Colleges and corporations will now have to be more careful if they choose to discriminate.

Global Reset While Trump’s re-ascendance has dramatically changed domestic politics, he’s also monumentally reshaping the global chess board. Trump has pushed hard for peace in Eastern Europe, has put pressure on Iran and its proxies in the Middle East with the hopes of creating stability in the region, and more broadly reoriented American foreign policy to more strictly focus on U.S. national interests. He’s reviving the Monroe Doctrine with a focus on the Americas to both secure America’s doorstep and, more importantly, to keep China at bay. And while Trump’s tariff policies have perhaps sparked the greatest backlash, this administration has made it clear that the U.S. can’t continue to be addicted to cheap goods from a foreign country that often means to do us harm. Trump has at least started what should have begun long ago, which is the great decoupling from China.

The jury is still out on whether these moves will pay off. But the necessary pivot was a long time coming. In the age of increasing great power competition, Trump is clearly making moves to ensure that America continues to be the greatest power. What Trump has done across the board should be defined as the great pivot. In his first 100 days back in office, Trump has demonstrated that he’s a man leading a populist uprising—not just to break down an old system, but to rebuild it on a stronger foundation.

Read more …

“Trump knows that time is of the essence. If he is going to realign the markets and make progress on issues like deportations, he has to put points on the board before the midterm elections..”

• The First 100 Days: The Method Behind the Madness in Court Challenges (Turley)

This is an administration in a hurry. Trump learned in his first term that you need to move as fast and as far as possible in the first two years of a presidential term. With the midterm elections looming, Trump knows that reforms may end and investigations and impeachments will begin if the Democrats retake the House in 2026. Despite some losses, the Justice Department has succeeded generally in reaffirming its authority to seek the reduction of government and to root out waste. It has also made real progress in other areas. Take the area of greatest success for the Trump administration: Immigration. One thing that was clearly established in the first 100 days is that the entry of millions of unlawful immigrants was a choice made by the Biden administration and the Democrats. They could have stopped most of these entries at any time, but elected to leave the southern border effectively open for four years as millions poured over.

In a matter of weeks, Trump effectively closed the border. In February, there were just 8,326 southern border encounters, down from 189,913 in February 2024. Daily encounters this week declined 97% from Biden. As many of us stated during the Biden administration, Democrats could have shut down the border, but clearly did not want to. Now with millions in the country, Democrats are calling for “pathways to citizenship” by arguing that there is no way to process so many illegals allowed in under Biden. In the meantime, the public overwhelmingly favors deportations and elected Trump on his pledge to carry out such removals. Polling shows that 83% of Americans support deportations of immigrants with violent criminal records and roughly half support mass deportation of all undocumented persons.

A new CBS poll shows that, after the first 100 days, 56 percent approve of President Donald Trump’s “program to find and deport immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally.” To carry out that policy, Trump is seeking to use new expedited systems. For the worst individuals, he has turned to the centuries-old Alien Enemies Act, a little-used act that presents a series of novel, unresolved questions. Even with this smaller subset of detainees, individual hearings and appeals could make Biden’s decision to allow millions into the country a permanent reality. Many immigrants have been given initial court dates that extend beyond the Trump term. Trump also pledged to reduce trade barriers for American exports and he is pushing existing laws to the breaking point on tariffs. He is right on the merits.

Even our closest allies impose unfair barriers to our goods and Trump sought to change the status quo with sweeping tariffs issued under his own authority. Democrats have challenged that authority in various courts and, again, there are good-faith arguments that must be hashed out in court. It is too early to tell how successful these cases will prove. However, a district court injunction (or even a dozen injunctions) a crisis does not make. The Supreme Court is about to hear arguments on limiting the use of national injunctions and some of these district court decisions are highly challengeable on appeal. There is no question that Trump is moving at a lightning speed and the Justice Department has to move at the same pace as the president.

There is also no question that it would better to slow down to avoid some of the unforced errors in the first 100 days. However, Trump knows that time is of the essence. If he is going to realign the markets and make progress on issues like deportations, he has to put points on the board before the midterm elections. Ronald Reagan lost 26 seats in the House in his first midterm, Bill Clinton lost 54, and Barack Obama lost a breathtaking 63 seats. The greatest problem for the Justice Department is that the White House and the political team appear to be largely dictating these moves. Political aides see these hills as worth dying on. Even if they lose in court, fighting to remove criminal aliens or to reduce certain foreign aid remains popular with voters.

Read more …

Dmitry Trenin is a research professor at the Higher School of Economics and a lead research fellow at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations.

• Trump’s Foreign Policy Is Calculated, Not Chaotic (Trenin)

The first 100 days of Donald Trump’s second presidency have sparked a wave of commentary portraying him as a revolutionary. Indeed, the speed, pressure, and determination with which he has acted are striking. But this view is superficial. Trump is not dismantling the foundations of the American state or society. On the contrary, he seeks to restore the pre-globalist republic that the liberal elite long ago diverted onto a utopian internationalist path. In this sense, Trump is not a revolutionary, but a counterrevolutionary – an ideological revisionist determined to reverse the excesses of the liberal era. At home, Trump benefits from Republican majorities in both houses of Congress. Legal challenges to his policies – particularly on downsizing government and deporting illegal immigrants – have so far made little progress.

Accustomed to media attacks, Trump continues to hit back hard. The recent story alleging that top officials debated strikes on Yemen over Signal has not gained political traction. If anything, it reinforces Trump’s image as a president who acts decisively and without fear of scandal. Trump’s economic course is clear: re-industrialization, tariff protectionism, and investment in cutting-edge technologies. He is reversing decades of globalist integration, pressing allies to pool financial and technological resources with the US to rebuild its industrial base. Tactically, Trump applies pressure early, then offers retreats and compromises to lure competitors into negotiations favorable to America. This approach has been effective, particularly with Washington’s allies. Even with China, Trump is betting that Beijing’s reliance on the US market, and America’s influence over EU and Japanese trade policy, will yield strategic concessions.

In geopolitics, Trump embraces a realist doctrine grounded in great-power competition. He has defined his global priorities: secure North America as a geopolitical fortress from Greenland to Panama; redirect US and allied power toward containing China; make peace with Russia; and consolidate influence in the Middle East by supporting Israel, partnering with Gulf monarchies, and confronting Iran. In the military sphere, Trump is pursuing greater American strength by purging the armed forces of “gender liberalism” and accelerating strategic nuclear modernization. Despite his public peace overtures, he has continued airstrikes against the Houthis in Yemen and has warned of devastating retaliation against Iran should negotiations fail. His approach to Ukraine reflects strategic pragmatism.

Trump aims to end the war quickly, not out of sympathy for Russia, but to free US resources for the Pacific theater and to reduce the risk of escalation into a nuclear conflict. He expects Western Europe to assume more responsibility for its own defense. Importantly, Trump does not see Russia as a primary adversary. He views Moscow as a geopolitical rival, but not a military or ideological threat. Rather than pushing to sever Russia from China, he aims to re-engage Russia economically – in areas like energy, the Arctic, and rare earths – with the expectation that greater Western economic engagement will reduce Moscow’s dependence on Beijing.

In fact, outreach to the Kremlin has become the centerpiece of Trump’s foreign policy in his second term. His goal is not to divide Moscow and Beijing outright, but to lay the groundwork for a new global balance of power in which Russia has options beyond the Chinese orbit. In sum, Trump is not tearing down the American system but striving to restore it. His counterrevolution is aimed at reversing liberal-globalist distortions, reinforcing sovereignty, and returning realism to international affairs. It is this mission – not chaos or confrontation – that is defining his presidency.

Read more …

“..Ukraine is ready for an unconditional ceasefire, Russia is not, and Mr. Trump should not abandon a peace that only he can deliver.”

• Zelensky Pleaded With Trump In Vatican – The Economist (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky tried to persuade US President Donald Trump during their brief conversation at the Vatican not to give up on his efforts to settle the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, according to The Economist. Trump and Zelensky got together for some 15 minutes on the sidelines of Pope Francis’ funeral on Saturday. The negotiations “produced a striking photograph of the two men sitting in St. Peter’s Basilica, locked in conversation as apparent political equals,” The Economist wrote on Tuesday. Ukrainian sources told the outlet that Zelensky used the discussions “to deliver a simple message: Ukraine is ready for an unconditional ceasefire, Russia is not, and Mr. Trump should not abandon a peace that only he can deliver.” Russia previously called the 30-day ceasefire demanded by Kiev “unrealistic,” stressing that talks can take place without a pause in the fighting.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned over the weekend that Washington could disengage from the peace process if it does not see rapid progress from Russia and Ukraine towards an end to the fighting. The mood in Ukraine is now “cautiously optimistic” because the officials in Kiev believe that “after months of threats and blackmail,” Trump has finally started “to respect” Zelensky, the Economist wrote. The talks at the Vatican became the first in-person conversation between the two leaders since their meeting at the Oval Office in late February, which devolved into a shouting match in front of the cameras. At the time, Trump and US Vice President J.D. Vance accused Zelensky of being ungrateful for the American aid and not being interested in peace. The public quarrel resulted in the Ukrainian leader’s visit to the White House being cut short.

Following the meeting at the Vatican, Trump described Zelensky as “calmer,” saying that the Ukrainian leader now “understands the picture. And I think he wants to make a deal. I do not know if he wanted to make a deal [before]. I think he wants to make a deal.” On Tuesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated Moscow’s readiness to engage in direct talks with Kiev without any preconditions. As for the ceasefire, Russia considers it “a precondition that will be used to further support the Kiev regime and strengthen its military capabilities,” he explained.

Read more …

“It’s very obvious that the Ukrainians were involved in the attempted assassination on the golf course in Florida..”

• Tucker Carlson Accuses Ukrainians of Trying To Kill Trump (RT)

Ukraine was involved in a plot to assassinate US President Donald Trump during his 2024 reelection campaign, American journalist Tucker Carlson has claimed. In September 2024, pro-Ukraine activist Ryan Wesley Routh was arrested after setting up a firing position with a rifle near Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach, Florida. He was spotted by Secret Service agents before he could open fire and was detained following a brief manhunt. “It’s very obvious that the Ukrainians were involved in the attempted assassination on the golf course in Florida,” Carlson said on the Megyn Kelly Show on Tuesday. “That guy definitely had some contact with Ukraine, for sure,” Kelly replied. “He was in Ukraine!” Carlson stressed. Kelly said Routh was “asking them” for heavy weaponry, including rocket-propelled grenades. Carlson agreed and suggested that Kiev may have been involved in other assassination plots.

“I know for a fact there were others who were a target of assassination attempts by the Ukrainian government,” he claimed, without providing details. According to court documents from the Southern District of Florida, Routh – a convicted felon – attempted unsuccessfully to enlist in the Ukrainian army in 2022. Despite this, he allegedly worked to recruit foreign volunteers for the Ukrainian military. Prosecutors allege that Routh attempted to purchase either a rocket-propelled grenade launcher or a Stinger man-portable air-defense missile from a Ukrainian associate. “I need equipment so that Trump don’t [sic] get elected,” he wrote in one of the encrypted messages cited in the case. Both weapons systems have seen extensive use in the Ukraine conflict. “One missing would not be noticed,” Routh reportedly said in another message.

In 2022, Routh took part in a rally in Kiev in support of Ukraine’s Azov military unit, whose fighters were under siege by Russian forces in Mariupol at the time. The unit – which includes members with neo-Nazi and ultranationalist backgrounds – later stated that Routh “has never had any connection to Azov.” In a social media post earlier this month, the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., criticized officials in Kiev for failing to alert the US authorities about Routh’s attempts to obtain heavy weapons. The Florida incident came after a separate assassination attempt in July 2024, when a gunman opened fire during a Trump campaign rally in Pennsylvania. Trump was escorted from the stage after a bullet grazed his ear. One spectator was killed and several others were wounded. The shooter, later identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks, was fatally shot by a Secret Service sniper.

Read more …

An attack by Nazis on a parade celebrating the defeat of nazis. How fitting.

“..if the two nations were to reach a peace agreement, Kiev’s secret services might embark on a decades-long campaign of assassinations against Russian officials.”

• Zelensky Openly Threatening Victory Day Terrorist Attack – Moscow (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has openly threatened to target the Victory Day parade in Moscow on May 9, according to Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova. Russia has announced a unilateral three-day ceasefire next week to coincide with the celebration commemorating the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. Kiev has rebuked the move, instead demanding an immediate unconditional 30-day truce. On Tuesday, Zelensky described targeting Russian “pressure points” to push the country “towards diplomacy” as he reiterated the ceasefire call. “They are now concerned that their parade is in jeopardy and rightly so,” he remarked, referring to the event scheduled for May 9 in Red Square. “What they should worry about is that this war continues.”

Zakharova reacted on social media on Wednesday, asking what kind of truce Kiev can offer, given that the Zelensky government “is literally planning terrorist attacks on air.” She added that boasting about such intentions “is exactly what typical terrorists do.” Officials in Kiev claim that the offer of a unilateral suspension of hostilities by Russia is “not real” and merely aims to pressure Ukrainian forces into granting their adversaries a respite during the Victory Day festivities. Ukrainian nationalist figures who were allied with Nazi Germany during World War II are treated as heroes by the current government. Those who commemorate Adolf Hitler’s defeat on May 9 — rather than May 8, as observed in Western Europe and the United States — face harassment in Ukraine for perceived disloyalty.

The prospect of striking Red Square while President Vladimir Putin and foreign dignitaries observe the parade is being actively discussed in Ukrainian media. MP Roman Kostenko, secretary of the country’s parliamentary Defense Committee, stated in an interview on Tuesday that Kiev possesses the necessary weapon systems for such an operation, asserting that planning it “would not be difficult.” The same lawmaker recently suggested that if the two nations were to reach a peace agreement, Kiev’s secret services might embark on a decades-long campaign of assassinations against Russian officials.

Read more …

“..urging the Ukrainian government to lift its ban on direct negotiations..”

• US Cannot Sign Peace Deal On Behalf of Kiev – Kremlin (RT)

Russia values US mediation in the Ukraine conflict and hopes for its success, but it cannot sign a peace deal with Washington as a stand-in for Kiev, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has stated. Moscow is therefore urging the Ukrainian government to lift its ban on direct negotiations. US President Donald Trump’s administration is advocating a compromise resolution to the hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, warning that a lack of progress could lead to a US withdrawal from the peace process. On Wednesday, Peskov reiterated that Ukraine’s willingness to make concessions is crucial to a favorable outcome. ”A peace deal should be done with the Ukraine, not with America,” he remarked in English during a press briefing, answering a question from a foreign journalist. He reminded the media that Russian President Vladimir Putin remains open to direct discussions with Ukraine, adding, “Unfortunately, we haven’t heard any statements in this context from Kiev, so we don’t know whether Kiev is ready or not.”

Previously, Moscow urged Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to rescind his 2022 order banning direct negotiations with Russia as long as Putin remains in office. Peskov expressed gratitude toward the Trump administration for its diplomatic efforts, and observed that while Washington’s desire for a swift resolution is understandable, a peace deal is “too complicated to be achieved overnight.” Trump has previously criticized Zelensky for publicly opposing aspects of the US truce proposal, which were reported in the media. In an interview with ABC News this week, he claimed that Russia “would have taken all of Ukraine” if he had not been in office. Separately, US Vice President J.D. Vance has argued that Kiev lacks a viable path to reverse its misfortunes on the battlefield against Russia. Peskov stated that Russia prefers a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict, having pursued that path before resorting to military action after its overtures were rebuffed.

Read more …

Are there any rare earths there at all?

• US and Ukraine Sign Minerals Deal (RT)

Washington and Kiev have signed a minerals deal granting the US access to developing Ukraine’s natural resources, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukrainian Economy Minister Yuliya Sviridenko announced on Wednesday. The agreement comes as Ukraine seeks security guarantees from Washington as part of a potential peace deal with Moscow that US President Donald Trump is working to negotiate. The deal sees the establishment of the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund. “President Trump envisioned this partnership between the American people and the Ukrainian people to show both sides’ commitment to lasting peace and prosperity in Ukraine,” Bessent said in a statement. The full text of the agreement has not yet been released. Sviridenko said the fund will be jointly managed by Ukraine and the US “on a 50/50 basis,” and that “neither side will hold a dominant vote.”

She said that 50% of the revenue from new licenses in the fields of critical materials, oil, and gas will be directed to the fund. Full ownership and control remain with Ukraine,” the Ukrainian minister added. “It is the Ukrainian state that determines what and where to extract. Subsoil remains under Ukrainian ownership – this is clearly established in the Agreement.” According to Sviridenko, the deal does not alter privatization processes or the management of state-owned companies. She said that the oil and gas giant Ukrnafta, as well as Energoatom – the operator of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants – will remain under government ownership. While the Biden administration approved large aid packages for Ukraine, including the supply of advanced weaponry, the current US president has focused on shifting the burden of assistance to Kiev’s European supporters.

In February 2025, the US went so far as to halt all military support to the country following a tense Oval Office meeting between US President Donald Trump, US Vice President J.D. Vance, and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. According to various estimates, Washington has provided at least $170 billion to Kiev. The White House insists those expenses should be compensated via access to Ukraine’s mineral resources, including rare earth elements critical to high-tech industries. Negotiations between the two countries over a minerals agreement have been underway since the early days of Trump’s return to office. A preliminary memorandum of intent was signed on April 17, but the US president has publicly criticized the delay in finalizing the deal. In a post on Truth Social on April 25, he accused Zelensky of being “three weeks late” in signing it and demanded that it be completed “immediately.”

Although the minerals agreement does not explicitly include US security guarantees for Ukraine, it is described as ‘an expression of a broader, long-term strategic alignment and a tangible demonstration of the United States of America’s support for Ukraine’s security, prosperity, reconstruction and integration into global economic frameworks’, according to the Financial Times. Zelensky said last week that Kiev hopes to receive long-term security assistance from Washington, similar to the US-Israel model. Meanwhile, Trump declined to clarify whether the US would continue to provide military aid to Ukraine if a peace agreement between Kiev and Moscow is not reached. “I want to leave that as a big, fat secret, because I don’t want to ruin a negotiation,” he said in an interview with ABC News on Tuesday.

Axios reported last week that Washington had given Kiev what President Donald Trump called a “final offer” to resolve the conflict. The United States has expressed mounting frustration over the lack of progress in the peace negotiations. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said last week that Washington may withdraw from the talks entirely if they stall. In February, Reuters cited estimates from two Ukrainian think tanks stating that about 40% of Ukraine’s metal resources are now under Russian control. According to the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development (CIRSD), between 50% and 100% of the lithium, tantalum, cesium, and strontium deposits claimed by Ukraine are located in territories currently controlled by Russia.


Read more …

“..they’re willing to give up the land… not de jure – forever – but de facto because the Russians actually occupied it..”

“..without formally recognizing Moscow’s sovereignty over them..”

• Ukraine Willing To ‘De Facto Give Up’ Land To Russia – Kellogg (RT)

Kiev has agreed to acknowledge Russia’s control over Crimea and four other regions – without formally recognizing Moscow’s sovereignty over them – according to US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg. During an interview on Wednesday, Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum asked Kellogg whether the US could accept Moscow’s demand that Ukraine renounce claims to territories it considers under Russian occupation. “Partially, yes,” Kellogg replied. “Look, the Ukrainians, Martha, have already said—they’re willing to give up the land… not de jure – forever – but de facto because the Russians actually occupied it. They’ve agreed to that,” he said. “They told me that last week.” Kellogg added that Ukraine wants a ceasefire that would mean “you sit on the ground that you currently hold.”

The envoy said he met with Ukrainian officials in London on April 23 and that they had agreed to “22 concrete terms” presented by the US, including a 30-day comprehensive ceasefire. He urged Moscow to “pick up on” the proposal. Russia, however, has maintained that a full ceasefire would require Ukraine to halt its mobilization campaign and stop accepting military aid from abroad. President Vladimir Putin further demanded that Kiev withdraw troops from the Russian territories it still claims. Moscow has accused Ukraine of repeatedly violating the 30-day “energy truce” brokered by Trump in March, as well as last month’s 30-hour Easter truce.

Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine and join Russia shortly after the 2014 U.S.-backed coup in Kiev. The Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, along with the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, followed suit after referendums in 2022. Ukraine and the European Union have consistently stated that they do not recognize the five regions as Russian territory. The agreement proposed by Washington reportedly includes US recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, freezing the conflict along the current front line, and acknowledging Moscow’s control over large parts of the four other former Ukrainian regions. The deal would also reportedly block Ukraine from joining NATO and initiate a phased removal of sanctions imposed on Russia.

Read more …

“..we are the deficit country,” Bessent said. “They sell almost five times more goods to us than we sell to them. So the onus will be on them to take off these tariffs. They’re unsustainable for them.”

• China Caves to Trump on Tariffs Again (Margolis)

The communist regime had desperately slapped this tariff on U.S. ethane earlier this month in a failed attempt to counter Trump’s brilliant Liberation Day tariff offensive. Obviously, it couldn’t sustain the tariff — China depends on American ethane for its survival, gobbling up about half of our total ethane exports annually, according to federal energy data. The reality is that major Chinese manufacturers like Satellite Chemical, SP Chemicals, Sinopec, Sanjiang Fine Chemical, and Wanhua Chemical Group can’t function without American ethane from powerhouse U.S. suppliers Enterprise Products Partners and Energy Transfer. Ethane is just the latest addition to a growing list of American products that China has quietly exempted from its retaliatory tariffs in the ongoing trade war with the United States. This is what winning looks like. Just last week, Chinese officials began rolling back tariffs on American semiconductors. They’ve also quietly removed duties on pharmaceuticals and aircraft engines.

So much for the hysterical predictions that Trump’s trade policies would wreck the U.S. economy — it turns out that all that doom and gloom should have been reserved for China, which has realized the hard way that it needs the United States more than the United States needs China. News of China lifting tariffs on U.S. ethane comes on the heels of a warning from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who made it clear that Trump’s trade strategy is hitting Beijing where it hurts. “I think that over time we will see that the Chinese tariffs are unsustainable for China,” Bessent told reporters from the White House on Tuesday. “I’ve seen some very large numbers over the past few days that show if these numbers stay on, Chinese could lose 10 million jobs very quickly. And even if there is a drop in the tariffs that they could lose 5 million jobs.” “So remember that we are the deficit country,” Bessent said. “They sell almost five times more goods to us than we sell to them. So the onus will be on them to take off these tariffs. They’re unsustainable for them.”

“Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary has long advocated that Trump leverage America’s dominant economic position while we still have it. “We have to squeeze heads while we’re the largest economy on earth,” he told Fox Business last week, noting that the U.S. accounts for 39% of global consumption and 26.1% of world GDP. “Squeeze while you can, otherwise you’ll never get this opportunity again.” O’Leary also noted that Xi Jinping doesn’t face voter backlash the way American leaders do, but he still has to contend with millions of restless workers if exports dry up. “He can use his own currency to print money and pay these people for doing nothing, then he gets hyperinflation. Saw that movie in Venezuela. We have leverage,” he warned. Trump’s hardball approach is doing exactly what it was meant to do. While Biden spent four years appeasing Beijing, Trump’s tariffs are showing China who’s really in charge. It’s a vindication of what conservatives have been saying all along: the only thing China’s communist regime respects is strength.

Read more …

“..the party tried—in a very anemic fashion—to move to the center, where they knew the votes were. But this new cohort is saying, “You lost the election because you didn’t go far left enough..”

• Democrats’ Radical Changing of the Guard (Victor Davis Hanson)

There was some news lately that Sen. Dick Durbin from Illinois—he was the author, remember, of the DREAM Act. He was a hardcore liberal. You could even say he was left of center. He’s stepping down. He’s in his 70s. And there’s a changing of the guard. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, in some polls, is running—I cannot believe it—behind Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for his upcoming senatorial bid by 20 points and more in a primary. And then, as a force multiplier, I just saw Rep. Nancy Pelosi, she was at a public event. I think she’s 85, turning 86. She was as incoherent as former President Joe Biden. So, what’s Victor trying to say? We’re watching a changing of the guard, both due to aging—and we see that with Joe Biden, and the Biden generation is over with, and Nancy Pelosi. And then the next cohort in their 70s, the septuagenarians, they’re terrified.

Dick Durbin’s terrified of being in a primary. And so is Chuck Schumer. He took the dignified way out. Chuck Schumer will probably fight to the very end and be humiliated by AOC. Who are these people? Well, “the squad,” remember, traditionally was Rep. Ilhan Omar, the Somalian who allegedly had married her brother to gain citizenship access to the United States. There was Ayanna Pressley. She was the radical African American congresswoman. We had, of course, AOC, who was a prominent member. And we have also, in addition, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, she was a member of the squad, she was the Michigan pro-Hamas congresswoman. Then we had the Democratic National Committee. And we had Ken Martin who won the DNC chairmanship. He’s very much to the left.

And really to the left is his subordinate, David Hogg, the vice chairman. He was a survivor of the Parkland shooting, remember, in 2018. And he transmogrified into anti-Second Amendment. But then he got even more and more and more radical. I don’t think he’s ever really done anything except raise money. But here’s my point. We’re watching a metamorphosis of the Democratic Party that is out of power. The old guard: Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin—that old guard did not deliver the 2024 election. And they lost the House. They lost the Senate. They don’t have a majority in the Supreme Court. They lost the popular vote. They lost the Electoral College. So, in the eyes of the Democratic youth, they’re discredited.

But here’s the key. They didn’t lose the 2024 election because they were too far—they didn’t go far left enough. They lost it because former Vice President Kamala Harris and her supporters tried to move her from her hard left. And can I make a parentheses here? She had the most left-wing voting record in the U.S. Senate—to the left of Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. And she couldn’t even move a little bit to the center, although she tried. She said, remember that she was for fracking and she wanted the border wall and she was for deportation? That was all untrue.

But the point I’m making is, the party tried—in a very anemic fashion—to move to the center, where they knew the votes were. But this new cohort is saying, “You lost the election because you didn’t go far left enough. And maybe we represent 20% of the Democratic registered cohort, but we’re young. And we’re charismatic. And we’re dynamic. And we’re gonna take this party, in the 2026 midterms and the 2028, to victory. And we’re gonna do it by a socialist agenda. And a radical, radical, new, new, new green deal. And an open border. And a trans banner on every campaign event. That’s who we are. And a disarmament. And we’re gonna raise taxes on the billionaires.” And that’s their message. It has no public support.

So, even though they think they’re charismatic and they’re youthful, we get back to the old proverb of the 80-20 paradigm. The Republican Party has been on the 70% to 80% of where the people are on the border, on foreign policy, on the economy, on social and cultural issues. These people—these Jacobin French revolutionaries—they’re pulling 20% to 30% on this issue. I’ll leave you with a final thought. The Republicans are not afraid. They’re not afraid of the squad and the Jacobins and this new cohort, the David Hoggs of the world. But you know who’s terrified of them? Dick Durbin, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer, because they don’t know how to handle them. They’re part of themselves. It’s an incestuous relationship. And they’re saying to them, “But we’re the old guard.” And they’re saying, “You may be the old guard, but we’re going to guillotine you and get rid of you. And we’re coming in with a revolutionary fervor they’re terrified of.”

Read more …

Let’s all invent our own laws..

• Illegal Immigrants in My District Are Constituents: California Democrat (DS)

Rep. Norma Torres said at a Wednesday press conference that every taxpayer in her district—including illegal immigrants—is her constituent. Torres, D-Calif., held the event to promote her Fairness to Freedom Act, which would require the government to pay for the legal defense of any immigrant facing deportation who cannot afford counsel. “Everyone living in my district is my constituent, and I am there to serve and be a public servant for them,” Torres said, when asked by The Daily Signal whether she considers immigrants without legal status to be among her constituents. “Everyone who pays taxes is a constituent of all members of Congress, including immigrants who have filed for a tax ID and are denied any benefits,” she added.

In the midst of the recent controversy over Maryland Democrat Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s meeting with Kilmar Abrego-Garcia, the Salvadoran national deported from Maryland to an El Salvador prison, White House adviser Stephen Miller said that Van Hollen was confused about Abrego-Garcia’s status. “Senator Van Hollen seems to be under the very confused impression that this MS-13 terrorist is his constituent,” Miller said on Fox at the time. “He is [Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele’s] constituent. … He is President Bukele’s resident. He is not a ‘Maryland man’ … . He is an illegal alien from El Salvador … .” At the press conference, Torres laid out her legislation as a way to prevent deportations. “We all know that the system is designed to leave people in the dark without legal support so they can be railroaded through the system and taken out of our country,” she said.

“But the Fairness to Freedom Act says, ‘Enough is enough’—if a detainee doesn’t get counseled in time, the deportation proceedings must be terminated with prejudice.” Torres was joined by fellow Democrat Reps. Robert Garcia of California and Pramila Jayapal of Washington state. Jayapal boasted that they were “three of the less than two dozen naturalized citizens to serve in the United States Congress … and so we know how tough the system is to navigate.” Jayapal also mentioned that “decades of research clearly shows that immigrants with representation are 10 times more likely to obtain relief from deportation … and detained immigrants with representation are three-and-a-half times more likely to be granted bond, enabling their release.”

But Garcia and Torres both voted against the Laken Riley Act in January, which requires that illegal immigrants charged with theft or violent crimes be detained. Jayapal did not vote on the legislation, which was named after a Georgia nursing student slain by an illegal alien. It passed the House on Jan. 22, two days after it passed the Senate, in both cases with large bipartisan majorities. On Jan. 29, it became the first bill signed into law by President Donald Trump at the start of his second term. Torres, Garcia, and Jayapal all voted against the SAVE Act, which would require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote. That bill passed the House 220-208 on April 10, with just four Democrats voting in favor. It has yet to receive a vote in the Senate.

Read more …

Dr. Karin Kneissl is Austria’s former minister of foreign affairs.

“The issue is transmission, not generation, of energy..”

• Massive Blackouts Is What Green Agenda Gets You (Karin Kneissl)

It was probably the weather that triggered the ten-hour breakdown of all utilities on the Iberian Peninsula earlier this week. It was also the weather that has turned Germany into Europe’s top CO2 emitter. There are days when the sun does not shine, and the wind does not blow. And then the backup is coal in the absence of nuclear power or natural gas (from Russia). An even bigger threat to the grid, however, stems from overproduction of electricity due to too much sun and wind. Both Spain and Germany proudly point out their statistics in terms of power generation based on huge onshore and offshore wind farms and extensive photovoltaic panels, often constructed on precious arable soil. Spain and Portugal are champions of green energy in the EU, and were sourcing 80 percent of their electricity from renewables just before the outage hit on Monday.

The larger underlying problem is in transmitting rather than generating electricity. Large parts of the existing grids in the EU were constructed in the 1950 and 1960s, when it was fairly easy to build infrastructure in the post-war towns. When Angela Merkel announced her ambitious energy transition, Peter Altmaier, the head of the Chancellor’s office announced the building of several thousands of kilometers of “electricity highways” (Strom Autobahnen). The slated budget was one trillion euros. But that budget was never established and nobody in Merkel’s government calculated the years for administrative planning and implementation.

So, the new grid was never built, neither in Germany nor elsewhere. The current grid is not made for to absorb constantly increasing volumes. The “electrification” of all forms of energy production and consumption, above all in mobility, poses a serious problem for the stability of the existing grids. Electric vehicles were supposed to replace cars with the traditional internal combustion engines. The hype surrounding the electric car has already died down. Customers simply refrain from buying an electric car. But the ambitious green agendas rarely take into account serious investments and above all solid timeframes for an enlarged electrical grid.

The European electrical grid stretches from Türkiye across the European continent to North Africa. Its technical name is Continental European Synchronous Area, and it is vulnerable. It is fed with an alternating current with a frequency of approximately 50 Hertz. In case of an overload, as probably happened on Monday in Spain, the risk is high that the frequency is destabilised. In order to pre-empt a power cut, since power plants will automatically shut down, the overload is sent abroad. Some voices claim that the Iberian Peninsula lacks interconnectors, while others warn against more interconnectors since this would only put the entire grid at risk, a domino blackout across more than 30 countries.

In 2012, the Austrian writer Marc Elsberg published his thriller “Blackout.” The plot describes a fictional 13-day power outage and the ensuing total breakdown of life as we know it. In the well-researched book, the blackout is caused by a cyber-attack. Many commentators eagerly suggested that one was behind the real-world crisis on Monday. Apparently, no one is ready to discuss the problem with the grid and green deal ambitions. Attending energy conferences for years and teaching the topic of geopolitics of energy, I often wondered about the romantic fantasy models that Brussels officials and other climate experts presented. For the last 15 years, we witness an inflationary concept of “energy transition” or even worse, zero-carbon economy. Throughout the entire EU we have seen a focus on climate change. The approach lacks a solid energy policy, one which covers security in supply, affordability, and investments into grids.

I expected a major blackout to happen in Germany, rather than on the Iberian Peninsula. The so-called energy transition declared by the Angela Merkel government in spring 2011 did not deliver at all. In the first quarter of 2025, instead of more electricity from wind and sun, more electricity was generated from coal and gas. Easter week also showed why the so-called energy transition is causing problems. Despite the record expansion of wind and solar power, renewables are producing less electricity than at any time since 2021. Compared to the first quarter of last year, the amount of electricity produced by renewables in the same period this year fell by 16 percent.

The wind was not particularly strong in February and March. Electricity production from offshore wind turbines fell by a total of 31 percent, while production on land fell by 22 percent. As a result, electricity production from coal, oil, and gas had to be drastically increased. The logical consequence: CO2 emissions have risen dramatically. Electricity in Germany was dirtier than it had been since the winter of 2018.

However, it is not only in the medium term that the energy transition is not doing what its supporters believe it should. Easter week exemplifies all the problems associated with the plan to switch Germany’s energy production to mainly wind and solar. On a sunny Easter Sunday, for example, the five million or so solar installations in Germany produced far more electricity than would have been needed to cover demand during the holiday. However, electricity must be consumed exactly when it is produced, otherwise the electricity grid may be disrupted. This applies both nationally and to the local electricity grids on site and the regional capacities of the weather-dependent energy sources.

Read more …

The decisions have been made by politicians who think any energy source can be seamlessly replaced with any other energy source.

Because … well, energy is energy, right? This is going to hurt.

• The Spanish Power Outage. A Catastrophe Created By Political Design (Lacalle)

On April 23rd, I participated in a conference at the European Parliament on the future of nuclear energy with experts from all over Europe, where I warned that, with the current energy policies, blackouts will be the norm, not a coincidence. The shortsighted and sectarian policy of the activists who populate the government has led us to the worst blackout in the history of Spain. We have been without communication or electricity for nearly eleven hours. This blackout, with the immediate collapse of fifteen gigawatts of power in the system, is the consequence of a policy that penalizes base energy, key to providing stability to the system, and plunders the energy sector. Governments have been dedicated to closing nuclear power plants, making them unviable with abusive and confiscatory taxation; penalizing investment in distribution with absurd regulations; imposing a volatile and intermittent energy mix; and burdening energy with elevated taxes and administrative delays. What could go wrong? Everything.

And it happened. Renewable energies, while essential in a balanced energy mix, cannot provide safety and stability due to their volatility and intermittent nature. That’s why it is essential to have a balanced system with base-load energy that operates all the time, such as hydropower, nuclear, and natural gas as backup. Destroying access to nuclear energy with unnecessary closures and confiscatory taxation has been part of the fundamental causes of the disaster and the blackout. Last week, they had to close the remaining nuclear power plants because their taxes are so high that they cannot cover their fixed costs. They have destroyed nuclear plants’ economics by political design. Moreover, those plants would have provided stability to the grid if national and regional governments, which use nuclear and hydroelectric power as cash cows for their revenue-hungry policies, had prioritized supply security over energy sectarianism.

There is much more. Spain and Portugal produce electricity with more than 60% solar and wind energy. Hydraulic, nuclear, and combined cycle gas plants must cover the shortfalls in solar and wind production, which is intermittent. There is no possibility of having a stable and secure system with a continuous supply if the electrical grid is not balanced to avoid a total blackout. According to Euronews, France sometimes produces too much electricity, leading the network operator RTE to disconnect solar or wind sites. The consumer pays taxes to cover the operator’s losses. This procedure prevents a general blackout of the grid.” In Spain, the president of Red Eléctrica, Beatriz Corredor, whose experience in energy is more than scarce, has never given a message or coordinated actions to prevent blackouts that were happening more frequently recently. We have been experiencing sporadic supply cuts to the industry for years, and just a week ago, the Chamartín station had a severe supply cut episode.

The crisis was not only a disaster due to the shortsighted energy policy of the current and previous governments. It was a disaster due to the inaction of the Ministry of Defence. Similar to the recent floods, our security forces exhibited astonishment at their lack of mobilization. Trains and elevators blocked thousands of travelers for hours, while the army stood by, waiting for orders. Six days ago, the government, left-wing parties, and many media outlets celebrated that Spain’s power grid ran entirely on renewable energy for a weekday for the first time. Bravo. A week later, a massive blackout in Spain, Portugal, and parts of France. France quickly restored electricity because it has the largest nuclear fleet in Europe. In Spain, the government maintained a confiscatory taxation system that prevented nuclear plants from operating, resulting in nearly eleven hours of darkness and no communication.

Red Eléctrica reported that the cause was a “strong oscillation in the electrical grid” that “forced the Iberian Peninsula to disconnect from the European system”. The collapse was immediate and long-lasting. It was the longest power outage in the history of Spain. The recovery efforts were in vain as they attempted to restore frequency control and stability with a system dependent on volatile and intermittent renewables. A system without physical inertia, provided by baseload energies that operate all the time—nuclear and hydroelectric—makes it impossible to stabilise the grid in the face of supply disruptions. When the collapse occurred, the Spanish electrical grid had almost 80% renewable generation, 11% nuclear, and only 3% natural gas. There was practically no base generation or physical inertia to absorb the shock that was generated.

For years, experts have issued warnings. Experts from around the world have been accused of being mouthpieces for invented lobbies when they warned of the risk to the system from overloading with renewables and eliminating or limiting base-load energies. In 2017, the European Network of Transmission System Operators warned that the increase in renewables would raise the risk of cascading failures if urgent investment was not made in synthetic inertia and storage technologies. Moreover, even if investment is made in storage, hundreds of experts warned about the additional burden with the electrification of the mobile fleet. Despite the warnings from energy companies and operators, the European Commission maintained its bet on renewable development that was poorly planned and worse executed. This included a New Green Deal that ignored the importance of networks and backup and seemed designed by school activists.

The Spanish government wanted to present itself as the top student of that so-called ecological sectarianism, which ignores copper and lithium mining, the importance of backup, and system stability. What have they achieved? They have created a disaster that has the potential to repeat itself.

Read more …

“.. that his efforts were met with violence and terrorism from illiterate, middle-aged children who would better credit the theory of evolution by slithering around on their bellies.”

• Elon Musk, (Half of) a Grateful Nation Thanks You (Skeet)

After months of vandalism and arson on Tesla dealerships and physical attacks on Tesla owners by deranged leftists (with the full support and active encouragement of Democrat leaders), Elon Musk has announced his intention to “significantly” cut back his role with DOGE. This is a shame, as he has done more good for this country in those few short months than the entire wretched bureaucracy has done in the last half century. One hopes that Musk’s announcement is more to calm the more, ahem, incendiary of leftist lunatics and less of an actual reduction in influence. But either way, the Left will have won an important victory. And by doing so, they will have again shown that organized, widespread, and persistent violence is their most effective (and preferred) method of imposing their political will.

Musk, as you know, is responsible for revolutionizing the auto industry with his production of electric vehicles. For the cult of the Left, which howls incessantly and destroys art and throws tantrums in the middle of the street during rush hour about how climate change is the greatest threat the planet has ever faced, one would think that the man who gave America zero-emission vehicles would garner a bit more adulation. One would think.Musk is responsible for opening up Twitter to free speech after years of government-encouraged censorship that reigned under the submissive Jack Dorsey. One would think that leftists who dread “fascism” around every corner would breathe a sign of relief at the foremost social media company refusing to toe the narrative of the ruling political party like they do in, you know, actual fascist countries. One would think.

Musk is responsible for using Starlink to provide the entire country of Ukraine with internet and communications, starting during the opening months of the Russian invasion and continuing to the present day. For the Ukraine hawks in the Democrat party, one would think that the man who singlehandedly kept Ukraine’s communications running (including its military and weapons systems) would receive a bit more ideological wiggle room on issues most people would agree are more bipartisan, such as cutting American funding for poppy seed (heroin) production by the Taliban. One would think. Musk is responsible for using SpaceX to rescue two astronauts whom our government abandoned at the International Space Station for nine months after NASA equipment proved incapable of functioning. Why did NASA not launch a rescue mission before Musk? Because NASA officials said it had neither the budget nor the operational need to send a rescue craft for them.

The Crew Dragon shuttle that Musk used to rescue the astronauts costs between $100 million and $150 million per flight. Expensive for you and me, but in terms of the government budget? A mere drop in the bottomless bucket. NASA’s budget in 2024 was $24.875 billion. If my personal budget were $24.875 billion, believe you me, I could find $150 million in there somewhere to rescue two of my fellow human beings whose predicament was my fault to begin with. I wouldn’t do this out of “operational need,” but it is because that is what, at a bare minimum, any decent, responsible person would do. One would think that in life-or-death circumstances, when our own government officials refuse to do the job we literally pay them billions of dollars to do, people would celebrate when an Evil One Percenter steps up and privately funds the rescue mission rather than squandering his fortune on more yachts. One would think.

It’s not democracy that dies in darkness. It’s astronauts whose rescue is actively impeded and then downplayed if the rescuer’s political ideology doesn’t conform entirely to the Left. As Clive Irving of the New York Times sneered, “So what if Elon Musk rescued the astronauts?” The only logical way a leftist could still be mad after all this is if they actually didn’t care about the environment, if they actually didn’t care about Ukraine, if they actually didn’t care about protecting free speech against government fascism, rescuing astronauts left floating in space, or cutting government waste to make the entire operation more effective and, hence, more reputable.

Gee, it’s almost as if these alleged concerns were all just public posturing and virtue signaling and that their true colors showed when DOGE set about cutting USAID’s debauched pet projects, such as transgender activism in Latin America and feeding al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria. It’s almost as if the Left was actually motivated not by youthful idealism or passion for “social justice” but by an envious nihilism bred in the putrid swamps of their spiritually vacuous ideology. It’s almost as if they take a smug, sadistic pleasure in all of us doing worse rather than some of us doing better. Huh. If one were a cynic, one would think…

Because even beneath his DOGE cuts to worthless leftist narcissism, their hatred of him reflects something deeper and primordial. Elon Musk represents everything that is anathema to the Left. He is an immigrant who rose from a turbulent, chaotic childhood to become one of the world’s most successful self-made billionaires. His story reflects the moral and pragmatic superiority of the West. And his stunning productivity contrasts with the stunning uselessness of the activist class. The necessity of Musk reflects like a mirror the vulgar dispensability of his detractors. The world needs more Elon Musks and a lot less bureaucrats, DEI officers, and hyphenated studies professors. They know it. And they hate him for it.

Just this week, a non-verbal man with ALS was able to communicate on social media due to the research that Elon Musk’s Neuralink conducted. This is game-changing medical technology that hopefully will help not just people suffering from ALS, but from all paralyzing disabilities. The advancements this research created are nothing short of miraculous. During this same week, a man was caught and arrested in Mesa, Ariz., for burning a Tesla vehicle at a dealership in the middle of the night. The 35-year-old arsonist spray-painted the word “THEIF” on the wall of the dealership. This misspelling is his. And there you have it, folks. There is America in a nutshell. One half gives kudos to a successful, self-made, hardworking immigrant who champions free speech, environmentally-friendly vehicles, space rescue missions, tangible aid to wartime allies, groundbreaking medical advancements, and ending the massive corruption and waste in the government.

The other half hates him for reasons they neither comprehend nor can properly articulate using monosyllabic words exceeding four letters. Whatever happens over the course of the next four, ten, or fifty years in this country, let it be known here and wherever possible that WE are the half of the nation that is grateful to Musk for all he’s done, not just with DOGE but with everything else mentioned above. Let our grandkids’ history books tell how he tried to pull us back from the brink. And let future generations feel shame at the depravity of our age, that his efforts were met with violence and terrorism from illiterate, middle-aged children who would better credit the theory of evolution by slithering around on their bellies.

Read more …

Pepe’s doing a crash course.

• China Steps Up Its Game in the Global AI Race (Pepe Escobar)

Late next month, Huawei will be testing its new powerful AI processor, the Ascend 910 D, even as by early May the previous 910C will start to be mass-delivered to scores of Chinese tech companies. These serious breakthroughs are the next chapter of Huawei’s drive to counter Nvidia’s global monopoly in GPUs. The Ascend 910D is supposed to be more powerful than Nvidia’s extremely popular H100. Huawei is pulling no punches in its race to manufacture a new generation of processors. Huawei has collaborated with SMIC – China’s largest semiconductor foundry – to apply Deep Ultraviolet Lithography (DUV) on what was previously only possible on EUV (Extreme Ultra-Violet technology). Once again, Huawei and SMIC defied the proverbial American “experts” with creative engineering solutions.

Huawei arrived at fabricating 5nm chips with DUV even as the process is more expensive than with EUV. If Huawei had access to EUV they would be already manufacturing 2-3nm chips. That will come, in short time, as both China and Russia, under permanent US high-tech blockade, must by all means develop their own EUV technology. Shanghai geeks are convinced that Huawei will switch on 6G networksbefore the end of the decade. Their current breathless drive is not just aimed at the smartphone front – where Huawei is peerless; the new Huawei Mate 70 Pro + is by far the absolute top smartphone in the world, running on Harmony OS. Huawei is looking at cloud computing, AI and enterprise servers – and to become no less than the core player in the AI infrastructure race.

Earlier this month, Huawei introduced the CloudMatrix 384, a system connecting 384 Ascend 910C chips. The tech word in Shanghai is that this configuration, under certain conditions, and of course consuming much more power, already outperforms Nvidia’s flagship rack system – which is powered by 72 Blackwell chips. Meanwhile, Huawei’s Kirin X chip is targeting the PC market, offering stiff competition to Apple, AMD, Intel and Qualcom while Harmony OS plus removes the necessity of using US software such as Microsoft and Android. Shanghai geeks swear that China essentially doesn’t need to beat Nvidia or other US chips developers. After all, China already has the largest consumer market in the world – by volume and by value. If a parallel tech universe is the likely result of the Trump Tariff Tizzy (TTT), so be it. China already controls over 60% of the global gadget consumer market.

Kirin X may not – yet – match the power of Nvidia’s H100 GPUs. But Huawei chips are already the real deal for every Chinese company which is following the new Beijing-defined direction to reduce any reliance on American technology. All of the above naturally brings us to the enormous AI elephant in the (digital) room: Nvidia. A recent book, The Thinking Machine: Jensen Huang, Nvidia, and The World’s Most Coveted Microchip, is quite helpful to track not only the personal story of CEO superstar Huang, a Taiwanese who played the American Dream to the hilt and became a tech multi-billionaire, but Nvidia’s enviable tech accomplishments. Huang does not interpret AI as emergent machine superintelligence, and firmly dismisses any direct analogy to biology. For this all-round pragmatist, AI is merely software – running on hardware that his company sells for a fortune.

Still, Nvidia has ventured into virgin territory way beyond the American biz-tech Valhalla, complete with holding the most valuable stock on the planet: arguably, when it comes to AI, Nvidia unveiled a new phase of evolution. It’s crucial to understand how Huang sees China. It is indeed a key market for his AI chips – and he wants to keep selling them in droves. Trump’s tariffs though make sure that won’t happen. And that’s what moved Huang to ditch his proverbial leather jackets and don a crisp business suit for a strategic visit to Beijing, where he affirmed the sacred importance of the Chinese market, whatever the new Trump-dictated gimmicks By 2022, the China market represented 26% of Nvidia’s business; this year, it has fallen to 13%, because of euphemistic “technology export controls”.

The problem is the US government, already by 2022, under the previous automatic pen administration, had blocked sales to China of advanced A100 and H100 chips. Nvidia started selling modified versions – and even after the ban chips continued to arrive in China. By June 2023, it was easy to find A100s for double their price in the black market in Shenzhen. Huang is convinced that “no AI should be able to learn without a human in the loop” – even as he admitted, two years ago, that “reasoning capability is two or three years out”. Translation: according to Huang AI will start thinking for itself within the next few months.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Ladapo

Lymphocytes

Colon c

Fertility vaccine

Florida
https://twitter.com/G_W_Forum/status/1917726463882559491

Shit
https://twitter.com/jomickane/status/1917218825474548024

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 24 2025

Apr 242025
 
 April 24, 2025  Posted by at 9:12 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  32 Responses »


Jean-François Millet The Angelus 1857

 

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

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

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

Collum

Moon

66

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

The war industry has conquered Europe in record time.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Bookkeeping.

• Judge Orders Correction Notices For Fired Probationary Workers (ET)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• The Left’s Mount Rushmore (Al Perrotta)

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Fully unprovoked.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

Twins

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 17 2025

Apr 172025
 
 April 17, 2025  Posted by at 9:54 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  33 Responses »


Piet Mondriaan Trafalgar Square 1939-43

 

• What Is a Woman? The UK Supreme Court Knows the Answer (Margolis)
• Trump Shot Down Israel’s Plan To Attack Iran – NYT (RT)
• New York AG Letitia James Accused of Alleged Mortgage Fraud (Turley)
• Judge to Trump Administration: I Feel Unfacilitated (Turley)
• Judge Boasberg Floats ‘Criminal Contempt’ Against Trump Admin (ZH)
• Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panel Over Gang Member’s Deportation (PJM)
• OpenAI Planning To Take On Musk’s X (RT)
• Trump Is Right to Hammer Environmental Lawfare (DS)
• What Can We Expect from the Peace Negotiations? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• ‘Stop Blackmailing’ – China to US (RT)
• US To Restrict China’s Access in Exchange for Fewer Tariffs on Allies (Sp.)
• US To Tie Tariff Deals To China Curbs – WSJ (RT)
• Dutch MPs Call For Ban On Amplified Islamic Calls To Prayer (RMX)
• Belgium Eyes Welfare Cuts To Meet NATO Target (RT)
• Trump Confronts Economic and Geopolitical Reality (Ring)

 

 


Longhorn beetle’s face.

 

 

Genetics

Hero

AI

CCP

Macleod

Bukele taxes
https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1912335542806802689

Flynn

Tucker Bernier

 

 

 

 

From a bit of an unexpected corner, but we’ll take it. A man’s no. 1 duty is to protect women, and that was not happening.

• What Is a Woman? The UK Supreme Court Knows the Answer (Margolis)

The U.K. Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling Wednesday that affirmed that the legal definition of “woman” refers specifically to those born biologically female, excluding biological men who “identify” as women from that category. The decision marks a major course correction after years of gender ideology sweeping Europe. The AP reports: “Several women’s groups that supported the appeal celebrated outside court and hailed it as a major victory in their effort to protect spaces designated for women. “Everyone knows what sex is and you can’t change it,” said Susan Smith, co-director of For Women Scotland, which brought the case. “It’s common sense, basic common sense and the fact that we have been down a rabbit hole where people have tried to deny science and to deny reality and hopefully this will now see us back to, back to reality.” The ruling brings some clarity in the U.K. to a controversial issue that has roiled politics as women, parents, LGBTQ+ groups, lawmakers and athletes have debated gender identity rights.”

This wasn’t some razor-thin ruling divided on ideological grounds. The UK Supreme Court ruled unanimously, with all five judges in agreement: under the Equality Act, biological men can be lawfully excluded from women-only spaces and services even if they “identify” as women. That includes places like changing rooms, female-only shelters, swimming areas, and women-centered medical or counseling services. The court made it explicit that even a transgender person holding a certificate legally recognizing them as female does not qualify as a “woman” under equality law. As far as I know, none of the judges on the UK Supreme Court are biologists, yet they were able to answer the question “What is a woman?” when Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson couldn’t do the same when asked during her confirmation hearings.

The case stems from a 2018 law passed by the Scottish Parliament stating there should be a 50% female representation on the boards of Scottish public bodies. Transgender women with gender recognition certificates were to be included in meeting the quota. “Interpreting ‘sex’ as certificated sex would cut across the definitions of ‘man’ and ‘woman’ … and, thus, the protected characteristic of sex in an incoherent way,” Hodge said. “It would create heterogeneous groupings.” Hannah Ford, an employment lawyer, said that while the judgment will provide clarity, it would be a setback for transgender rights and there would be “an uphill battle” to ensure workplaces are welcoming places for trans people. “This will be really wounding for the trans community,” Ford told Sky News. Groups that had challenged the Scottish government popped the cork on a bottle of champagne outside the court and sang, “women’s rights are human rights.”

The UK Supreme Court’s landmark ruling defining women based on biological sex isn’t just a victory for common sense; it’s a desperately needed course correction following years of radical gender ideology being legitimized worldwide. Thankfully, President Donald Trump has been fighting to bring this return to sanity to America, despite relentless opposition from radical leftists and activist judges who seem determined to deny basic biological reality.

Read more …

Looks like a narrow escape. Bombing Iran is sheer stupidity. A country that has always said it doesn’t want nukes, for religious reasons. Good to see multiple cabinet members get input.

• Trump Shot Down Israel’s Plan To Attack Iran – NYT (RT)

US President Donald Trump has rejected Israel’s proposal to strike Iran’s nuclear sites, The New York Times reported on Wednesday evening, citing White House officials and others familiar with the matter. Trump reportedly chose instead to pursue a new deal with Tehran.According to the Times, Israel had drafted plans to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities in early May, aiming to delay its ability to develop a nuclear weapon by a year or more. After considering a combination of airstrikes and commando raids, the Jewish state reportedly proposed “an extensive bombing campaign” that would have lasted more than a week. Israeli officials had hoped that the US would not only greenlight the operation but also actively support it.

Trump, however, shot down the plan earlier this month, following a “rough consensus” in the White House. Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard were among the top administration members who reportedly raised concerns that the strikes would “spark a wider conflict with Iran.” Iran and Israel exchanged strikes in April and October of last year, marking the most dramatic escalation between the regional arch-rivals.

Trump tore up the 2015 UN-backed agreement on Iran’s nuclear program during his first term in office. The president accused Tehran of secretly violating the deal and reimposed sanctions. Iran responded by rolling back its own compliance with the accord and accelerating its enrichment of uranium. Last month, Trump threatened to bomb Iran “if they don’t make a deal,” to which the Islamic Republic vowed not to bow to pressure. Despite the belligerent rhetoric, the US and Iran held a first round of talks in Oman on Saturday. The negotiations took place in a “productive, calm and positive atmosphere,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1912670170977382901

Read more …

She deserves it.

• New York AG Letitia James Accused of Alleged Mortgage Fraud (Turley)

“No matter how big, rich or powerful you think you are, no one is above the law.” Those words by New York state Attorney General Letitia James echoed throughout the media, lionizing her after her office secured a judgment against Donald Trump for false business practices, including misrepresentations on loan documents. They may echo even louder this week as James finds herself the subject of a criminal referral for committing alleged financial fraud to secure her own property loans. On April 14, William J. Pulte, Director of US Federal Housing (FHFA), sent a referral letter to the Justice Department detailing alleged false statements made in filings by James to secure housing loans. For an attorney general who just prosecuted Trump for everything short of ripping a label off a mattress, the irony is crushing.

The alleged false statements are particularly damning for someone who insisted that she had zero tolerance for such irregularities or errors in financial filings. Indeed, the greatest danger is that the Letitia James standard could be applied to Letitia James in guaranteeing that “no one is above the law.” The allegations against James run from the demonstrably false to the downright bizarre. In securing a loan for a home in Norfolk, Va., James is accused of claiming through her representative that the property would be her principal residence. As the referral notes, primary residences receive more advantageous rates. However, as “the sitting New York Attorney General of New York [James] is required by law to have her primary residence in the state of New York.” Notably, the Justice Department has prosecuted those who have committed this common fraud.

For example, in 2017, it charged a man in Puerto Rico with false statements on a reverse mortgage loan application in which he falsely claimed the property as his principal residence. It emphasized that “mortgage lenders provide capital so people can purchase homes, not enrich themselves illegally.” There are other such cases under 18 U.S.C. 1014 and related laws. James could claim that these representations were made by a third party acting on her behalf. However, that is precisely the argument that she repeatedly rejected in the Trump case, insisting that he was legally obligated to review all filings made in his name or that of his companies. James is also accused of misrepresenting a five-unit property in Brooklyn as a four-unit property “to receive better interest rates … and to receive mortgage assistance through [the Home Affordable Modification Program].”

The referral also includes a claim that James filed papers that listed herself and her father as a married couple. The referral notes that just last year, Baltimore’s State Attorney, Marilyn Mosby, was convicted by the Biden administration of filing a false mortgage application. Another case resulted in a guilty plea last week for fraudulent filings in a home loan. The timing for James could not be worse. The Trump civil case has languished on appeal for months with a long overdue opinion. The appellate argument did not go well for James in the case that resulted in a grotesque half-billion-dollar fine in a case where no one lost a dime. James accused Trump of inflating property value in filings, a common practice in the real estate field. It did not matter that the company warned banks to do their own evaluations. It did not matter that bank officials testified that they made money on the deal. Indeed, the “victim” wanted more business from Trump. None of that matters.

James not only demanded an even greater fine but wanted to foreclose on Trump properties after Trump was told to secure a ridiculous $455 million bond to simply secure appellate review. Throughout that case, James repeated her mantra that there would be no exceptions for the rich and powerful. She insisted that accuracy on such financial records is essential and must be rigorously enforced. Many of us objected that James was selectively targeting Trump after she ran for office on the pledge to nail him on some unspecified offense.

James insisted that this was not lawfare and that she would prosecute anyone guilty of false or misleading statements on financial filings. She is now allegedly that person. It is not clear what James’ defense will be to these allegations. However, she may cite the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Thompson v. United States, which ruled in March that 18 U.S.C. § 1014 does not criminalize statements that are merely misleading but are not false. The problem is that, if proven, these statements are not misleading. They are false.

Read more …

Two separate judges are on the MS-13 case.

• Judge to Trump Administration: I Feel Unfacilitated (Turley)

After the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, I wrote a column disagreeing with the media coverage that claimed that the Trump Administration was ordered to return Garcia to the United States from El Salvador. The Administration mistakingly sent Garcia to a foreign prison. However, the Court only ordered that the Administration “facilitate” such a return, a term it failed to define. Now, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis is indicating that she feels unfacilitated, but it is unclear how a court should address this curious writ of facilitation. After the ruling, many on the left claimed “Supreme Court in a unanimous decision: He has a legal right to be here, and you have to bring him back.” The Court actually warned that the district court could order the government to facilitate but not necessarily “to effectuate” the return.

“The application is granted in part and denied in part, subject to the direction of this order. Due to the administrative stay issued by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, the deadline imposed by the District Court has now passed. To that extent, the Government’s emergency application is effectively granted in part and the deadline in the challenged order is no longer effective. The rest of the District Court’s order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand. The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term “effectuate” in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs. For its part, the Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated.”

So what does that mean? As I asked in the column, “what if the Trump Administration says that inquiries were made, but the matter has proven intractable or unresolvable? Crickets.” The Administration has made clear that it views the orders as meaning that, if El Salvador brings Garcia to its doorstep, it must open the door. The court clearly has a different interpretation. Judge Xinis said yesterday, “I’ve gotten nothing. I’ve gotten no real response, and no real legal justification for not answering,” she continued, adding that if the administration is not going to answer her questions “then justify why. That’s what we do in this house.” There is nothing worse than a feeling of being unfacilitated, but how does the court measure good faith facilitation? Garcia is an El Salvadorian citizen in an El Salvadorian prison. The refusal of El Salvador to send the accused MS-13 gang member back effectively ends the question on any return.

Many of us suspect that El Salvador would send back Garcia if asked, but how can a court measure the effort of an Administration in communications with a foreign country? Judge Xinis is suggesting that she will be holding someone in contempt. However, this is a discussion occurring at the highest level. Would a formal request be enough? Is Judge Xinis suggesting that the court can require punitive or coercive measures against a foreign country to facilitate a change in its position? The fact is that a unanimous decision of the Court is not hard when no one can say conclusively what the order means. If Judge Xinis is going to move ahead with new orders, it will find its way back to the Supreme Court.

The Court clearly (and correctly) held that Garcia deserves due process and that this removal was a mistake. As I have previously stated, the Administration should have brought him back for proper deportation. I still believe that. However, the Court also held that the President’s Article II authority over foreign policy has to weigh heavily in such questions. As the court goes down this road, it can quickly get bogged down in subjective judgments on what constitutes facilitation. That is the can kicked down the road by the Supreme Court and it is now likely to come rattling back to the justices.

Read more …

The de facto ruler of America.

• Judge Boasberg Floats ‘Criminal Contempt’ Against Trump Admin (ZH)

US District Judge James Boasberg ruled Wednesday that “probable cause exists” to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt for ignoring oral instructions to turn a plane full of alleged Venezuelan gang members around mid-flight, despite the US Supreme Court determining that Boasberg’s court was an improper venue for the case altogether – and vacating two of his temporary restraining orders related to the case. “The Court ultimately determines that the Government’s actions on that day demonstrate a willful disregard for its Order, sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt,” Boasberg wrote in a “46-page rant” (as Julie Kelly puts it). “The Court does not reach such conclusion lightly or hastily; indeed, it has given Defendants ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions,” Boasberg continues. “None of their responses has been satisfactory.” Oh, and if the DOJ won’t prosecute the Trump admin’s alleged contempt, “the Court will “appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.””

https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1912553159269949783?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1912553159269949783%7Ctwgr%5Ea3688f29ee12125fd4b2930b336905f62a939345%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fpresident-jeb-boasberg-floats-criminal-contempt-against-trump-admin-over-deportations

That said, the Supreme Court is partially to blame here over their refusal to draw clear boundaries for District court judges… Which has created a complete shit-show…

Read more …

“There’s no version of this man’s life where he comes back.”

• Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panel Over Gang Member’s Deportation (PJM)

CNN’s Scott Jennings was having none of the hand-wringing on Monday’s panel discussion over the Trump administration’s handling of the deportation of MS-13 gang member Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia — the latest cause célèbre of the radical left. While the liberals on the panel tiptoed around legal technicalities and rhetorical posturing, Jennings delivered a blunt reality check that left the rest of the table scrambling. Anchor Abby Phillip tried to tee up criticism of Trump by focusing on “the optics” of sending “Americans” to El Salvador — even though Abrego Garcia is an illegal immigrant. But Jennings wasn’t distracted. “Yes. He said they were studying the laws. I mean, there wasn’t any definitive statement,” he clarified, before cutting right to the core of the debate: “I think you guys need to understand, for the Trump administration, there’s no version of this man’s life that ends up with him living in the United States.”

Jennings laid out the Trump administration’s reasoning without flinching: “He’s an illegal alien from El Salvador who came to the country illegally, who has a deportation order, who, in their view and in the view of some immigration courts, has an affiliation with MS-13.” Phillip tried to interject by claiming that Garcia’s affiliation with MS-13 isn’t definitive because Abrego Garcia “strongly disputes in court.” Well, I guess that settles it, right? “I’m telling you that their view of it is that… it’s an El Salvador citizen who was sent back to El Salvador, who was in the country illegally,” Jennings reiterated. “According to some people in his long process… he has an existing deportation order, [and they] believe he has an affiliation with MS-13.” Then Jennings repeated his knockout point: “There’s no version of this man’s life where he comes back.”

As the panel continued to push the narrative of unjust exile, Jennings laid out the consequences if Abrego Garcia is returned. “If the president of El Salvador releases him and we do facilitate his return, when he lands in this country, one of two things will happen,” Jennings explained. “He’ll either be arrested… or sent to another country that I promise you you don’t want to go to. He’s not going to be allowed to come back and live in this country as though he is a U.S. citizen.” Harvard Law’s Jay Michaelson jumped in with the melodramatic accusation, “That’s literally the definition of tyranny, right?” Umm, no? What are they teaching at Harvard Law these days? Seriously.

Michaelson continued, “So, here’s what’s going to happen: We’re going to throw him in jail. No, there’s a thing called the rule of law and due process, which has not been followed in this case. And if I have a slightly optimistic take on this; I actually think this is going to come back to bite the Trump administration. Because what’s going to happen is the next time this goes up the court system, they have absolutely zero credibility to say, Don’t worry, you can file a habeas petition. You can get your person back.” But Jennings coolly reminded the panel, “They have the ability to deport people who have deportation orders.” He added that Garcia “got due process. He has a deportation order.”

Later, he dissected the legal victory Trump’s team got last week. “The reason the administration believes they got a big win at the Supreme Court is because the district court was trying to compel the executive on foreign affairs. The Supreme Court threw that out,” Jennings explained. “The courts have long recognized that they cannot compel the executive on foreign policy matters.” As for the politics? Jennings didn’t sugarcoat it. “What they also believe is that, politically, the American people want them to be as aggressive as possible… to solve a crisis that has festered for years,” he asserted. Then he drove the moral argument home with a chilling reminder: “We keep calling this guy ‘Maryland man’ in the press. Nobody seems to worry about the Maryland mother, Rachel Morin, who was murdered by someone that the previous administration let out of jail.”

Read more …

Social media without people. Just AI bots.

• OpenAI Planning To Take On Musk’s X (RT)

OpenAI, a San Francisco-based company best known for ChatGPT, has reportedly been working on a new social media app similar to Elon Musk’s X. The early prototype features a feed centered on AI-generated images, according to sources familiar with the project cited by The Verge on Sunday. The experimental platform reportedly includes a social media feed and is being tested internally. CEO Sam Altman has also been seeking private feedback from individuals outside the company, the outlet reported. It remains unclear whether OpenAI intends to release the project as a separate app or integrate it into ChatGPT, which was the most downloaded app worldwide last month, with 46 million new downloads, according to Appfigures.

OpenAI’s potential social media network “would likely increase Altman’s already-bitter rivalry with Elon Musk,” The Verge writes. Musk was a co-founder of OpenAI but left the company in 2018. In February, Musk offered $97.4 billion to acquire OpenAI, but Altman rejected the offer, reportedly saying, “no thank you but we will buy twitter [now known as X] for $9.74 billion if you want,” according to The Verge. Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, could also be in OpenAI’s sights. The report noted that Meta is planning to launch its own AI assistant app with a social media feed. Following reports that Meta is building a ChatGPT rival, Altman responded on X in February: “ok fine maybe we’ll do a social app.”

Having a social media platform would reportedly allow OpenAI to collect unique real-time user data to enhance its AI models, similar to how Meta and Musk’s xAI currently operate, according to The Verge. Musk has merged his AI company xAI with X. Grok is a chatbot developed by xAI. It has been integrated with X and pulls content from the platform to inform its responses. According to a source from another AI lab cited by the Verge, “The Grok integration with X has made everyone jealous,” particularly regarding its role in helping users create viral content. It is reportedly uncertain whether OpenAI’s social media prototype will be released publicly.

Read more …

“Making America Great Again” has to include energy dominance and eradicating the barriers to innovation and growth at all levels of government, including courtrooms.”

• Trump Is Right to Hammer Environmental Lawfare (DS)

President Donald Trump’s critics are right about one thing: The first few months of his second term have been a reckoning. Starting with the federal government’s pursuit of law firms and organizations that committed lawfare against the president to hobble his political comeback, Trump has now supercharged executive authority to stop the flood of ideologically based lawsuits targeting America’s energy providers. In an executive order signed last week, Trump empowered Attorney General Pam Bondi to turn up the heat on local prosecutors and state attorneys general abusing the legal system with lawsuits against energy companies. He is right to do so. “Making America Great Again” has to include energy dominance and eradicating the barriers to innovation and growth at all levels of government, including courtrooms.

Trump has directed Bondi to “expeditiously take all appropriate action to stop the enforcement of state laws and continuation of civil actions” that threaten American energy dominance, including restrictive rules and civil actions against oil, natural gas, hydroelectricity, and nuclear energy projects. What Trump is specifically targeting here is the well-resourced cadre of state attorneys general and liability “lawfare” firms that have deployed creative legal strategies to try to extract money from companies by claiming they’ve committed “climate” crimes. This genre of lawsuit relies on the alleged violation of state nuisance or consumer deception laws, and litigators argue that the energy companies actively strove to mislead the public about their products’ impact on the climate.

A local lawsuit in North Carolina against Duke Energy, one of the largest nuclear energy utilities in the nation, provides the most baffling case. Officials in the small suburb town of Carrboro want the company to pay for the “climate-related harm” caused by its electricity generation, even though Duke Energy’s carbon-free nuclear energy fleet powers half the homes in North and South Carolina, and the region’s use of natural gas is one of the lowest per capita in the country. Climate lawfare has a direct impact on consumers who rely on affordable energy of all types by forcing these companies to beef up their legal departments rather than improving the delivery of their goods and services. The end result is higher prices for consumers who already live on tight budgets due to the rising cost of living in other areas of the economy.

Most, if not all, of these cases are filed in blue states and launched by attorneys on behalf of city governments such as Honolulu; Boulder, Colorado; and San Francisco. The states of Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont, Maine, New York, and California each have their own lawsuits aimed at recouping the “costs” of climate change on local communities and enforcing “net-zero” energy policies. Net-zero policies seek to rapidly choke off fossil fuel use in order to reach zero carbon emissions by reducing them as well as removing them from the atmosphere and relying on renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and sometimes, nuclear power. Oil companies like Exxon, Chevron, Shell, and BP get hit hardest, but like in the case of Duke Energy in North Carolina, electricity utility companies get dragged into the mess as well.

But as far as messes go, it’s one carefully orchestrated by the climate litigation industry, armed with deep pockets and patience in its quest to pull the rug out from under Big Energy. That’s why Trump’s revamp of federalism to review many of these laws and statutes is not only legal but deeply necessary. Consumers who need affordable energy and who rely on continued innovation from the companies that power their lives should not have their standard of living cut by greedy environmental lawyers jamming up district courts where judges are ideologically inclined to their side. In March, the Supreme Court declined to weigh in on the deluge of Democrat state-led climate lawsuits, denying the request by red states to put a halt to the lawfare.

In their dissent, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito made clear that the court was punting on a vital constitutional case “for policy reasons.” When the Supreme Court refuses to address the obvious abuse of our litigation system for energy providers and the consumers that rely on them, the intervention of the executive branch becomes a necessity. The most likely unconstitutional state statutes that enable these costly lawsuits should meet the wrath of a president willing to exercise some federal authority. Trump has answered that call, and at least on this specific issue, he’s proved that our government’s unique balancing act between state and federal power does make it possible to get important things done for Americans.

Read more …

PCR won’t give Putin a break. But Putin has a problem with dead Ukrainians: they’re Russia’s brothers.

• What Can We Expect from the Peace Negotiations? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Are the peace negotiations leading anywhere we want to go, or are they leading nowhere, or to more conflict? If I had to bet, I would pick one of the last two choices. Most likely more conflict. It is a tendency of peace negotiations to go nowhere except to a ceasefire that is immediately broken. As for the Ukraine negotiations, the Russians are the only party to the limited cease fire in Ukraine that have kept the agreement. Putin’s reward is to be told by Trump to stop fighting and put Russia’s fate in Washington’s hands or there will be more sanctions. Negotiations tend to keep on continuing, because it is in the interest of the negotiating teams. It is their time of fame. They are in the limelight. They enjoy being important. An agreement would make them invisible again. It is their 15 minutes of fame that they stretch into months and years.

Consider how long peace negotiations have been going on between Israel and Palestine to no effect except the utter and total destruction of Palestine and its people. The same could happen to Russia as the Kremlin seems to consist of 19th century naive liberals. In my recent interview on Dialogue Works I wondered why Iran was negotiating when the solution is to invite inspectors in to see if there is any evidence of nuclear weapons production. I wondered why Putin was negotiating when his real responsibility to Russia is to win the conflict and dictate the peace terms. After all his sad costly experiences with negotiating with Washington, why does Putin desire yet another sad experience? As far as I can tell, I am the only person who has answered the question. Putin is trying to use the conflict to negotiate a Great Powers Agreement like Yalta. If he wins the war, as he should have done long ago, to his way of thinking he loses the chance for a new Yalta that naive Russian foreign affairs commentators are talking about.

My view differs from Putin’s. If he won the war, especially if he had done so right away, Russia would be recognized as a great power worthy of a Great Power Agreement. Instead, by preventing the Russian military from winning, Putin has convinced the West that Russia is not a formidable military force, and that its leadership is irresolute. Among the consequences, we have today the French and British considering sending their soldiers to fight against Russia in Ukraine. Only Putin’s irresolution could have convinced the British and French that they could take on Russia. We also have Baltic countries with small populations engaging in unresisted and unanswered aggression against Russia. Both Estonia and Finland have moved to use military force to capture and detain Russian oil tankers.

If you were the captain of a Russian oil tanker delivering oil to somewhere in Europe, you might already be wondering why your government is fueling the ability of its enemies to wage war against Russia. But when you are boarded by a two-bit country whose population is less than Moscow’s and the Kremlin does not intervene, what do you think about the world’s respect for your country? You must be heart-broken. Powerful Russia humiliated by Estonia! Putin does not think about these things. His focus is only on negotiation. He is wedded to it, firmly. He might even be a little crazed by it. It is all that is important. He won’t respond to humiliations because it might queer the all-important negotiations. So the smallest countries on earth can humiliate Russia at will.

This must affect the Russian population, unless they have been so corrupted by Western “culture” that they are no longer Russian. That is the case with many of the Russian intellectuals. If Russia can’t be a part of the West, they feel isolated and alone. Decades of Washington’s propaganda succeeded in diminishing the Russian in them. From the day that Putin, who had erroneously relied on negotiations, was forced by Washington to intervene in Donbas, Putin and his foreign minister have not ceased bleating how welcoming they would be of peace negotiations. Consequently, no one in Western governments thought, or think today, that the Kremlin has an ounce of resolve on the battlefield. This is the problem Putin caused himself.

Do you remember Prigozhin and the Wagner Group? The Wagner Group was the essentially private military force under the command of Yevgeny Prigozhin that Putin had to rely upon when he belatedly intervened in Ukraine. Having erroneously relied on the Minsk Agreement, which the West used to deceive Putin, Putin had no military force prepared to deal with the massive Ukrainian army Washington had trained and equipped. Prigozhin found Putin’s way of fighting a war problematical. He said his top echelon troops were being required to take casualties but were prohibited from fighting to win. The dissatisfaction of the troops with Putin’s strictures that prevented victory, led to a protest march on Moscow, which the jealous Russian General Staff misrepresented as a “rebellion.” Prigozhin was removed and later died in a mysterious airplane crash, and the Wagner Group was broken up, thereby depriving Russia of its hardest hitting military force. This is a huge sacrifice in behalf of a distant possible negotiated settlement.

Prigozhin wasn’t alone. The second most effective Russian force were the Muslim troops from Chechnya. Their leader also complained that his force had to take casualties but were prevented from winning. He asked publicly, why can’t we get this conflict over with? I think the answer is that Putin thinks a negotiated settlement possibly leading to a Great Power Agreement is more important than the reputation of Russian military arms and Russian and Ukrainian casualties. If Washington comes to my conclusion, the settlement imposed on Putin will look good on paper but will perpetuate American hegemony. I have said many times that Putin does not need a mutual security agreement with the West. He does not need a New Yalta. Russia needs a mutual security agreement with China and Iran. A mutual security agreement of these three powers would end all wars. The US, NATO, Israel cannot possibly confront these three countries militarily.

But there is no agreement. Why? Is it a lack of vision of Russian, Chinese, and Iranian leaders? Or is it distrust between them? Russia and Iran walked away from Syria, leaving the country to Israel, Washington, and Turkey. Why wouldn’t they walk away from one another? China, knows that if China wished, China could crush Taiwan, with or without US support to Taiwan, in a few hours. But Putin can’t defeat outclassed Ukraine in more than three years, longer than it took Stalin’s Red Army to destroy the powerful German Wehrmacht, driving the Germans out of thousands of miles of Russia, Eastern Europe, and arriving in the streets of Berlin in a shorter time than Putin has been fighting over a few kilometers in Donbas. China must wonder what sort of military help would Russia be?

My conclusion is, and I much regret it, it is not a conclusion I want, that Putin has so badly handled the Ukrainian situation, the pipeline, and all other matters with Washington that the only agreement that can be reached is Russia’s surrender. Putin has shown no will to fight, only to engage in fruitless negotiation. Putin rolls out all of Russia’s superior weapons systems, which clearly are superior to anything the West has. But no one in the West believes he would use them. Putin has failed to present himself and his country as entities that must be contended with on their terms. Consequently, Putin is dismissed by Trump as someone to be bossed around, and by militarily impotent Britain and France who are talking about sending their soldiers to Ukraine to defeat Russia.

Read more …

Blackmail? Is that what it is?

• ‘Stop Blackmailing’ – China to US (RT)

China has called on the US to “stop threatening and blackmailing,” if it wants to resolve the escalating trade dispute between the two countries through dialogue. Beijing has stressed that it will continue to protect its interests in the face of US pressure. The two countries have implemented a series of reciprocal tariff hikes over the past two months, with the US imposing a cumulative rate of 145% last week. On Tuesday, the White House warned that Chinese imports to the US could face tariffs as high as 245%, and claimed the ball is in China’s court. “If the United States really wants to solve the problem through dialogue and negotiation, it should give up the extreme pressure, stop threatening and blackmailing,” Foreign Ministry Spokesman Lin Jian told journalists on Wednesday.

The diplomat reiterated that the tariff war was initiated by the US and stated that China’s response was aimed at safeguarding its legitimate rights and interests. Beijing’s retaliation has included a hike to 125% on all American imports, a suspension of global shipments of rare-earth metals and magnets used in tech and military industries. In addition, Beijing ordered Chinese airlines to stop accepting Boeing jets and parts, according to Bloomberg. President Donald Trump previously suggested that the “proud” Chinese want to make a deal, they “just don’t know how quite to go about it.” The Chinese authorities have meanwhile insisted that “the door remains open” for negotiation with the US, but dialogue must be based on mutual respect. The Ministry of Commerce last week dismissed the multiple rounds of duties imposed by the US on China as “numbers game” with no practical meaning and vowed to “fight to the end.”

Read more …

The US wants to prevent China from using third countries to circumvent tarriffs.

• US To Restrict China’s Access in Exchange for Fewer Tariffs on Allies (Sp.)

During negotiations with more than 70 countries, the US administration plans to secure commitments from trade partners to economically isolate China in exchange for lower tariffs imposed by the White House, The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported. The White House plans to convince countries to prohibit China from transporting goods through their territories, the report said on Tuesday, adding that Washington also wants to ban Chinese companies from locating in these countries in order to circumvent US tariffs, and prevent cheap Chinese industrial goods from entering their markets.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has become one of the key developers of this strategy, the report read. In his opinion, in the near future, such agreements can be reached primarily with Japan, the United Kingdom, Australia, South Korea and India. On April 2, US President Donald Trump announced reciprocal tariffs on imports from various countries, establishing a baseline rate of 10%. The tariffs were intended to be adjusted based on the rates charged by those countries on US goods. However, on April 9, Trump declared a 90-day pause on tariffs for all countries except China and lowered the rate to 10% to facilitate negotiations.

Read more …

“The ball is in China’s court. China needs to make a deal with us. We don’t have to make a deal with them,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said..”

• US To Tie Tariff Deals To China Curbs – WSJ (RT)

The US plans to use tariff negotiations to push trade partners to scale back economic ties with China, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday, citing sources familiar with the talks. The strategy is reportedly aimed at securing commitments from countries hit by recent US tariff hikes to help isolate China’s economy and pressure Beijing to negotiate. US President Donald Trump announced new “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly 90 countries earlier this month, citing unfair trade practices. After global markets reacted by dropping sharply and several governments sought exemptions, he paused most of the tariffs for 90 days, reducing them to a baseline rate of 10%. However, the pause does not apply to China, whose exports to the US are now subject to tariffs of up to 145% amid an ongoing tit-for-tat trade war.

US officials aim to convince trade partners to accept permanent tariff cuts in exchange for curbing their economic engagement with China, according to the WSJ. Proposed commitments may vary by country, but could reportedly include stopping China from rerouting exports through third-party nations, banning Chinese firms from setting up operations locally to avoid US tariffs, and limiting imports of low-cost Chinese industrial goods. Sources said the measures are meant to undermine China’s economy and reduce its leverage ahead of potential negotiations between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The US has already raised the proposal in early discussions with some countries, sources claimed.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was reportedly one of the main architects of the plan. Sources claimed he presented the strategy to Trump during an April 6 meeting at Mar-a-Lago, arguing that obtaining concessions from partners could prevent China from evading tariffs and export controls. He previously named the UK, Australia, South Korea, India, and Japan as countries likely to finalize trade agreements with Washington in the near future.

The White House and Treasury Department declined to comment on the WSJ report. On Tuesday, Trump urged China to initiate negotiations to resolve the tariff dispute. “The ball is in China’s court. China needs to make a deal with us. We don’t have to make a deal with them,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, quoting a statement she claimed was dictated by the president. Beijing, however, has so far refused to back down. On Friday, China announced it would impose a 125% tariff on all US goods, reiterating it will “fight to the end” against Washington’s trade policy. Beijing also signaled this could be the last increase, noting that “at the current tariff level, there is no market acceptance for US goods exported to China,” while adding that other countermeasures are being considered.

Read more …

You grow up in Holland and you’re forced to hear the call to Muslim prayer 5x a day. Get real.

• Dutch MPs Call For Ban On Amplified Islamic Calls To Prayer (RMX)

Two minor conservative parties in the Netherlands, the SGP and JA21, have tabled a private members’ bill aiming to ban amplified Islamic calls to prayer in residential areas, arguing that the practice is increasingly at odds with Dutch cultural norms. The proposed legislation, submitted by SGP MP André Flach and JA21 leader Joost Eerdmans, targets the growing use of loudspeakers in mosques to broadcast the adhan — the Islamic call to prayer — across neighborhoods. While amplified calls were rare until the 1990s, the MPs claim they are now heard in dozens of communities nationwide, “from Amsterdam to Alblasserdam.” “It doesn’t fit in with Dutch culture,” Flach said, as cited by De Telegraaf newspaper. He noted that current broadcasts loudly proclaim religious texts such as “Allah is the greatest” and “there is no other god but Allah” several times a day. He argued that when laws were changed in 1988 to allow amplified religious calls under the Public Manifestations Act, lawmakers did not anticipate how pervasive and loud such calls might become.

Eerdmans expressed equal concern over the trend, pointing to what he sees as a steady increase in Islamic practice seeping into the Dutch way of life. “Today, around 40 mosques play the adhan on Fridays, but with about 500 mosques in the Netherlands and that number growing, how many will there be in 10 years?” sIn some neighborhoods, “you really feel like you’re in Istanbul or Marrakesh,” he added. The MPs also cited a poll commissioned from researcher Maurice de Hond, which claims that nearly 80 percent of Dutch citizens view amplified calls to prayer as inconsistent with Dutch culture and find them bothersome. While the government had already signaled plans to tighten regulations on amplified prayer calls earlier this year, Flach and Eerdmans are pushing for a complete ban on sound amplification for such broadcasts.

“This is not about restricting freedom of religion,” Flach insisted. “People can still make the call to prayer, just without sound amplification. The current law simply lacks the word ‘unamplified’ — and we are adding it,” he said. In a statement, JA21 wrote, “More and more Dutch streets are drowned out by amplified Islamic calls to prayer. The public space belongs to everyone – the mosque does not have to rise above it. That is why JA21 and SGP are submitting a private members’ bill to ban the reinforced call.” The proposal follows earlier statements by Integration Secretary Jurgen Nobel, who in February pledged to review existing legislation to better manage noise disturbances from amplified religious expressions. Supporters argue that the measure would restore balance and respond to long-standing complaints from residents in affected areas. The bill will now move to parliamentary debate.

Read more …

Just to get to 2%. Then that becomes 5%. And then Ursula wants $800 billion on top of that.

• Belgium Eyes Welfare Cuts To Meet NATO Target (RT)

Belgium is preparing to raise debt and cut welfare to meet NATO’s minimum military spending target, the EU country’s budget minister has said. Vincent Van Peteghem told the Financial Times on Wednesday that Brussels recently agreed to lift its 2025 military budget to 2% of GDP through a mix of temporary cash injections, creative accounting, and structural reforms. The planned hike in military spending could exacerbate the budget crisis as debt mounts. Recent government plans to cut social services have sparked protests, with over 100,000 people rallying in Brussels in February. Belgium had previously planned to meet the 2% target only by 2029. Military spending currently stands at around 1.31% of GDP, or roughly €8 billion ($8.5 billion), according to Defense Minister Theo Francken.

The shift comes amid pressure from Washington and ahead of a NATO summit in June, where members are expected to consider raising the spending target to above 3% of GDP. US President Donald Trump has urged the bloc members to increase military spending to 5%, warning that countries that fail to do so may no longer be guaranteed American protection. Higher spending on military budgets would take a toll on the EU’s welfare programs, Van Peteghem warned. Last month, the European Commission proposed exempting military budgets from fiscal rules and offering €150 billion in loans as part of its ‘ReArm Europe’ plan, which aims to mobilize up to €800 billion through debt and tax incentives for the bloc’s military-industrial complex.

Van Peteghem said Belgium would tap both options to fund additional military spending this year. To maintain the 2% level, the government plans to raise more debt and may privatize state-owned assets, the minister said. The remaining gap would be filled through spending cuts, including curbs on unemployment benefits, pension reforms, and tax changes. “But of course, we will need to do more,” Van Peteghem, who also serves as deputy prime minister, said. France has also announced plans to cut €5 billion from its budget, with some of the savings potentially redirected to military spending. Moscow has condemned the EU’s military buildup. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called it “a matter of deep concern,” noting that it was aimed at Russia.

Read more …

“That would raise the annual federal interest payment on the national debt to $1.5 trillion. At what point does this become a crisis?”

• Trump Confronts Economic and Geopolitical Reality (Ring)

By the time this is published, everything may have changed, and that is to be expected. Throughout his career, well before and since becoming a politician, Trump has explicitly stated that he does not think it is always a good strategy to be predictable. And while markets love predictability, sometimes markets, and the systems propping them up, need disruption. This is such a moment. Nobody should deny that the anxiety is genuine. An older friend of mine, well into his 70s, still working but ready to retire, is wondering how he and his wife will survive if their savings are wiped out. That’s true for all of us, but it begs the question: What if the painful restructuring we may be about to endure, and which may last for many years, is necessary to avoid an even worse fate? Trump’s abrupt escalation of import tariffs goes well beyond violating the principles of comparative advantage, but we can start there.

“Comparative advantage” is not all it’s cracked up to be. Repeated in business schools as if it were gospel since the 1980s, it goes something like this: “Wool is cheaper in Scotland, and wine is cheaper in France, so France should sell their wine to Scotland, and Scotland should sell their wool to France.” Everybody wins. Period. That’s the extent of it. That is the essence of free trade theory. In the real world, though, policies that rely on “comparative advantage” doctrine as their moral justification have gotten pretty ugly. While overall economic growth may be maximized when every nation exports products that it produces most cost-effectively, the local impacts are not always benign. Nations that produce coffee at competitive global prices, for example, end up with valuable cropland converted from food production to coffee plantations.

These coffee plantations are typically owned by multinational corporations that repatriate profits to low-tax nations elsewhere while buying off a small local elite that streamlines the regulatory environment. Meanwhile, the nation becomes dependent on imports for everything except coffee, and even the coffee ends up priced out of reach for the average citizen. Replace “coffee” with any specialty product, and all too often, the “gains of trade” translate on the ground into nations with seething, destitute populations dependent on accumulating debt and foreign aid. These examples aren’t restricted to foreign nations, nor are they restricted to commodities. While American multinationals moved manufacturing overseas, in the process destroying millions of jobs and thousands of communities in America, it wasn’t just cheap wool, cheap wine, and dirt-cheap flat-screen TVs that were pouring into the country in exchange. We offshored our production of steel, our chip manufacturers, our pharmaceutical industry, and much more.

And even that devastation was tolerated for decades because its effects were mostly felt in what we now call rust belt states. Our service economy and tech sectors boomed, along with what was left of manufacturing, satiating a majority of the population that loved buying cheaper foreign imports. But this whole scheme could never go on forever. America’s trade deficit in 2024 was up to $918 billion, a new record. America’s cumulative trade deficit, nearly all of it incurred since 2000, is now estimated in excess of $17 trillion.

To balance the trade deficit, there is what economists call the “current account.” If dollars flow overseas for us to purchase foreign imports in excess of foreign nations spending dollars to purchase our exports, the surplus dollars are repatriated in the form of foreigners bidding up the prices for assets they purchase in America. A slight oversimplification would be that trade deficits equate to cheap flat screens and unaffordable homes. But there is another reason America has huge trade deficits. It floods the world with dollar-denominated transactions, and by permitting foreigners to buy American assets, we effectively collateralize our currency. And so long as America is for sale in this manner, that helps sustain the dollar as a hard currency.

That comes in handy. For 46 out of the last 50 years, Americans have logged federal budget deficits. So far, the dollar’s status as the dominant transaction and reserve currency of the world gives America’s federal government the ability to borrow money by selling Treasury Notes. This is all well known and rehashed beyond the need to elaborate further. So, why are people acting like this was sustainable? How long can the global economic model rest on American trade deficits funding the military and industrial development of nations that, in some cases, aren’t even allies, with all of it balanced through foreign purchases of American assets? And how long will international demand for dollars finance federal budget deficits? To understand why this had to come to a head, consider federal budget trends in recent years.

In 2019, the last year of Trump’s first term, the federal budget was $4.4 trillion, with interest payments of $400 billion. For 2025, the first year of Trump’s current term, the projected federal budget is $7.0 trillion, with interest of just under $1.0 trillion. What changed? While the COVID pandemic was used to justify massive infusions of stimulative federal cash into the economy, much of it probably necessary, why hasn’t spending been reduced since the pandemic’s impact has been over for at least two years? Are we supposed to just expect massive federal budget deficits year after year? Is it sustainable to log a federal budget deficit that has grown from an alarming $900 billion in 2019 to $1.9 trillion in 2025, more than twice as much?

A roughly accurate summary of the economic reality we confront is federal budget deficits of $2 trillion per year and trade deficits of $1 trillion per year. Trade deficits translate into growing foreign ownership of American assets. Federal budget deficits add up in the form of accumulating, interest-bearing national debt. In 2019, the interest payments on what at the time was $22 trillion in national debt had already reached $575 billion, at an average interest rate of 2.5 percent. By 2024, the national debt had skyrocketed to $35 trillion, an increase of $13 trillion in just six years. Interest payments in 2024 were $1.1 trillion, and the average interest rate had risen to 3.3 percent. “Average” interest rate requires explanation. Ten-year treasury notes currently pay 4.4 percent. Interest rates have risen over the past few years. Imagine if that continues, and $35 trillion (or more) in treasury notes mature and are reinvested at 4.4 percent. That would raise the annual federal interest payment on the national debt to $1.5 trillion. At what point does this become a crisis?

Read more …

 

 

Favorite Calvin of all time.

 

 

https://twitter.com/khnh80044/status/1911960834559148452

Holy week

 

 

Fairy

 

 

Vancouver
https://twitter.com/dom_lucre/status/1912240470480285729

 

 

Charlie
https://twitter.com/khnh80044/status/1912456564352717089

 

 

Two things
https://twitter.com/RealDonKeith/status/1912496724888690887

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle Valentine’s Day 2025

Feb 142025
 
 February 14, 2025  Posted by at 10:22 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  50 Responses »


Margaret Gillies Charles Dickens 1844

 

• Trump To Xi, Putin: Let’s Cut Military Budget In Half – Russia Back In G7 (ZH)
• Russia and US To Hold ‘High-Level’ Meeting In Munich Friday – Trump (RT)
• Trump’s Call With Putin Marks A Shift In Global Power (Fyodor Lukyanov)
• Putin-Trump Summit On The Way – Kremlin (RT)
• Trump Wants A Deal With Russia – But Can He Deliver? (Suchkov)
• RFK Jr. Confirmed As Trump’s Health Secretary (RT)
• Panic Grips European Leaders as EU Left Out of Trump-Putin Call (Sp.)
• European NATO ‘Fears Cost’ Of Trump’s Ukraine Burden Shift (RT)
• Orban Sees EU As Undeserving Of Role In Ukraine Settlement Talks (TASS)
• Vance Blasts ‘Russian Meddling’ Excuse (RT)
• Musk Fraud Probes May Explain ‘Urgency’ of Trump-Putin Call (Sp.)
• Zelensky Targets Political Opposition (RT)
• Trump Will Terminate ‘Woke’ Policies – Musk (RT)
• Trump Freezes All National Endowment for Democracy Funding (RT)
• DOGE Exposes Insane Federal Use Of Old Limestone Mine (MN)
• Musk: “We Need To Delete Entire Agencies”; Fed Worker Buyout Tops 75,000 (ZH)
• US Govt Paid Reuters For ‘Social Deception’ – Musk (RT)
• The Great AI Game: US, China Vie For West Asian Cash (Cradle)
• The Pentagon Is Recruiting Elon Musk To Help Them Win A Nuclear War (MacLeod)

 

 

 

 

CNN

182
https://twitter.com/i/status/1889801494897238094

Trump Zel
https://twitter.com/i/status/1890000851185668123

Tulsi
https://twitter.com/i/status/1889873438791073796

Benz
https://twitter.com/i/status/1889851950189125656

Leavitt


https://twitter.com/i/status/1889744236867707247

Tillis

Rand Paul

JD

 

 

 

 

Full collision course with the MIC/deep state.

And: you can demand that Europe pays more, or you can pay less yourself.

• Trump To Xi, Putin: Let’s Cut Military Budget In Half – Russia Back In G7 (ZH)

On Thursday President Donald Trump continued to signal positive feelings about a future relationship with Russia and Putin, telling reporters that he’d like to see Russia invited back in to join the The Group of Seven major economies, or G7, which until 2014 was the G8 when Russia was included. “I’d love to have them back. I think it was a mistake to throw them out. Look, it’s not a question of liking Russia or not liking Russia. It was the G8,” Trump said from the Oval Office upon announcing new US reciprocal tariffs. “I said, ‘What are you doing? You guys – all you’re talking about is Russia and they should be sitting at the table.’ And he then added, “I think Putin would love to be back.”

The G7 countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US. In 2014 these nations decided to expel Russia over the annexation of Crimea, but Moscow pointed out that Crimeans overwhelmingly voted to become part of the Russian Federation after a popular referendum. Another highlight from the Oval Office press conference was when the president called on China and Russia to join the United States in agreeing to cut their enormous defense budgets in half. He said in the context of also urging the three major powers to restart nuclear arms control talks.

“One of the first meetings I want to have is with President Xi of China, President Putin of Russia. And I want to say, ‘let’s cut our military budget in half.’ And we can do that. And I think we’ll be able to,” Trump declared. According to an Associated Press summary of the comments: Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump lamented the hundreds of billions of dollars being invested in rebuilding the nation’s nuclear deterrent and said he hopes to gain commitments from the U.S. adversaries to cut their own spending. “There’s no reason for us to be building brand new nuclear weapons, we already have so many,” Trump said. “You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons, and they’re building nuclear weapons.”

“We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully much more productive,” Trump continued. Russia and the US have long had the world’s biggest nuclear arsenals, but China has in the last ten years been making strides to greatly bolster its strategic capabilities, which has alarmed the West. Trump warned that any future nuclear use by a global power is “going to be probably oblivion.” Likely Moscow and Beijing will receive these words positively as an overture, especially on the nuclear front, but neither will actually heed Trump’s call to pledge a 50% reduction in defense spending – especially when Russia is at war in Ukraine and under US-EU sanctions. They might tell the Trump White House instead: ‘your move first’.

Read more …

The Munich Security Conference was going to take place anyway, but it acquires a whole new status now. JD Vance leads the US delegation, Foreign Ministers Rubio and Lavrov(?!) will be present. Perfect settings to prepare the Putin-Trump get-together. Not sometime in the future, but today, Feb. 14, and over the weekend. Things move fast.

• Russia and US To Hold ‘High-Level’ Meeting In Munich Friday – Trump (RT)

President Donald Trump has announced that “high-level” US representatives will meet their Russian counterparts at the Munich Security Conference on Friday to discuss a resolution to the Ukraine conflict. President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart spoke for nearly 90 minutes by phone on Wednesday, marking the first known direct interaction between the Russian and US heads of state since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. On Thursday, Trump said the phone call paved the way for further direct contacts between American and Russian officials. “They’re having a meeting in Munich tomorrow. Russia is going to be there with our people,” Trump told journalists at the White House on Thursday. Trump added that “Ukraine is also invited, by the way,” but did not specify the format of the meeting or clarify whether it would be a three-way dialogue or a series of bilateral talks.

“Not sure exactly who’s going to be there from any country, but high-level people from Russia, from Ukraine, and from the United States,” the US leader added. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said earlier on Thursday that the fact that both presidents had expressed a willingness to engage in dialogue was a “very important achievement” that has “set in motion an apparatus of aides, ministries and so on, that will now gradually begin dialogue and prepare the next contacts.” “Now that the leaders have demonstrated political will and provided their aides with the necessary instructions to initiate communication, we ask for a bit of patience. These discussions need time to gain momentum,” Peskov said.

The Munich Security Conference is taking place from February 14 to 16 in Munich, Germany. US Vice President J.D. Vance will lead the American delegation at the MSC, where he is expected to meet with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the conference is an opportunity for American officials to “lay out a broad path forward” on Ukraine. Meanwhile, US presidential envoy for the Ukraine conflict Keith Kellogg is reportedly expected to make it clear that the US has no intention of deploying troops to protect Ukraine and wants European NATO allies to increase their defense spending. Russian officials have not attended the Munich Conference since 2022, and Moscow has yet to confirm its participation this year or announce the composition of its delegation.

Read more …

“The liberal world order is no longer a guiding principle – it is a relic of the past..”

• Trump’s Call With Putin Marks A Shift In Global Power (Fyodor Lukyanov)

The long-anticipated phone call between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump has finally taken place, sending shock waves through the geopolitical landscape. But before anyone gets carried away with triumph or despair, it’s worth recognizing what has actually happened: Russian-US relations have simply returned to their natural state – one of strategic rivalry, conflicting interests, and fundamental differences in worldview. For decades, the US pursued a fantasy – one where it could reshape Russia in its own image, first through incentives and later through coercion. Washington believed it could mold Moscow into a compliant partner within the ‘liberal international order’, an illusion that only collapsed when reality hit: Russia was never going to be remade. Meanwhile, Moscow spent years trying to find common ground, adjusting its own policies in hopes of reaching a workable coexistence.

That experiment, too, ended a decade ago. The dissolution of the Cold War system in the late 1980s was a historical anomaly, a fluke that many mistook for a permanent transformation. The Western narrative of ‘victory’ was premature – history does not end, it evolves. Over time, the illusion of a unipolar world became harder to sustain, and the global balance of power began shifting. Those who benefited from the old order clung to it desperately, while those who felt shortchanged pushed back harder. Ukraine became the unfortunate fault line in this struggle, the battleground of irreconcilable visions. What is happening now is not the beginning of a new era but the inevitable correction of an old one.

The US, even under Trump’s presidency, has recognized that great power rivalry is once again the defining feature of international politics. But unlike previous decades, when ideological battles masked geopolitical interests, the new competition is more pragmatic, stripped of the pretense of universal values. The liberal world order is no longer a guiding principle – it is a relic of the past. This shift does not guarantee peace, nor does it eliminate the risks of confrontation. But it does bring a certain rationality back into the equation. The West’s ideological zeal, which often led it to take reckless, counterproductive actions, is giving way to a more sober assessment of power and interests. The focus is no longer on forcing one side to submit, but on negotiating tangible advantages.

Russia, meanwhile, is positioned as a key player in shaping this new world order. The strategic fantasies of the 1990s have been replaced with a hard-nosed realism that acknowledges the limits of Western power. The reset to ‘factory settings’ does not mean stability – it means a return to the fundamentals of global politics, where strength, influence, and calculated diplomacy dictate the course of history.

Read more …

The view from Moscow: “..the Trump team apparently “holds the view that everything must be done to stop the war and for peace to prevail..”

• Putin-Trump Summit On The Way – Kremlin (RT)

It is hard to overestimate the significance of the recent phone call between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. He also noted that the presidents have instructed their teams to lay the groundwork for the summit. The call on Wednesday marked the first known conversation between the US and Russian leaders since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Trump has since signaled that he is “okay” with keeping Ukraine out of NATO and suggested that it is “unlikely” that Kiev could regain all of the territory it has lost to Russia over the past decade. Trump also noted that the presidents had exchanged invitations to visit each other’s countries.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Peskov described the phone call as “a very important conversation.” “Against the backdrop of what has been happening for several years, there have been no contacts at the highest level between Moscow and Washington,” he said, noting that this landscape did not contribute to solving the Ukraine crisis. Unlike the administration of ex-US President Joe Biden, which believed that “everything must be done to ensure that the war continues,” the Trump team apparently “holds the view that everything must be done to stop the war and for peace to prevail,” Peskov said. “We are much more impressed by the position of the current administration, and we are open to dialogue,” the spokesman stressed. Peskov added that the leaders would remain in touch regarding a summit.

“They will focus on a separate meeting; they also agreed that instructions would be immediately given to the relevant assistants so that they would begin the relevant work.” At the same time, Peskov declined to reveal which side had initiated the engagement, while clarifying that there has been no agreement on whether Trump will come to Moscow to attend the Victory parade to celebrate the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany on May 9. “Exchanging mutual invitations is one thing, but focusing on a separate bilateral meeting is a different process,” the spokesman noted. Regarding a potential territory swap with Ukraine, Peskov cautioned against “getting ahead of ourselves.” “There is political will… to conduct a dialogue to reach a settlement… We need to wait for… at least the first results of the joint work.”

At the same time, Peskov would not confirm or deny Trump’s remarks that Saudi Arabia would host a summit between the two leaders. He also did not provide any timeline for a potential Trump-Putin meeting, or when Russian and American work groups could get down to negotiations. “There is definitely a need for such a [Trump-Putin] meeting to be held promptly. The heads of state have a lot to talk about… It is also impossible to speculate on any deadlines at this point, because the work will only begin these days.”

Read more …

“The idea that Trump and Putin could strike a deal on Ukraine [..] poses an existential threat to the current European security order.

• Trump Wants A Deal With Russia – But Can He Deliver? (Suchkov)

The defining geopolitical rivalry of the 21st century may be between the United States and China, but few interactions in global politics draw as much scrutiny and intrigue as those between America and Russia. While the future world order may hinge on the dynamics between Washington and Beijing, the stability of the world itself often depends on the relationship between the US and Moscow. Wednesday’s phone call between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump was a reminder of this enduring reality. It was also a signal that, for all the efforts to isolate Russia, serious negotiations are back on the table.

Unlike his predecessors, Trump has never treated Russia with the hostility so often expected in Washington. While he has mocked and insulted rivals and allies alike, from Mexico to NATO partners, Russia and India remain two notable exceptions. The US foreign policy establishment readily accepts Trump’s warmth toward India but views his respectful approach to Russia as something suspicious. Since his first presidency, speculation has swirled around whether Trump genuinely sees Russia as a major power deserving of engagement, or whether he simply understands that diplomacy with Moscow requires mutual respect. Whatever the case, the meticulous preparations that preceded this latest phone call suggest a stark contrast with Trump’s often impulsive approach to other world leaders. Every face-to-face meeting between Trump and Putin during his first term was marked by strong personal chemistry and productive discussions on key global issues.

However, each time Trump returned to Washington, those tentative diplomatic breakthroughs were undermined by a political establishment determined to preserve the narrative of a Russian threat. Allegations of “Russian interference” sabotaged potential cooperation on Syria, Ukraine, counterterrorism, missile defense, and arms control. Now, with Trump back in office, those same forces are once again mobilizing to block any steps toward détente. The idea that Trump and Putin could strike a deal on Ukraine — one that would leave behind those who have invested political and financial capital into prolonging the war — poses an existential threat to the current European security order. It is no coincidence that this phone call took place just before the Munich Security Conference, where many of these “investors in war” gather to reinforce their commitments to perpetual conflict.

Yet, this conversation is merely the first step in a long and uncertain road. Trump’s primary focus remains making America — not Russia — “great again,” and any agreements he seeks with Moscow will be dictated by that priority. However, his openness to negotiation and strategic realism signal a shift in approach that could redefine the global balance of power. The next crucial moment will be an in-person meeting between the two leaders. Whether that meeting leads to a genuine breakthrough or another cycle of political sabotage remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: with the world watching and the stakes higher than ever, Trump and Putin have set the agenda — and their adversaries are paying attention.

Read more …

“..Kennedy joined Trump’s campaign, with the latter vowing to let him “go wild” on healthcare policy.”

• RFK Jr. Confirmed As Trump’s Health Secretary (RT)

The US Senate confirmed Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services on Thursday. The confirmation was secured despite Democratic objections to what they described as Kennedy’s promotion of ‘conspiracy theories’ about vaccines and nutrition. The vote was largely divided along party lines, with 52 Republicans supporting the nomination and 48 Democrats opposing it. Former GOP leader Mitch McConnell was the only Republican to vote against the confirmation. Kennedy, 71, an environmental lawyer, was nominated by US President Donald Trump shortly after his reelection victory in November last year. The vote breakdown marks the second time in as many days that McConnell has opposed one of Trump’s nominees. He was the only Republican to oppose the confirmation of Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence on Wednesday.

McConnell said he refused back RFK Jr. due to the nominee’s vaccine skepticism. “I’m a survivor of childhood polio … I will not condone the re-litigation of proven cures, and neither will millions of Americans who credit their survival and quality of life to scientific miracles,” McConnell stated. Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, said in a statement that “when dangerous diseases make a comeback and people struggle to access lifesaving vaccines, all Americans will pay the price.” Warren also warned that “with his significant, unresolved conflicts of interest, RFK Jr.’s family could continue profiting from his anti-vaccine agenda while he holds office.”

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 vaccinations and promoting the claim that vaccines are linked to autism. He was also a vocal critic of the Covid-19 response measures recommended by the World Health Organization, including the strict lockdowns and rapid rollout of vaccines. Despite this, Kennedy denies being opposed to vaccination, noting that his own children are immunized. During his confirmation hearings, he stated that he simply advocates for stricter studies and safety testing of vaccines. Following an unsuccessful independent presidential bid, Kennedy joined Trump’s campaign, with the latter vowing to let him “go wild” on healthcare policy.

Kennedy has publicly backed Trump’s pledge to end the Ukraine conflict quickly. In a 2023 interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson, he alleged that the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington’s primary agency for funding political projects abroad, had funneled $5 billion to support the protests that led to the 2014 Maidan coup. In the interview, Kennedy described USAID as a front for the CIA. He also referenced a leaked phone call between then-US diplomat Victoria Nuland and the US ambassador to Ukraine, in which Nuland was heard selecting members of Ukraine’s post-coup government – just weeks before the president was overthrown. Kennedy is the son of former US Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and the nephew of President John F. Kennedy.


https://twitter.com/i/status/1890081625368854561

Read more …

Europe wants to be important. In reality, it is impotent. Close, but…

Why on earth would Trump and Putin want the likes of von der Leyen or Macron at the table? They would just be in the way.

• Panic Grips European Leaders as EU Left Out of Trump-Putin Call (Sp.)

Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump discussed Ukraine, the Middle East, energy issues, and the exchange of citizens in a telephone call that lasted for one and a half hours, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov revealed. The phone conversation between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump has triggered a litany of reactions from European politicians. Britain’s Foreign Secretary David Lammy posted a joined statement by several European states that read: “Our shared objectives should be to put Ukraine in a position of strength. Ukraine and Europe must be part of any negotiations.” UK Defense Secretary John Healey claimed that no peace talks could be done “about Ukraine without Ukraine.”

Boris Pistorius, Germany’s defense chief, lamented the development as “regrettable” arguing that the Trump administration had made “concessions” to Russia, while asserting that “it would have been better to speak about a possible NATO membership for Ukraine or possible losses of territory at the negotiating table.” Joining the bandwagon, Germany Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock added that “peace can only be achieved together. And that means: with Ukraine and with the Europeans.” In addition, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk declared that “All we need is peace… Ukraine, Europe and the United States should work on this together.”

For his part, French top diplomat Jean-Noel Barrot insisted that “There will be no just and durable peace in Ukraine without Europeans.” Meanwhile, Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur chimed in, saying: “Europe is investing in Ukrainian defense, and Europe is rebuilding Ukraine with European Union money, with our bilateral aid – so we have to be there.” And finally, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte called for turbo-charging defense production among member states, adding: “We have to make sure that Ukraine is in a position of strength.”

Read more …

It’s not just the money. Europe has no war industry, it has no troops. For decades, it let the US take care of all that. Much cheaper. It will take decades to re-balance this, if ever.

• European NATO ‘Fears Cost’ Of Trump’s Ukraine Burden Shift (RT)

Officials in European NATO states are reluctant to shoulder Ukraine’s security without US backing, The Financial Times reported on Thursday. This week, the US President Donald Trump administration signaled its desire for minimal involvement, once a possible truce is achieved. According to the FT, Washington’s transatlantic allies “fear they will have to bear the cost of postwar security and reconstruction” and are frustrated by Trump’s negotiations with Russia conducted without their input. One source indicated that a scenario where “the US says, ‘We did the ceasefire, and all of the rest is for you to clean up’” wouldn’t work for the EU. The diplomat further noted: “There is a limit to what the EU alone can realistically provide in terms of money, arms, and perhaps boots on the ground.”

Another EU official remarked that “the Americans don’t see a role for Europe in the big geopolitical questions related to the war,” adding: “Trump sees us as money.” Former US President Joe Biden’s stated policy was to stand with Ukraine “for as long as it takes,” a sentiment echoed by the EU and various national governments. The shift in Washington’s stance was articulated by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at a meeting of arms donors in Germany on Wednesday. Hegseth characterized Kiev’s ambition to recover territories it has lost since 2014 as “an unrealistic objective,” an “illusionary goal” would only lead to greater suffering. He also dismissed the feasibility of NATO membership for Ukraine and emphasized that any post-ceasefire peacekeeping mission should not involve the US-led military bloc or US forces: “To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be US troops deployed to Ukraine.”

Trump then made his intentions clear by announcing he had held a “lengthy and highly productive” phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the UK issued a joint statement on Wednesday evening alongside the EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, reaffirming support for the previous US government’s approach. Releasing the statement on Wednesday Kallas declared Ukrainian territorial integrity “unconditional” and demanded Western Europe has a “central role” in any negotiations. Russia has consistently expressed concerns over NATO’s eastward expansion since the 1990s, viewing it as a direct threat to its national security. Moscow has viewed Ukraine’s potential NATO membership as a “red line” and a significant factor in the ongoing Ukraine conflict.

Read more …

“While [Trump and Putin] negotiate on peace, EU officials issue worthless statements. You can’t request a seat at the negotiating table. You have to earn it! Through strength, good leadership and smart diplomacy.”

• Orban Sees EU As Undeserving Of Role In Ukraine Settlement Talks (TASS)

The EU leadership has not earned a seat at the Ukraine negotiating table alongside Russia and the US, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said. His comments came in response to a statement by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, who, following phone talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, insisted that Europe and Ukraine should be included in any negotiations to resolve the conflict. The statement was issued on behalf of the EU as well as France, Germany, Poland, Italy, Spain and the UK.

“This declaration is a sad testament of bad Brusselian leadership. While President Donald Trump and President Putin negotiate on peace, EU officials issue worthless statements. You can’t request a seat at the negotiating table. You have to earn it! Through strength, good leadership and smart diplomacy. The position of Brussels – to support killing as long as it takes – is morally and politically unacceptable,” Orban wrote on X. Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Putin’s conversation with Trump on Wednesday lasted almost 90 minutes. They discussed the crisis in Ukraine, the Middle East and exchanging convicted nationals of the two countries. The Russian and US leaders agreed to maintain communication and arrange a face-to-face meeting.

Read more …

But that excuse is all Europe has.

• Vance Blasts ‘Russian Meddling’ Excuse (RT)

Western mainstream political parties blaming Russian meddling for electoral failures are increasingly out of touch with voters, US Vice President J.D. Vance has said. EU politicians would rather suppress dissent than reflect on their actions, he told the Wall Street Journal on Thursday. Ahead of attending the Munich Security Conference on Friday, Vance urged Western politicians to embrace the rise of anti-establishment politics. He criticized attempts to dismiss viewpoints on issues such as traditional values and immigration by those who attribute them to “misinformation.” “If your democratic society can be taken down by $200,000 of social media ads, then you should think seriously about how strong your grip on or how strong your understanding of the will of the people actually is,” Vance said.

Hillary Clinton, former US secretary of state and presidential candidate, notably popularized the tactic of blaming Russia following her loss to Donald Trump in the 2016 US presidential election — a claim Moscow has consistently denied. A recent instance occurred in Romania in December, where the Constitutional Court annulled the first round of voting in the country’s presidential election after right-wing anti-establishment candidate Calin Georgescu unexpectedly led the race. Media reports revealed that the alleged Russian interference cited by the court actually stemmed from a consulting firm associated with the ruling National Liberal Party. Allegations of Russian efforts to undermine Romanian democracy were promoted by Context, an NGO funded by the US through the National Endowment for Democracy — an organization that according to its co-founder Allen Weinstein is mostly doing in the open what the CIA previously did covertly.

The narrative suggesting Moscow bolstered Georgescu was supported by the US Embassy in Romania and senior American officials. Vance argued that mainstream parties in the EU are “kind of terrified of their own people.” He pointed to the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which despite electoral success struggles to find coalition partners due to being labeled extremist by centrist factions. Elon Musk, a close ally of Trump, ignited controversy in Berlin by endorsing the AfD in this month’s federal election, asserting that “the entire fate of Europe” hinges on its outcome. In response, the German government accused the billionaire of election interference, with Chancellor Olaf Scholz stating that freedom of speech does not encompass the promotion of “extreme-right positions.”

Read more …

“..Trump, Elon Musk and the DOGE sniff out “the fraud and corruption of the Biden Ukraine project.”

• Musk Fraud Probes May Explain ‘Urgency’ of Trump-Putin Call (Sp.)

“Trump appears to have a better understanding of the causes and conditions of the Ukraine-Russia and US/NATO versus Russia conflict,” retired US Air Force Lt. Col and ex-DoD analyst Karen Kwiatkowski told Sputnik, commenting on Wednesday’s lengthy telephone conversation between the Russian and US leaders and its focus on Ukraine. “His tendency to be practical (something we are not seeing in his Israel-Gaza policy) is apparent here. The signal is one of deal making and practicality,” Kwiatkowski said. The call comes at a decisive moment, the observer stressed, pointing out that Congress will be teeing up a new package of aid to Ukraine shortly, with current commitments to run dry in March, as Trump, Elon Musk and the DOGE sniff out “the fraud and corruption of the Biden Ukraine project.”

“I suspect this cannot be kept under the lid much longer, so this may explain the urgency of a settlement,” Kwiatkowski said. “Whether Trump gets a settlement he likes from Russia” or not “is not clear, but I think Trump realizes Russia has already won, and Europe/NATO, in agitating for a long costly wasteful war, needs to start dealing with what it has wrought,” the analyst said. Earlier in the day Wednesday, President Trump took to Truth Social to announce that he had a “lengthy and highly productive” phone call with President Putin, and that the leaders had discussed an array of issues, focusing on Ukraine.

“We each talked about the strengths of our respective Nations, and the great benefit that we will someday have in working together. But first, as we both agreed, we want to stop the millions of deaths taking place in the War with Russia/Ukraine,” Trump said. “We have also agreed to have our respective teams start negotiations immediately,” Trump said, adding that his first step would be to call Volodymyr Zelensky. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed important details on the call, including Putin and Trump’s expression of mutual commitment to a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine crisis. Putin reiterated the importance of addressing the “root causes” of the conflict, Peskov said, and invited Trump to visit Moscow. The conversation was said to have lasted for one and a half hours.

Read more …

“..criticized Zelensky in parliament, accusing him of transforming Ukraine into a dictatorship with “closed borders, state-controlled television, and leader KimJong-Ze..”

• Zelensky Targets Political Opposition (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has imposed personal sanctions on five prominent individuals, including potential political rivals former President Pyotr Poroshenko and exiled opposition leader Viktor Medvedchuk. Zelensky previously suspended elections nationwide, citing the ongoing conflict with Russia. On Wednesday evening, Zelensky put into power an order penned by the National Security and Defense Council, which he chairs. In addition to the two politicians, it targeted three wealthy entrepreneurs, including Poroshenko’s business partner Gennady Bogolyubov, former Dnepropetrovsk Region Governor Igor Kolomoysky, and former MP Konstantin Zhevago. Reports of impending sanctions against Poroshenko have circulated in the Ukrainian media since January.

The former president, now serving as an MP, has condemned Zelensky’s move as politically motivated and labeled it “a crime” with “many accomplices.” He accused Zelensky of attempting to scapegoat others for his own mistakes. MP Aleksey Goncharenko, a political ally of Poroshenko, criticized Zelensky in parliament, accusing him of transforming Ukraine into a dictatorship with “closed borders, state-controlled television, and leader KimJong-Ze,” alluding to the Western perception of North Korea. The sanctions issued by Zelensky vary in severity, ranging from largely symbolic revocations of state awards to the freezing of assets, prohibiting legal contracts, and barring the use of mass media for communication. Zelensky has framed the measures as essential for “protecting our state and restoring justice,” alleging that the five targeted individuals “earned billions by effectively selling out Ukraine and Ukrainian interests.”

The sanctions were announced shortly after US President Donald Trump reportedly secured Zelensky’s agreement to transfer $500 billion worth of Ukrainian rare earth minerals as compensation for American military assistance. Trump aims to swiftly resolve the Ukraine conflict while recouping costs for US taxpayers. Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, although he has refused to call new elections or relinquish power, citing martial law in Ukraine. He maintains that his landslide victory over Poroshenko in 2019 grants him sufficient legitimacy and insists that Ukrainians are not interested in choosing a new leader at this time.

Read more …

“..wasting taxpayer money on “ridiculous – and in many cases, malicious – pet projects of entrenched bureaucrats..”

• Trump Will Terminate ‘Woke’ Policies – Musk (RT)

US President Donald Trump and his administration will work to end the promotion of diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) programs across the world, Elon Musk announced at the World Governments Summit in Dubai on Thursday. The billionaire’s statement comes as Trump has launched a campaign aimed at ending DEI initiatives within the federal government since assuming office last month. Shortly after being sworn in, Trump repealed some 78 orders signed by his predecessor Joe Biden. This includes terminating DEI programs and ending protections for transgender individuals. Trump also set a 60-day deadline for federal agencies to cease all DEI-related practices.

Speaking via video link at the Dubai forum, Musk, who currently heads Trump’s newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), acknowledged that there has been “a lot of pushing of DEI worldwide” by the US and stressed that the new administration “doesn’t agree” with this approach. “We want to terminate that stuff, and we are,” Musk said. He warned that if DEI principles were allowed to continue and be used to implement “crazy things that are untruthful” and “don’t reflect reality” into things like artificial intelligence, it could easily lead to a “very dystopian outcome.” Earlier this month, the billionaire claimed that DOGE had already saved the US over $1 billion by scrapping over 100 contracts related to DEI programs.

Musk also reported that his department has managed to cut federal spending by $1 billion per day by effectively halting “the hiring of people into unnecessary positions, the deletion of DEI, and stopping improper payments to foreign organizations.” Trump has also ordered the dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which was Washington’s primary vehicle for funding political projects abroad. The president accused the agency of wasting taxpayer money on “ridiculous – and in many cases, malicious – pet projects of entrenched bureaucrats,” which included promoting DEI initiative both domestically and internationally. Musk has also called USAID a “criminal organization” and claimed that it had funded bioweapons research.

Read more …

USAID’s ugly little sister.

• Trump Freezes All National Endowment for Democracy Funding (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s administration has frozen all funding to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), several media outlets reported on Wednesday. The move is said to have caused a “bloodbath” within the organization, leaving it unable to pay staff or fulfill financial commitments. The NED, established in 1983, is officially a nonprofit organization that provides grants to support democratic initiatives worldwide. However, over the years, it has faced allegations of covertly influencing political outcomes, with critics arguing that it has taken over covert functions previously handled by the CIA, particularly those aimed at overthrowing foreign governments.

Earlier this month, Elon Musk, who heads Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and has been in charge of finding ways to cut federal spending, singled out NED, calling it a ”scam” and an “evil organization” that needs to be dissolved. Since then, the organization has reportedly been “under siege” from Musk’s DOGE, according to Free Press. “It’s been a bloodbath,” one NED worker told the outlet, explaining that the organization has been unable to meet payroll and pay basic overhead expenses.

The NED has faced longstanding criticism over its role in supporting political movements to undermine sovereign governments. The Center for Renewing America, a think tank founded by Russell Vought, Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget, released a policy paper on February 7, accusing the NED of acting as the “tip of the proverbial spear for heightened CIA and State Department efforts to foster political revolution in Ukraine.” The report claimed that the NED had funneled tens of millions of dollars to a myriad of Ukrainian political entities and anti-Russian interests and “advanced both the ‘Orange Revolution’ and ‘Maidan Revolution’ that paved the way for the current Ukraine-Russia war.”

The NED has also faced accusations of sponsoring “color revolutions” in Georgia and Kyrgyzstan and of funding opposition groups in Belarus, Serbia, and Egypt. “The reasons for defunding NED are as numerous as they are imperative,” Vought’s think tank wrote, listing things like “Ukraine warmongering” and “Middle East meddling” as the most clear and pressing rationales for dismantling the agency. The NED funding freeze comes as part of broader measures by the Trump administration to cut foreign spending. This has already included a crackdown on the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington’s primary vehicle for funding political projects abroad. Trump earlier called for the agency to be shut down, claiming it is run by “radical lunatics.”

Read more …

Easily the craziest story this week. People can’t retire when the mineshaft elevator breaks down.

• DOGE Exposes Insane Federal Use Of Old Limestone Mine (MN)

Elon Musk’s DOGE has revealed that the federal government is using an old limestone mine in Pennsylvania to store tens of thousands, if not millions of physical paper files in cardboard boxes. The files are just retirement documents for federal workers, so could easily be digitised, yet the government has continued to physically store them. The mine is 230 feet underground and requires over 700 workers with the Office of Personnel Management to operate and upkeep it. What the hell? At least if there is a nuclear apocalypse whoever survives in here will have access to…information on retired government workers. Musk shared the insane finding, noting “Maybe it’s just me, but I think there is room for improvement here.”

The vault inside Iron Mountain which is equipped with a huge reservoir for geothermal cooling. A 2021 report uncovered that despite spending $106 million spent trying to digitize the process, the government abandoned the idea and decided to stick with the stone mine. Labelling it a “time warp,” Musk noted that “The limiting factor is the speed at which the mine shaft elevator can move determines how many people can retire from the federal government.” “The elevator breaks down sometimes, and nobody can retire,” Musk revealed, adding “Doesn’t that sound crazy?” Musk also revealed that since 2014 they had gotten to the letter B in their efforts to digitize the records.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1889923424145011151

The DOGE post has close to 45 million views at time of writing. Commenting on the mine and other “rot” being exposed by DOGE, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday on Fox News that the media was left in “sheer silence.” “I was watching the faces of the mainstream media reporters who were in the Oval Office, and there was sheer silence because it appeared that many of them who are supposed to be writing the truth about our federal bureaucracy had no idea that the federal retirement system is being processed deep into the ground and is not computerized,” Leavitt said.

“They, the president and Elon are shining a light on the truth about our federal government. But the mainstream media simultaneously is saying there’s an alleged lack of transparency and access. It’s preposterous,” Leavitt continued, adding “Together, President Trump and Elon, the entire DOGE team and this entire administration are shining a light on the corruption, the waste, the fraud and abuse.” “Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and they are revealing the rot of this city every single day. It’s music to the ears of the American people who voted for this. As you rightly pointed out, 77 million of them liked what President Trump promised on the campaign trail, and he is delivering and it’s fascinating,” Leavitt urged.

Read more …

“Even Ronald Reagan, the great apostle of smaller government, couldn’t achieve in eight years what Mr. Musk has done in 3 1/2 weeks.”

• Musk: “We Need To Delete Entire Agencies”; Fed Worker Buyout Tops 75,000 (ZH)

Early Thursday, Elon Musk joined Dubai’s annual World Governments Summit via video link to provide an update on his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) efforts within the US government, aimed at rooting out corruption and dismantling federal agencies, reducing the federal workforce, and eliminating the shadow government operated in a complex web of NGOs. “We need to delete entire agencies. We need to remove the roots of the weed. That’s not to say there won’t be an increase in future bureaucracy from another administration but it will be from a lower baseline. Nothing is forever but we can strengthen the foundation,” Musk told the crowd.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1889921154082807841

President Trump appointed Musk as a “special government employee” to lead DOGE and has waged war against the federal bureaucracy. The latest data from Bloomberg, citing sources familiar with the voluntary resignation program for the federal workforce, indicates that 75,000 workers across various federal agencies have opted to leave. This number only makes up about 3% of the 2.4 million civilian federal workforce, far short of White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt’s target of 5% to 10%. This came after a federal judge in Boston lifted his order freezing the buyout program overnight. “The federal workforce grew 6.3% under former President Joe Biden, fueled by pandemic spending programs. A 3% cut to the federal workforce would only bring the number down to 2023 levels,” Bloomberg pointed out.


Source: Bloomberg

Even with the targeted buyouts missing the White House’s estimates, an op-ed by the Wall Street Journal’s deputy op-ed editor, Matthew Hennessey, noted: “Even Ronald Reagan, the great apostle of smaller government, couldn’t achieve in eight years what Mr. Musk has done in 3 1/2 weeks. The billionaire businessman is less apostle than avenging angel. The Department of Government Efficiency is the change we’ve been waiting for.” On Tuesday, Trump signed an executive order to eliminate what he described as “waste and bloat” in the government while “promptly undertaking preparations to initiate large-scale reductions in force.” He called it a “critical transformation” of Washington, DC, and framed the move as a necessary step forward for the nation.

Early Thursday, we noted internet search trends across the DC metro area, including Maryland and northern Virginia counties, indicating growing panic among federal workers in the so-called DC swamp. Searches for “Criminal Defense Lawyer” and “RICO Laws” have erupted in recent weeks. Draining the swamp is long overdue. Yet Democrats are calling for war against Musk and Trump over DOGE’s efforts for a more transparent and efficient government. Some far-left Democrats, like Rep. Robert Garcia, called for supporters to begin arming up.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1889848260954841445

Read more …

“..the US Department of Defense had committed more than $9 million on two projects called Active Social Engineering Defense (ASED) and Large Scale Social Deception (LSD)”.

• US Govt Paid Reuters For ‘Social Deception’ – Musk (RT)

A subsidiary of Reuters has received millions in US government funding for “large scale social deception” projects, Elon Musk, the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has claimed. In a post on Thursday, Musk weighed in on data from the website USAspending.gov stating that Thomson Reuters Special Services LLC, a subsidiary of Thomson Reuters, had contracts with government agencies. One of the publicly available documents stipulated that the US Department of Defense had committed more than $9 million on two projects called Active Social Engineering Defense (ASED) and Large Scale Social Deception (LSD). Commenting on the document, Musk wrote: “Reuters was paid millions of dollars by the US government for ‘large scale social deception’. That is literally what it says on the purchase order! They’re a total scam. Just wow.”

According to the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the ASEAD program aims to develop automated defenses against social engineering attacks, which could involve deceptive tactics to manipulate individuals into divulging confidential information. Neither the Pentagon nor USAspending.gov elaborates on the purpose of the program, but both LSD and ASEAD are listed as activities within the realm of engineering and research and development. Reuters was awarded another Pentagon contract that provides the Department of Defense with unidentified advanced development services. The agency has also received around $500,000 from the State Department for access to news services.

Both Musk and US President Donald Trump have vowed to fight corruption and wasteful spending in the US government. In light of this, several federal agencies have terminated contracts totaling $8 million with Politico magazine following Musk’s criticism of these agreements as a “wasteful” use of taxpayer funds. Trump has also suggested that billions of dollars have been misappropriated within agencies such as the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington’s primary agency for funding political projects abroad, to pay for favorable media coverage of Democrats. The claim was rejected by several US media outlets, including Politico and the Associated Press.

Read more …

AI requires lots of energy. Where is that cheap? In the Gulf states.

• The Great AI Game: US, China Vie For West Asian Cash (Cradle)

China’s unveiling of DeepSeek sent shockwaves through the tech industry. The app skyrocketed to the top of Apple’s US App Store, surpassing ChatGPT and Gemini, and triggered a market tremor: US tech giants like Nvidia saw their valuations plunge by $600 billion. The development heightened Washington’s security anxieties, with officials warning that China’s AI advances could give Beijing a military edge and serve as a tool for spreading state-backed narratives. Global investors have responded by shifting capital toward China’s AI sector, signaling confidence in Beijing’s ability to challenge US dominance. Simultaneously, China is accelerating its push for technological self-sufficiency, reducing reliance on western semiconductor firms like TSMC and Samsung.

Beyond economics, AI-driven automation is expected to disrupt the global labor market, displacing jobs in data analysis, translation, and customer service. Meanwhile, China’s surging demand for AI talent is attracting experts from western markets, exacerbating a potential brain drain in the US and Europe. The global AI contest is often framed as a US–China duel, but West Asia is emerging as a decisive force capable of tilting the balance. With DeepSeek proving that western AI hegemony will no longer go unchallenged, Persian Gulf states are reevaluating their AI alliances, making them a critical factor in Washington’s efforts to secure AI investments. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar are now considered the “swing states” of AI geopolitics. Their importance in the AI revolution rests on three key pillars: energy, finance, and geography.

Energy is the most obvious element as generative AI data centers require vast amounts of power, and energy-rich countries in West Asia are expected to benefit significantly. Persian Gulf states, rich in energy resources, are well-positioned to benefit from this demand. Financially, oil-rich countries such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE are heavily investing in AI infrastructure and future technologies, making them not only key customers but also influential players. Sovereign wealth funds are channeling billions into AI-related projects through initiatives like Sanabil, a subsidiary of Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF), which invests $3 billion annually in top-tier venture capital firms across both the US and China. In addition, Prosperity7, the investment arm of Saudi Aramco, made headlines by investing in Zhipu AI, one of China’s largest AI startups, becoming the first non-Chinese investor to do so.

The move highlights West Asia’s evolving strategy of playing on both sides in the geopolitical race for AI, maintaining influence and independence despite growing global pressure to ally with the US or China. Such investments demonstrate the region’s ability to balance geopolitical tensions while expanding its influence in the global AI ecosystem. In addition, the geographical location of West Asia represents a fully untapped advantage in the development of AI globally. Data centers play a pivotal role in improving the speed and quality of digital services for users as service efficiency increases and data centers get closer to the end user. Having multiple data centers in strategic locations ensures that data recovery backups are provided in case of failures.

The region’s location is also an advantage, as West Asia serves as a digital crossroads between Europe, Asia, and Africa. The majority of web traffic between these continents passes through the region, making it a prime hub for global AI deployment. As AI competition intensifies, West Asia is no longer just an emerging market – it is a strategic theater in the tech war between Washington and Beijing. China views the region as an extension of its Digital Silk Road, aiming to expand its technological footprint through cost-effective AI solutions.

The US, on the other hand, is deepening its AI partnerships with Persian Gulf states, trying to ensure that AI infrastructure aligns with western standards. The battle over AI in West Asia transcends mere technological rivalry; it is a contest for economic and geopolitical dominance. With Persian Gulf states positioned as kingmakers in this struggle, their decisions in the coming years could redefine the balance of power in the AI era. The US–China AI war is no longer just a two-player game – West Asia is now firmly in the mix, and its role in shaping the future of AI is only growing.

Read more …

I have a hard time seeing Musk as a -nuclear- warmonger. For one thing, how would he ever get to Mars?

• The Pentagon Is Recruiting Elon Musk To Help Them Win A Nuclear War (MacLeod)

Donald Trump has announced his intention to build a gigantic anti-ballistic missile system to counter Chinese and Russian nuclear weapons, and he is recruiting Elon Musk to help him. The Pentagon has long dreamed of constructing an American “Iron Dome.” The technology is couched in the defense language – i.e., to make America safe again. But like its Israeli counterpart, it would function as an offensive weapon, giving the United States the ability to launch nuclear attacks anywhere in the world without having to worry about the consequences of a similar response. This power could upend the fragile peace maintained by decades of mutually assured destruction, a doctrine that has underpinned global stability since the 1940s. Washington’s war planners have long salivated at the thought of winning a nuclear confrontation and have sought the ability to do so for decades. Some believe that they have found a solution and a savior in the South African-born billionaire and his technology.

Neoconservative think tank the Heritage Foundation published a video last year stating that Musk might have “solved the nuclear threat coming from China.” It claimed that Starlink satellites from his SpaceX company could be easily modified to carry weapons that could shoot down incoming rockets. As they explain: “Elon Musk has proven that you can put microsatellites into orbit, for $1 million apiece. Using that same technology, we can put 1,000 microsatellites in continuous orbit around the Earth, that can track, engage and shoot down, using tungsten slugs, missiles that are launched from North Korea, Iran, Russia, and China.” Although the Heritage Foundation advises using tungsten slugs (i.e., bullets) as interceptors, hypersonic missiles have been opted for instead. To this end, a new organization, the Castelion Company, was established in 2023.

Castelion is a SpaceX cutout; six of the seven members of its leadership team and two of its four senior advisors are ex-senior SpaceX employees. The other two advisors are former high officials from the Central Intelligence Agency, including Mike Griffin, Musk’s longtime friend, mentor, and partner. Castelion’s mission, in its own words, is to be at the cutting edge of a new global arms race. As the company explains: “Despite the U.S. annual defense budget exceeding those of the next ten biggest spenders combined, there’s irrefutable evidence that authoritarian regimes are taking the lead in key military technologies like hypersonic weapons. Simply put – this cannot be allowed to happen.” The company has already secured gigantic contracts with the U.S. military, and reports suggest that it has made significant strides toward its hypersonic missile goals.

Castelion’s slogan is “Peace Through Deterrence.” But in reality, the U.S. achieving a breakthrough in hypersonic missile technology would rupture the fragile nuclear peace that has existed for over 70 years and usher in a new era where Washington would have the ability to use whatever weapons it wished, anywhere in the world at any time, safe in the knowledge that it would be impervious to a nuclear response from any other nation. In short, the fear of a nuclear retaliation from Russia or China has been one of the few forces moderating U.S. aggression throughout the world. If this is lost, the United States would have free rein to turn entire countries – or even regions of the planet – into vapor. This would, in turn, hand it the power to terrorize the world and impose whatever economic and political system anywhere it wishes.

If this sounds fanciful, this “Nuclear Blackmail” was a more-or-less official policy of successive American administrations in the 1940s and 1950s. The United States remains the only country ever to drop an atomic bomb in anger, doing so twice in 1945 against a Japanese foe that was already defeated and was attempting to surrender.

President Truman ordered the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a show of force, primarily to the Soviet Union. Many in the U.S. government wished to use the atomic bomb on the U.S.S.R. President Truman immediately, however, reasoned that if America nuked Moscow, the Red Army would invade Europe as a response. As such, he decided to wait until the U.S. had enough warheads to completely destroy the Soviet Union and its military. War planners calculated this figure at around 400, and to that end—totaling a nation representing one-sixth of the world’s landmass—the president ordered the immediate ramping up of production. This decision was met with stiff opposition among the American scientific community, and it is widely believed that Manhattan Project scientists, including Robert J. Oppenheimer himself, passed nuclear secrets to Moscow in an effort to speed up their nuclear project and develop a deterrent to halt this doomsday scenario.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Humanity

 

 

Princess

 

 

Dogkey
https://twitter.com/i/status/1890033188241915922

 

 

Albatross
https://twitter.com/i/status/1890110258112262291

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle January 31 2025

Jan 312025
 
 January 31, 2025  Posted by at 11:30 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  78 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Standing nude 1928

 

• Trump’s Outsider Nominees Ran The Senate Gauntlet And Emerged Unscathed (Whedon)
• Why Does the NYT Continue To Print Front Page Lies About RFK Jr.? (Fleetwood)
• ‘An Abject Lie And You Know It!’: Patel Claps Back At Adam Schiff (JTN)
• Stop the Nonsense and Confirm Tulsi Gabbard (Charlie Kirk)
• Trump’s Executive Orders Are Key to DOGE’s Success (Silverstein)
• Ukraine Conflict ‘Needs To End Now’ – Rubio (RT)
• Ukraine’s ‘Independent’ Institutions Collapse As Trump Unplugs The ATM (Marsden)
• EU Considering Return To Russian Gas – FT (RT)
• Ukraine Wants EU To Replace Lost US Aid (RT)
• Ukraine ‘An Invented State’ – Romanian Election Frontrunner (RT)
• Kiev Mayor Accuses Zelensky’s Team Of Attempting To ‘Usurp Power’ (RT)
• Architect of Russia Sanctions Sentenced To 11 Years In Prison (RT)
• Trump’s Doomed Plan for Ukraine (Scott Ritter)
• Russian Skating Stars On Board Crashed American Plane (RT)
• US ‘In Contact’ With Russia – Trump (RT)
• What Sultan Erdogan Is Really Up To (Pepe Escobar)
• Italy Blocks DeepSeek (RT)
• Cloud Capital vs AI (Yanis Varoufakis)

 

 

 

 

Crowder

Canary

 

 

 

 

Vance

Watters

Shanahan
https://twitter.com/i/status/1884427706852618362

 

 

 

 

These hearings take place at a very questionable level. They pick a quote, strip away all context, and Bob’s your uncle. RFK wants to ban the polio vaccine (no,really!) , Tulsi is a traitor because she won’t call Ed Snowden a traitor, Kash is a cop killer for sympathizing with J6 prisoners. There’s nothing wrong with the nominees, but a lot with those that question them.

• Trump’s Outsider Nominees Ran The Senate Gauntlet And Emerged Unscathed (Whedon)

Three of President Donald Trump’s most contentious nominees for Cabinet posts faced tense confirmation hearings on Thursday, with Kash Patel, Tulsi Gabbard, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. all fending off attacks from irate Democrats, many of whom pressed on partisan matters, such as the Jan. 6 capitol riot. Kennedy found himself in familiar territory after appearing Wednesday before the Senate Finance Committee. With Pete Hegseth now confirmed as Secretary of Defense, the trio represent the last of Trump’s unconventional nominees tasked with substantially overhauling the departments they’ve been appointed to lead. Each met significant skepticism, including much from the Republican side of the aisle. All three emerged unscathed by any new outrage — manufactured or otherwise — though they may not have flipped any lawmakers to the cause as many seemed to have already resolved to vote against their confirmations. Here’s a look at how things played out.

Patel
The FBI Director-designate’s hearing before the Judiciary Committee was far and away the most tense. The bureau has faced scandal after scandal in recent years, including widespread allegations of politicization. While much of the hearing saw lawmakers agree on the need for a non-partisan and independent FBI, Democrats worked to paint Patel as a Trump loyalist who would invariably comply with the president’s, possibly unlawful demands. Several Democrats, including Sens. Amy Klobuchar, Minn.; Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; took exception to Patel’s work related to a recording by Jan. 6 prisoners that he had worked to promote. The trio largely pressed him on his efforts to promote the single and raise funds for the families of those incarcerated.

One exchange grew particularly heated as Schiff accused Patel of profiting off of people who attacked law enforcement and urged him to look at the Capitol Police guarding the hearing. “That’s an abject lie and you know it!” Patel fumed. “I’ve never, never, ever accepted violence against law enforcement. I’ve worked with these men and women as you know you go and I did not make a single dime out of it.” Democrats also attempted to coax Patel into detailing his testimony to special counsel Jack Smith about Trump’s Mar-a-Lago case, though Patel insisted he was not permitted to discuss his testimony and that the panel would have to seek its release from the court.

Gabbard
The former Hawaii Democrat spent much of her hearing before the Intelligence Committee playing defense as members of her former party raised concerns over her past foreign trips. An advocate for non-intervention and surveillance reform, Gabbard’s appointment to serve as director of national intelligence roiled some in the D.C. foreign policy establishment. Her 2017 trip to Syria after which she insisted that now-ousted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was not an enemy of the United States. The trip also came under scrutiny in light of a reported call between a Hezbollah figure and another person indicating Gabbard had met with an unidentified “big guy.” Gabbard denied meeting with members of the Lebanon-based group and called the allegation “absurd” during an exchange with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine.

She further used some of her own remarks to castigate the Intelligence Community for its perceived politicization and to insist that she would uproot it. “President Trump’s reelection is a clear mandate from the American people to break this cycle of failure and weaponization and politicization of the intelligence community and begin to restore trust in those who have been charged with the critical task of securing our nation,” she said. Frustrating many senators was her resolute unwillingness to condemn Edward Snowden as a “traitor” to the United States. Snowden famously released classified materials exposing government surveillance programs and has since fled to Russia, becoming a nationalized citizen of that country. Though Gabbard agreed that Snowden broke the law, she declined to call him a traitor and highlighted the unconstitutional nature of what he brought to light, ABC News reported.

Kennedy
The former independent presidential candidate was back for round two of confirmation hearings in his bid to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. He appeared before the Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday and subsequently fielded questions from the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Thursday. Kennedy faced questions related to his past statements on vaccine efficacy, especially the measles vaccine. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., offered some of the most contentious questioning during the process. Cassidy took exception to Kennedy’s remarks linking the measles vaccine to autism and urged him to use his influence to foster trust in vaccines.

The would-be HHS secretary indicated he would be happy to correct his statements and apologize should the science prove him to be in the wrong. “I want the best science,” he said. “I can guarantee you on my word of honor, if you show me science that says that I’m wrong, I’m going to say I was wrong. I don’t have any problem. There’s nothing that would make me happier.” Kennedy’s is one of the few positions that requires a would-be officeholder to testify before two committees. Both panels will need to recommend him for the office before his confirmation proceeds to a floor vote.

Read more …

“..an outpouring of more than 10,000 comments calling Kennedy “a lunatic” and “a present danger to our health.”

• Why Does the NYT Continue To Print Front Page Lies About RFK Jr.? (Fleetwood)

Any NYT reader looking at the buzzy front page headline below would immediately think that Robert F Kennedy Jr. is a madman. Can he really be an advocate for repealing the polio vaccine, a disease that has killed and crippled tens of millions of kids? “Kennedy’s Lawyer Has Asked the F.D.A. to Revoke Approval of the Polio Vaccine” To the ordinary reader, the headline says pretty clearly that Kennedy asked his lawyer to revoke the polio vaccine. The headline makes the shocking accusation that Kennedy is in favor of banning the polio vaccine. There is no other way of interpreting it. But it is flagrantly false and a gross distortion of the truth. There is not one polio vaccine; there are six different polio vaccines that are used worldwide. Moreover, Aaron Siri, the lawyer in question, does not represent Kennedy in his petition.

Contrary to the misrepresentations the NYT has been making, Kennedy does not oppose vaccines or want to take away anybody’s vaccine. All seven of his children were vaccinated, including with the polio vaccine, and his grandkids were also vaccinated against polio. Most importantly, Kennedy has long insisted publicly that he is “all for the polio vaccine.” He has said that the polio vaccine has prevented hundreds of thousands of deaths, a seemingly relevant fact that the Times deliberately omitted from its punchy but reckless news article. Kennedy does question the long-term of some vaccines and wants further studies about them. When RFK is quoted as saying no vaccines are safe, he is saying no vaccines are “completely” safe – they all have side effects.

The prestigious New England Journal of Medicine supports Kennedy’s positions regarding vaccine safety and has called for more funding for “Post Authorization Vaccine Safety”: “Progress in vaccine-safety science has understandably been slow.” “We recommend the National Academy of Medicine conduct an independent and comprehensive review to address these important and complex structure and governance issues. The highest quality research should be funded.” The NEJM also called for a review of the 1986 Act of Congress, which holds that pharmaceutical companies cannot be held liable for adverse reactions to vaccines and cannot be sued.

The main reason Kennedy is a vaccine skeptic is that the widely accepted reality that the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control are hugely influenced by Big Pharma. A nefarious revolving door allows executives to ping-pong back and forth between the regulatory bodies that approve vaccines and the drug companies that profit from them. Nine of the last ten FDA chiefs moved on to well-paid jobs with Big Pharma. This corporate capture inevitably leads to a conflict of interest, a corrupt dynamic not permitted in other countries.

Moreover, Big Pharma receives billions of dollars from the government to prepare the drug studies it submits and which the FDA relies on for licensing new drugs. Today, nearly 45% of the FDA’s $5.9 billion budget comes from the user fees companies pay when they apply for drug approval. These industry-paid fees have increasingly resulted in a lower burden of proof for medication approval, according to Public Citizen (a Ralph Nader spinoff). Don’t bite the hand that feeds you. This latest NYT article and other mainstream media repetitions predictably provoked an outpouring of more than 10,000 comments calling Kennedy “a lunatic” and “a present danger to our health.” This is but a continuation of a slew of NYT articles seeking to falsely link Kennedy to the misleading position that he wants to ban the polio vaccine and all other vaccines.

RFK Warren

 

Pharma recipients

Read more …

Oh no, not Schiff again..

• ‘An Abject Lie And You Know It!’: Patel Claps Back At Adam Schiff (JTN)

FBI Director-designate Kash Patel responded furiously to Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., as the lawmaker challenged him to face Capitol Police and implied he supported violence against them. Schiff pressed Patel over his help promoting a recording of the Jan. 6 prisoners to raise money for their families. The California Democrat urged Patel to look at Capitol Police officers in the room. “I want you to look at them if you can, if you have the courage to look them in the eye, Mr. Patel, and tell them you’re proud of what you did,” Schiff said. “Tell them you’re proud that you raised money off of people that assaulted their colleagues, that pepper sprayed them, that beat them with poles. Tell them you’re proud of what you did. Mr. Patel, they’re right there. They’re guarding you today. Tell them how proud you are.”

“That’s an abject lie and you know it!” Schiff fumed. “I’ve never, never, ever accepted violence against law enforcement. I’ve worked with these men and women as you know you go and I did not make a single dime out of it.” “Well, let me, let me, let you ask them if I have their back. So let’s see about that answer,” he retorted.

Patel

Read more …

“Republicans can either participate in the president’s reform agenda or they can be trampled by it. It’s up to them. Any questions?”

• Stop the Nonsense and Confirm Tulsi Gabbard (Charlie Kirk)

Conservatives of all stripes have enjoyed the first week of Donald Trump’s presidency. The events of the past week have made it very clear that President Trump has come in well-prepared and is laser-focused on fulfilling the many promises that won him the election. Whether it’s securing the border, breaking the DEI cartel, or ending DOJ lawfare, the president is executing his agenda with unprecedented energy and aggression. In the long term, though, securing the president’s promises can’t be done with executive orders alone. Success will come down to the president picking appointees who can carry out his will. President Trump chose Tulsi Gabbard as his director of national intelligence for a very clear reason. Ever since he entered the political scene 10 years ago, Trump has faced not just opposition but outright sabotage and deceit from the so-called “intelligence community” of Washington, D.C.

They spied on his campaign and gave life to the ridiculous smear that he was a Russian agent. Analysts deliberately withheld information from the president, then leaked about what they were doing to the press. And of course, during the 2020 election, the intelligence apparatus pressured America’s tech companies to engage in widespread censorship while a network of “former intelligence officials” lied through their teeth to denounce the Hunter Biden laptop story as “Russian disinformation.” The American intelligence world is arrogant, wayward, and in dire need of reform. That is precisely why President Trump chose former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a longtime critic of these agencies, to be his director of national intelligence.

Gabbard is indisputably qualified. She is a veteran of the Iraq War, the worst of the wars that the intel agencies blundered us into. She spent eight years in Congress and served stints on the homeland security, armed services, and foreign affairs committees, all of them relevant to the job. She has authentic bipartisan credentials: She represented the Democrats in Congress, is the choice of a MAGA president, and has the personal endorsement of Meghan McCain (a Republican with whom I have no shortage of differences). So what do her opponents bring against her? It’s simple: They lie. Every attack on Tulsi Gabbard is a smear concocted by those desperate to prevent the change voters demanded in November.

Some bad actors in D.C., and even within the Republican Party, think they can rerun the game plan of 2017 when people thought the Donald Trump moment was a fluke that would soon be over. And I mean “rerun” literally because one of the top smears against Gabbard is the same one brought against Trump eight years ago: the wild claim that Tulsi Gabbard is a “Russian asset.” Just like the attack on Trump, this smear was popularized by Hillary Clinton, and just like the attack on Trump, it’s based wholly on Gabbard’s refusal to endorse the failed groupthink consensus of Washington. Gabbard supported military aid to Ukraine prior to the country’s invasion in 2022. She called Putin a U.S. adversary. But none of that matters because this attack was never about the truth. It’s about smearing Gabbard for opposing regime change, forever wars, and a blank check for the D.C. cabal.

The same rules apply to the wild claim that Gabbard is an “Assad sympathizer” in league with the fallen dictator of Syria. The allegation is utterly ridiculous. Gabbard’s 2017 trip was cleared by House Ethics beforehand, and she did a debriefing with America’s ambassador to Lebanon afterward. Members of Congress are free to meet with foreign leaders, especially if those leaders are the ones Americans are supposed to spend billions of dollars fighting, directly or indirectly. This is why President Trump has sought direct diplomacy with Vladimir Putin and even North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un.

With nothing else to argue, Gabbard’s critics have to fall back on the complaint that she didn’t believe Assad actually used chemical weapons during his fight to hold onto power. It’s another lie – Gabbard has been saying she believes Assad used chemical weapons for more than five years. But truthfully, it wouldn’t even matter if she thought otherwise. Unlike nearly all of Washington’s war hawks, Gabbard has direct experience fighting in a misbegotten war sold with bad intelligence. Unlike most of Washington, Gabbard learned the lesson that spectacular claims about weapons of mass destruction should be backed with proof, not ridiculous threats against anyone showing skepticism.

Other attacks are even more pathetic. There’s the Hail Mary that she is “soft on Iran” when her track record makes it clear she simply shares the president’s goal of avoiding another fruitless war in the Gulf. Attacks on Gabbard’s Hindu religious beliefs are so puerile they don’t even merit a reply. Gabbard brings to the table exactly what President Trump needs in a DNI: an independent thinker who isn’t shackled to decades of Beltway consensus and who has learned to be skeptical. This isn’t just what President Trump wants, though. It’s what the American public voted for in 2024 – and the election was not a squeaker.

Republicans who hold office right now hold it thanks to voters who expect them to help Trump keep his promises. If those same Republicans instead scuttle one of the president’s essential appointments on the basis of establishment smears, then I have a simple promise: They will face a primary challenge. I, and many others, will do whatever it takes to see them replaced. Republicans can either participate in the president’s reform agenda or they can be trampled by it. It’s up to them. Any questions?

Cotton Tulsi

https://twitter.com/i/status/1885012374182142186
https://twitter.com/i/status/1884993695893573891

Read more …

“The U.S. Constitution solely vests the president with the executive power – meaning all bureaucrats subject to these executive orders exercise power at the president’s behest..”

• Trump’s Executive Orders Are Key to DOGE’s Success (Silverstein)

President Trump has just been sworn in, but his administration has already taken steps to promote a robust and efficient administrative state. By implementing four executive orders aimed at expanding the scope of Schedule F and reforming the federal hiring system, Trump can expediently implement the Department of Government Efficiency’s rulemaking and budget recommendations.

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is a temporary advisory committee tasked with implementing Trump’s “18-month DOGE agenda” of maximizing efficiency and productivity in the federal government. Because DOGE cannot execute its efficiency agenda, the president is responsible for implementing DOGE’s recommendations. DOGE will likely recommend numerous administrative rule changes and budget cuts to reduce the federal bureaucracy’s size, which means that Trump needs bureaucrats who will faithfully implement the recommendations and leeway to fire those who try to stall the department’s progress or who DOGE’s report finds are wasteful. President Trump set himself up to enforce DOGE’s recommendations by enacting four executive orders.

The first executive order is a hiring freeze on executive branch employees until the Office of Management and Budget develops a plan to reduce the size of the federal workforce. This is sound policy as the administration needs to determine what positions benefit the American people and which positions are wasteful, inefficient, and needlessly cost taxpayers money. Furthermore, the administration needs to implement a new hiring process for federal bureaucrats. Former President Biden’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives fostered a federal bureaucracy devoted to serving woke ideology instead of the public. Trump issued an order implementing reforms for the hiring process that prioritize hiring highly skilled individuals who are “committed to improving the efficiency of the Federal government, passionate about the ideals of our American republic, and committed to upholding the rule of law and the United States Constitution.”

This executive order also ends DEI hiring and is intended to lower hiring times across the executive branch. These two executive orders overhaul the hiring process for civil servants, which should result in skilled bureaucrats who will faithfully execute DOGE’s recommendations. In turn, this order will make the federal bureaucracy more efficient and responsive for the American people. Trump doesn’t just need competent bureaucrats to enact DOGE’s recommendations – he also needs leeway to remove inefficient employees and career civil servants who may work to slow down the implementation of DOGE. Beyond federal employee hiring, he enacted two executive orders enhancing his removal power over the civil service.

First, Trump signed an order resuscitating and expanding the scope of Schedule F. In his first administration, Schedule F was a job classification that removed civil service protections from policy-making positions within the executive department and allowed for streamlined hiring and firing of those positions. Biden never implemented Schedule F, instead repealing Trump’s executive order that implemented the Schedule. Trump revived Schedule F on his first day, so it should be fully implemented by the time DOGE releases initial recommendations. Moreover, Trump expanded Schedule F’s scope to include all “policy/career” positions, allowing DOGE to fully examine the civil service. The order also requires all bureaucrats to implement the administration’s policies faithfully, deeming it a fireable offense if they refuse.

In addition to this order, Trump signed a second order eliminating removal protections for Career Senior Executive Service (SES) officials and requiring them to adopt performance plans. SES officials oversee vast bureaucracies in 75 federal agencies responsible for making rules that impact millions of Americans. Previously, they were not subject to at-will removal from the president and could only be fired with cause. The president’s executive order removes these protections and subjects SES officials to the same removal requirements lesser bureaucrats are subject to – increasing presidential control over the civil service.

These changes are a lawful exercise of executive power and will allow quick implementation of DOGE’s recommendations. The U.S. Constitution solely vests the president with the executive power – meaning all bureaucrats subject to these executive orders exercise power at the president’s behest. Further, the Supreme Court approved this level of executive control in Myers v. U.S. and Humphrey’s Executor v. U.S., where they held that purely executive officers are subject to presidential removal without good cause. Therefore, courts will likely uphold Schedule F’s revival, increasing executive power over removal.

Schedule F and SES reform will allow Trump to enact DOGE’s policies in two ways. First, his orders allow him to fire bureaucrats which DOGE and department heads deem wasteful or inefficient. Second, these reforms empower Trump and his surrogates to remove civil servants from top to bottom who are intentionally stalling DOGE’s implementation. These executive orders are essential to DOGE’s success. Enacting these orders will create a proficient, highly skilled, merit-based civil service that efficiently implements DOGE’s recommendations. The result will be a civil service that effectively serves the American people.

Read more …

“a very simple way” for the US and other “sponsors” of Kiev to achieve peace by ending funding for Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s government.”

• Ukraine Conflict ‘Needs To End Now’ – Rubio (RT)

Ukraine is being destroyed by the fighting with Russia and the conflict must be swiftly settled through negotiations, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. In an interview on Sirius XM’s The Megyn Kelly Show on Thursday, Rubio reiterated US President Donald Trump’s willingness to find a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine crisis, saying that Trump believes the conflict “needs to end now.” “It needs to end to a negotiation. In any negotiation, both sides are going to have to give something up,” Rubio stated. Even a growing number Democrats who vowed to support Kiev for “as long as it takes” under the previous administration of US President Joe Biden “would now acknowledge that what we have been funding is a stalemate, a protracted conflict, and maybe even worse than a stalemate, one in which incrementally Ukraine is being destroyed and losing more and more territory,” the secretary of state said.

“What the dishonesty that has existed is that we somehow led people to believe that Ukraine would be able not just to defeat Russia, but, you know, destroy them, push them all the way back to what the world looked like in… 2014,” Rubio added. As a result of the conflict, Ukraine is “being set back a hundred years. Their energy grid is being wiped out… And you know how many Ukrainians have left Ukraine, living in other countries now? They may never return. I mean, that is their future, and it is endangered in that regard,” Rubio warned.

After his inauguration last week, Trump said he was ready to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin “anytime” to find a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine conflict. The Kremlin replied by saying that Putin is also willing to talk to his US counterpart, but stressed that Moscow has not yet been approached by Washington about organizing contacts between the two leaders. The Russian president said earlier this week that there is “a very simple way” for the US and other “sponsors” of Kiev to achieve peace by ending funding for Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s government.

Read more …

“..he now has the unique ability and apparent will to put his foot on the firehose of American cash that has been systemically undermining the interests of average citizens around the world..”

• Ukraine’s ‘Independent’ Institutions Collapse As Trump Unplugs The ATM (Marsden)

A few days ago, newly re-minted US President Donald Trump put the brakes on internal sabotage of his own administration by ordering the State Department to freeze American funding of foreign aid. Oh, won’t someone think of the starving children? Well, critics can unclutch their pearl necklaces because he did exactly that, actually. The freeze doesn’t apply to emergency food assistance, as Reuters has reported. “This is lunacy. This will kill people,” a former official for CIA handmaiden, USAID, now president of Refugees International, told Reuters. A couple of years ago, his organization was promoting the idea that the big threat to Syrians was the stability – or “normalization”, as it had said, under former President Bashar Assad. Must just be a coincidence that it’s also the position of those who failed at regime change and were looking for a way to keep that dream alive.

In December 2024, his organization found “no substantial, confirmed cases of corruption among Ukrainian partners.” Yeah, well, maybe that’s because the same organization also admits that only 1% of the aid actually makes it into the hands of local Ukrainian organizations. Doesn’t sound like the Ukrainian people are going to much miss those few crumbs that they’ve been tossed by their Western establishment ideological colonizers. But it sure does seem that the US establishment-approved front groups using Ukrainians as white gloves in which to wrap their iron fisted, self-serving establishment-backed agenda are going to have to slow their roll now that the grant train has gone right off the rails. Or maybe they’ll just get their puppets to dance for more dollars – this time from the actual public, like the true independent media they’ve long promoted themselves to be.

The guys over at Ukrainer for example, posted on their Instagram account that “Ukrainer will be tempted to reduce the team, and thus create fewer projects” in light of the funding cuts. Ukrainer, normally a culture-focused website, claims to have switched to providing “reliable information about events in Ukraine” for the duration of the war with Russia – or “until the victory”, as they put it. Wonder what incentivized them to make that switch. These guys sound like kept labrador retrievers accustomed to waiting for handouts from the master rather than hungry lone wolves driven by a passion for the cause. “US grants are on pause. Become a supporter of Hromadske,” wrote the media of the same name under an image of what looks like a journalist straight-up on fire while holding a camcorder.

Nothing screams independence like implosion-driven panic the moment a sole sponsor bails out with a sudden hand cramp that apparently radiates all the way to the US Treasury and prevents him from writing the next cheque. Ukrainska Pravda has bumped the promotion of its Patreon fundraising up to “priority” level on its front page. Maybe I’m going way out on a limb here, but I’m guessing those roughly 230 paid subscribers haven’t been doing all the heavy lifting to-date in funding your “independent” operations. In kvetching about Trump’s USAID funding cut in a front page article, the outlet also effectively exposed just how many “Ukrainian media” NGOs are funded by USAID. There were so many listed in the wall of names that followed that my eyes went buggy trying to count them one by one. So I ultimately just gave up and asked ChatGPT by feeding it the list. The answer: 127. And that doesn’t even count the non-media civil society politically-oriented NGOs consisting of about 66 recipients.

“Independent Ukrainian media is a key element distinguishing us from Putin’s Russia,” wrote Detector Media shortly after Trump’s bomb fell. Indeed, Putin isn’t willingly funding his own country’s media via the US State Department and calling it independent, so that certainly sets Ukraine apart. They go on to say that, in the absence of the USAID media funding, Ukrainians now “will be left without a tool that ensures control over power and boosts the stability of democratic institutions.” Ensures control over Ukrainians by US power, you mean. Because nothing says “truth to power” like being this reliant on funding from the government that acts as sugar daddy to your own. They’re right about one thing, though: knee-jerk anti-Russian groupthink sure does boost stability, unlike dissent.

And well, well, lookie here, even the podcasters and influencers are whining. “There will be no podcasts with Karas now either due to the suspension of grants, sadly :(,” activist Melania Podolyak wrote on social media, highlighting the USAID logo on the page of the leader of the neo-Nazi group C14, Yevhen Karas. The guy just can’t catch a break. It was barely over five years ago that a politician in neighboring Slovakia asked the European Commission whether the EU would “consider introducing travel bans and other related measures against the leader of the violent Ukrainian neo-Nazi militant group C14, Yevhen Karas and other radical Ukrainian nationalists implicated in murders, intimidation of ethnic minorities and other violent crimes?”

Excuse you, sir! That would be star podcaster Yevhen Karas. Why would you not want him in your country? Call his agent in Washington if you’ve got a problem. Better hurry though, before Trump fires him. Also, color me shocked that there now appears to be an active regime change effort in Slovakia, and Western-backed pro-Ukrainian NGOs. Much has been said over the past few days of USAID, but its equally meddling sister from the same mister, Uncle Sam’s “National Endowment for Democracy,” whose board members include Victoria Nuland (aka Regime Change Karen, aka the Maidan Cookie Monster), is just as toxic with its use of US funds to promote the interests of the US establishment elites to the detriment of free people around the world, including in Ukraine.

Back in 2022, they even had an orgy of awards for their own Ukraine civil society projects. Among those featured at the event were NED board member, Anne Applebaum, whose husband, now the Polish foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, tweeted “Thank you, USA” in the wake of Europe’s economic and industrial lifeline of cheap Russian gas getting blown up and effectively making the EU overdependent on pricey US LNG. It’s all one big cozy club, and Trump’s definitely not in it. And he now has the unique ability and apparent will to put his foot on the firehose of American cash that has been systemically undermining the interests of average citizens around the world in favor of endless regime change and conflict, to the benefit of the few who profit from war and instability. Let’s see what else ends up surfacing as the futzing-around funds dry up.

Read more …

“..as part of a potential peace agreement in Ukraine..”

• EU Considering Return To Russian Gas – FT (RT)

European Union officials are discussing the possibility of resuming Russian gas imports as part of a potential peace agreement in Ukraine, according to the Financial Times. The issue of Russian gas deliveries to the EU has proven contentious for the bloc, especially after Brussels stepped up efforts to reduce dependence on cheap Russian energy following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Advocates of the proposal, including officials from Germany and Hungary, argue that reinstating Russian gas imports could lower Europe’s energy prices and encourage Moscow to engage in negotiations, the FT wrote, citing sources familiar with the matter. They believe that such a move would provide incentives for parties to the conflict to uphold a ceasefire.

”There is pressure from some big member states on energy prices and this is one way to bring those down, of course,” one official told the FT. However, the idea has reportedly “infuriated” officials in Brussels and diplomats from some Eastern European countries, who have traditionally been the most outspoken critics of Russia. They are concerned about increasing Moscow’s export revenues and reversing efforts to decrease reliance on Russian energy. Moscow has expressed doubt about the feasibility of the reported plan. The EU is unlikely to be prepared to restart purchases of Russian gas in the near future, first deputy chairman of the State Duma Energy Committee Igor Ananskikh told Lenta.ru on Thursday. Russia has repeatedly stated that it’s ready to resume gas supplies to Europe and has criticized the sanctions, stating that they are causing more damage to the EU than to Moscow.

The EU has faced a dramatic reduction in Russian gas imports due to Ukraine-related sanctions and the 2022 sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline, which was the main conduit for Russian gas to the EU. On January 1, Ukraine ceased the transit of Russian gas through its territory after an agreement with Moscow expired. Previously, Russian gas accounted for approximately 40% of the EU’s total supply. The bloc has instead increased imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from countries like the United States and Norway, driving up energy prices. US President Donald Trump previously urged Brussels to purchase more American LNG, threatening tariffs if they did not comply.

High energy prices have significantly impacted the EU economy. The bloc’s economic powerhouse, Germany, saw its economy contract for the second consecutive year in 2024, according to official data. Slovakia, one of the countries affected by the halt of the gas transit through Ukraine, has accused Kiev of jeopardizing its energy security. Prime Minister Robert Fico has pledged to veto any EU aid to Ukraine if the transit of Russian gas is not resumed. “In the end, everybody wants lower energy costs,” a senior EU official told the FT.

Read more …

“Ukrainian lawmakers have appealed to non-US donors to fund local media outlets and NGOs..”

• Ukraine Wants EU To Replace Lost US Aid (RT)

Ukrainian lawmakers have appealed to non-US donors to fund local media outlets and NGOs following the suspension of Washington’s foreign assistance programs that has reportedly drastically impacted the sector. Last week, President Donald Trump halted cash flows from the US and ordered a 90-day review of aid schemes. Many affected programs were run by USAID, Washington’s soft power agency that distributes billions of dollars each year for projects that promote US interests around the world, under the premise of humanitarian development. It spent over $60 billion in 2023 alone.Ukrainian recipients of American grants were hit “worse than it may seem,” a statement by the parliamentary committee on humanitarian affairs said on Wednesday.

Lawmakers anticipate that it will take up to six months for US funding to fully resume, and have urged EU donors to step in. “Given the constraints on public funding, grants remain virtually the only way for cultural and media projects to function,” the statement said. Oksana Romanyuk, executive director of a Kiev-based media research non-profit, warned that 90% of news outlets in Ukraine rely heavily on foreign grants. With USAID operations frozen, many of them are now soliciting emergency donations.

The Ukrainian MPs described foreign assistance as “an important part of our path to democratic development and sustainability”. They empathized that USAID was funding projects for children, with thousands of minors attending schools that depend on American taxpayer dollars. According to media reports, senior officials in the Department of State have lobbied Secretary Marco Rubio to make exemptions for their preferred aid programs, arguing that they are essential for US interests. Meanwhile, at least 60 senior USAID officials reportedly have been placed on paid administrative leave.

Read more …

“..expects Ukraine to be fragmented as part of a peace deal with Russia..” ”This will happen 100%. The path to an outcome like that is inevitable,” he asserted. “Ukraine is an invented state.”

• Ukraine ‘An Invented State’ – Romanian Election Frontrunner (RT)

Calin Georgescu, the politician whose first-round victory in the Romanian presidential election was overturned by the Constitutional Court, has argued that the borders claimed by Ukraine were artificially drawn and are subject to inevitable change. The staunch critic of Western policies made the remarks on Wednesday in an interview with political analyst Ion Cristoiu on YouTube. He was discussing the adjustments of European borders after World War II, which resulted in a transfer of territories to Soviet Ukraine. Georgescu said he expects Ukraine to be fragmented as part of a peace deal with Russia, along historical lines. ”This will happen 100%. The path to an outcome like that is inevitable,” he asserted. “Ukraine is an invented state.”

Parts of the historic areas of Bukovina and Bessarabia, which were ceded from Romania to Ukraine during the post-war settlement, are “of interest” to Bucharest, Georgescu said, adding that Hungary and Poland could also claim their historic lands in a hypothetical breakup of Ukraine. Georgescu made headlines in November when he unexpectedly garnered 23% of the vote in the first round of the presidential election in Romania, a NATO member. However, the Constitutional Court annulled the results shortly before the second round, citing intelligence documents alleging ‘irregularities’ in the campaign. Subsequent media reports revealed that Georgescu’s candidacy was boosted by a firm closely linked with the pro-Western National Liberal Party (PNL), seemingly to undermine another candidate.

The Romanian government has claimed that Russia was behind the interference scheme. Georgescu leads in opinion polls and is projected to get 38% of the vote in the upcoming election re-run in May. Russian President Vladimir Putin previously warned about the threat of potential separatism in Western Ukraine, driven by ethnic minorities’ wish “to return to their historic homeland,” with potential support from foreign governments. ”In that sense, only Russia could serve as a guarantor of Ukrainian territorial integrity,” he claimed in late 2023. “If [Ukrainians] don’t want that, so be it. History will set things straight. We will not stand in the way, but neither will we relinquish what is rightfully ours.”

Read more …

“Let me remind you that the military administration is a temporary body that should deal with defense and security, not usurpation of power..”

• Kiev Mayor Accuses Zelensky’s Team Of Attempting To ‘Usurp Power’ (RT)

Kiev Mayor Vitaly Klitschko has accused the Ukrainian government of attempting to undermine the city’s leadership, claiming that Vladimir Zelensky’s administration is interfering in local governance. In a video address on Wednesday, Klitschko, who has a strained relationship with Zelensky, warned of ongoing “political intrigues” in the capital, allegedly orchestrated by the Ukrainian leader’s allies. Klitschko’s criticism follows the appointment in December of Timur Tkachenko as head of the Kiev City Military Administration. Tkachenko, previously a deputy minister for community and territorial development, replaced Sergey Popko, a military officer who had led the administration since 2022. Klitschko has challenged the move, arguing that Tkachenko lacks military experience and is unqualified for the position.

Tkachenko has been obstructing key economic decisions in Kiev in a bid to take over the powers of the mayor and the city council, Klitschko claimed. ”Since taking the job, Tkachenko has been ‘blocking the resolution of key economic issues’ in the city,” the mayor alleged. According to Klitschko, Tkachenko is doing so in an attempt “to take over the powers of the mayor, the city council… in violation of the law.’” “An attempt is being made in Kiev to unbalance power and destroy local governance,” Klitschko added in his address. “Let me remind you that the military administration is a temporary body that should deal with defense and security, not usurpation of power,” he stressed. The mayor emphasized that the military administration is a temporary body meant to handle defense and security, not to assume control of the city’s leadership.

Klitschko, a former world heavyweight boxing champion, was one of the most prominent figures in the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, which led to the overthrow of democratically elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich.He became the capital’s mayor the same year and is one of the few officials from the era of Zelensky’s predecessor, Pyotr Poroshenko, to have retained his post. In 2019, Zelensky’s administration attempted to remove Klitschko from his position as head of the Kiev City State Administration, but he was re-elected in 2020. In December 2023, Klitschko accused Zelensky of steering Ukraine toward authoritarianism, expressing concerns over the centralization of power. Tensions between the two have persisted, with disagreements over issues such as the state of Kiev’s bomb shelters and the management of city infrastructure.

Read more …

“Gold Bar Bob.”

• Architect of Russia Sanctions Sentenced To 11 Years In Prison (RT)

A US senator has for the first time been found guilty of bribery and acting as an agent of a foreign government. US Democrat Bob Menendez, who championed stringent sanctions on Russia while he was chair of the highly influential Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been sentenced to 11 years in prison on bribery and corruption charges. He was found guilty last July of accepting cash and gold bars and acting as an illegal agent for the Egyptian government, and resigned from the Senate a month later.“The public cannot be led to the belief that you can get away with bribery, fraud, and betrayal,” US District Judge Sidney Stein said on Wednesday. “I don’t know what led you to this,” Stein added. “You’ll have to try to figure that out yourself over time.”

Prosecutors had sought at least 15 years in prison, along with millions of dollars in forfeitures and fines, arguing that such penalties were necessary “to provide just punishment for this extraordinary abuse of power and betrayal of public trust.” “For someone who spent his entire life in public service, every day I’m awake is a punishment,” the former lawmaker told the court. Menendez began his political career in 1974 when he was elected to the Union City Board of Education. He later served as the city’s mayor from 1986 to 1992, then moved to the state legislature in 1988 and the state senate in 1991. He represented New Jersey’s 13th district in the US House of Representatives from 1993 to 2006, when he was appointed to the Senate.

After the initial charges were filed in September 2023, Menendez stepped down from his position as head of the Senate’s influential Foreign Relations Committee, where he had played a key role in drawing up Washington’s sanctions on Moscow even before the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. His attorney, Adam Fee, argued that the former senator’s nearly 50 years of public service should not be overshadowed by his conviction, dismissing the public’s characterization of him as “Gold Bar Bob.” The defense team also requested that Menendez remain out of prison while they appeal his conviction.

Read more …

Forcing oil prices down will backfire.

• Trump’s Doomed Plan for Ukraine (Scott Ritter)

What we do know is that Donald Trump’s designated special envoy for Ukraine — retired Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg — has floated a “peace plan” to the president which has been apparently well received. The elements of this plan are drawn from a paper Kellogg authored back in the spring of 2024 — a paper as nonsensical and lacking in fact-based argument as one could imagine. The core elements of this plan involved the establishment of “normal” relations with Russia and its president — basically stopping the Russophobic demonization that was prevalent during the Biden administration. Once the U.S. and Russia were talking again, to then open negotiations with both Russia and Ukraine about bringing an end to the conflict.

The “carrot” for Russia included postponing Ukraine’s membership in NATO for 10 years, allowing Russia to retain the Ukrainian territories it currently occupies and gradually lifting sanctions to lead the way to the normalization of relations with the United States — all subject to the conclusion of peace agreements acceptable to Ukraine. For Ukraine, the “deal” offered both continued military assistance from the U.S. and NATO and bilateral security guarantees. While Ukraine is not required to officially recognize Russia’s control over the conquered territories, it would need to refrain from changing the status quo by force. If Russia refused to cooperate, the U.S. would impose crippling sanctions. And if Ukraine refused the “deal,” the U.S. would cut off all military aid. This “deal,” while never formally expressed, had been hinted at before and after Trump’s electoral victory in November 2024.

And it took no one with any insight into Russia’s goals and objectives regarding the Special Military Operation by surprise when Russian President Vladimir Putin summarily rejected this “deal” in an answer to a media question on Dec. 26, 2024. Three days later Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov likewise threw cold water on the Kellogg “peace plan,” declaring that Russia was “not happy with the proposals made by members of the Trump team to postpone Ukraine’s admission to NATO for 20 years and to station British and European peacekeeping forces in Ukraine.” But what exactly does “the hard way” mean?

According to Scott Bessent, Donald Trump’s new Treasury secretary, the answer lies in ratcheting up sanctions on the Russian oil industry. “I will be 100 percent on-board for taking sanctions up” that target the major Russian oil companies, Bessent said during his Senate confirmation hearing. But Bessent will be working against a history of the U.S. and its European allies overselling sanctions as a tool to tear down the Russian economy (the opposite, in fact, has happened.) Moreover, given Russia’s status as a leading oil producer, any successful application of sanctions could have a negative economic impact on the U.S.

This is something that seems to have escaped the attention of Keith Kellogg, Trump’s “peace deal” guru. Noting that, under the Biden administration, the United States and its allies imposed a cap of $60/barrel on Russian oil (the market price for oil hovers around $78/barrel), Kellogg observed that, despite this, “Russia earns billions of dollars from oil sales.” “What if,” Kellogg mused during an interview on Fox News, “you lower the price to $45 a barrel, which is essentially the breakeven point?”

Read more …

Russian athletes are banned everywhere, in every sport. Except figure skating. There’s a whole contingent of them that freely fly in and out, live in the US etc. Or there was.

(Plenty of Russians in NHL hockey too. They also wear skates.)

• Russian Skating Stars On Board Crashed American Plane (RT)

Several prominent figure skaters and coaches were reportedly on board the passenger plane which crashed into the Potomac River in Washington, DC following a mid-air collision with a military helicopter. The list of victims reportedly includes Russian world champions Yevgenia Shishkova and Vadim Naumov. Flight 5342 was carrying 60 passengers and four crewmembers from Wichita, Kansas to the American capital when it hit a US Army Black Hawk helicopter. There were reportedly no survivors.The passengers included athletes, coaches and family members from the National Development Team, a training program for top juvenile figure skaters, The Wichita Eagle reported, citing US Figure Skating. The city hosted the national championships for the sport last week, and some elite young athletes attended advanced classes there, the outlet explained.

Some of the skaters have connections with Russia, according to media reports. Yevgenia Shishkova and Vadim Naumov, a married couple who won the 1994 world championship pair event, were on board the flight, according to TASS. So, reportedly, was Inna Volyanskaya, who won medals at several Soviet and international skating events with her partner and husband Valery Spiridonov. Some outlets claimed that most of the young athletes came from the Russian-American figure skating community. There were fears that American skater Ilia Malinin, whose family came to the US from the USSR, was among the victims, but he confirmed that was not the case. Prominent athletes have expressed their shock in the wake of the tragedy, including Malinin, Luke Wang and Ethan Peal.

Read more …

“We had a Russian contingent – some very talented people – unfortunately on that plane,” Trump told reporters at a White House briefing on Thursday. “Very, very sorry about that.” “We’ve already been in contact with Russia..”

• US ‘In Contact’ With Russia – Trump (RT)

The US government has reached out to Moscow regarding the Russian nationals killed in the crash of a civilian airliner and a military helicopter at Washington National Airport, President Donald Trump has said. All 64 passengers and crew members aboard Flight 5342 died when their Bombardier CRJ700 collided with an H-60 Black Hawk helicopter while attempting to land in the US capital on Wednesday evening. Three members of the US military on board the helicopter were also killed. “We had a Russian contingent – some very talented people – unfortunately on that plane,” Trump told reporters at a White House briefing on Thursday. “Very, very sorry about that.” “We’ve already been in contact with Russia,” Trump said in response to a question from the press. He also stated that the US “will facilitate” the transfer of the remains of any Russian nationals killed in the crash, regardless of the sanctions and flight bans currently in effect.

The Kremlin later clarified that the “contact” Trump mentioned did not involve direct communication between him and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Russian embassy in Washington expressed its condolences to the American people over the tragedy, adding, “We were especially saddened to learn from the White House that there were Russian citizens on board the airliner.” “We are grateful to the American authorities, with whom we are in constant contact, for the words of support expressed to the families of the victims and their readiness to help with the transfer of the remains to their homeland,” the embassy said in a statement on Thursday. It added that it was still awaiting information from the State Department about the Russian nationals who died in the crash. American Airlines, whose subsidiary PSA operated Flight 5342, has not yet released the names of the crew or passengers. However, some victims have been identified through social media posts and interviews with family members and friends.

Many of the passengers were athletes, coaches, and family members returning from the US Figure Skating Championships in Wichita, Kansas. Among them were Vadim Naumov and Evgenia Shishkova, the 1994 world champion figure skaters and former Russian Olympians who moved to the US in 1998 and worked as coaches. Former Soviet professional skater Inna Volyanskaya was also confirmed to have been on board by Congressman Suhas Subramanyam, a Virginia Democrat, in whose district she lived. The Trump administration has pledged to conduct a swift and thorough investigation into the causes of Wednesday’s tragedy. The US president has suggested possible errors by the helicopter crew or air traffic control at Ronald Reagan National Airport, citing videos that captured the crash.

Read more …

“Türkiye simultaneously could be a member of BRICS and NATO?”

• What Sultan Erdogan Is Really Up To (Pepe Escobar)

On the table, a geopolitical banquet – served by some of the best independent analytical minds from Bursa to Diyarbakir.

ISTANBUL – The scene is a Circassian restaurant off fabled Istiklal street in historic Beyoglu. On the table, a geopolitical banquet – served by some of the best independent analytical minds from Bursa to Diyarbakir. The menu, apart from a meze feast, is simple: only two broad questions about Sultan Erdogan’s approach to BRICS and to Syria. Here’s a concise synopsis of our dinner – more relevant than a torrent of Western-manufactured word salads. Enjoy it with a hefty dose of the best arak. And let the table have the first – and last – word. On BRICS: “Türkiye feels itself as part of the West. If we look at our political party leaderships and Turkish elites, right-wing or left-wing, there’s no difference. Maybe a little bit part of the East… Ankara is using its membership in BRICS as a bargaining chip against the West.”

Türkiye simultaneously could be a member of BRICS and NATO?
“Erdogan has no clear future plans. After Erdogan there’s no clear answer for the future of the AKP party. They could not establish a normal, permanent system. We have a governmental system just for Erdogan. We are receiving gas from Russia. We buy materials from China, assembling them in Turkish factories and selling them to Europe and the U.S. We have advantages in foreign trade compared to the EU, according to statistics published by the Turkish government. The biggest trade deficit is against Russia – and then China. This is our special position – and explains why Ankara does not want to lose the Eastern option. And at the same time we depend on the West to defend ourselves. All that explains our unique foreign policy behavior.”

So there’s no guarantee Ankara will agree to become a BRICS partner?
“No. But Ankara will not completely close the door to BRICS. Türkiye knows the West is losing its power. There are new dynamics, rising powers, but at the same time we are not a completely independent power.” On the three pillars of Turkish society: “You can’t think about geopolitics without ideology. Erdogan and the AKP decided that it’s only possible to integrate Türkiye with a liberal-Islamist project. Almost two generations have grown with them – and they don’t know what happened before. They are neo-Ottomans, Islamists, pro-Arabization guys. In Türkiye, if someone openly supports Islamism, he is Arabized, ideologically. Here we have three pillars. The first one is a nationalist view – we have right Kemalism and left Kemalism. The other one is a Western perspective. And the third one is Islamist, also divided in two factions; one is nationalist and the other is liberal Islamist, integrated with Western institutions, NGOs and capital. That’s why we can say that wokeism and Islamism are different sides of the same coin. These guys are using the Turkish state to maneuver in the broader Middle Eastern geography – but in fact they are focused on Western-minded neoliberal economy, politics, society.”

Neo-Ottomanism, revived: “The West planned Syria together with them – the neo-Ottomans. During the Gaza war they kept sending oil to Israel, it was a P.R. thing for Erdogan, he needs to give this message to the grassroots anti-imperialist, Islamist part of Turkish society. The problem for Erdogan is that Türkiye is different from Arab countries, while Turkish capital is connected to the West, some of it connected with Russia, and Türkiye is dependent as much as 40% on Russian energy. Ankara needs to act in a balanced way, but that does not change the whole picture: Capital that supports Erdogan, and benefits from Erdogan, including 40% of the Turkish exports going to Europe. When it comes to BRICS, they can try to manage the relationship but they will never agree to join the BRICS directly.”

The Sultan never sleeps: “Erdogan is a pragmatist. Ideological. He can sell out the Palestinians – easily. He may be very powerful, and grasp how the state system works, but he does not enjoy total obedience from society to rule. That’s why he’s always aiming for some sort of balance.” Can we say that with Greater Idlibistan under the control of Türkiye’s MIT – with Jolani as one of their main assets, if not the top asset – the MIT knew about the capabilities of HTS, and they knew this would stop in Aleppo?“ Not all the way to Damascus. That was the original plan. The aim of the operation was attacking the regime, The aim was not the conquest of Damascus. This was the best unexpected result of the attack. The military leadership of HTS said, “we lost our best warriors in the first moments of the operation”. But then came the collapse of the Syrian Army.”

Read more …

Easy to smear anything Chinese. To be safe, you must use our inferior and grossly expensive product.

• Italy Blocks DeepSeek (RT)

Italy has become the first country to ban the Chinese AI model, DeepSeek, after its data protection authority blocked the app on Thursday, citing concerns over its handling of personal data. Developed by Hangzhou-based startup DeepSeek Inc., the AI assistant of the same name was released last week and has become an online sensation after toppling US-based OpenAI’s ChatGPT as the most popular AI assistant on Apple’s App Store. The removal followed a request by the authority, Garante, for detailed information about the application’s data usage, including what personal data is collected, its sources, the intended purposes, legal grounds, and whether the data is stored in China.

The issue arose after Euroconsumers, a consumer rights group, filed a complaint against DeepSeek over its handling of personal data. In response, the Italian watchdog requested detailed information about the company’s data storage practices, giving DeepSeek 20 days to reply. However, DeepSeek’s initial response was considered “totally insufficient,” Garante said in a statement. “Contrary to the authority’s findings, the companies declared that they do not operate in Italy, and that European legislation does not apply to them,’‘ the statement said, noting that the app had been downloaded by millions of people around the globe in just a few days.

The regulator added that the decision had “immediate effect” and that it had launched an investigation into the matter as “the data of millions of Italians is at risk.” The Italian watchdog was not alone in raising concerns. On Wednesday, the Irish Data Protection Commission told TechCrunch that it had sent a request to DeepSeek for details on how the company processes the data of Irish citizens. South Korea’s privacy watchdog also plans to send a similar request, according to Reuters.

The US Navy has already advised its personnel to avoid using the Chinese-developed chatbot, both for work and personal use, citing concerns over ethical and security risks. DeepSeek’s new chatbot has raised the stakes in the AI race, shaking up markets earlier this week with major tech companies like Nvidia experiencing significant losses. Investors are worried that DeepSeek’s cost-effective AI solutions could disrupt established industry giants. The new AI assistant has rapidly closed the gap with US generative AI leaders, reportedly achieving similar performance on key indicators, while being offered at a fraction of the cost.

Read more …

Interesting difference.

• Cloud Capital vs AI (Yanis Varoufakis)

The gist of DeepSeek’s arrival on the AI scene and the carnage in the American stock exchanges is a sudden transition from proprietary to open source technology. It is therefore no great wonder that the moment DeepSeek became the most downloaded app on the Apple Store, it pulverized the market capitalization of the hitherto overinflated US Big Tech stocks. But how did this happen exactly? How is it that a private commodified service is suddenly offered for free? And does this mean that technofeudalism is in trouble? To begin with, it’s important to note that AI was never a proprietary technology in itself. The underlying code of all AI companies was always open source. What made American AI a quasi-private commodity was the way in which these models were trained using huge amounts of privatized data.

Where I say privatized, you should translate stolen data, your data, my data. There was a Google memo that was leaked in 2017 that was widely discussed and refuted, but it was a harbinger for what happened with DeepSeek. In that memo, we read the following words: If an open source large language module, it said, trained for a few million dollars, comes to outperform a proprietary model, then there’s going to be trouble. There will be no firewall, the memo continues, even to safeguard open AI. That’s what happened. DeepSeek pierced the United States’ AI company’s bubble by decommodifying the results of the model’s training and doing it at a tiny, tiny cost to itself, shifting the results of AI-trained models from behind a paywall to the public realm. Within days since the release of the latest version of DeepSeek, developers around the world started building their own models on top of DeepSeek’s.

This was the nightmare of American Big Tech AI service providers who have been offering the results of prompts as a commodity in the form of subscriptions. You see, DeepSeek-type applications can now produce high quality translations for free. That’s just an example. And in so doing, they undermine the business model of companies like DeepL, the German company. In the broader scheme of things, this means that the morsels of cloud capital that Europe owned, like DeepL, essentially have lost their market value. Nevertheless, and this is a huge nevertheless, it is only AI as a commodity that has lost its grossly exaggerated market price or value. In sharp contrast, cloud capital utilized as Amazon, Meta, Google and so on have been utilizing it, that is not as a commodity producing piece of tech but as a produced means of behavioral modification, that business model is not at all threatened by companies like DeepSeek.

And since technofeudalism is powered by cloud capital working that way, rather than commodity-like AI services of the ChatGPT-4 or 5 type, our technofeudal order is not threatened by competitors such as DeepSeek. To help understand the difference between cloud capital and AI-based commodified services. It helps to compare and contrast Alexa, take Amazon’s Alexa, and OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Now, Alexa is not offering you a commodified service. It is your free, pretend slave. Unlike GPT-4 or 5, you do not pay a subscription to Amazon for the right to order Alexa, to order your milk, or to switch off your lights. Rather, you train Alexa to train you, to train it, to know you, so that it wins you over, it wins your trust, with good recommendations. So that it can ultimately modify your behavior, so that it can encourage you to buy a commodity from Amazon.com with Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon, retaining up to 40% of the price you pay for a book or an electric bicycle, money that will be retained as cloud rent by the owner of Amazon, Jeff Bezos.

In short, and this is very important, the work that Alexa performs for you is not a commodity that you buy, unlike ChatGPT, which works to sell you a commodity, even in a subscription form. To put it in different words once more, ChatGPT is subject to market competition and therefore vulnerable to companies like DeepSeek. But Alexa is not. This is why OpenAI, ChatGPT’s maker, is seriously damaged by the emergence of DeepSeek, but Amazon is not. That’s my basic point. Cloud capital is in a league of its own, beyond market competition from DeepSeek-like upstarts, because its power lies in its capacity to modify our behavior and remove us from any market for example, to shift us from real markets to cloud fiefs like Amazon or Alibaba. To wrap this up, in conclusion, cloud’s capital capacity to drive technofeudalism is not challenged by companies like DeepSeek. Only companies like OpenAI, which invested so much, and so foolishly I would add, in providing a commodified service, these companies stand to lose enormously.

This, I believe, is yet another sign that capitalism is dead at the hand of cloud capital, while technofeudalism is going from strength to strength. And as it does so, it fuels even further the new Cold War between the United States and China, which in my book, “Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism,” I have explained away, I have explained this new Cold War as the almighty clash between these two huge concentrations of cloud capital, the American dollar denominated super cloud list power and the Chinese Yuan denominated super cloud list power. Now, speaking of this new Cold War, which I have argued is mostly fueled by the clash between American and Chinese cloud capital, I wonder what impact DeepSeek’s success will have on the United States government. Not just Trump, but the whole gamut of the American state and its government.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Marianne RIP. First ever Jagger/Richards song. They didn’t really like it. Their manager gave it to Faithfull.

 

 

Fair
https://twitter.com/i/status/1884935489922195864

 

 

Just a fox, cat and birds
https://twitter.com/i/status/1884870541024149657

 

 

Frens

 

 

Let it be

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries