Menu Icon

Debt Rattle April 4 2026

Apr 042026
 
 April 4, 2026  Posted by at 9:47 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  35 Responses »


Paul Gauguin Apatarao 1893


• Strait of Hormuz Won’t Return to Pre-War Status Quo – Iranian Official (RT)
• EU To Be Hostile Alliance For Russia, Worse Than NATO – Medvedev (TASS)
• Western Leaders Demand More Sacrifices From Their People (RT)
• Germany’s Economy Minister Urges Nuclear Rethink As Energy Prices Surge (ZH)
• Bondi’s Replacement is Important, But Not as Important as Perceived (CTH)
• Is This the REAL Reason Trump Fired Pam Bondi? (Matt Margolis)
• Why States Are Right to Reject AI Legal Personhood (ET)
• Trump Offers Cabinet Position With Perks, Power, and Zero Job Security (Turley)
• The Red Line (James Howard Kunstler)
• Most Powerful Energy Crisis In Human History Is Looming – Putin Envoy (RT)
• Primary Fundraising Mechanism of Democrats Accepted Foreign Donations (CTH)
• HUGE March Jobs Report Leaves Democrats Speechless (Margolis)
• Chicago Bulls Release Forward After He Speaks Out Against Pride Month (Turley)

 


 

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2039840056316186806?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2039925796454772799?s=20 https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/2040004781306208600?s=20 https://twitter.com/Nob0dymyname/status/2039622739867103741?s=20

 


 

 


 


“The key waterway is closed for the US and its allies, but ships from other countries are able to use it, the official told RT..” A French ship crossed through the Strait of Hormuz yesterday. Is there hope from that angle?

• Strait of Hormuz Won’t Return to Pre-War Status Quo – Iranian Official (RT)

The Strait of Hormuz will not return to the status quo enjoyed before the US-Israeli war against Iran, a security official has told RT. The waterway, through which around 20% of seaborne crude oil trade passes, remains effectively closed due to the fighting during the past month. The deadlock has caused economic strains for many countries – including the US, where gas prices surpassed $4 per gallon earlier this week. The Iranian official said in an interview with RT on Thursday that the “conditions in the Strait of Hormuz will not return to the pre-war status quo.”


At the moment, transit through the waterway “remains operational,” but ships “are subject to the approval of the Iranian side and require the flag state of the vessel to establish contact with Tehran,” he said, adding: “To date, no vessel belonging to the enemy or its partners has been granted permission to pass,” referring to the US, Israel, and their allies. The Iranian authorities have established a “secure route” through the strait, the official said. “Given the insecurity caused by American aggression across various parts of the Persian Gulf, this corridor remains the only viable path for the transport of goods and products.”

He also urged the international media “to ignore the disinformation campaigns by the US-Israeli side and [US President Donald] Trump personally.”“Iranian regulation and control over the Strait continues and will persist,” he told RT. In an address to the nation on Thursday, Trump suggested that countries that depend on oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz should “build up some delayed courage… and just take it.” He added that the waterway could “open up naturally” after the war ends, without providing details.

Earlier this week, the Iranian parliament approved a “new regime,” according to which Tehran will collect payment from ships going through the strait. Lloyd’s List magazine said earlier that one vessel has already paid $2 million for transit. Tasnim news agency estimated that Tehran could make around $100 billion annually under the scheme once traffic in the strait is fully restored.

Read more …

“European political freaks, especially in Brussels, are seriously thinking about creating a full-fledged military component within the EU..”

• EU To Be Hostile Alliance For Russia, Worse Than NATO – Medvedev (TASS)

The European Union could turn into an extremely hostile military alliance toward Russia, “worse than NATO,” Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Head of the Russian Security Council, said on Max. “It is obvious that there are powerful contradictions within the alliance, which have been exacerbated by the Iranian campaign. And European political freaks, especially in Brussels, are seriously thinking about creating a full-fledged military component within the EU. But this is altering the picture of the world,” Medvedev warned. He said until now the Russian rhetoric about EU membership has been restrained and calm in relation to all neighbors, even to Ukraine: join it, if you want.


“But now everything has to change – now the EU is no longer an economic union. It can quickly turn into a full-fledged and extremely hostile military alliance against Russia, in some ways worse than NATO,” the politician said. “It will be a disgusting rabble of rabid European parasites and their task will be to earn political capital and, of course, dough by inflating Russophobic hysteria. It’s time to abandon the tolerant attitude towards joining the military-economic European Union of our neighbors.” Medvedev said that Russian President Vladimir Putin had already done this neatly when he told Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan that Moscow was calm about the development of Yerevan’s relations with the EU, but Armenia would not be able to be in two customs unions at once – the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union.

Read more …

Until the people say no more.

• Western Leaders Demand More Sacrifices From Their People (RT)

The leaders of the UK and Australia have told their citizens to cut fuel consumption and prepare for months of hardship as a result of the US-Israeli war with Iran. But Keir Starmer and Anthony Albanese couldn’t bring themselves to name who’s responsible. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his Australian counterpart, Anthony Albanese, delivered a pair of seemingly coordinated addresses to their nations on Wednesday. “The economic shocks caused by [the Iran war] will be with us for months,” Albanese said, telling Australians to switch to public transport if possible, and promising to cut fuel taxes and prepare for the possibility that “the global situation gets worse and our fuel supplies are seriously disrupted.”


“Australia is not an active participant in this war,” he claimed, despite his government being the first in the world to back the US and Israel’s opening strikes on Iran on February 28. Starmer struck a similar tone, declaring that “this is not our war,” but warning that “the impact of this war will affect the future of our country.” The British PM promised that “no matter how fierce this storm is, we are well placed to weather it,” and vowed to help “reopen” the Strait of Hormuz.

How bad is the energy crisis?
The US-Israeli war with Iran has triggered the most severe energy crisis since the 1970s, if not in history. Around 40% of the world’s oil comes from the Middle East. Nearly a third of the world’s seaborne crude oil transits the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway less than 40 km wide at its narrowest point, which through a combination of Iranian attacks on tankers and hesitance by Western insurers, is de facto closed to maritime traffic. Additionally, Iran’s retaliatory attacks on Gulf states hosting American troops have taken refineries and export terminals out of action. Qatar, which supplies 20% of the world’s liquefied natural gas (LNG), completely halted production almost a month ago.

As a result, Brent oil prices – which serve as a barometer for 80% of the world’s crude oil – have sat above $100 per barrel for three weeks, while gas prices have surged 60% in the EU and more than 100% in the UK. While the crisis is global, its effects are particularly acute in the EU, UK, and Australia, all of which have sanctioned Russian oil and gas, shutting themselves off from a potential lifeline amid the crisis. The EU once relied on Russia for 45% of its gas imports, before switching to more expensive American and Qatari supplies after 2022. With no date in sight for the resumption of Qatari imports, and with inflation spiking across Europe, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde warned last week that “we are facing a real shock…probably beyond what we can imagine at the moment.”

The Strait of Hormuz was open to maritime traffic until the US and Israel launched an unprovoked attack on Iran in the middle of nuclear talks. However, neither Starmer nor Albanese mentioned the US or Israel in their speeches. Instead, both the UK and Australia issued a joint statement – along with 32 other US allies in Europe and the Gulf – blaming the closure of the strait squarely on “Iran’s actions.” “We call on Iran to cease immediately its threats, laying of mines, drone and missile attacks and other attempts to block the Strait to commercial shipping,” the statement reads, accusing Tehran of posing “a threat to international peace and security.

Read more …

You can’t just have a “Nuclear Rethink”. It’ll take a decade at the very minimum.

• Germany’s Economy Minister Urges Nuclear Rethink As Energy Prices Surge (ZH)

Germany’s Economy Minister Katherina Reiche has openly called for a fundamental reassessment of the country’s long-standing rejection of nuclear power, warning that heavy dependence on gas has left Europe’s largest economy dangerously exposed to repeated energy shocks. Speaking at the launch of a new international investor conference aimed at drawing foreign capital into Germany, Reiche told the Financial Times that the decision by previous governments to phase out nuclear generation has eliminated any realistic alternative for reliable baseload electricity. “We need gas to secure our supply – that is the only baseload supply I have left,” she said. “Politically speaking, I have no alternative.”


Reiche, a senior figure in Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democratic Union, made the remarks as fresh data highlighted the mounting costs of the nuclear exit, originally decided under Angela Merkel in 2011 and completed under Olaf Scholz. While the policy was accompanied by a massive push for renewables, it has left Germany more reliant on gas-fired power stations to keep the lights on when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine. European gas prices have risen more than 60 per cent since the outbreak of conflict in the Middle East, delivering the continent’s second major energy price crisis in under five years. Futures contracts for German electricity in May are trading at four times the level seen in France, Europe’s biggest nuclear producer, according to the energy exchange EEX.

Reiche urged Germany to stop sitting on the sidelines of Europe’s nuclear revival. France, Sweden and Poland are all either building new reactors or extending the life of existing ones, attracted by the technology’s ability to deliver large volumes of low-carbon, dispatchable power. “We can decide that we are not interested. Then we stick to gas and become more dependent on one energy source,” she said. “Or we can say that we are interested in technology again.” With Germany’s renowned engineering expertise, Reiche argued the country should at minimum engage constructively in European nuclear projects and international forums. “Anyone standing on the sidelines simply commenting loses influence. You must be on the pitch if you want to play.”

The vulnerability of Germany’s gas strategy was brutally exposed after Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine cut off pipeline supplies. Berlin was forced to pivot rapidly to liquefied natural gas, much of it from the United States, which now accounts for around 10 per cent of the country’s gas supply. Energy costs have remained stubbornly high ever since. In the second half of 2025, gas prices for private households were 79 per cent above 2021 levels, while electricity prices rose 23 per cent, official statistics show. The latest price spike is already hammering industry and derailing growth forecasts. A consortium of leading German economic institutes warned on Wednesday that the energy shock would erase more than half the GDP growth previously expected for 2026.

The new projection is just 0.6 per cent, down from 1.3 per cent in September, with 2027 growth seen at 0.9 per cent. Reiche acknowledged the strain on energy-intensive sectors but insisted Germany faced no immediate supply shortages. She noted that Chancellor Merz, who heads a year-old coalition between the CDU and Social Democrats, has long described the nuclear phase-out as a “huge mistake.” While the government has ruled out restarting closed conventional reactors, it is now supporting research into small modular reactors and nuclear fusion. Merz has also pledged to end Germany’s previous opposition to nuclear power at EU level.

The renewed energy debate comes as Berlin battles to revive an economy weighed down by high costs, Chinese competition and structural weaknesses. Despite a €1 trillion decade-long infrastructure and defence spending package – the largest since reunification – growth remains elusive. To counter the gloom, the government is hosting the first “Invest in Germany” summit in Berlin on 19-20 October. Reiche hopes the event, modelled on France’s “Choose France” initiative, will secure concrete investment pledges and reposition Germany as a stable, diversified alternative for global capital. “I don’t see a flight from the dollar … but we see a lot of inquiries from America,” she said.

Investors she speaks to recognise the country’s underlying strengths, she added: a powerful industrial base, well-capitalised small and medium-sized companies (Mittelstand) and strategic importance. “Germany is currently in a weak phase,” they tell her, “but … you are of great strategic interest to us.” Whether a more pragmatic stance on nuclear power can help restore that interest – and ease the pressure on German households and factories – will be one of the defining tests for Merz’s government in the months ahead.

Read more …

The intelligence community controls the DOJ. That is significant.

• Bondi’s Replacement is Important, But Not as Important as Perceived (CTH)

In a two-week period right after the 2024 election, the most energy expended by the transition team putting a cabinet together was toward Main Justice or the Dept of Justice. As a consequence, those around Lutnick and Wiles spent an incredible amount of time thinking about the Attorney General pick. Following an insider discussion, I spoke with several people about positions and appointments, focused on pointing out that the transition’s priorities were misplaced. The AG needed to be someone with exceptional moral character, capable of gathering information and presenting it for public consumption, with the option of supporting criminal referrals if necessary.


The Attorney General wasn’t going to be the tip of the spear in any operation to confront the Deep State, because if Main Justice wanted to confront Lawfare they needed to confront the Intelligence Community first. The IC controls all of the activity within the Dept of Justice. Read that again for emphasis. For the issues of greatest importance, the Intelligence Community controls all of the activity within Main Justice. The IC is in control of the source material. The IC is above the DOJ. If you don’t strategize a confrontation with the IC first, it doesn’t matter what you do with the Dept of Justice.

The best example I could reference at the time was the Mar-a-Lago documents case and Judge Aileen Cannon. In that example the Executive branch was targeting Trump through the DOJ/FBI, and representing the Judicial branch Judge Cannon was the firewall ensuring the appropriate administration of justice. Trump’s defense, through Cannon, pushed back against the DOJ (Jack Smith) while Smith leveraged all his Lawfare tools back against Cannon. You might remember the “classified document” issue went to the 11th CCA.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the government position that any documents defined as “classified” by the executive branch that claimed, “national security,” should not be disclosed to the defendant, Trump. The 11th CCA said when it comes to matters of national security, the judicial branch must defer to the determinations of the executive. Basically, if the intelligence community decides certain information is tied to national security and labels it as classified for the DOJ, that decision can’t be challenged. The U.S. Supreme Court has backed this view. As a result, when it comes to national security issues, the judicial branch has to defer to the executive, giving the IC significant control over the DOJ.

If you drag former CIA Director John Brennan into court and Brennan’s lawyers argue ‘national security’ as a defense against indictment, inquiry or questioning, it’s not the DOJ (Attorney General) who matters – it’s the ‘national security’ determination of the Intelligence Community (Tulsi Gabbard) who controls the outcome. Over and over, I kept emphasizing this point. If you want to hold the Spygate/Russiagate folks accountable, it’s not going to be the DOJ who matter; not directly. It is the Intelligence Community that matters.

If you seek accountability, and if you want to stop Lawfare from exploiting the silo defenses, it’s the IC that matters; not the Dept of Justice. The transition team was putting emphasis on the wrong syllable. Remember, my emphasis was on the need for institutional accountability on Spygate and Russiagate, and the DOJ is a tool toward the goal but not the ultimate weapon.

Read more …

I doubt it. She just never arrested anyone.

• Is This the REAL Reason Trump Fired Pam Bondi? (Matt Margolis)

On Thursday, we learned that President Donald Trump fired Pam Bondi as attorney general, making her the second Cabinet member he’s axed in less than a month. Trump’s official send-off was gracious, but the question remains: Why did he fire her? Bondi has come under fire for her handling of the Epstein files. Her muddled public statements about the existence of a so-called “client list” turned a political liability into a full-blown firestorm, drawing bipartisan condemnation and fueling accusations of a transparency cover-up. But there may be another nugget to the story.


Trump, for what it’s worth, praised her in a post on Truth Social, calling her “a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my Attorney General over the past year,” crediting her with doing “a tremendous job” overseeing a crackdown on crime that drove murder rates to their lowest point since 1900. “We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future.” That’s a warm sendoff, atypical for Trump, who often kicks people out the door and trashes them immediately after. It’s a welcome change, as far as I’m concerned. I’ve never been a fan of his constantly trashing and making enemies out of people he had served in his administration.

According to a report from the Daily Mail, the reason Trump gave Bondi the axe is that he believes Bondi tipped off Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) about the FBI’s plans to release documents tied to his decade-old relationship with a suspected Chinese spy. “She’s intervening in those matters,” a source close to the situation told the paper. “The White House wasn’t pleased she was intervening due to her personal friendship with Swalwell.” Trump had also grown privately furious that Bondi wasn’t prosecuting the political enemies who spent years targeting him. He made it known — publicly — posting last September that the delays in those cases were “harming our reputation and credibility.”

According to a senior administration source, Trump informed Bondi of her dismissal on Wednesday night, just before he delivered his Iran speech. And she didn’t take it well. Bondi reportedly pleaded for more time, and the confrontation at the White House grew tense. “She was unhappy and tried to change his mind,” the source said. Bondi stayed at the White House throughout the Iran speech, then quietly flew home to Florida. The Swalwell angle is an interesting one. But still bizarre. “It is unclear why Bondi would have intervened, but it is believed that Bondi and Swalwell have a friendly relationship,” explains the Daily Mail. “Swalwell, a fellow lawyer, has openly criticized her since she took the AG position after failing to prosecute multiple death threats against him and his family.”

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal attorney, is now serving as acting Attorney General until a permanent nominee is identified. Some are speculating that EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin is a possible candidate.

Read more …

An AI system can easily be smarter than a human. But it’s not accountable?

“..a clear chain of human accountability from every AI action to every AI consequence. When an AI system causes harm, there must always be a human who answers for it.”

Can a human “answer” for a system that is much smarter than him/her?

How would an AI system answer that?

• Why States Are Right to Reject AI Legal Personhood (ET)

A quiet but consequential legal movement is gathering momentum. Idaho and Utah have enacted statutes declaring that artificial intelligence systems are not legal persons. Ohio’s House Bill 469 proposes to declare that AI systems are “nonsentient entities” and bars them from acquiring any form of legal personhood. Similar bills are advancing in Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Missouri, South Carolina, and Washington. The legislatures driving this movement are not technophobes. They are drawing a necessary line that philosophy, law, and common sense all demand.


The pressure in the opposite direction is real. In January, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, historian Yuval Noah Harari described AI as “mastering language.” Since language is the medium through which law, religion, finance, and culture are constituted, AI may soon be capable of acting within every institution humans have built. Harari asked whether countries would recognize AI as legal persons—whether AI could open bank accounts, file lawsuits, and own property without human supervision. The prospect is not science fiction. It is a policy choice, and the wrong choice would be deeply consequential.

Phantasms versus Nous
Aristotle argued in De Anima that all sentient creatures share a basic cognitive capacity to perceive the world, retain impressions of it, and recombine impressions into new configurations—what he called phantasia, imagination. A dog, a crow, and a chess grand master possess this competency.

Aristotle distinguished human beings as categorically different: possessing nous, the capacity to grasp universal, abstract concepts—ideas like justice, causation, and the good—that cannot be derived from any sensory experience alone. A dog can recognize its owner, but it cannot grasp the concept of ownership. A parrot can reproduce a sentence about fairness, but it has no understanding of fairness.

vWhat is the distinction? Can’t we simply feed an AI system Webster’s definition of “fairness” and let it work from there? No—feeding a machine the dictionary definition only gives it more words to pattern-match against—the concept is not in the words. Any child who grasps fairness can apply it correctly to a situation no definition anticipates. AI can only produce text that statistically resembles how humans talked about fairness before.

This is not a gap that more computing power or better training data will close. Computer scientist Judea Pearl demonstrated mathematically that no amount of pattern recognition over observational data can substitute for genuine causal inference. The appearance of understanding is not understanding itself. And it is precisely the capacity for genuine understanding—for deliberating about what is good and right—that grounds moral responsibility, which is the only coherent basis for legal personhood.

The Problem With the Corporate Analogy
Proponents of AI personhood often invoke corporate personhood as precedent. Corporations are not natural persons, yet the law treats them as legal persons capable of owning property, entering contracts, and being sued. Why not extend this pragmatic fiction to AI? The analogy breaks down at accountability.

Corporate personhood is a legal convenience built on human moral agency. Behind every corporation is a structured network of natural persons—board members, executives, shareholders—who bear fiduciary duties, can be deposed and held liable under piercing-the-veil doctrine, and face reputational and criminal consequences for their decisions. The corporation is a vehicle for organizing human action, not a substitute.

Ohio’s HB 469 captures this logic by denying AI legal personhood, prohibiting AI systems from serving as corporate officers or directors, and assigning all liability for AI-caused harm to identifiable human owners, developers, and deployers.

Labeling a system “aligned” or “ethically trained” does not discharge human responsibility. Granting AI legal personhood would shatter this accountability architecture. An AI “person” could own intellectual property, hold financial assets, and bring lawsuits—all without a human principal who can be held responsible. Sophisticated actors could construct chains of AI-owned shell companies that dissolve liability through layers of nominal personhood. The result would not be extending rights to a new class of beings; it would be creating accountability vacuums that benefit the powerful humans who deploy AI while insulating them from consequence.

The Moral Stakes for Real People
A deeper moral issue underlies all of this. Legal personhood is not merely an administrative category; it carries normative weight. It signals that an entity has standing to make claims, to be wronged, and to bear obligations. Extending that status to systems that cannot genuinely deliberate, cannot suffer, and cannot be held morally responsible would dilute the concept of personhood in ways that could ultimately harm the humans who most need its protections.

We have not yet secured the full benefits of legal personhood for all human beings in practice—for the displaced, stateless, and structurally invisible. Rushing to extend a contested status to machines while that work remains unfinished would be a profound misallocation of moral and legal energy.

None of this requires hostility to AI as a technology. AI systems can be powerful, useful, and—when properly governed—enormously beneficial. What AI systems cannot be is persons. The states passing anti-personhood legislation are preserving something more important than a competitive advantage—a clear chain of human accountability from every AI action to every AI consequence. When an AI system causes harm, there must always be a human who answers for it. That principle is not a constraint on technology; it is the foundation of a just society.

Aristotle taught that law is reason without passion—a framework for coordinating human beings capable of living well together. AI can help us pursue the good life, but it cannot deliberate about what that life requires. As states across the country move to codify this distinction, they are doing exactly what legislatures exist to do—drawing lines that protect persons: all of them, and only them.

Read more …

Lee Zeldin.

• Trump Offers Cabinet Position With Perks, Power, and Zero Job Security (Turley)

There is an old joke that scientists switched from lab rats to lawyers because you do not get as attached to lawyers. President Trump has shown the same tendency not to become attached to either private or public counsel. Attorney General is only the latest in a long line of lawyers let go by a president made famous with the tagline “You’re fired.” There is no evidence of bad blood between President Trump and Bondi. The Attorney General has been attacked over her loyalty to the President and has been by his side in some of the most precarious moments from his impeachment to his criminal defense. As his “apprentices” learned, this is not personal. It’s business.


Jeff Sessions. Rex Tillerson. Bill Barr. Mark Esper. Kristi Noem. Trump’s “cabinets” are known more for shelving than storage.Indeed, being a cabinet member in a Trump administration is about as secure as being a quarterback on the Cleveland Browns. Trump has always viewed terminations as a way to spur higher performance levels. There is a reason why Trump may have wanted to move now in swapping out Attorneys General. There are growing predictions that the Republicans will lose the House and could also lose the Senate. Democrats are running on pledges of unleashing a new spasm of investigations and impeachments, targeting not just President Trump but anyone who supports him.

Figures like Susan Rice, top policy adviser to both President Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have promised “revenge” against all those who pushed Democrats out of power and warned that “it’s not going to end well for them.” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) pledged that, as soon as they regain power, they will start throwing Trump people in jail when they retake Congress. Democratic strategist James Carville previously threatened that “collaborators” may be treated in the same way as they were after World War II.Trump has to decide who will be the best hand on the wheel in those coming choppy waters.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has the street cred that Trump values. An accomplished litigator and former prosecutor, Blanche is neither flashy nor gregarious. He is a lethal litigator who can gut you like a trout without breaking a sweat. He has been at the president’s side in and out of court. While he will be a lightning rod for Democrats who have attacked him for his role in the release of the Epstein files, his firmness in dealing with a hostile media likely appealed to the President.

Blanche offers a seamless transition for the Department. He literally only has to walk down the hallway to take the reins from Bondi. Another name reportedly under consideration is EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, who would likely be the easiest to confirm and the most popular with members of Congress. Zeldin transformed the EPA in short order, including clearly away barriers to increasing energy production. Almost elected governor of New York, Zeldin has cross-over appeal in Washington as someone who cut his teeth in this town.

Other candidates include state attorneys general, as well as wild cards like U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, a former judge with a tough-as-nails reputation in Washington, D.C. It is a deep bench. There will be no shortage of applicants for the job. The office of the Attorney General in the Trump Administration has everything that one could want in Washington. Everything, that is, except job security.

Read more …

“The ends must justify the means — the only question is what means are necessary.” —Saul Alinsky

• The Red Line (James Howard Kunstler)

Why do the news anchor ladies of CNN, Erin Burnett, Kate Bolduon, always look so depressed on the air? They never smile. Their faces always register something between grave concern and hysteria. Is it the network’s cratered ratings? The pending hostile takeover by Paramount / Skydance (led by conservative David Ellison)? Too much botox, zombifying the small facial muscles? Or is it self-loathing from being compelled to slant everything they report on in the direction of a lie?


There does seem to be some hidden hand in Narrative Central issuing prescribed story-lines to the networks, and that hand seems to be tinged with malice for anything and anyone seeking to rescue our country from chaos, penury, psychosis, and jihad. It looks like the hidden hand wants the country to go down in flames, and will resort to any means necessary to get it done. The template for that is so-called “color revolution,” which is a hyper-accelerated version of Antonio Gramsci’s “march through the institutions” to capture the transmitters of culture so as to produce a communist utopia.

Gramsci (1891 – 1937) founded the Italian communist party. The fascist Mussolini tossed him in jail where Gramsci scribbled out three thousand pages of his Prison Notebooks, in which he laid out his strategy for destroying civil society, later adapted by the Americans Saul Alinsky (1909-1972) in his Rules for Radicals and Gene Sharp (1928-2018), who penned several concise manuals of strategic mechanics for dismantling targeted governments.

These are the mentors of chief Lawfare ninja Norm Eisen, who has made a specialty of marching through the institution of American law in order to advance the agenda of the Democratic Party allied with cohorts of the permanent Washington bureaucracy (or Deep State) to fend off any challenge to the corruption and racketeering embedded in those two symbionts.

The challenge obviously presents in the form of Donald Trump, the once and current president battling an increasingly rabid set of opponents. Norm Eisen has been deeply involved in every attempt to undermine and disable Mr. Trump since 2016. He wrote briefs for the Mueller Special Counsel operation; he acted as prosecutor in Trump’s impeachment # 1 (prompted by CIA agent and so-called “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella, as facilitated by then Rep. Adam Schiff); he assisted ex parte in the House Jan 6 Committee proceedings; he prepared legal arguments for the Fani Willis prosecution of Mr. Trump and 18 co-defendants; and he helped construct the legal framework for Special Counsel Jack Smith’s cases against Mr. Trump. In short, Norm Eisen spent the past decade laboring to brand Donald Trump as a criminal and shove him out of the political arena. His efforts failed.

Norm Eisen founded or is associated with several swamp NGOs active in Trump-hunting operations, including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the States United Democracy Center, the Democracy Defender’s Fund, Democracy Defenders Action — all posing as anti-autocracy operations. Eisen and his orgs have filed hundreds of lawsuits against the Trump administration to obstruct any initiative the President advances to stop Democratic Party sanctioned grift, deport illegal aliens ushered in during the “Joe Biden” years, and especially to derail investigations of election fraud. These orgs are well-funded by George Soros’s Open Society NGO and it’s spinoffs, Arabella Advisors (rebranded as Sunflower Services), the Tides Foundation, that is, the usual suspects.

Read more …

“The EU and the UK are unprepared and face deindustrialization after rejecting Russian oil and gas, Kirill Dmitriev has said..”

Repeated from a few days ago. It seems that important.

• Most Powerful Energy Crisis In Human History Is Looming – Putin Envoy (RT)

The world is heading toward the most severe energy crisis in history and Europe is unprepared, Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev has said. The warning comes as the escalating conflict in the Middle East has driven volatility in global energy markets. Speaking on Thursday, Dmitriev – who heads the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and is President Vladimir Putin’s special envoy for investment and economic cooperation – said he earlier predicted that oil would exceed $100 a barrel if a conflict like this broke out. “Back then, no one believed,” he said, adding that some market participants are now discussing the possibility of prices rising to $150 or even $200.


“We see that the most severe energy crisis in the history of mankind is approaching. Neither the EU nor the UK is at all prepared for it,” Dmitriev said on the sidelines of the RDIF congress. Brussels and London “shot themselves in the foot” by rejecting Russian oil and gas, and the consequences of this are only beginning to emerge, he added. Dmitriev warned that the EU faces deindustrialization, and that “big problems” await the UK, arguing that this the result of choices made by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and other “Russophobic politicians.” Western governments will eventually be forced to seek renewed access to Russian energy, he said.

Oil and gas prices have spiked since the escalation of the Middle East conflict, triggered by the US-Israeli strikes on Iran and subsequent Iranian retaliatory attacks across the region, which have led to the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz to Western shipping. The strait normally carries around a fifth of the world’s daily oil supply, and the IEA has warned that disruptions could last months or years. European gas prices have risen by around 70% since March 1; Brent crude has topped $110 per barrel, prompting Washington to ease the sanctions on Russian oil.

The EU was already grappling with the fallout from its decision to cut energy ties with Russia following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, as well as the costs of its green transition policies. The European Commission has said there will be no return to Russian energy, and it will continue to pursue a full phase-out of Russian fossil fuels by 2027. This week, however, it put plans for a complete ban on Russian oil on hold, due to what some officials reportedly called “current geopolitical developments.”

Read more …

ActBlue.

“.. the Eric Holder law firm Covington & Burling, the primary legal mechanism for the ActBlue/DNC machinery, lies at the heart of the matter.”

• Primary Fundraising Mechanism of Democrats Accepted Foreign Donations (CTH)

ActBlue is to the Democrat party fundraising machine as WinRed is to the Republican side of the equation.


In a rather stunning outline by the New York Times [SEE HERE] the progressive outlet is reporting of serious concerns within the leadership of ActBlue related to their willfully blind reception of foreign sources of money to fund Democrat candidates. The remarkable aspect is not just that ActBlue takes foreign funds, but rather the New York Times revealing internal legal discussions about it. According to the Times reporting, the Eric Holder law firm Covington & Burling, the primary legal mechanism for the ActBlue/DNC machinery, lies at the heart of the matter.

(NYT) […] The firm concluded that ActBlue’s chief executive had given a potentially misleading response to congressional Republican investigators in a 2023 letter explaining how the organization vetted donations to ensure that they were not illegally coming from foreign citizens. The letter from the chief executive, Regina Wallace-Jones, said ActBlue carried out “multilayered” screenings of contributions that helped “root out” those from overseas. In fact, the law firm found, some of the steps she had described were not always followed.

“This presents a substantial risk for ActBlue,” the law firm, Covington & Burling, wrote in one of two memos expressing legal concerns. One memo raised the specter of a criminal investigation if prosecutors believed that ActBlue had tried to conceal facts about its efforts to prevent foreign contributions. To really appreciate the scheme that seems to be outlined by the internal documents, it is worth remembering that James O’Keefe previously did some boots on the ground research into ActBlue and found that multiple, perhaps thousands, of “donor” names and addresses were assigned to contributions the donors said they never made.

Put the two issues together and it appears that ActBlue may have been laundering foreign money into the DNC by using donor identities to cover the funding mechanism. Foreign funds, broken up into separate, smaller components and then attributed to Smurf donor identities. As many surmised at the time, the donor IDs would be useful – only to launder the funds. That would explain why thousands of donors denied making contributions, yet FEC reports filed by ActBlue officials assign, falsely, their identity to donations. Shortly before the 2024 federal election, on October 24th, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton also submitted a criminal referral to the DOJ following his own investigation of this activity.

TEXAS – “Attorney General Ken Paxton made a criminal referral to the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) detailing the results of an investigation that revealed how suspicious actors seemingly use ActBlue’s political fundraising platform to make illegal straw donations.” Put the New York Times story together with the James O’Keefe investigation, and then overlay the Texas AG investigation and criminal referral, and there’s not just smoke -or fire- there’s an inferno ablaze.

[…] ActBlue is now all but declaring war on its own past lawyers, an extraordinary turn of events at a moment when President Trump has already ordered a Justice Department investigation into the organization. Democrats are nervous that any additional upheaval at ActBlue could destabilize the party’s critical fund-raising apparatus ahead of the midterm elections. All levels of Democratic candidates, from incumbent presidents to school board aspirants, use ActBlue to raise campaign money from online donors. The platform has processed nearly $19 billion in contributions since its founding in 2004, building a donor database with millions of credit card numbers that is unmatched in American politics. Nearly 23,000 candidates and groups used the site in 2025, ActBlue has said, raising almost $1.8 billion from 52 million contributions, some of which recur every month.

[…] “It can be alleged that ActBlue accepted and/or facilitated the acceptance of foreign-national contributions into American elections,” one memo states. “In addition, because ActBlue’s staff was aware that its system was not as robust as necessary, it could be alleged that these violations were ‘knowing and willful,’ a standard that both increases the penalties the F.E.C. might seek and gives the Justice Department jurisdiction for a potential criminal investigation.” (more)

It’s called, Money Laundering.

Read more …

Strong numbers. Not much attention.

• HUGE March Jobs Report Leaves Democrats Speechless (Margolis)

The so-called experts didn’t just miss the mark on March jobs numbers; they got steamrolled by reality. Economists predicted a weak 59,000 jobs. The actual number came in at a stunning 178,000. Talk about getting it completely wrong. And it’s the latest reminder that the same crowd that spent months warning about economic doom under President Donald Trump still doesn’t understand what’s actually happening on the ground. Even CNN couldn’t deny that this was huge. CNBC couldn’t contain its excitement.


Unemployment dipped again, falling from 4.4% to 4.3%. Even more telling, the rate dropped across multiple groups, including women, black Americans, Asians, Hispanics, and veterans. That kind of broad-based improvement doesn’t happen in a weak economy. It doesn’t even happen when a Democrat is in the White House. Meanwhile, jobless claims are now hovering near a two-year low. In other words, fewer people are losing jobs, and more people are finding them. That’s the formula for sustained momentum. Manufacturing and construction both saw real growth, the kind that signals strength in the backbone of the economy. Let’s keep going, shall we?

Since Trump returned to office, the private sector has added 609,000 jobs. At the same time, federal government employment has dropped by 352,000. On top of that, native-born Americans are benefiting, too. A total of 218,000 native-born workers have gained employment, and 193,000 have entered the labor force. That’s no accident; that’s by design. Trump’s designWages are also moving in the right direction. Average hourly earnings rose 0.2% in March and sit 3.5% higher than a year ago. It gets better. Blue-collar workers, who took a beating during the Biden years, have now recovered those lost wages in just one year under Trump.

As for inflation, it continues to cool. It now sits at 2.4%, down from 3.0% when Trump took office — and way below the 9% it reached under Biden. Core inflation has dropped to 2.5%, its lowest level in five years. That’s a major shift after the price spikes Americans endured not long ago. What does this mean for Americans? It means prices for everyday staples like bread, meat, fruit, and dairy have all come down. Egg prices, which became a symbol of runaway inflation, have plunged nearly 50% since Trump took office and 60% compared to last Easter. Housing is showing signs of relief as well. Mortgage rates have declined, and rents are down 1.7% over the past year.

Put it all together, and it’s clear that the Trump economy is working. Jobs are growing faster than expected. Wages are rising. Inflation is falling. And everyday costs are easing. The “experts” can keep predicting collapse if they want. The numbers keep telling a very different story. Trump’s golden age is coming through. Neither Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, DNC Chairman Ken Martin, nor the Democratic Party has addressed the new jobs report on X.

Read more …

”Ivey expressed his opposing religious beliefs, including criticizing the NBA’s Pride Month celebrations.”

• Chicago Bulls Release Forward After He Speaks Out Against Pride Month (Turley)

This week, the Chicago Bulls waived guard Jaden Ivey for “conduct detrimental to the team.” No, Ivey did not assault anyone or gamble on games. He did not call for violence. Ivey expressed his opposing religious beliefs, including criticizing the NBA’s Pride Month celebrations. There is no question that private companies have the right to control employees’ on-the-job speech, including barring demonstrations such as kneeling during the national anthem. However, the Ivey controversy exposes the hypocrisy of sports associations and teams in the combination of corporate virtue signaling and athlete speech limitations.


Companies in various fields have asserted the right to condition contracts on the possibility of termination due to public behavior or comments that are detrimental to the company. Notably, this was a player speaking off the basketball court who was deemed “detrimental” to the brand. The main concern is the lack of consistency. Actors such as Rachel Zegler have tanked their own movies to use their platforms to advance their own political viewpoints. Likewise, athletes have routinely espoused controversial views on racial divisions or law enforcement without losing their contracts. Recently, teams supported athletes espousing anti-ICE sentiments. In other words, it is not advocacy but the cause that these companies focus on when allowing or punishing speech.

At the same time, the NFL and NBA require players to wear and espouse views that some of them — like some in the nation — may oppose. Ivey was objecting that he does not feel that Pride Month is espousing “righteous” lifestyles. Ivey was not attacking the Bulls or the game. He was asserting that he does not support the virtues or values being endorsed by the company. Many of us were offended by social media postings by Ivey in referring to Catholicism as a “false religion.” He also drew the ire of many by telling a fan that “God does not hear your prayer if you are a sinner.”

However, it appears that it was his criticism of the LGBTQ community and Pride Month that ended the matter with the NBA. Ivey objected to the advocacy required by the NBA, objecting “they proclaim it. They show it to the world. They say, ‘Come join us for Pride Month,’ to celebrate unrighteousness.” The issue of “talent” becoming notorious has long been a focus of sports and entertainment contracts. Hateful or divisive public comments can impact a brand or corporate image. For example, a team does not have to continue an association with a racist spewing hateful remarks about fans.

The Ivey controversy should force a discussion of the countervailing responsibilities of the teams and the NBA. Some of us have previously criticized the virtue-signaling of associations like the NFL, with giant statements in the end zones and on players’ helmets. Many fans would like these teams to stop lecturing them and simply play sports. We do not need morality or civics lessons from the likes of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. However, if the NFL and NBA are going to get into the business of shaping fans’ values, they may need to accept greater leeway for athletes who hold opposing values. Instead, they are expecting athletes like Ivey to effectively endorse approved values while barring them from expressing dissenting views.

This is not the first such controversy. Years ago, former coach Tony Dungy was the subject of a cancel campaign because he expressed his faith at a pro-life rally. Former Washington Commanders defensive coordinator Jack Del Rio was punished for expressing a dissenting view of what happened on January 6th and what he viewed as the different treatment given to these cases, including excessive sentences. Likewise, recently, Chicago Cubs player Matt Shaw was the target of a campaign to trade him after he attended the funeral of Charlie Kirk.

Sports organizations, like other businesses, have every right to bar protests and political statements at games. They should, however, apply the same standard to themselves. It is time to get virtue signaling and social statements out of sports. Teams need to stop picking sides on social and political issues while blocking opposing views from their athletes. Once out of the business of shaping public values and views, these teams will be in a better position to demand that athletes avoid controversial public statements that alienate fans or harm a brand.

Otherwise, teams could simply bar such commentary during games and allow athletes the same freedom of expression outside of the game that the teams enjoy during games. None of this means that Jaden Ivey is right or admirable in his specific statements. It only means that, if teams want him to just play basketball, they should do the same.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/BROKENBRITAIN0/status/2039988689246298534?s=20 https://twitter.com/CatholicArena/status/2039794549229322271?s=20 Half an hour of your time. You will come away a lot smarter. https://twitter.com/farzyness/status/2039760304805220662?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 2 2026

Apr 022026
 
 April 2, 2026  Posted by at 9:49 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  63 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh A Lane near Arles (Side of a Country Lane) 1888


• Trump Reassures Americans: Iran Operation Won’t Be a Forever War (Chris Queen)
• US, Iran Discussing Ceasefire In Exchange For Reopening Strait (ZH)
• Rubio Delivers a Reality Check on Iran, NATO, Cuba, and Venezuela (Anderson)
• Marco Rubio, the Question Must be Asked: “Why are we in NATO”? (CTH)
• NATO Without America? A Slow Shift Is Already Underway (Zevelev)
• Keir Starmer Gives a National Address – Things Will Never be the Same Again (CTH)
• Chuck Schumer Is Losing Control of His Party; They Turn On Him (Margolis)
• Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Warns Against Unbridled Free Speech (Turley)
• How Many Times has the EU Screwed Itself Over in the Past Year? (Marsden)
• Europe Needs to Hear This Harsh Truth (Stephen Green)
• A Civilization Whose Defense is Abandoned, is Lost (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Charlie Kirk Bullet Doesn’t Match Suspect’s Rifle – Lawyers (RT)
• More Than Half of Americans Believe AI Will Do More Harm Than Good: Poll ET)

 


 

https://twitter.com/andweknow/status/2039304266775740853?s=20 https://twitter.com/WallStreetMav/status/2039126040686248240?s=20 https://twitter.com/ScaryEurope/status/2039236276709376095?s=20 https://twitter.com/BasilTheGreat/status/2039088940129391074?s=20

 


 

 


 


He has to wrap it up quickly, nobody wants a long war, or heavy casualties, and it’s midterms soon.

• Trump Reassures Americans: Iran Operation Won’t Be a Forever War (Chris Queen)

President Donald Trump delivered a speech on Wednesday night with the intention of informing Americans about what’s going on with our joint military operations with Israel against Iran. It was remarkably restrained for a Trump speech and relatively brief. Side note: My favorite phrase from the speech was when Trump referred to the “green, green cash” that Barack Obama threw at the Islamic regime during his presidency. The president remarked that Wednesday was the one-month mark for Operation Epic Fury:


As we speak this evening, it has been just one month since the United States military began Operation Epic Fury targeting the world’s number one state sponsor of terror, Iran. In these past four weeks, our Armed Forces have delivered swift, decisive, overwhelming victories on the battlefield — victories like few people have ever seen before. Tonight, Iran’s navy is GONE. Their air force is in ruins. Their leaders, most of them — the terrorist regime they led — are now dead. Their command and control of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Core is being decimated as we speak. Their ability to launch missiles and drones is dramatically curtailed and their weapons, factories, and rocket launchers are being blown to pieces — very few of them left. Never in the history of warfare has an enemy suffered such clear and devastating large-scale losses in a matter of weeks.

He reminded viewers that disabling Iran was one of his earliest campaign promises: “From the very first day I announced my campaign for President in 2015, I have vowed that I would never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. This fanatical regime has been chanting ‘Death to America, ‘Death to Israel,’ for 47 years. Their proxies were behind the murder of 241 Americans in the Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut, the slaughter of hundreds of our servicemembers with roadside bombs, they were involved in the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, and they’ve carried out countless other heinous acts… For these terrorists to have nuclear weapons would be an intolerable threat. The most violent and thuggish regime on earth would be free to carry out their campaigns of terror, coercion, conquest, and mass murder from behind a nuclear shield. I will never let that happen.”

The president expressed that his goal was to resolve Iran’s issues diplomatically, but Iran wouldn’t allow that to happen: “My first preference was always the path of diplomacy — yet, the regime continued their relentless quest for nuclear weapons and rejected every attempt at an agreement. For this reason, in June, I ordered a strike on Iran’s key nuclear facilities in Operation Midnight Hammer… The regime then sought to rebuild their nuclear program at a totally different location, making clear they had no intention of abandoning their pursuit of nuclear weapons… For years, everyone has said that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons — but in the end, those are just words if you’re not willing to take action when the time comes.”

Trump acknowledged the pain Americans are feeling at the gas pump. (As somebody who recently bought a new vehicle that gets much lower gas mileage than my prior car, I can testify.) “Many Americans have been concerned to see the recent rise in gasoline prices here at home… This short-term increase has been entirely the result of the Iranian regime launching deranged terror attacks against commercial oil tankers and neighboring countries that have nothing to do with the conflict. This is yet more proof that Iran can never be trusted with nuclear weapons. They will use them and they will use them quickly. It would lead to decades of extortion, economic pain, and instability worse than we can ever imagine. The United States has never been better prepared economically to confront this threat.”

He called out nations that are dealing with the effects of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz: “To those countries that can’t get fuel — many of which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran, we had to do it ourselves — I have a suggestion. Number one, buy oil from the United States of America; we have plenty. We have so much. And Number two, build up some delayed courage… Go to the Strait and just take it. Protect it. Use it for yourselves. Iran has been essentially decimated. The hard part is done.”

After assuring the public that operations in Iran should be done in “two to three weeks,” Trump reassured his viewers that Iran’s days as a threatening power are almost over. “Tonight, every American can look forward to a day when we are finally free from the wickedness of Iranian aggression and the specter of nuclear blackmail,” he declared. “Because of the actions we have taken, we are on the cusp of ending Iran’s sinister threat to America and the world.”

Tonight, the president gave a speech that was characteristically Trumpian. But it achieved the objectives that he wanted of informing the American people that Operation Epic Fury is nearly over and won’t be a “forever war.”

Read more …

A ceasefire or “back to the stone age”, everything’s on the menu.

• US, Iran Discussing Ceasefire In Exchange For Reopening Strait (ZH)

Ahead of Trump’s address tonight at 9pm ET, Axios reports citing three sources that the US and Iran are discussing a potential deal that would involve a ceasefire in exchange for Iran reopening the Strait of Hormuz “The officials did not say whether those discussions had taken place directly or only through mediators, and they cautioned that it was unclear whether a deal could be reached. But the officials said President Trump was discussing the possibility with officials inside and outside the administration.” As a reminder, earlier in the day Trump claimed on Wednesday that Iran had asked the U.S. for a ceasefire, but stressed he would only consider it if the strait was reopened. In response, Iran countered that it had not requested a ceasefire. https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/2039352788468003220
* * *

Iranian Supreme Leader Vows To “Continue Supporting The Resistance Against The Zionist-US Enemy”
Amid speculation that he is dead or badly wounded, moments ago Iran’s new supreme leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei said on X that he “emphatically declare that the consistent policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, following on the path of Imam Khomeini and the martyred Leader, is to continue supporting the Resistance against the Zionist-US enemy.”
* * *

Iran: Not True that Iran Requested a Ceasefire
Iran has again rejected Trump’s narrative, after he hours ago claimed that “Iran’s New Regime President” has just “asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE!” Iran’s Foreign Ministry has responded by saying “there is no truth” to “Trump’s statements that Iran requested a ceasefire.” The Iran FM spox statement continues: “No decision has been made yet. We have many considerations. Our conditions for ending the war are very clear. We do not accept a ceasefire; We seek a complete end.” As a reminder, President Masoud Pezeshkian has been Iran’s president since July 2024 – and he’s made public appearances in Tehran, even over the last days. There is not a “new regime president”.= Additionally, Trump is now threatening to bomb Iran “back to the stone age” if Hormuz is not reopened, but just yesterday suggested he’s fine with it staying closed and that ultimately others should open it.

Preparing American Public for an Exit?
President Trump has issued new words to Reuters on his highly anticipated speech tonight (9pm ET): The United States will be “out of Iran pretty quickly” and could return for “spot hits” if needed, President Donald Trump tells Reuters, hours before he was scheduled to make a primetime address to the nation. Trump also says he would state in the speech that he is considering withdrawing the US from the NATO alliance. There’s expected to be heavy focus on chastising NATO. If this is indeed the Bush-style ‘mission accomplished’ moment, it may be that he’s ready to blame Western allies for the closure of the Hormuz Strait – a problem which didn’t exist before Operation Epic Fury.

Trump: Iran President has Asked for Ceasefire
President Trump on Truth Social has claimed the US has been directly asked for ceasefire; however, he coupled this with the typical threat of bombing Iran “back to the Stone Ages!!!” Here’s what he said (note: Iran does not have a new president): Iran’s New Regime President, much less Radicalized and far more intelligent than his predecessors, has just asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE! We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!! President DJT

And yet the Hormuz question lingers, after just yesterday Trump strangely said the vital energy shipping waterway would “automatically open”. Oil prices initially dumped on the Trump message, and quickly rebounded – perhaps based on the latter part of Trump’s statement. A lot would have to happen – for one Washington is likely to require that Tehran giving up charging a some $2 million fee for tankers to make safe passage. Oil unimpressed…

Read more …

“Cuba has no economy, and no one there can fix the economy because they’re incompetent. ..”

• Rubio Delivers a Reality Check on Iran, NATO, Cuba, and Venezuela (Anderson)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been doing a lot of MSM interviews lately, and I kind of get the feeling he’s… fed up. He’s tired of having to correct false narratives on Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela. As I reported on Monday, he got to a point where he told George Stephanopoulos that maybe he needed to “write down” Donald Trump’s objectives for Iran because no matter how many times Rubio told him what they were, he implied that he didn’t understand them. While it was entertaining, it does get old, I imagine.


The three main points about these topics that he’s asked about in every interview — and there have been a lot; perhaps Trump is prepping him to cover for Karoline Leavitt when she goes on maternity leave (kidding) — are as follows: 1) We’re very close to meeting our objectives in Iran. Not months, not days but weeks away. 2) Cuba has no economy, and no one there can fix the economy because they’re incompetent. 3) Venezuela is in phase two of the three-phase plan he and Trump have for its recovery, and things are going very well there. But no matter how many times he says these things, to hear the MSM tell it, the administration has no idea what’s going on in Iran, the people in Cuba are suffering because of Trump, and Venezuela isn’t improving at all.

Well, on Tuesday night, Rubio appeared on Hannity on Fox News, where he was actually allowed to talk without being asked asinine questions. He hit on all three countries (and NATO), and while he didn’t necessarily say anything new, he was able to lay it all out clearly and without dealing with stupidity, so it was nice to watch. Plus, as I said, he’s fed up with these MSM narratives, and it’s always fun to watch him get a little worked up. I’m going to kick back here and let him do most of the talking. I feel like i’m taking the lazy way out, but sometimes, it’s best just to let him talk. On how efficiently our military has achieved its objection and how it will “go down in history”:

On the threat to the United States and the rest of the world:

On why it’s the regime’s fault that we’ve gotten to this point:

Read more …

“The NATO membership is now a one-way street where they demand our military protection..”

• Marco Rubio, the Question Must be Asked: “Why are we in NATO”? (CTH)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio appears on Fox News to discuss the various goals and objectives of the U.S. military operation against Iran. As part of the interview Secretary Rubio was asked about the strategic conflicts and hypocrisies now flowing from NATO member states. The U.S. supports our NATO posture in Europe in part because it provides us with strategic military bases and operations that are considered vital to our national interests. However, as outlined in the Iran conflict, when we need to use those strategic bases the NATO member states withdraw previous permissions. France has blocked us from flying over their airspace, Spain and Italy have said the U.S. cannot use our military bases on their soil for operations. The U.K has refused to protect and/or escort their own energy assets.


The NATO membership is now a one-way street where they demand our military protection, but Europe blocks us from using our own military assets for our independent operations. Europe, while hiding behind the NATO protection skirt of the U.S, is simultaneously telling the U.S. what we can and cannot do with our own military. Secretary Rubio and President Trump are now confronting this very visible one-way benefit head on.

Read more …

80 years ago.

• NATO Without America? A Slow Shift Is Already Underway (Zevelev)

US President Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy is often dismissed as chaotic or erratic. In reality, it reflects a deeper shift that is unlikely to disappear when he leaves office. Beneath the surface lies a consistent worldview, one shaped by populism and nationalism, that’s steadily gaining ground, both within the United States and globally. This shift is already reshaping long-standing institutions. Nowhere is this more visible than in Washington’s relationship with its European allies. For decades, US foreign policy rested on a simple premise: alliances, above all NATO, were the foundation of American power and influence. That consensus held across party lines for nearly 80 years. Today, it’s breaking down.


Trump is not merely skeptical of alliances, he openly questions their value. His reaction to the refusal of European allies to support US and Israeli military action against Iran was telling. Writing on Truth Social, he described NATO as a “paper tiger” and accused American allies of cowardice. “Everyone agrees with us, but they don’t want to help. And we, as the United States, must remember this,” he said. The message is blunt: if allies don’t act when Washington calls, then their status as allies is called into question. This doesn’t mean the United States is about to withdraw from NATO. What is unfolding is more gradual, and arguably more significant – a quiet dismantling of the alliance’s traditional structure.

There are growing signs of this shift: sharper rhetoric, fewer high-level engagements, and plans to reduce the American role within NATO’s command system. This is no longer just political theater.Even when constrained by Congress, as in the decision to block a rapid reduction of US troops in Europe, the administration has adjusted tactics rather than abandoning its objective. The restriction on cutting troop levels below 76,000 slows the process, but doesn’t change its direction. The broader aim remains clear: shifting responsibility onto Europe.A key element of this strategy is the gradual transfer of operational control. Reforms to NATO’s integrated command structure are already underway.

Soon, all three of the alliance’s operational commands will be led by Europeans. This marks a significant step towards transforming NATO into a European-led organization. If the United States relinquishes its central role in force planning and command, the consequences will be profound. NATO may remain intact in form, but its substance will change. Washington will no longer lead the alliance in the way it once did. This isn’t simply a matter of one president’s preferences. Trump reflects a broader shift in American public opinion.

There’s growing fatigue in the United States with the idea of underwriting the security of others. Years of costly conflicts in the Middle East, rising national debt, and pressing domestic concerns have made the traditional role of global guarantor increasingly unpopular. Don’t mistake it for isolationism. The recent strikes on Iran demonstrate that Washington remains willing to use force when it chooses. The change is more subtle, and more consequential. The United States no longer wants to be bound by obligations. Alliances and institutions that once defined American leadership are now seen as constraints. The emerging model is one of leadership without commitments: the ability to act freely, without being tied to the interests or expectations of partners.

That is a fundamentally different approach to international relations. It leaves NATO in an uncertain position, still formally intact, but increasingly hollowed out. In time, the alliance may survive. But it will no longer be the same organization that defined the transatlantic relationship for generations. And it’s far from clear that Europe is ready for what comes next.

Read more …

“.. if it remains alone, without key support and protection from the USA, the British empire is at risk of collapse.”

• Keir Starmer Gives a National Address – Things Will Never be the Same Again (CTH)

Against the backdrop of the Iran conflict, crisis in the middle east and the disruption of energy supplies due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, U.K Prime Minister Keir Starmer held an urgent meeting with British business leaders, finance and bankers as well as U.K insurance leaders. At the conclusion of that meeting he informed media of a national address. During the national address to the people of Great Britain, Prime Minister Starmer emphasized that events in the middle east have forever changed the landscape of U.K. economic and geopolitical policy. Signaling an inflection point crossed, the British prime minister announced that urgent actions were being taken to mitigate a national crisis.


Additionally, accepting the U.S. position toward NATO and the U.K appears to be permanently shifted, Starmer said the British relationship with Europe now becomes critical to their vital national security interests. Against the backdrop of an end to the “special relationship” with America, the Brexit independence from the European Union is now a threat. The United Kingdom must find a way to reunite with the European Union, because if it remains alone, without key support and protection from the USA, the British empire is at risk of collapse.


Read more …

“..while he may be the most recognizable congressional leader, that familiarity isn’t doing him any favors ..”

• Chuck Schumer Is Losing Control of His Party; They Turn On Him (Margolis)

A quiet rebellion is brewing inside the Democratic Party, and Chuck Schumer is sitting right in the crosshairs. Even as the Senate Minority Leader works to claw back the majority he lost in 2024, several Senate candidates are making it a point of pride to say they won’t support him as leader — before they’ve even won their races. The clearest shot came from Illinois. Lieutenant Gov. Juliana Stratton, who won her Democratic Senate primary earlier this month, made her position crystal clear during a January debate. “I’ve already said that I will not support Chuck Schumer as leader in the Senate, and I’m the only person on this stage that has said so,” Stratton declared. She’s not alone.


Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow has also called for Schumer to step aside. Texas Senate Democratic nominee James Talarico is keeping his options open, saying he wants to hear from leadership candidates before making any commitment. And when Sen. Chris Murphy was offered the opportunity on NBC’s Meet the Press to back Schumer directly, he ducked it with a classic non-answer: “Well, no, we are united as a caucus right now.” United, sure. Just not necessarily behind Schumer.

Sen. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), appearing on CNN’s State of the Union, was careful to keep his support firmly in the past tense. “I’ve been supportive of our leadership right now,” Kim said, which is a far cry from saying he’d vote to keep Schumer in charge after November, and it’s quite the insult to the sitting leader. “And I think that that’s really what the American people are seeing is what we get when the Democrats are united, and the Republicans are constantly fighting themselves,” Kim concluded.

The Hill reports: “Schumer, 75, has led the Senate Democratic Conference since 2016, when he replaced longtime party leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who died in 2021. But in recent years, the New York Democrat has faced calls to give up power from various corners of the party, including from progressive groups, House Democrats, and even Democrats running for Senate. Criticism of Schumer particularly ramped up after eight Democrats, a group he was not part of, joined Republicans in voting to end the record-long government shutdown in November.

Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, the Democratic nominee in the race to succeed retiring Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), told liberal YouTuber Jack Cocchiarella earlier this month that she does not support Schumer serving as Senate Democratic leader for another Congress. We all know that Schumer’s problems with the base go back to this vote to keep the government open last March. That one vote cost him dearly with the base, and he’s never recovered from it. Schumer told The Hill he is just focused on winning the majority in November.

“The way to counter Trump more effectively is to win the majority in 2026 and put gavels in the hands of Democrats. That’s my North Star, and that’s what I’m focused on doing every single day,” Schumer said. A recent Morning Consult poll found that while he may be the most recognizable congressional leader, that familiarity isn’t doing him any favors. Compared to John Thune, Mike Johnson, and Hakeem Jeffries, Schumer is viewed the most negatively.

Read more …

“No One Knows What Will Happen Now”:

• Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Warns Against Unbridled Free Speech (Turley)

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is again warning of a growing threat to the nation. In her lone dissent in Chiles v. Salazar, Jackson observed that “to be completely frank, no one knows what will happen now.” The ominous tone stemmed from the fact that free speech had prevailed over state-imposed orthodoxy in a Colorado case. Eight justices, including her two liberal colleagues, ruled that Colorado could not prevent licensed counselors from “any practice or treatment” that “attempts or purports to change” a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The win for free speech was catastrophic for Jackson and many on the left. Allowing counselors to discuss the causes and basis for sexual orientation changes, Jackson maintained, would “open a can of worms.” It would be far better for the majority to simply silence such dissenting voices in the name of science.


The dissent in Chiles is only the latest example of the chilling jurisprudence of Justice Jackson, including a pronounced dismissal of free speech values. Consider the holding of her colleagues that Jackson finds so horrific. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the First Amendment “reflects … a judgment that every American possesses an inalienable right to think and speak freely, and a faith in the free marketplace of ideas as the best means for discovering truth … any law that suppresses speech based on viewpoint represents an ‘egregious’ assault on both of those commitments.” What a nightmare.

Instead, Jackson would have declared the ban on anything deemed “conversion therapy” to be “conduct,” not speech. It is that easy. You simply impose an orthodoxy and then treat any dissenters as being regulated for their conduct, not their viewpoints. Justice Elena Kagan could not withhold her frustration with her colleague, noting that “[b]ecause the State has suppressed one side of a debate, while aiding the other, the constitutional issue is straightforward.” She added that Jackson’s view “rests on reimagining—and in that way collapsing—the well-settled distinction between viewpoint-based and other content-based speech restrictions.”

Other countries have embraced Jackson’s permissive approach to speech curtailment. Recently, Malta failed to convict a man who was facing five months in prison for merely discussing his own abandonment of homosexuality due to a religious conversion. Of course, we just went through a pandemic when censorship and orthodoxy were dressed up as science. Leading scientific figures were canceled and harassed. That was the case with Jay Bhattacharya, who co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration and was a vocal critic of COVID-19 policies. Bhattacharya was target due to his dissenting views on health policy, including opposing wholesale shutdowns of schools and businesses.

He and other scientists were later vindicated. European allies that did not shut down their schools fared far better than we did, including avoiding a national mental health and learning crisis. We simply never had that debate. He was recently honored with the prestigious “Intellectual Freedom” award from the American Academy of Sciences and Letters. He is also now the 18th director of the National Institutes of Health. Yet, years ago, the courts, the media, and politicians joined in treating dissenting views as “conspiracy theories.”

Some argued that the virus’s origin was likely the Chinese research lab in Wuhan. That position was denounced by the Washington Post as a “debunked” coronavirus “conspiracy theory.” The New York Times Science and Health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli called any mention of the lab theory “racist.” Federal agencies now support the lab theory as the most likely based on the scientific evidence.Likewise, many questioned the efficacy of those blue surgical masks and supported natural immunity to the virus — the government later recognized both positions.

Others questioned the six-foot rule, which shut down many businesses, as unsupported by science. In congressional testimony, Dr. Anthony Fauci later admitted that the rule “sort of just appeared” and “wasn’t based on data.” Yet not only did it result in heavily enforced rules (and meltdowns) in public areas, but the media further ostracized dissenting critics. For years, pundits portrayed those who questioned gender reassignment surgeries and treatments as bigots. Now, leading medical associations and European nations have decided that such procedures should not be generally allowed. All of it was orthodoxy masquerading as science.

Yet, Jackson sees the protection of dissenting scientific and professional views as a “can of worms” that the courts should avoid in favor of state and assocational imposed truths. She wrote that allowing such opposing views “ultimately risks grave harm to Americans’ health and wellbeing.”

Read more …

“Ursula von der Leyen recently announced the need to yank another €200 million from taxpayers to “support investment in innovative nuclear technologies.”

• How Many Times has the EU Screwed Itself Over in the Past Year? (Marsden)

Hey, good news! The EU has found a new source of desperately needed gas amid the current energy crunch. The bad news? It’s in the US. So it will serve America, first. With Europe getting any sloppy seconds that Daddy Trump feels like overcharging it for when he isn’t threatening to invade. It’ll be the French energy multinational, TotalEnergies, serving it up to the US like a waiter at a Montmartre bistro, forced to smile and bow while the guest pockets the silverware.


Even better? The company wasn’t even supposed to be over there doing that. They had planned to be building offshore windfarms. But instead, Trump’s Department of the Interior now says that they made a deal with the French company to spend roughly a billion dollars investing in American gas operations in exchange for getting about the same amount of cash back for agreeing to say goodbye to its green wind dreams in the US. Team Trump calls it an “innovative agreement driven by President Donald J. Trump’s Energy Dominance Agenda.” But the CEO of the European company is making the cucking sound like a big win.

“TotalEnergies is pleased to sign this settlement agreements with the DOI and to support the Administration’s Energy Policy. Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States, in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” said TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanne, while adjusting his knee pads, before continuing to service Trump via official US government press release.

“Furthermore, these agreements, under which we will reinvest the refunded lease fees to finance the construction of the 29 Mt Rio Grande LNG plant and the development of our oil and gas activities, allows us to support the development of US gas production and export.” Hold up. So this company gave the US about a billion dollars in exchange for access to green energy. Then the US gave them back their money. And now they’re reinvesting it to serve Trump’s agenda? And publicly “pleased” about it?

Well, good riddance to – er, I mean, so much for Europe’s green dreams, I guess. But at least it means they’ll get easier access to more desperately needed LNG, right? Since they’re the ones doing the heavy lifting. Not without securing a trade agreement on America’s terms, they won’t. Which is why they’re aiming to ratify a trade agreement with their tormentor.

Brussels had been concerned about the agreement that was struck with Trump back in 2025, named the Turnberry Agreement after the US president’s Scottish golf resort where it all went down. The deal was about tariffs. Specifically, it gave a huge break to the US with ZERO tariffs on some of its exports to the EU, while slapping a 15-percent tariff on EU imports to the US. Another master stroke of cuckoldry. And yet Trump still won’t stop talking about how the EU is constantly stiffing America on trade. Which explains why the EU has been dragging its feet on ratifying it, worried that maybe it was putting too many eggs in a very unstable basket. Something that the US warned it against doing with Russia, being only too happy to step up to offer a costlier overdependency on itself instead.

The EU is doing the exact same with green energy, turning its back on nuclear power before its beloved green renewables were even ready for prime time. Which also went about as well as you might expect from these central planning geniuses. Calling it a screwup, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently announced the need to yank another €200 million from taxpayers to “support investment in innovative nuclear technologies.” The same ones they’d been busy vilifying until recently.

Read more …

“Europe believes that their needs must be our priority, and that, furthermore, we’re required to do their job for them.”

• Europe Needs to Hear This Harsh Truth (Stephen Green)

Shipping and military expert John Konrad spent all day in D.C. on Tuesday talking to his military sources and concluded that “the Navy appears to be in no rush to reopen the strait,” even while Iran dictates whose oil tankers are allowed to pass. “What is this administration trying to leverage?” Konrad wondered, and that nobody he talked to was willing to discuss the fate of Hormuz “until European politicians and media stop calling Americans war criminals and monsters.”


While Konrad admitted he has “no idea” when Hormuz will reopen, “but if the price is a modicum of cooperation and respect for everything America has done for decades to keep Europe safe, the strait could stay closed for months, or turned into a toll booth for years, because the majority of Americans…. and the vast majority of Trump administration officials I’ve talked with… seem fed up with their arrogance.” The self-styled sophisticates in Brussels and Europe’s capitals remain remarkably provincial in their outlook, and that’s why today we will speak some harsh truths to our friends in Europe — not because the truth is harsh, but because they believe that we naïve Americans don’t recognize it.

So here comes the truth bomb, laser-guided right into the atrium of the EU’s Berlaymont building. The harsh truth is that Hormuz is their priority, not ours, and yet they refuse to make any serious contribution to the war effort. The U.S. is a net exporter of oil and liquified natural gas (LNG), and we buy hardly anything from the Gulf. Closing the Strait of Hormuz is an inconvenience for us (in the price of gas and diesel) and hardly a strategic necessity. In both military and economic terms, Hormuz is way down our target list. Complicating the decision matrix even further, re-opening Hormuz at this stage likely requires ground troops — so it’s simply smarter for us to continue the bombing campaign and see if we can’t wait out an increasingly split and brittle regime that might still collapse under pressure.

Europe, of course, doesn’t see things the way we do. Europe believes that their needs must be our priority, and that, furthermore, we’re required to do their job for them. [And Another Thing: We could do more to stabilize energy prices, but in 2024, the Biden Cabal declared a moratorium on the construction of new LNG export terminals. So while the rest of the world suffers an LNG supply shock, our producers are forced to, at times, pay people to take LNG off their hands, and even burn off excess. Crazy, right?]

Before Epic Fury, something like 20% of the world’s LNG and 25% of seaborne oil trade passed through the strait each year and accounted for something like 10-15% of Europe’s energy supplies. Losing that hurts, and Politico reported on Tuesday that one “top Brussels official urges Europeans to work from home and drive less.”nEU energy chief Dan Jørgensen says Europe faces a “very serious situation,” and that “even if… peace is here tomorrow, still we will not go back to normal in the foreseeable future.”nSucks to be EU, chief. Meanwhile, Europe’s contribution to the actual military effort is barely minuscule, and a handful of nations, including France (duh), Spain (fricken commies), and even Giorgia Meloni’s Italy, have closed their airbases to our military traffic headed to the Gulf. Apparently, “lead, follow, or get out of the way” isn’t a part of Europe’s lexicon.

Read more …

The UK today.

• A Civilization Whose Defense is Abandoned, is Lost (Paul Craig Roberts)

For many years I have expressed concern that Western Civilization was being destroyed intentionally from within by failing to convey the civilization’s achievements to succeeding generations via education. Instead, education was used to alienate generations from their own civilization by stressing evils such as wars, slavery, oppression of blacks and women, oppression of other peoples as the result of colonial rule, abuse of children by parents, religious prejudices, class prejudices, and so on. The history of Western Civilization as a series of great reforms was kept from generation after generation so successfully that today hardly anyone under sixty years of age knows about them.


Western civilization has many achievements in science, technology, architecture, music, art, but perhaps the greatest achievement of Western Civilization began in the ninth century during the reign of Alfred the Greet in what became England. Alfred established law based on the people’s beliefs and behavior–the English Common Law–not on the edicts of a king. This was the beginning of developments over the centuries that culminated in the Glorious Revolution of 1680 that established that the king was subject to the law and the law was established by the commoners and the aristocrats in Parliament, thus making the king accountable to the people. The accountability of government rested on free speech. Without free speech truth cannot be ascertained.

The Americans who inherited the notion of government accountable to the people inscribed in the US Constitution the right to free speech.In recent years this right on which accountable government rests has been eroded in the US and essentially destroyed in the UK. In America today citizens who use the Constitutionally protected right of free speech can lose their jobs, can be prohibited from contracting with or having jobs with many state governments. If they are students who protest Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians, they are expelled from the university, and if they are foreign students they are deported. The universities do nothing to protect the free speech that the US Constitution guarantees. Neither do the bar associations nor the law schools.

Free speech is in the way of anti-Western civilization ideologies. We must believe that white racism, not the black King of Dahomey’s slave wars, is the cause of black slavery. We are denied the fact that blacks held blacks in slavery and the fact that the blacks sent to the New World were enslaved by blacks, and that colonists in the New World purchased already enslaved blacks for a labor force. White people did not enslave black people. Black people sold as slaves were enslaved by the black King of Dahomey. You will not be able to find this fact in any Black Studies program in any university. The generations of indoctrination of white people against themselves, called education, has produced a situation in which law is no longer applied to the guilty but to his victim. Black immigrant-invaders are protected against hate speech and an accusation of rape has become hate speech.

In the UK, and also I believe in Norway and Sweden and perhaps throughout the EU, a white woman who reports a rape or a gang-rape might be charged with a hate crime against a “person of color.” This possibility essentially conveys rape privileges to black immigrant-invaders to rape white European women. The police are as likely to hold the rape victim accountable for a hate crime as to hold the rapist accountable for rape. In England these rapes went on for 30 years with the police and the British government doing nothing about it except covering it up. A year or two ago former British prime minister Liz Truss said that for 30 years the British government covered up the rapes. It stilll does.

Read more …

Tyler Robinson’s defense team may use this argument in an attempt to get the charges against him dropped”

• Charlie Kirk Bullet Doesn’t Match Suspect’s Rifle – Lawyers (RT)

Investigators could not match the bullet that killed conservative influencer Charlie Kirk to the rifle used by his alleged assassin, lawyers for the suspect have claimed. The accused killer’s defense team is using this fact to push for a delayed trial. Tyler Robinson’s lawyers said in a recent court filing that the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) could not conclusively connect a bullet fragment recovered from Kirk’s body to a rifle found at the scene, citing an internal report by the agency.


The full ATF report has not been made public, but Robinson’s lawyers cited excerpts from the document in a request to delay a preliminary hearing scheduled for May. The 22-year-old suspect’s legal team stated that they need more time to review the bullet analysis, and to analyze the DNA of multiple other people found at the crime scene. Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA (TPUSA), was shot in the neck and killed almost instantly at an event on a Utah college campus last September. His death sent shockwaves through the US, with President Donald Trump posthumously awarding Kirk the Presidential Medal of Freedom and describing the conservative icon as “a visionary and one of the greatest figures of his generation.”

Robinson was arrested two days after Kirk’s death. Investigators quickly linked him to a Mauser model 98 rifle found near the scene, which had apparently been modified at some point to fire the American 30.06 round used in the assassination. Text messages between Robinson and his transgender lover were then unearthed, in which Robinson confessed to the killing and revealed almost every detail of the plot, down to how he cleaned his fingerprints off the gun before stashing it in a nearby patch of woods.

Prosecutors have said that DNA matching Robinson’s was found on the trigger of the rifle, but the case has nevertheless spawned multiple conspiracy theories – including the widely spread claim that Kirk was killed for turning on TPUSA’s pro-Israel donors and opposing US strikes on Iran. Every firearm leaves a unique imprint on a bullet as the projectile leaves the barrel. When enough fragments are found in good condition, ballistic analysts can match the projectile to the weapon with almost 100% confidence. Robinson’s lawyers suggested in the filings that they may point to the lack of a match in an attempt to dismiss charges against their client.

Read more …

People hear it will take their jobs, and that’s all they can understand.

• More Than Half of Americans Believe AI Will Do More Harm Than Good: Poll ET)

About 55 percent of Americans surveyed in a 2026 Quinnipiac poll said artificial intelligence (AI) will be more harmful than helpful. The survey, released on March 30, was conducted in collaboration with the Quinnipiac University School of Computing & Engineering and the Quinnipiac University School of Business. In April 2025, only 44 percent believed AI would do more harm than good in their daily lives. In the 2026 poll, 21 percent answered that AI affects their lives a lot, while 29 percent said only somewhat, and 30 percent believed AI impacts are minimal. Only 17 percent said they are not impacted at all.


Regarding education, 64 percent of survey respondents said AI is more harmful, compared with just 27 percent who believe it will help. For health care issues, 45 percent of those surveyed believed AI will do more harm, while 43 percent said AI will be more helpful. The employment outlook showed the greatest percentage of people worried about the future of AI, as 75 percent said continuous advancements in AI will most likely lead to a decline of job opportunities for people. While 18 percent said AI will not have much of an impact on jobs, only 7 percent said jobs for humans will increase as a result of AI.

In just one year, the fear of possible job losses due to AI increased by nearly 20 points. In April 2025, 56 percent of respondents said AI would be detrimental to human jobs. All generations surveyed remain pessimistic about the job outlook as a result of AI’s rapid growth, with Gen Z—including ages 18 to 29—exhibiting the highest percentage at 81 percent. For millennials, aged 30 to 45, 71 percent said jobs are likely to decrease as AI grows, and 67 percent of Gen Z, aged 46 to 61, agree. Of the baby boomer generation, aged 62 to 80, 66 percent indicated that human jobs will decline.

“Younger Americans report the highest familiarity with AI tools, but they are also the least optimistic about the labor market,” Tamilla Triantoro, associate professor of business analytics and information systems at Quinnipiac University School of Business, said in the report. “AI fluency and optimism here are moving in opposite directions.”Among those currently employed, 30 percent reported being very or somewhat concerned about AI rendering their jobs obsolete, but 69 percent said they are not very worried about it. Compared with last year’s survey, only 21 percent of employed Americans expressed fear of losing their jobs to AI.

“Americans are more worried about what AI may do to the labor market than about what it may do to their own jobs,” Triantoro said. “People seem more willing to predict a tougher market than to picture themselves on the losing end of that disruption—a pattern worth watching as the technology moves deeper into the workplace.”

An overwhelming 85 percent of Americans said they would be unwilling to work a job where their direct supervisor was an AI program that assigned their tasks and schedules. When asked how much they trust AI, 76 percent of respondents said that they hardly ever trust it, while just 21 percent admitted they do trust AI. Still, 51 percent said they often use AI for researching topics. Only 20 percent said they relied on AI for medical advice, and just 15 percent for personal advice.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 16 2026

Mar 162026
 
 March 16, 2026  Posted by at 10:33 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  64 Responses »


Willem de Kooning Police gazette 1955


• White House Denies Tucker Carlson CIA Spy-Op (ZH)
• Was the Supreme Leader Set up by a Leaker Named… Tucker Carlson? (Pinsker)
• Did Tucker Carlson Unwittingly Help Set Up Iran’s Leadership Decapitation? (ZH)
• Tucker Carlson Claims He’s the Subject of Criminal Probe Over Iran (Margolis)
• Reports: Mojtaba Khamenei in ‘Low Condition,’ Said to Be Dull-Witted (Manney)
• The Media Should Not Call Mojtaba Khamenei ‘Ayatollah’ (MEF)
• Iran’s Blockade of the Strait of Hormuz Is Destined to Fail (Rubin)
• The Place Where Every French Leader Makes The Same Mistakes (RT)
• French Municipal Elections Provide Early Test For Le Pen (ZH)
• Companies Are Starting to Enforce AI Use (AIX Files)
• In Search of Banksy (R.)

 


 

A few days ago, I happenstanced upon a Debt Rattle from 2019. I hadn’t seen that in forever. The first thing that I noticed about the 7 year hiatus was that the articles -or quotes thereof- were much shorter then. That makes reading easier, but not necessarily understanding. Second thing I noticed was the source of the articles; it was often the MSM, AP, Reuters etc.


In 2019, there was no Covid yet, and no Ukraine war either, the two topics that would “define” the news later. And the topics that made me search for alternative sources from the MSM. One source I used a lot for the Ukraine war was RT, the former Russia Today. Since there are always bans on RT somewhere, I post the entire article when I post. That way my readers don’t miss anything. Same goes for Sputnik and TASS, though they’re not as good as RT. Since you then have long(-er) articles, the length of the others sort of automatically increases too. It’s a main reason why the Debt Rattles got longer.

None of it makes any difference for our ads. Someone at Google doesn’t like TAE, and we still get notices regarding this, and they still don’t say why we are being refused. I have given up trying to understand this. I accept I will have to ask my readers for donations in order to keep TAE alive. Hereby. Please.

Topics since, say, 2015,have been the rise of Donald Trump, then Covid, then Ukraine. “New” topics in the time ahead will be the Middle East and, especially, AI. We’ll be on top of it.

 


 

https://twitter.com/MintPressNews/status/2033184171045126460

 


 


Whatever the truth is, great story.

• White House Denies Tucker Carlson CIA Spy-Op (ZH)

Update (2250ET): ‘Top admin officials’ tell Axios’ Marc Caputo that this is fake news;


Meanwhile, Carlson sat down with Glenn Greenwald Friday morning, and said that several high-placed sources told him that the CIA was preparing a criminal referral about him to the DOJ.

“Tucker said he had learned from several high-placed sources — and he obviously has many within the Trump administration — that the CIA was preparing a criminal referral about him to the DOJ. The subject of the agency’s report of suspected crimes: conversations he allegedly had with Iranian officials and others living in Iran prior to the start of the Trump-Netanyahu war. The clear implication was that Tucker had committed acts of subversion, or even treason, by speaking to Iranians in advance of the war that was about to be launched on their country.

Despite how innately shocking this claim is, I had and still have zero doubt that Tucker was telling the truth about what he heard. I have known him for many years, spent much time talking to him both in front of a camera and away from one, and never once has he lied to me or misled me. Tucker has been in public life as a journalist and media figure since his 20s. There have been many harsh criticisms launched against him during those decades, many of which — as he will be the first to tell you — were ones that were quite valid. -GlennGreenwald”

So now they’re going to suggest Tucker made it all up.

Read more …

“Tucker Carlson has relationships with Iranian government leaders..” No more?!

• Was the Supreme Leader Set up by a Leaker Named… Tucker Carlson? (Pinsker)

The really weird thing is, there might be precedent for it: Quite a few pundits, including Michael Knowles and Jack Posobiec, connected the dots back in December. Remember when Tucker Carlson solemnly told us that President Donald Trump was going to use his 2025 end-of-year primetime speech to declare war on Venezuela? Judge Andrew Napolitano: Is Trump going to start a war in Venezuela?


Tucker Carlson: Here’s what I know so far, which is that members of Congress were briefed yesterday [Tuesday] that a war is coming, and it’ll be announced in the address to the nation tonight at 9:00 by the president. […] A member of Congress told me that this morning. According to Axios reporter Marc Caputo, Carlson also claimed that “members of congress were briefed yesterday that a war is coming and it’ll be announced in the address to the nation tonight at 9 o’clock by the president.” Only it didn’t happen. We didn’t invade Venezuela ‘til Jan. 3, 2026 — and when we did so, we did it unannounced.nInstead, Trump used the media’s interest in war to deliver a 20-minute, domestic-centric speech that focused on affordability, public safety, and other successes.mn(Yours truly wrote about the bait-and-switch.)

Naturally, Tucker Carlson immediately outed the congressperson who fed him bad information. After all, ANYONE who’d lie about war deserves our condemnation. Why, if you’re willing to lie about war, you’re willing to lie about anything. BWAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA!! I’m just kidding: Tucker Carlson never mentioned who his “source” was. It was almost like s/he never even existed. (I guess it just wasn’t that important.) Today, a brand new theory is percolating: Did lightning just strike twice? Did President Trump use Tucker Carlson’s disloyalty to set up the Iranians? After all, you might’ve heard Carlson’s latest claim. If you haven’t, my PJ Media colleague and/or Tesla bro Matt Margolis wrote about it: Tucker claims he’s the subject of a criminal probe over Iran.

Tucker Carlson claims the CIA is preparing a criminal referral against him to the Department of Justice. For what, exactly? Well, according to Tucker, it’s for talking to people in Iran before the war started. “So the other day I found out that the CIA is preparing some kind of criminal referral against me, a crime report, to the Department of Justice on the basis of a supposed crime I committed,” Carlson said in a video posted to X. “What’s that crime? Well, talking to people in Iran before the war.”The potential charge, according to Tucker, is a violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which would classify him as an agent of a foreign power. “They [the CIA] read my texts,” he alleged. “So the crime under consideration apparently would be the Foreign Agent Act or something like that, acting as an agent of a foreign power.”

Hmm. So Carlson admits he was “talking to people in Iran before the war.” To whom was he talking — and what was he talking about? Because we know he spoke directly to the leadership of Iran. Less than a year ago, he bootlicked Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is an astonishingly powder-puff “interview.” And when a journalist (or whatever Carlson is) has relationships like that, he tends to use ‘em. It gives you a competitive advantage: Access is power.Furthermore, before the Iran War began, we know Tucker Carlson made numerous trips to the White House. Multiple outlets reported that Carlson was attempting to convince President Trump not to go to war against Iran.

Yet once war broke out, Carlson insisted Israel must’ve somehow talked Trump into it. It’s all very intriguing, because one of the biggest mysteries of this war is, why the heck were the Iranian mullahs and their “supreme leader” so careless and stupid to meet all together in broad daylight? It decapitated Iran’s government. Anyone with half a brain would’ve known how dangerous that was! And now, finally, an explanation emerges. But before we get to that, let’s recap what we know:

Tucker Carlson has relationships with Iranian government leaders, admits to “talking to people in Iran before the war,” and vehemently opposed attacking Iran. Allegedly, Carlson personally lobbied President Trump NOT to attack Iran — and when Trump did, Carlson assumed someone (Israel) must’ve changed his mind. Whatever messages Carlson sent to Iranians have, allegedly, become the focus of a criminal investigation.

Perhaps the reason why the mullahs and their “supreme leader” were lulled into a false sense of security was because Tucker Carlson told them that the president was bluffing: There were no strikes coming, so there’s nothing to fear.

Read more …

“At this point, there is no public evidence that Trump told Carlson, directly or indirectly, “we’re not going to war,” intending that message to be relayed to Tehran. “:”

• Did Tucker Carlson Unwittingly Help Set Up Iran’s Leadership Decapitation? (ZH)

Tucker Carlson dropped a remarkable monologue on Saturday. In it, he claimed that the CIA had been reading his texts and was preparing some kind of criminal referral tied to his communications with Iranian officials. That by itself would already be a huge story, if Tucker’s claims are correct. But what makes it even more explosive is the theory now circulating online: that the Trump administration may have used Tucker as part of a deception operation to get Iran’s leadership to let their guard down before the U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran.


Now on to the theory that Tucker may have unwittingly set up Iran’s leadership for a U.S.-Israeli decapitation strike. There are at least three pieces of publicly reported information that make this theory impossible to dismiss out of hand.= First, it is now widely reported that Carlson had unusually direct access to Trump in the run-up to the war. The Atlantic reported that Carlson met with Trump three times in the Oval Office over the past month, with the meetings lasting roughly 90 minutes each, to argue against striking Iran. Other reports citing the New York Times have echoed that Carlson had multiple Oval Office sessions with Trump in the weeks before the attack. And the Atlantic and others have noted that Carlson was among the populist voices privately and publicly urging Trump and his aides to avoid a prolonged Middle East war.

Second, Reuters has reported that the opening U.S.-Israeli strike was not some spontaneous response to a last-minute emergency. An Israeli defense official told Reuters the operation had been planned for months and that the launch date had been decided weeks in advance. That matters, because it means the attack was already in the pipeline long before Carlson’s Saturday monologue and long before the public fight between Tucker and Trump.

Third, Reuters also reported something even more striking: the attack was moved up to coincide with a meeting Ali Khamenei was holding with top aides. According to Reuters, Israeli intelligence detected that meeting on Saturday morning, the operation was moved forward, and confirmation that Khamenei was assembled with senior advisers helped set the strike in motion. In other words, the decapitation worked not merely because Washington and Jerusalem had superior firepower, but because they caught Iran’s top leadership concentrated in one place at one time.

Put those three facts together and you can see why the online theory has taken off. Carlson says he was talking to Iranian officials. Carlson had repeated private access to Trump before the war. And the war’s opening strike succeeded in part because Iran’s top leadership was gathered together when the hammer fell.

At this point, there is no public evidence that Trump told Carlson, directly or indirectly, “we’re not going to war,” intending that message to be relayed to Tehran. There is also no public evidence that Iranian officials relaxed their security posture specifically because of anything Carlson said, or because of any message they believed came from Trump through Carlson. The strongest confirmed reporting is narrower: the strike had been planned for months, the final timing was adjusted when intelligence detected Khamenei in a meeting with his inner circle, and Carlson had been in contact both with Iranian officials and with Trump before the war.

There is another reason to be careful here. Trump was hardly projecting dovish clarity in public before the strike. Reuters reported in late February that he had been publicly laying out the case for possible military action against Iran and warning that “bad things” would happen if Tehran failed to reach a meaningful agreement. So if Tehran concluded that no attack was imminent, that conclusion cannot simply be attributed to one media personality’s chatter.

Read more …

“He also noted that he’s never taken outside money, saying, “Don’t need it, don’t want it, and that’s provable.”

• Tucker Carlson Claims He’s the Subject of Criminal Probe Over Iran (Margolis)

Tucker Carlson claims the CIA is preparing a criminal referral against him to the Department of Justice. For what, exactly? Well, according to Tucker, it’s for talking to people in Iran before the war started. “So the other day I found out that the CIA is preparing some kind of criminal referral against me, a crime report, to the Department of Justice on the basis of a supposed crime I committed,” Carlson said in a video posted to X. “What’s that crime? Well, talking to people in Iran before the war.” The potential charge, according to Tucker, is a violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which would classify him as an agent of a foreign power.


“They read my texts,” he alleged. “So the crime under consideration apparently would be the Foreign Agent Act or something like that, acting as an agent of a foreign power.” Despite this, Tucker insists he’s not losing sleep over it. “I don’t expect this to go anywhere,” he said. “I’m not too worried about an actual criminal case against me for a bunch of reasons. One, I’m not an agent of a foreign power, unlike a lot of people commenting on U.S. politics and global affairs. I have only one loyalty, and that’s the United States, and have never acted against it.” Tucker continued, “Its interests are the only interests I care about ’cause I’m from here, and I have a lot of kids.” He also noted that he’s never taken outside money, saying, “Don’t need it, don’t want it, and that’s provable.”

He also pointed out that talking to foreign sources is, quite literally, his job. “It’s my job to talk to everybody all the time and try and figure out what’s happening around the world. That’s literally what I do for a living, and I’m not gonna stop doing that.” He then called the legal theory behind the potential case flat-out ridiculous. “So legally, I think the case is ludicrous, and I doubt it’ll even become a case.”So, why discuss it? He argued that the point of the video goes beyond his own situation. He’s turning this situation, which may or may not be true, frankly, into a warning about how wartime governments become authoritarian:”Countries tend to become more authoritarian in wartime. It’s just the nature of war. People are dying. The stakes are high.”

And the dissent that gets tolerated in peacetime starts getting treated like a threat. “The irony, of course, is the United States fights wars on behalf of freedom, but there’s always less of it here in our country during war,” Carlson said. Then came the more pointed accusation: the U.S. intelligence community spies on Americans, and it does so more broadly than most people realize. “The USIC, the intelligence agency, spy on Americans,” he said. “It’s probably a little more widespread than most people understand, and it’s outrageous.”

Tucker acknowledged the CIA is a large agency and said he’s not painting everyone in it with the same brush. But he was direct about what he believes is happening in his case. “There are some people who are mad at me for my views about Israel, and they have some latitude,” he said. He explained the mechanics of how this kind of operation works: a criminal complaint gets passed to law enforcement, which generates a warrant, which justifies the spying. Then the existence of the investigation gets leaked to media outlets to “humiliate and terrify the subjects of this op.”

This, he says, has happened to him before, more than once. “In famously 2021 when I was still at Fox News and trying to set up an interview with Vladimir Putin,” he recounted, “the NSA, I heard from someone there, had grabbed my text messages with an American citizen and had leaked them to news outlets.” Those texts were nothing more than interview logistics. “They leaked them to The New York Times in order to stop the interview, which they successfully did, by the way, and they admitted that they were spying on me. This is not a fantasy. It actually happened.”

He said they did it again two years later when he was trying to arrange a second Putin interview — the one he ultimately got anyway. The tell, he said, is simple: “When you get a call from a reporter who knows the contents of your texts, it’s pretty clear something’s going on.”

Carlson closed by making clear this video is a warning, not a fundraising pitch: “None of this, in my judgment, as of right now, is a huge threat to me, so I’m not making this video to complain about it or whine or ask you to send me money ’cause I’m under attack.” The message, he said, is about what the government is actually doing — and who’s doing it. “There are also people with agendas and grudges and no sense of restraint who are happy to misuse the power they have granted them by our elaborate secrecy laws to hurt fellow Americans for ideological reasons.”

He concluded, “That is entirely real. That’s the story of Russiagate, and it’s likely that things like that will begin to happen at greater scale now.”

Read more …

Something’s amiss.

• Reports: Mojtaba Khamenei in ‘Low Condition,’ Said to Be Dull-Witted (Manney)

The rumor that’s circulating in Middle Eastern political networks claims that Iranian cleric Hojtaba Khamenei may be in poor condition while he struggles to command respect among key figures inside the regime. Mojtaba Khamenei remains widely viewed as the center of Iran’s leadership after the death of his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who served as Iranian supreme leader for over 30 years and whose death created a sudden leadership vacuum.


Iranian state media later confirmed the killing and declared a 40-day national mourning period as the regime moved quickly to maintain control and reassure supporters that the government remained intact. The Iranian supreme leader has held ultimate authority over Iran’s military forces, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, and the country’s judiciary since taking power in 1989. Removing that figure in a single strike represented one of the most significant blows to Iran’s ruling structure since the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

Attention immediately shifted to Mojtaba Khamenei, a cleric who spent years operating inside his father’s inner circle and managing parts of the supreme leader’s office. Mojtaba never held the highest clerical rank traditionally expected for leadership, yet he built influence through relationships with security officials and members of the IRGC. That network placed him in a position to become a leading figure in the succession debate once Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was gone. The clerical body responsible for selecting Iran’s supreme leader is the Assembly of Experts, which holds the formal authority to choose the next figure to guide the Islamic Republic. The group weighs

It sounds like the IRGC took the opportunity of the Supreme Leader’s death to take power from the mullahs. They appointed the dull son, who is likely in a coma, and he can serve as a leader in the way Joe Biden served as the US president. We showed them the way, or rather, Democrats did. CBS News reports this morning that US intel assessed Mojtaba Khamenei as an incompetent bungler and that his father assessed him in pretty much the same terms:

U.S. intelligence has circulated to President Trump and to a small circle around him that Iran’s late supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, had misgivings about his son replacing him, multiple sources familiar with the matter told CBS News. “The analysis showed the elder Khamenei was wary of his son, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, ever taking power because he was perceived as not very bright and was viewed as unqualified to be leader, according to sources. The information gathered also indicated that the father was aware that his son had issues in his personal life. According to sources within the administration, the intelligence community, and people close to the president.

Mojtaba’s rise has never been universally accepted inside hereditary leadership, yet the son of the former supreme leader has remained deeply embedded within the regime’s power networks. That unusual path has fueled years of speculation among Iranian elites about whether a dynastic succession could occur inside a system built to avoid one.

New rumors about Mojtaba’s condition add another layer of uncertainty. Questions about his health and capability circulate at the same moment Iran faces military pressure, economic strain, and internal tension. “Israel reports that Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei is injured and in “low condition.” There are several other reports indicating he lost at least one leg and has severe facial and internal injuries. There are reports that he is in a coma. If he were in any kind of decent condition, they would have rolled him out. It’s unlikely he is making any statements. You are hearing the IRGC statements, not his. He is also thought to be unfit for leadership in his normal state.”

When leadership stability becomes uncertain inside a regime built on centralized authority, the entire system feels the strain. The Islamic Republic built its power around the authority of the supreme leader, and speculation is spinning around faster than it took Dorothy to get to Oz. The regime’s future leadership structure remains one of the most closely watched questions in the Middle East.

Read more …

“Mojtaba Is a Fraud Under the Islamic Republic’s Constitution, Which Sets ‘Grand Ayatollah’ as the Full Rank for the Supreme Leader ..”

• The Media Should Not Call Mojtaba Khamenei ‘Ayatollah’ (MEF)

ranks to grand ayatollah. For the foreign media to accept the regime’s terms is a mistake.n The New York Times committed the most egregious of these errors. Reporter Farnaz Fassihi, who cultivates good contacts with regime insiders, preempted doubts on the younger Khamenei’s credentials, writing, “Unlike his father, Mr. Khamenei, 56, carries the full religious credentials as an ayatollah at the moment of his ascension.” These assertions may have ingratiated Fassihi to her sources and preserved her access, but they are false.


First, Mojtaba is a Hojjat al-Islam, and he has never published a dissertation. Second, the full rank for the supreme leader is grand ayatollah, which even the regime media do not call him. This is important, as a simple ayatollah is, according to the Islamic Republic’s constitution, insufficient for a supreme leader.The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps rebuffed the mullahs when, at gunpoint, it directed the Assembly of Experts to elect Mojtaba.

The difference matters. There are three classes in the Islamic Republic: the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, the clergy, and the people. Before the revolution, the clergy carried significant support among the people. Under Ruhollah Khomeini, the clergy became the ruling class but, with time, its influence on society eroded. This trend accelerated under Ali Khamenei, as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps replaced the clerics as the country’s most powerful class, making Iran effectively a military dictatorship with an Islamic flavor.

During Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s presidency, for example, only one member of the cabinet—the intelligence minister—had a clerical background, and he essentially had been the chaplain to the Revolutionary Guard. This has forced a reckoning among the clerical class, which now has neither popular support nor significant political power and complains that the Guard vetoes its initiatives. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps rebuffed the mullahs when, at gunpoint, it directed the Assembly of Experts to elect Mojtaba. The assembly refused to announce the results for days. Ayatollah Ahmad Alamalhoda, who is close with both the Khameneis and the Guard, warned that the Assembly has the power to elect the supreme leader but not the right to change its vote, which suggests that there was an effort among the assemblymen to vote for a second time.

On March 13, 2026, opposition outlet Iran International reported that some powerful clerics were maneuvering to strip Mojtaba of his powers. It added, “[Ali-Asghar] Hejazi and [Alireza] Arafi are also among influential clerics who have criticized the growing power of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the increasing dominance of its commanders over government decision-making during the war.”

Read more …

“Stop the Panic Over Closure of Strait of Hormuz ..”

• Iran’s Blockade of the Strait of Hormuz Is Destined to Fail (Rubin)

Oil is again over $100 per barrel, gasoline prices have risen up to 40 cents a gallon at the pumps, and the Iranians released a statement in Mojtaba Khamenei’s name declaring, “for certain, the leverage of blocking the Strait of Hormuz should continue to be used.” While much of the media conflated this attack with the Hormuz closure, it was actually 350 miles away, close to the Iraqi port of al-Fao. Iranian forces have attacked 16 tankers in the Strait and Persian Gulf since the war began on February 28, 2026. On March 11-12, suicide drone speed boats attacked the Marshall Islands-flagged Safesea Vishnu and the Malta-flagged Zefyros, setting them ablaze. While much of the media conflated this attack with the Hormuz closure, it was actually 350 miles away, close to the Iraqi port of al-Fao.


Some analysts say oil could spike to $200 a barrel. The Foundation for Defense of Democracy’s Mark Dubowitz, long an advocate for regime change, even tweeted, “success would be a militarily decisive victory that leaves the regime in place—but with its deadly capabilities severely degraded,” at least in the short-term. But this Iranian play is nothing new, and panic is unwarranted. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps first sought to close the Strait of Hormuz, mining both it and the Gulf of Oman four decades ago. President Ronald Reagan responded by reflagging Kuwaiti tankers and, when the U.S. guided-missile frigate Samuel B. Roberts hit a mine, blowing a 15-foot hole in its hull, injuring ten sailors. In response, Reagan ordered Operation Praying Mantis, destroying two oil platforms, sinking Iranian naval ships, and Revolutionary Guards’ speedboats.

A joke from shortly after asked why the Iranian navy had purchased glass-bottom boats. The answer? So they could see their air force. Oil prices surged but then dropped quickly about two weeks later, on one day falling by 5%. Iran’s ability to sustain closure is short for two reasons. First, Iran has relied on imports of refined gasoline for decades due to its own lack of investment in its refineries and pipeline networks. If the closure lasts much longer, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ vehicles will run out of fuel. The clock is ticking, and the men controlling Mojtaba’s avatar simply hope Washington will kneecap itself with a vortex of panic and political warfare rather than assess the facts objectively. While Trump opposes boots on the ground, subduing and controlling the islands could be a mission for the U.S. Special Forces.

Iran has a limited number of ports, even including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ “invisible jetties.” Iranian docks, jetties, and ships are fair targets. Just as the war has depleted the regime’s missiles and drones, it should now destroy its speedboat fleet, a task in the 21st century for drones. The Gulf Cooperation Council was formed in 1981 to contain and deter Iran’s Islamic Revolution. Ironically, it never coalesced in more than theory until this month, when the Iranian regime began attacking every Gulf Arab state, including Qatar and Oman, both of which professed neutrality but had long sympathized with Tehran. Utilizing drones and its own manned fighter-jet fleet would be a natural mission for each Gulf state, each of which has an interest in preserving its own freedom of navigation.

The Emiratis especially have the capability and motive, given Iran’s attacks on Dubai as well as Iranian occupation of Persian Gulf islands claimed by the United Arab Emirates. U.S. authorities should clear every island in the Persian Gulf from which the regime targets shipping. This means not only the three disputed islands—Abu Musa, Greater Tonb, and Lesser Tonb—but also Farsi Island from which the regime once seized U.S. sailors, Sirri; and Hengam, Larak, and Hormuz, islands which control the sea lanes off the more populated Qeshm Island.

Read more …

Africa.

• The Place Where Every French Leader Makes The Same Mistakes (RT)

Africa has historically been a foundational pillar of France’s influence and a cornerstone of its global status. Africa provided France with raw materials, geopolitical weight, and economic advantages. All this formed the system known as ‘Francafrique’. However, this system is currently facing an acute crisis. It’s clear that France has failed to maintain a stable presence on the African continent. From de Gaulle to Macron, French leaders have repeatedly made the same mistakes, which eventually resulted in the failure of France’s Africa policy.


Every nation aspiring to be a leader aims to uphold its image as a ‘great power’. France particularly cherishes this image, but current economic and political realities no longer allow for such status. French philosophers noted the decline of the nation’s grandeur as early as the post-WWII era, describing France as a “second-rate power.” It was during this time that Africa became the cornerstone of French foreign policy, one that allowed Paris to sustain and extend its influence on the global stage. France and Africa have a long shared history rooted in the expansion of the French colonial empire at the end of the 19th century. France’s colonial expansion, unlike that of other European countries, was driven not merely by economic gain but by a quest for international prestige.

The modern strategy for maintaining French power is often associated with Gaullism – the philosophy of General Charles de Gaulle, who sought to restore France’s greatness while “totally lacking resources to make it possible.” This logic has shaped France’s Africa policy for decades, with leaders from de Gaulle to Macron facing the same challenges. De Gaulle’s philosophy laid the groundwork for France’s modern Africa policy. At first glance, the general appeared to sacrifice France’s interests by acknowledging the independence of its colonies. However, behind this apparent withdrawal lay a pragmatic calculation aimed at preserving economic, political, and strategic advantages.

Key tools of influence following decolonization included the CFA franc zone and military cooperation agreements that allowed French troops to be stationed in various African nations. Jacques Foccart played a pivotal role in this system; appointed by de Gaulle, he was tasked with establishing a network of clientelist relationships with the new African leaders. Thus emerged France’s unofficial policy in Africa, known as Francafrique – a term coined by economist and historian Francois-Xavier Verschave.

Foccart, nicknamed ‘Monsieur Afrique’, headed the General Secretariat for the Community and African and Malagasy Affairs, which reported directly to the president rather than the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This department was initially small and the staff was likely handpicked by Foccart, who preferred former colonial officials and high-ranking civil servants, so-called ‘universalists’. This group also included several African agents. This department established the mechanisms for controlling the politics of the former colonies.

Read more …

Not a democracy.

• French Municipal Elections Provide Early Test For Le Pen (ZH)

France held the first round of municipal elections on Sunday in nearly 35,000 municipalities, serving as an initial indicator of political momentum ahead of the 2027 presidential election. Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) is seeking to expand its limited local presence, with ambitions focused on southern cities such as Perpignan, Marseille, Nice and Toulon. Pre-vote polls suggested competitive races in key targets, but full first-round results and projections are emerging gradually after polls closed, with many larger cities expected to head to a March 22 runoff. Turnout at 17:00 CET was estimated at 48.9%, up from 2020 but below 2014 levels; final estimates around 56-58% at 20:00 CET.


French voters went to the polls Sunday in the first round of municipal elections, casting ballots for mayors and councilors in a vote widely viewed as an early gauge of support for Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and other parties ahead of the 2027 presidential contest. The two-round system means most small municipalities will see winners decided Sunday if they secure over 50% of the vote, while larger cities, where no candidate typically reaches an absolute majority – advance to a March 22 runoff. Parties have until Tuesday evening to negotiate alliances, withdrawals or pacts that will shape final outcomes.

The RN, which leads national polls for 2027 (with Le Pen or Jordan Bardella as potential candidates, pending Le Pen’s ongoing EU funds embezzlement appeal), has historically struggled to secure mayoral seats despite strong national performances. The party currently holds only about a dozen cities, with Perpignan (population ~122,000) as its largest stronghold under incumbent Louis Aliot. Pre-election polling and RN strategy highlighted southern France as a priority area for expansion:

• In Perpignan, Aliot was favored to secure re-election, potentially outright or with a strong first-round lead, based on surveys showing him well ahead of fragmented opposition.
• In Marseille (France’s second-largest city), RN candidate Franck Allisio polled closely with incumbent Socialist Mayor Benoît Payan (around 32-35% range in surveys), setting up a potential multi-way runoff if the left fragments (e.g., with France Unbowed’s Sébastien Delogu qualifying).v • In Nice (fifth-largest), RN ally Éric Ciotti (from his UDR group) held strong pre-vote polling positions against incumbent Christian Estrosi.
• In Toulon and surrounding areas, RN’s Laure Lavalette was seen as competitive in a region where the party has parliamentary dominance.

These targets reflect RN’s aim to build grassroots infrastructure – more councilors and mayors for voter mobilization – and test the fraying “Republican Front” (cross-party efforts to block the far right). A symbolic win in a major southern city would mark a breakthrough, though municipal dynamics (local issues like security, public services, drug trafficking and economy) differ from national ones.

On the left, divisions between Socialists and Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s France Unbowed persist, while centrists and the center-right face challenges in places like Paris (Socialist Emmanuel Grégoire frontrunning amid Rachida Dati and others) and Le Havre (Édouard Philippe defending his seat).Turnout figures showed modest engagement: ~19% at midday in some reports, rising to 48.9% at 17:00 CET nationwide (higher than 2020’s pandemic-affected 38.77% but down from 2014). Final estimates hovered around 56-58% at 20:00 CET.

No comprehensive first-round results or nationwide projections were available immediately after polls closed (between 18:00 and 20:00 CET depending on the area), as counting begins progressively. Early partial tallies from smaller communes may appear soon, but major-city suspense – and any RN progress – will likely clarify overnight or into Monday, with runoffs deciding many high-profile races. Le Pen, meanwhile, has been courting old money – though there appears to be some friction. As the Straits Times reports: A new circle of advisers with elite pedigrees is asserting influence, adopting what some National Rally officials describe as a “know-it-all” style that grates on the old guard.

Courting high society risks alienating the base who fuelled the party’s rise and that has long been wary of financiers and high-powered networks, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The internal friction comes at a pivotal moment, with the party leading polls roughly a year before the next presidential election, and just as France heads into its two-round municipal vote on March 15 and March 22 – an early test of the party’s electability.

As Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella navigate the treacherous path to 2027, the National Rally’s calculated pivot toward France’s corporate and old-money elite – through technocratic advisers and pro-business overtures – represents both its greatest opportunity and its most potent risk. While these bridges could deliver funding, credibility, and a veneer of governability that has long eluded the party, they threaten to erode the populist authenticity that propelled its rise among working-class and disaffected voters. With the municipal elections offering an early, localized litmus test of the RN’s mainstreaming efforts, the coming days and weeks will reveal whether Le Pen’s “de-demonization” strategy can reconcile these worlds – or whether the old guard’s warnings prove prescient, leaving the party close to power yet still unable to seize it

Read more …

How much do people understand?

• Companies Are Starting to Enforce AI Use (AIX Files)

“Tech Firms Aren’t Just Encouraging Their Workers to Use AI. They’re Enforcing It.” This article appeared in the February 24 edition of the Wall Street Journal. It includes the subtitle: From startups to giants, including Meta and Google, companies are factoring AI use into performance reviews and trying to track productivity gains. Across industries, companies are now enforcing AI use through performance reviews, dashboards that track adoption, and explicit mandates that tie it to compensation and promotion. What began in Silicon Valley has rapidly spread to consulting firms, banks, manufacturers, hospitals, and even government agencies.


As you’d expect, Meta, Google, Amazon, and Microsoft were the first to move from encouragement to enforcement. Employees at these firms now see AI usage metrics appear in quarterly reviews. Non-adopters have reported stalled promotions or explicit warnings that “AI fluency” is a core competency (The Wall Street Journal, Feb 2026, reporting on internal policies). The trend has jumped sectors. PwC requires every consultant to complete an “AI + Human Skillset” curriculum and incorporates usage into evaluations (Business Insider, Feb 5, 2026). Colgate-Palmolive’s “AI evangelist” tracks adoption across global teams. Major banks have begun tying bonuses to the number of AI-assisted analyses completed. Even some hospitals now require doctors and nurses to use AI-assisted diagnostic tools for certain procedures.

Why the shift to mandates? Executives cite three main drivers: intense competitive pressure to keep pace with rivals, investor demands for visible returns on massive AI investments, and internal data showing that voluntary adoption plateaus at around 30–40% of employees. “We’ve made it clear: AI is no longer optional. Every employee is expected to use it, and it’s now part of how we evaluate performance,” said Accenture CEO Julie Sweet (Fortune, March 2026). The claimed benefits are real…on paper. Early internal metrics at several companies show 10–25% gains in task speed for routine work. Cross-functional teams using AI report faster ideation and fewer silos. But the drawbacks and unintended consequences are mounting. While mandatory AI adoption offers productivity benefits, recent research reveals significant drawbacks that undermine organizational health.

Surveillance and autonomy erosion. By 2025, 70% of large companies monitor employee activity, with 68% of employees opposing AI-powered surveillance and 59% saying digital tracking damages workplace trust. AI monitoring systems now track keystroke patterns, mouse movements, email content, and even biometric data, including stress levels. Amazon employees report that surveillance creates “fear and anxiety, which creates a dangerous work environment”.

Burnout and intensified demands. AI meant to reduce workload is paradoxically accelerating burnout. Research found that AI leads to fatigue, burnout, and a growing sense that work is harder to step away from as organizational expectations for speed rise. A South Korean study shows AI adoption significantly increases job stress and burnout, while 63% of workers report AI-related fatigue driven by stress and heavy workloads.

Collapsing trust. Recent research revealed that while AI usage jumped 13% in 2025, worker confidence plummeted 18%, creating a “toxic relationship” as employees receive tools without training or support. Deloitte’s TrustID Index showed trust in company-provided generative AI fell 31% between May and July 2025, with trust in agentic AI systems dropping 89%.

Retention risks. Without adequate training, 56% of workers receive no recent skills development despite widespread AI adoption, and 85% say they would be more loyal to employers investing in continuing education – top performers become increasingly vulnerable to departure. Analysis warns of an impending “seniority cliff” as companies that stop hiring juniors eliminate the pipeline for developing senior talent with deep institutional knowledge.

Critics argue the enforcement model is shortsighted. “You can force usage, but you can’t force wisdom,” said Dr. Ethan Mollick, professor at the Wharton School and author of Co-Intelligence (interview, March 2026). “When AI becomes compulsory, people stop experimenting and start complying — and that’s when the real mistakes happen.” Yet the train has left the station. In boardrooms and earnings calls, executives are increasingly judged on how aggressively they have embedded AI into daily operations.

The message is clear: in 2026, using AI is part of your job. The question companies are only beginning to confront is whether forcing the technology will ultimately make their workforces more cohesive, smarter, and more efficient, or simply more exhausted, distrustful, and replaceable.

Read more …

Long good article. But maybe if he wants to be anonymous, and he’s been that for 3 decades, you just let him be?

“.. identify and understand the elusive artist.”?

• In Search of Banksy (R.)

HORENKA, Ukraine. In late 2022, an ambulance pulled up to a bombed-out apartment building in this village outside Kyiv. Three people emerged. One wore a gray hoodie, another a baseball cap. Both had masks covering their faces. The third was more easily identifiable: He was unmasked, and had one arm and two prosthetic legs, witnesses told Reuters.mThe masked men carried cardboard stencils from the ambulance and taped them to what had been an interior wall of an apartment before the Russians obliterated the place. Then they pulled out cans of spray paint and got to work. An absurd image appeared in minutes: a bearded man in a bathtub, scrubbing his back amid the wreckage.

This Banksy mural of a man scrubbing his back in a bathtub appeared in 2022 on a wall of a destroyed building in the Ukrainian village of Horenka. The mural piqued the interest of a Reuters journalist, setting off an effort to identify and understand the elusive artist. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich

Its creator was Banksy, one of the world’s most popular and enigmatic artists, whose identity has been debated and closely guarded for decades. Banksy is best known for simple yet sophisticated stencil paintings with searing social commentary. His work has generated tens of millions of dollars in sales over the years. Once an annoyance to authorities who viewed him as a vandal, he has become a British national treasure. In one survey, Brits rated him more popular than Rembrandt and Monet. In another poll, his “Girl with Balloon” painting was voted the favorite piece of artwork Britain has produced. Some critics believe Banksy’s anonymity is as important to his work as stencils and paint. The British press has run many articles over the years that tried to deduce his identity.

Banksy’s iconic “Girl with Balloon” painting was named in one opinion poll as the favorite piece of artwork Britain has ever produced. REUTERS/Tom Nicholson

Still, Banksy and his inner circle won’t talk about it. Some have signed non-disclosure agreements. Others keep quiet out of loyalty, or fear of crossing the artist, his fans and his influential company, Pest Control Office, which authenticates his work and decides who gets the first chance to buy Banksy’s latest pieces. When the bathtub mural and other Banksy pieces began appearing in Ukraine, Reuters wondered about the artist and how he had pulled off the stunt. Horenka was less than five miles east of Bucha, where Russian forces had left behind at least 300 civilians dead seven months earlier.


[..] So we set out to determine how Banksy did it – and who he really is. Weeks later, a reporter visited Horenka with a photo lineup of graffiti artists often rumored to be the artist and showed the pictures to locals to see if anyone recognized him. Not long after, we heard that a famous British musician – one of the people often whispered to be Banksy – had been spotted in Kyiv, giving us a theory to pursue. Reuters interviewed a dozen Banksy-world insiders and experts. None would comment on his identity, but many filled in details about his life and career. We examined photos of the artist, most of which obscured his face but contained critical information. We later unearthed previously undisclosed U.S. court records and police reports.

These included a hand-written confession by the artist to a long-ago misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct – a document that revealed, beyond dispute, Banksy’s true identity. And in the process, we learned how and why the man behind the name Banksy vanished from the public record more than a decade ago. Reuters presented that man with its findings about his identity and detailed questions about his work and career. He didn’t reply. Banksy’s company, Pest Control, said the artist “has decided to say nothing.” His long-time lawyer, Mark Stephens, wrote to Reuters that Banksy “does not accept that many of the details contained within your enquiry are correct.” He didn’t elaborate. Without confirming or denying Banksy’s identity, Stephens urged us not to publish this report, saying doing so would violate the artist’s privacy, interfere with his art and put him in danger.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/GlobalDiss/status/2032878571266470147?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 15 2026

Mar 152026
 
 March 15, 2026  Posted by at 10:04 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  103 Responses »


Theodoros Vryzakis The Reception of Lord Byron at Missolonghi 1861


• Rats Jumping Ship: Is the Iranian Regime Relocating to Canada? (Tim O’Brien)
• Trump Announces Obliteration of Iranian Military Assets on Kharg Island (CTH)
• Donald Trump Checkmates Iran On Day 14 (Duane Patterson)
• Iran Shows The World The Limits of US Power (Timofey Bordachev)
• My Prediction For the War with Iran (Paul Craig Roberts)
• UAE Fujairah Port Burns As Iran Vows Escalation For Kharg Island Attack (ZH)
• Drones Are A ‘Rapidly Evolving’ Threat To US (JTN)
• Media Says ‘Gambling’ Trump Got Lucky On The Economy (ZH)
• The AI Boom Is Creating A Global Memory Chip Shortage (ZH)
• Did Someone Forget To Ask Zelensky? (RT)
• The Most Expensive Science Lesson in European History (Hickman)
• The EU Never Learns – Except For The Wrong Lessons (Amar)

 


 

https://twitter.com/OCOCReport/status/2032878205154041991?s=20

 


 

 


 


Strange story, but from multiple aources, so we’ll run with it.

• Rats Jumping Ship: Is the Iranian Regime Relocating to Canada? (Tim O’Brien)

This is not an overnight development that just happened in the past two weeks, after the Trump administration and Israel launched attacks on Iran. Reports were emerging in January that even while Iranian citizens fed an uprising that led to the murder of roughly 40,000 of them at the hands of the Iranian regime, members of the regime have been quietly relocating to Canada. A news site called Justice In Conflict reported in January that “in 2021, a Tehran police chief was spotted at a Toronto-area gym. In 2024, it was reported that 700 Iranian nationals linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) resided in Canada – the same group that has been designated as a terrorist entity by the Canadian government. That same year, five Iranian regime figures faced deportation back to Iran.”


Now, thanks to the X platform, we have almost real-time proof that the IRGC rats are fleeing the ship. Of course, it would be easy to make a lot of assumptions based on a video that can very well be taken out of context. But then there’s this post from X that corroborates the initial X post that went viral. We have a name of this Iranian official. It’s Hojjatoleslam Morteza Tayyebi. So is this a one-off? Not according to Canada’s Melissa Lantsman, a member of the Canadian Parliament.


Lantsman got into greater detail in an op-ed she penned for a Canadian news site called Todayville, where she said that hundreds of IRGC agents may be in Canada. While she acknowledged that Mark Carney, Canada’s prime minister, called that number inaccurate, he won’t confirm any number. “This week we learned from the Minister’s own agency that at least 239 people linked to the Iranian regime are living here in Canada and have had their visas revoked,” Lantsman wrote. “Yet of the 239 whose visas have been revoked, only one single person has actually been deported.” Lantsman’s numbers are based on news media reports, which she says suggests that 700 IRGC agents may be in Canada.


https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/2032751309363818982

When discussing the Canadian government’s seeming paralysis on the issue and the notion of deporting potential hostile residents from Iran, Lantsman said “senior bureaucrats blamed a lack of flights to Iran for the government’s inaction, as if the regime was not already a listed sponsor of terrorism long before the current hostilities.” She added that the government “went on about protecting ‘privacy,’ and suggested that some of these individuals might even be able to claim asylum. This is very much another self-own from Canada’s broken and abused refugee system, which is supposed to protect those fleeing violence, not protect those importing it.”

Carney has gone on record as saying he won’t support the U.S. and Israel in their attacks on Iran. In light of these reports of IRGC members setting up shop in Canada, you have to wonder if Carney’s motives were tied to his desire for peace in the form of the status quo, or has he taken a side in this conflict? The last thing the U.S. needs is a shift in the Iranian center of global power and influence from Tehran to the country just north of us. If Canada thinks Trump was tough on them before all of this, Carney & Co. could find out just how resolved the Trump administration is to protect the U.S. from the Iranian threat.

Read more …

“..90 percent of Iran’s crude is processed at Kharg Island ..”

• Trump Announces Obliteration of Iranian Military Assets on Kharg Island (CTH)

Kharg Island is a small coral island in Iran in the northern Persian Gulf. It is 34 miles (55 km) northwest of the port of Bushehr and vital to Iran’s oil industry. The oil processing facilities at Kharg Island are a foundational component of Iran’s economy. Roughly 90 percent of Iran’s crude is processed at Kharg Island, and any disruption to its oil processing could cripple Iran’s economy.


President Trump announced: “Moments ago, at my direction, the United States Central Command executed one of the most powerful bombing raids in the History of the Middle East and totally obliterated every MILITARY target in Iran’s crown jewel, Kharg Island. Our Weapons are the most powerful and sophisticated that the World has ever known but, for reasons of decency, I have chosen NOT to wipe out the Oil Infrastructure on the Island. However, should Iran, or anyone else, do anything to interfere with the Free and Safe Passage of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz, I will immediately reconsider this decision.”

“During my First Term, and currently, I rebuilt our Military into the Most Lethal, Powerful, and Effective Force, by far, anywhere in the World. Iran has NO ability to defend anything that we want to attack — There is nothing they can do about it! Iran will NEVER have a nuclear weapon, nor will it have the ability to threaten the United States of America, the Middle East or, for that matter, the World! Iran’s Military, and all others involved with this Terrorist Regime, would be wise to lay down their arms, and save what’s left of their country, which isn’t much! Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

~ U.S. President Donald Trump

Read more …

Kharg check or checkmate?

• Donald Trump Checkmates Iran On Day 14 (Duane Patterson)

Don’t misunderstand what I’m about to say. The war in Iran will continue for at least another week, according to President Donald Trump, and probably much longer. There are still hundreds, maybe thousands of targets, human and places, to destroy, thousands of sorties to be flown by U.S. and Israeli forces, and American naval assets will soon be joined by up to 5,000 Marines. There undoubtedly will still be casualties to come, joining the 13 we’ve already lost in the last fortnight. But not only are we winning this war against Iran, the killer move that all but assures the final outcome in our favor was played on Friday afternoon by Donald Trump.


The events began early in the morning, Washington, D.C. time, when War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan “Raisin'” Caine held a press briefing. Both men at several points in their remarks stated with conviction that Friday would become the most intense and largest bombing day to date. And from what we’ve seen thus far, that is saying something. No one knew what that would look like, but the fireworks to come were promised to be spectacular and game-changing. As it turns out, they were not kidding. On Brian Kilmeade’s Fox Radio Network show, the President joined him on the phone for a bit to update on Iran. Kilmeade asked Trump if a strike on Kharg Island was on the table.

To be honest, it’s a fair question for pundits and hosts to ask of experts in the Middle East, because that little strip of land off Iran’s southern shore accounts for nine of 10 barrels of oil Iran exports. In short, it’s the Persian Gulf’s largest Buc-ee’s. Trump’s reaction, in hindsight, was extremely telling. Brian is a wonderful newsman and anchor, and has a long history of doing radio well before his tenure at Fox. I’m not surprised he asked that question. And I’m also not surprised at all that the President answered by saying there’s no way he can answer that. But taking it to the degree of admonishing Kilmeade for the question, giving him a Trump tattoo in the process, tells me Trump was angling for the element of surprise.

He reacted in a way to at least make people think it was a stupid question; it wasn’t on the table, at least not imminently, and don’t bother him with such piffle. A couple of hours later, under the cover of darkness, the bat signal went out to several of our B-2 stealth bombers, and they took flight, one right after another. They were coming out to play in whatever this event was the Pentagon had previewed earlier in the day. Of course, the videos of them taking off were not released until they were already back home from delivering the mail to wherever they were headed. And as it turns out, where they were headed didn’t have a lot of street cameras or other video capabilities to make into neat, little reel videos.

A few hours later, Donald Trump unveiled what happened. Kharg Island was targeted. Instantly, the online community predisposed to hate the President and everything about this war, precisely because Trump is leading it, leaped to the conclusion that Trump had now escalated things to an irreparable level. Of course, they missed what was struck, how it was struck, and to whom his messaging was addressed. Here is Trump’s announcement on Truth Social and X.

Read more …

“The US did not defeat its major rivals through decisive military victory. Rather, it emerged as the strongest actor at a moment when other powers were preoccupied with solving their own internal problems.”

• Iran Shows The World The Limits of US Power (Timofey Bordachev)

Despite the optimism expressed in some quarters, it would be premature to declare that the American and Israeli military campaign against Iran has already stalled or that the crisis will soon be resolved through international mediation. The situation remains volatile, and the resilience of the Iranian state is still being tested. Yet even at this early stage, the conflict is raising deeper questions about the role the US will play in world politics once its latest attempt to restore global dominance runs its course. The US is not about to disappear from international affairs. Scenarios of American collapse belong to the realm of fantasy.


For Russia, China, India and other major powers, the real question is not whether the US will remain a central actor in global politics, but how it will fit into the evolving international order. For Russia in particular, this issue carries special significance. The US remains the most powerful component of the Western world, with which Russia has historically maintained relations that are at once close and confrontational. Geography and history ensure that our strategic calculations will always take into account both Western Europe and America. Russia must therefore think carefully about how the US can be incorporated into a future balance of power that serves our own long-term interests.

The events surrounding the recent attack on Iran may mark an important turning point. They have exposed the limits of American power in a world that is no longer willing or able to accept unilateral leadership. It remains unclear how long Iran can withstand sustained military pressure, what degree of assistance it will receive from external partners, and how long Washington itself is prepared to continue a campaign that appears to have exceeded its original expectations. What is already visible, however, is a contradictory picture.

The Israeli leadership appears determined to press ahead to the end. By contrast, Donald Trump and members of his administration seem increasingly perplexed by the unexpected resilience of the Iranian state. At the same time, many American allies are visibly anxious about the consequences of the conflict. Perhaps most importantly, the war is already having serious repercussions for the global economy. These economic pressures help explain why rumors are circulating that Washington may be quietly searching for mediators capable of opening a dialogue with Tehran.

In this turbulent environment, Russia has expressed support for the Iranian people and state, which it views as victims of an unprovoked attack. At the same time, Moscow must pursue policies that correspond to its own strategic interests. As one of the world’s major military powers, Russia is concerned above all with the overall balance of power in the international system, and with the unique place historically occupied within that system by the US.

To understand this position, one might use a medical analogy. The US resembles a neoplasm within the global political organism. Yet unlike in medicine, the existence of such a “tumor” does not necessarily destroy the whole system. Instead, it becomes integrated into the organism’s development, occupying a special role.

The extraordinary position achieved by the US in the second half of the twentieth century was not simply the result of overwhelming superiority. It was also the product of very specific historical circumstances. Western Europe had been devastated by war, China was in a state of internal upheaval, and Soviet Russia had largely isolated itself from the rest of the world during its communist experiment. These conditions allowed the US to assume a position of leadership with remarkable confidence.

But this leadership was never the result of classical imperial conquest comparable to the Roman Empire or the empire of Genghis Khan. The US did not defeat its major rivals through decisive military victory. Rather, it emerged as the strongest actor at a moment when other powers were preoccupied with solving their own internal problems.

Read more …

“.. there is no common front against the hegemonic agendas of Washington and Israel and there will be no military aid to Iran. That is a big green light for Trump and Netanyahu

• My Prediction For the War with Iran (Paul Craig Roberts)

President Trump, in an effort to rescue himself from a war that he began without adequate preparation, as he was warned to no avail by his hand-picked Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has propositioned Russian President Putin. The deal Trump has offered is to free Russian oil from sanctions on the condition that Putin direct the released oil flows to Europe away from Asia. This achieves two goals for Trump. It lessens or removes the pressure on oil price and inflation from the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, thus negating an Iranian advantage in the conflict, and it prevents China from replacing Iranian oil lost to blockage of the Strait and curtailment of shipping insurance. Little doubt that Russia’s incompetent central bank director is telling Putin to take the deal on the grounds that Russia needs the oil revenues to develop its economy.


In other words, if Putin will betray Russia’s Iranian and Chinese allies, Trump will remove sanctions on Russian oil. Think about Trump’s proposal for a minute. What does it tell us about Trump’s opinion of Putin? It tells us that Trump thinks of Putin as a man devoid of integrity and strategic vision who would sell out his allies and his country itself.I agree with Gilbert Doctorow that by accepting Trump’s call Putin revealed himself as a person of questionable character. Trump had a few days prior conducted a dishonorable sneak military attack on Iran. Putin should have refused the call.If Putin aligns with Trump and Israel against Iran it means the end of BRICS and the New Chinese Silk Road and a cessation of Chinese trust in Russia.

John Helmer thinks it reflects badly on China that the country’s leadership is entering into trade negotiations with Trump soon after Trump has begun a war with Iran that has adverse impact on Chinese economic and military power. I agree. So, both Russia and China have shown that the Israeli-American attack on an ally has given them no wakeup call and they are both content to continue with business as usual. I can’t help wondering if one motive for Trump’s attack on Iran was to create divisions between the three countries and to isolate them from one another.

As I have emphasized several times and again today on Rasheed Muhammad’s excellent program the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel means that the talk about mediating the Iranian conflict and restoring peace and stability to the Middle East is meaningless. Israel’s agenda is not consistent with peace and stability in the Middle East. Iran cannot be secure when Iran is in the way of Greater Israel. The Iranian president still does not understand this and is making a fool of himself and his country by giving conditions for negotiations to end the war, but a more powerful figure, Ali Larijani, head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, does understand. Larijani recently stated:

“Tonight, we received messages from U.S. President Donald Trump through the Omani mediator, asking us to negotiate a ceasefire. Our response is that we will not accept any negotiations as long as an entity called Israel exists.” The Iranian Supreme Leader should say that Iran is willing to trade all nuclear ambitions for Israel’s renouncing of the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel. The only way the Middle East can contain both Iran and Israel is for Israel’s agenda of Greater Israel to be deep-sixed. The first quarter of the 21st century has witnessed Israel use American blood and money to clear the Muslim Middle East of obstacles to Greater Israel. “Seven countries in five years.” It has taken longer than five years, but Iran is the last big obstacle.

It looks as if Trump and Israel are going to lose the conventional war. Iran seems to have the larger stockpile of missiles and the determination and ability to stay the course. After having their children slaughtered by the Trump and Netanyahu war criminals, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is unlikely to counsel negotiations or surrender. Morgan Stanley, BlackRock and other major American financial institutions have already been forced to cap withdrawals from their funds. Unless Putin bails out Trump, the oil price will continue rising carrying inflation with it and driving down the stock market and employment. Washington has shown that it is Incapable of protecting the Gulf oil sheikdoms from which people are fleeing.

The US Navy which the White House Fool said would escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz has had to move out of Iranian missile range. The war has spread to Saudi Arabia. Hezbollah is now attacking Israel. The Houthis may soon join in the attacks on Israel. The American Gulf bases seem to be indefensible. We don’t know the US casualties, but it is certainly more than Trump’s reassuring six. Perhaps the Russian and Chinese leaderships will save the war for Israel and Trump by pressuring Iran into a ceasefire, thereby showing that both countries lack intelligent leadership. There are no ground troops to send into Iran.

Trump and Netanyahu seem to have given up attacking Iran’s military capabilities and are focusing on bombing Iranian civilian residential areas, schools, and hospitals as Israel does to Gaza with Trump’s bombs. This cowardly way of fighting will only succeed in hardening the attitude of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. So, what is Trump to do now that in a midterm election year the fool has permitted Netanyahu to trap him into a longterm and apparently losing war. If Trump loses the midterm elections, he is likely to be impeached and removed from office. The only option left to Trump is to nuke Iran or have Netanyahu do it.

Thus the duplicity and lack of strategic vision of Putin and Xi will have let the nuke genie out of the bottle. Emboldened by the success of violence, Trump and the Zionists will turn on isolated Russia and China in pursuit of their hegemonic agendas. On March 11, Wang Yi, the Chinese foreign minister and Politburo member conveniently let Trump know that there is no Chinese-Russian alliance when he said that Chinese-Russian “bilateral ties are based on the principle of non-alliance, non-confrontation and not targeting any third party.”

In other words, there is no common front against the hegemonic agendas of Washington and Israel and there will be no military aid to Iran. That is a big green light for Trump and Netanyahu. Based on what we know at this time, the picture I have painted is a probable one.

Read more …

“America sacrifices everyone for Israel and does not care about anyone but Israel.” He added, “Anyone clothed by the US is literally NAKED!”

• UAE Fujairah Port Burns As Iran Vows Escalation For Kharg Island Attack (ZH)

Upon the overnight major US attack on Iran’s key oil hub of Kharg island, here’s what Iran’s military is threatening to do by way of response and escalation – which was also entirely predictable: “If Iran’s oil, economic, or energy infrastructure is attacked, we will immediately destroy energy and economic infrastructure across the region belonging to companies with American shareholders or ties to the U.S.” –IRGC spox Iran continues launching widespread missile and drone attacks on Israel and neighboring Gulf Arab states and has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz.


Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has vowed that any US site or any country hosting it will feel pain. “This war proved one thing quite clearly: American bases in our region do not protect anyone – they are a threat,” he wrote on X. “America sacrifices everyone for Israel and does not care about anyone but Israel.” He added, “Anyone clothed by the US is literally NAKED!” And in fact this retaliation is already in progress on Saturday. A missile struck a helipad inside the US Embassy compound in Baghdad, and debris from an intercepted Iranian drone hit an oil facility in the United Arab Emirates on Saturday.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has informed the United Arab Emirates that US “hideouts” are “legitimate targets” after the US struck Iran’s Kharg island. –Al Jazeera. Associated Press images meanwhile showed a column of smoke rising over the embassy compound in the Iraqi capital and a fire at the Fujairah port, offering confirmation.

President Trump had said late Friday that the US military “obliterated” targets on Iran’s Kharg Island, home to the primary terminal handling the country’s oil exports. Additionally, an American official said 2,500 additional Marines and an amphibious assault ship are heading to the Middle East – though it remains unclear on if they will actually enter the strait, or what their mission will ultimately be. But ‘mission creep’ is already happening at rapid pace, as the White House refuses to publicize an exit plan or offramp (if there even is one).

Read more …

US seems late to the show.

• Drones Are A ‘Rapidly Evolving’ Threat To US (JTN)

Iran’s Shahed-style drones each cost between $20,000 and $50,000, but they can do a lot of damage. Since the latest conflict began, Iran’s drones have killed six members of the Army Reserve at a command center in Kuwait on Sunday, and Iranian drones have wreaked havoc on Middle East petroleum facilities. The FBI is now warning that Iranian drones potentially pose risks to targets in California. Some journalists in the legacy media are shocked to discover that the U.S. has limited capabilities to counter these destructive and lethal aerial devices. While it’s true that neutralizing drone threats is difficult, it’s a problem the Department of War has been aware of and working to address since long before the conflict in Iran.


In 2007, Tom Rullman, president and CEO of GT Aeronautics, ended up sharing a cab ride with a two-star general in Washington, D.C. GT Aeronautics develops a variety of drones for commercial and defense purposes, and in 2006, it was developing a drone with air to ground capabilities, called a Bandito. The small devices have a wingspan of 16 inches, weigh less than two pounds, and fly at 200 miles per hour. During the chance encounter with the general, Rullman discussed the Bandito and showed him charts of the drone. The general was very interested in the technology and invited Rullman to brief the Air Force at the Pentagon on what his Banditos could do.

“There were like 40 generals in the room, and I had a 20-minute time slot. That brief turned into three hours,” Rullman told Just the News. Among the questions the generals asked Rullman was if his Banditos could be used to, say, attack the White House. “Absolutely,” Rullman told the generals. “We can launch a Bandito outside the window of a truck that’s moving, do it 20 miles away and send it to a target on the ground.” That got the Pentagon’s attention. The government asked GT Aeronautics to help develop drones that could take out air targets. By 2009, Ruleman was flying Banditos out in the California desert near Point Mugu Naval Air Station and developing the systems that allow them to track targets.

Col. Guy Yelverton is a project manager for the U.S. Army’s counter-unmanned aircraft system (UAS) — what the military and FAA call drones. Yelverton said the Department of War is actively working to address the risk that drones are posing to U.S. troops. The U.S. military has seen a proliferation of low-cost adversarial drones in recent years, and they range from small, commercial-style drones to larger, more capable platforms. “They’re becoming a defining feature of modern warfare,” Yelverton told Just the News. These drones increase the ability of our adversaries, as well as “non-state actors,” to conduct reconnaissance, targeting and harassment with little risk to their own personnel, Yelverton said.

“They can make a drone pretty cheaply and then hang something off of it that could do some damage,” Yelverton said. On the battlefield, adversaries’ use of drones provides them with persistent surveillance and enables rapid strokes. This presents a situation for U.S. troops where decision-making timelines are severely compressed.

Read more …

“..Trump has no business still standing. Except the economy is still standing..“

• Media Says ‘Gambling’ Trump Got Lucky On The Economy (ZH)

Democrats have been predicting doom and gloom ever since Trump returned to office, yet the economic calamity they assured us would come has yet to materialize. But rather than give Trump credit, the narrative being pushed now is that his wins are just dumb luck. That’s certainly the message of a Politico piece headlined “Trump Keeps Gambling With the Economy — And Getting Away With It.”


“President Donald Trump has spent his second term turning risky economic gambles into a way of life,” the article kicks off. “He has implemented sweeping global tariffs that have dramatically increased the cost of doing business across the world. He has sharply decreased the number of people immigrating to the U.S. He has pushed for the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates under any circumstance, even though inflation has not entirely cooled. And now, he’s launched an attack on Iran, a scenario that has long been the clearest and most direct threat to one of Trump’s favored political barometers: gas prices.”

The implicit verdict is clear: these were all reckless moves, and Trump has no business still standing. Except the economy is still standing. Quite well, actually. So-called experts warned repeatedly that Trump’s tariff regime would send prices spiraling. That didn’t happen. Inflation went down. Democrats entered 2025 predicting that aggressive immigration enforcement would “deliver a catastrophic blow to the U.S. Economy.” That blow never landed. What about the prediction that Trump’s mass deportations would devastate the economy? Not only did that not happen (albeit there was TACO’ing over the scale of deportations), it reversed the trend of rising housing costs, making them more affordable. At some point, a pattern of failed predictions stops being an argument about Trump’s recklessness and starts being an argument about the quality of the predictions.

The article quickly pivots to gas prices, which are up following the attack on Iran – though Energy Secretary Chris Wright called this a ‘fear premium’ that will fall in ‘weeks, not months’ [though we generally place little stock in bureaucrat promises]. “And now, he’s launched an attack on Iran, a scenario that has long been the clearest and most direct threat to one of Trump’s favored political barometers: gas prices,” the article warns. “The conflict has led to a jump in oil prices, though not quite to worst-case levels, and markets have been jittery about the prospect of more expensive energy and higher U.S. federal debt, stemming from the cost of the U.S.-Israel war with Iran.”

Politico is unwilling to credit the Trump administration for successfully managing the economy after the Biden administration went full leeroy jenkins on inflationary stimmies and red tape; instead, we’re supposed to be convinced that Trump is just lucky that disaster hasn’t struck, or as Politico put it, “getting away with it.” In fact, Politico suggests that the economy is doing well in spite of Trump… “In so many ways, that is the story of Trump’s economic stewardship up to this point. His disruptive policies have left some dents, including serious damage to his approval rating, but by the biggest readings of its health, the U.S. economy – measured by overall growth, the job market, the stock market, even inflation – largely keeps absorbing what he throws at it.”

Read more …

Elon is way ahead of you.

• The AI Boom Is Creating A Global Memory Chip Shortage (ZH)

A global shortage of memory chips is emerging as demand for artificial intelligence infrastructure surges, according to a new report from Bloomberg.


Large technology companies are locking in supply by signing long-term agreements and paying higher prices to guarantee access to chips years in advance. Because these deals are more profitable, chip manufacturers are increasingly directing production toward AI customers. This shift has reduced the number of chips available for other products such as laptops, smartphones, gaming consoles, and cars, pushing prices sharply upward.

Memory chips play a critical role in modern computing because they store and deliver data to processors, which carry out calculations. Without sufficient memory, devices would struggle to run applications, load programs, or process data efficiently. Two types dominate the industry. DRAM functions as short-term working memory that computers and servers use to quickly access active data. NAND flash memory serves as long-term storage, holding files, photos, and software even when devices are powered off.


Bloomberg writes that Artificial intelligence systems require enormous amounts of memory, especially a newer design known as high-bandwidth memory (HBM). This technology stacks multiple layers of memory vertically and places them close to processors, allowing data to move much faster than with traditional designs. The speed is essential for AI models that must constantly move and process huge volumes of information. The rapid expansion of AI data centers has dramatically increased demand for memory chips. Major technology firms are investing hundreds of billions of dollars to expand computing capacity, and AI servers require far more memory than traditional systems.

As a result, data centers now account for a much larger share of global DRAM usage than they did just a few years ago, and that share is expected to keep growing. With supply unable to keep pace, memory prices have climbed steeply. In some cases, DRAM spot prices have risen several hundred percent within a year, while NAND storage costs are also increasing. The impact is spreading across the electronics industry. Companies that build computers, phones, and gaming systems are facing higher manufacturing costs and tighter component supply. Some manufacturers have already raised prices or reduced the amount of memory included in certain devices to manage expenses.


Expanding production is not a quick solution. The memory chip industry is highly concentrated, with most output coming from companies such as Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix, and Micron Technology. Building new fabrication plants requires enormous investment and several years before meaningful output begins. Producing advanced chips like HBM is even more challenging because they involve stacking extremely thin layers of silicon with microscopic connections; even a small defect can ruin an entire unit.

Manufacturers are expanding cautiously because the memory business has historically been volatile, swinging between shortages and oversupply. Companies want to benefit from the AI boom without repeating past cycles that led to large financial losses when demand suddenly weakened. For the moment, firms building AI infrastructure are securing the components they need, while consumer electronics makers may have to cope with higher costs and limited supply until production eventually catches up with demand.

Read more …

Russian energy is indispensable to easing the world’s largest energy crisis. EU bureaucrats will soon be forced to recognize this reality, acknowledge their strategic blunders, and atone. https://t.co/5kn6RTZBb3 — Kirill Dmitriev (@kadmitriev) March 13, 2026

• Did Someone Forget To Ask Zelensky? (RT)

What have we learned from Kirill Dmitriev’s latest round of talks in Miami, and where does Ukraine stand now?


Two weeks of war in the Persian Gulf have forced the US to admit the obvious: that Russia is an indispensable oil supplier. After some lightning-fast diplomacy from Moscow, Russian oil is reaching its old markets again, and nobody is angrier than Vladimir Zelensky. The impact of the US-Israeli war on Iran on global energy markets has been brutal. Around 40% of the world’s oil comes from the Middle East, where Iranian attacks have forced the shutdown of refineries in US-allied countries, and a third of the world’s seaborne crude oil transits the Strait of Hormuz, which has been de facto closed for nearly two weeks. As a result, the Brent oil benchmark has soared to more than $103 per barrel, a figure last seen in June 2022, when oil markets grappled with the escalating conflict in Ukraine.

That Moscow would benefit from this situation was inevitable. Russia is the world’s largest oil producer, is not participating in the war in the Gulf, and does not depend on the Strait of Hormuz to bring its oil to buyers. The only impediment to Russian oil flows are Western sanctions, which the US proved this week it is willing to wave away with the stroke of a pen. It took only four days for US sanctions on Russia’s energy sector to start to fade. The process began with a phone call between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday. The Kremlin described the call as “frank and businesslike,” noting that the two leaders discussed the effect of the war on “global energy markets.”

Earlier that day, Putin publicly declared that Russia is a reliable energy supplier, willing to work with countries that themselves are reliable partners. Two days later, Russian special envoy Kirill Dmitriev was on a plane to Miami, where he met with Trump envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, as well as White House adviser Josh Gruenbaum. Neither side revealed much about the meeting, with Witkoff stating that the teams discussed a variety of topics and agreed to stay in touch, with Dmitriev thanking the Americans for a productive meeting. Less than 24 hours later, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced the temporary lifting of sanctions on Russian oil currently at sea. The waiver relates to exports of Russian oil loaded onto vessels prior to March 12 and is set to last 30 days.

Neither side has suggested that the decision to waive sanctions was made in Miami, but it is unlikely that the issue was not discussed. Bessent described the waiver as a “narrowly tailored, short-term measure” that would “not provide significant financial benefit to the Russian government, which derives the majority of its energy revenue from taxes assessed at the point of extraction.” However, Dmitriev believes that further easing of sanctions will follow. In a post on Telegram on Thursday, he said “many countries, particularly the USA, are beginning to better understand the key, systemically important role of Russian oil and gas in ensuring the stability of the global economy, as well as the ineffectiveness and destructive nature of sanctions against Russia.”

A Harvard-educated former investment banker, Dmitriev is a long-time proponent of increasing economic ties between the US and Russia. Throughout repeated rounds of talks aimed at resolving the Ukraine conflict, Dmitriev has accompanied Moscow’s negotiators to the US and held separate economic-focused talks with the Americans. $100 oil is “just the beginning of the largest energy crisis ever,” Dmitriev wrote on X, adding that “even $200+ is a possibility in a prolonged conflict.” “Amid the growing energy crisis, further easing of restrictions on Russian energy sources appears increasingly inevitable, despite resistance from some in the Brussels bureaucracy,” he predicted.

The war on Iran has been an unmitigated nightmare for Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. Not only has the conflict denied him the constant press coverage that he enjoyed since 2022, he has also been forced to watch as American weapons – particularly the PAC-3 Patriot anti-air missiles he has spent years demanding from the West – are burned up in the Middle East.In less than two weeks of fighting in the Persian Gulf, the US, Israel, and their Arab partners have used more PAC-3 interceptors than Ukraine has received in the last four years. In talks with his European backers earlier this week, Ukraine managed to secure a meager 35 of these missiles. The US and its partners have fired this many interceptors every five hours since the war on Iran began.

Zelensky’s attempts to insert Ukraine into the war have also proven fruitless. Despite offering to deploy anti-drone “experts” to the Middle East, the Ukrainian leader was told on Friday by Trump that “we don’t need Ukraine’s help with drone defense.” Before Bessent announced the waiving of sanctions, Zelensky took to social media to vent his frustrations. “Europe, the United States, and the entire civilized world imposed sanctions on Russia for its aggression,” he wrote on X on Wednesday. “In my view, if these sanctions are lifted, it means we are recognizing the legitimacy of this aggression… I consider this absolutely unjust.”

With Witkoff, Kushner, and the entire Trump administration consumed with Iran, trilateral talks between Moscow, Kiev, and Washington have been postponed until next week at the earliest. For now, Zelensky – the spurned mistress in this story – can only complain to the Europeans. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have all condemned Trump’s sanctions waiver. “We believe that easing sanctions now, for whatever reason, is the wrong thing to do,” Merz told reporters on Friday. “Russia,” von der Leyen said, should absolutely not benefit from the war on Iran.” However, Russia will continue to benefit as long as oil prices remain high, and Dmitriev has warned European “warmongers” that “energy markets will punish them” as long as they maintain their embargo on Russian oil and gas.

Read more …

Merkel turns out to be the great destroyer. Who saw that coming?

• The Most Expensive Science Lesson in European History (Hickman)

On March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake struck off the coast of Japan and triggered a massive tsunami that slammed into the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Three of the plant’s six reactors melted down, and it became the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl. On the other side of the world, German Chancellor Angela Merkel panicked. Her government had extended the operating lives of Germany’s 17 nuclear reactors just five months earlier. But, because of the earthquake in Japan, Merkel reversed course overnight and mothballed eight German reactors.But Merkel’s decision wasn’t really about natural disasters. It was political. Merkel was terrified of Germany’s Green Party— which was literally founded on anti-nuclear activism in 1980 and had been gaining ground. A critical regional election was just two weeks away, and Merkel was hoping that she might pull out a victory if she killed the reactors.


Her gambit didn’t work, and the Greens won anyway. But at that point the fate of nuclear had already been set in motion. Within three months, the German government decided to phase out EVERY nuclear reactor in the country. Bear in mind that Germany’s 17 reactors were generating over a third of the country’s electricity… with zero carbon emissions. That’s a pretty good thing for a country obsessed with climate change. Yet Germany’s Green party had inexplicably spent decades campaigning to close them, i.e. to shutter the cleanest, most carbon-free source of baseload energy known to man. Germany committed to replacing its nuclear plants with solar panels. Naturally this meant that, in a country where the sun barely shines, Germany became increasingly dependent on natural gas— most of which is piped in from Russia.


The true extent of this idiocy didn’t reveal itself until February 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine: Germany joined Western sanctions against Russia. Russia retaliated by throttling gas supplies. And Germany had no fallback. So Germany— the country that had lectured the entire world on carbon emissions— frantically restarted more than 20 coal-fired power plants. Then they imported 42 million metric tons of coal, including a surge from southern Africa. They even bulldozed the village of Lützerath to expand a lignite mine, dragging away protesters. Germany also became a net electricity importer, buying power from France’s nuclear grid. And gee what a surprise: German electricity prices are now the highest in the European Union. One obvious consequence is that Germany is no longer industrially competitive due to energy costs.

And that brings us to March 6, 2026. Manuel Hagel, a 37-year-old political candidate from ex-Chancellor Merkel’s party, visited an elementary school. National television cameras were rolling as Hagel attempted to explain the greenhouse effect to the children: “Between the earth and the sun is the atmosphere. And as this gets increasingly thin, the sun gets hotter and hotter. And the reason for this is CO2 emissions and and and. And that is the greenhouse effect.” Unfortunately his explanation is completely wrong. The greenhouse effect works because CO2 and other gases trap heat within the atmosphere; it has nothing to do with the atmosphere thinning or the sun getting hotter.

This is a guy who takes away stoves and gasoline powered vehicles in the name of reducing carbon emissions. Yet he doesn’t even understand the basics of his own ‘science’. Zee German leadership humiliated themselves even more when, on March 10, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stood at the Nuclear Energy Summit in Paris and declared that Europe’s retreat from nuclear power had been “a strategic mistake.” “In 1990 one-third of Europe’s electricity came from nuclear, today it is only close to 15%. This reduction in the share of nuclear was a choice, I believe that it was a strategic mistake for Europe to turn its back on a reliable, affordable source of low-emissions power.”

She’s right, of course. It was a mistake. An extraordinarily costly one. This is hilariously ironic since Von der Leyen is German. She served in Merkel’s cabinet. She personally voted to phase out nuclear, and her own policies at the Commission have been to quietly phase out nuclear power. Also this week, Germany’s current Chancellor (Friedrich Merz) weighed in on this nuclear blunder when he called the reactor phase-out “a mistake” and said, “I regret this.” Great. Then fix it! But they’re not going to do that. Unfortunately for Germany, said the Chancellor, “it is the way it is, and we are now concentrating on the energy policy we have.”

Read more …

Give it up.

• The EU Never Learns – Except For The Wrong Lessons (Amar)

Some observers of the current EU ‘elites’, including this author, used to believe that their defining feature – apart from things such as complicity in genocide and wars of aggression with Israel and the US, bigoted xenophobia about Russia and China, and, of course, pervasive corruption – was an absolute inability to learn.We must admit, we stand corrected: Those running the EU are able to learn. The real problem is their relentless compulsion to learn the wrong thing. We are not dealing with non-learners but anti-learners: where others progress from experience, they regress.


Case in point, their response to the fact that their US-Israeli masters have started a war to end if not strictly all then at least all (barely) affordable energy supplies to the EU’s economies, while its major players are already limping along on a spectrum between walking-wounded (for instance, France, maybe) to comatose (Germany, definitely).In Germany, still the largest single economy inside the EU, providing almost a fourth of the bloc’s total GDP, industrial demand – orders from factories – fell by over 11% in January. Such a decrease – really, collapse – in orders is “drastic,” as German Manager Magazine notes. According to the Financial Times, this “very weak” start into the new year, puts preceding – and very modest – signs of a recovery from years of stagnation in doubt. Indeed.

And all of that disappointing data was gathered before the fallout of the Iran war had even started.Regarding the latter, it will be severe. Even Berlin’s Ministry of Economics admits that the risks stemming from the war’s consequences, most of them still incoming, is substantial. In general, the Eurozone – different from but covering most of the EU – is not in good shape either. According to Bloomberg, a very low and yet still over-optimistic Eurostat estimate of expansion by 0.3% for the last quarter of 2025 has just been revised downward to 0.2%. But frankly, who cares at that level of misery?

And for the Eurozone as well, America and Israel’s unprovoked war against Iran is likely to make things much worse. Philip Lane, chief economist of the European Central Bank (ECB), has confirmed that much to the Financial Times: An enduring decrease in oil and gas supplies from the Middle East can (read: will), he warns, bring about a “substantial spike” in inflation and a “sharp drop in output.”And what is the EU leadership’s response to this deeply depressing outlook for its economy and the European citizens depending on it? Let’s not dream. It is true, if the EU’s ‘elites’ were in the business of protecting European interests and prosperity, they would, obviously, take a sharp turn against both the US and Israel (as well as London in case it were to stick to its special-poodle relationship with Washington).

Yet if the EU leadership had such priorities, it would long have turned against the US, for its blatant exploitation of its vassal regimes via, first, NATO over-expansion and, now, crippling overspending, for Ukraine proxy war outsourcing, and for devastating tariff warfare. It would also long have broken with Israel, for, to name only two compelling reasons, its genocide and serial wars of aggression that are both horrifically criminal and extremely destabilizing and damaging not “only” to the Middle East but the world as a whole and Europe in particular.In short, the EU would not even be in the mess it is now if it actually took care of Europe. And, by the way, if it were not so craven but had opposed the US and Israel instead of pandering to them, perhaps it could even have contributed to preventing the current criminal war against Iran.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 10 2026

Mar 102026
 
 March 10, 2026  Posted by at 10:32 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  58 Responses »


Rufino Tamayo The Dance of Joy 1950


• From Redcoats to Robots: AI is Challenging our Republic’s Future (Turley)
• Trump Makes A Huge Move to Get The SAVE Act Passed (Matt Margolis)
• Farther Along (James Howard Kunstler)
• ‘Wagging the dog’: Putin Mocks EU-Ukraine rRelationship (RT)
• Has Trump Made a Bad Choice of War? ((Paul Craig Roberts)
• Israel, Netanyahu and Trump Preparing the World for the Anti-Christ? (PCR)
• Pentagon Officials Saying Iran War ‘God’s Divine Plan’ (Cradle)
• Is Iran’s Regime Trying to Trigger Sleeper Cells in the USA? (Catherine Salgado)
• Bondi Charges Muslim Terrorists Who Tried to Bomb NYC Protest (Sarah Anderson)
• Meloni Slams Italian Judges For Blocking Expulsion of Foreign Criminals (RMX)
• In A Sane World, Zelensky’s Mafia Regime Would Be Isolated (Amar)
• Hungary Detains Ukrainians Transporting 10s Of Millions In Cash, Gold (Brooke)
• Vance Vs. Rubio? Trump’s Pals Have a Preference. (Sarah Anderson)
• Why the Left Suddenly Hates Gwen Stefani (Queen)

 


 

https://twitter.com/OCOCReport/status/2030661064761774364?s=20 https://twitter.com/robertdunlap947/status/2030960465799532639?s=20 https://twitter.com/jackprandelli/status/2030598639559540917?s=20 https://twitter.com/SeongWooIQ300/status/2030682138589454625?s=20

 


 

 


 


“This republic will survive so long as it does not die by our own hand.”

• From Redcoats to Robots: AI is Challenging our Republic’s Future (Turley)

This week, thousands of workers are receiving pink slips. They are not being let go due to inflation or outsourcing to foreign countries. To the contrary, they are being fired because booming sectors of the economy no longer need them. Indeed, it is an economy that may need fewer and fewer humans. Amazon this week announced further job cuts due to robotics and AI. Recently, Jack Dorsey, the co-founder of Twitter, announced that his company Block would be laying off 40 percent of its employees. He cited AI as reducing the need for human employees. In my book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I discuss not just the economic changes unfolding due to AI and robotics but also the political implications of those changes for the American republic.


These economic changes are unfolding all around us. We are looking at one of the greatest job losses in history. In a free-market system, such technological changes tend to offset losses with new jobs in emerging industries. And there will be such growth with the AI and robotic revolutions. But it is also likely that we are looking at a static class of unemployed and practically unemployable citizens as this new revolution unfolds. “Low-skill jobs are the most likely to be replaced by a robotic workforce,” I write in the book. “Amazon warehouses are now entirely mechanized with twelve different types of over seven thousand robots moving rapidly to collect and direct goods where hundreds of people were once employed.”

But what is most notable about the Amazon announcement is that these were white-collar jobs. The impact of AI is not confined to factory workers and truck drivers. The danger is that politicians will react predictably and try to subsidize jobs that are no longer viable and industries that are being dramatically downsized. At the same time, they are likely to expand model programs in Democratic cities for universal basic or guaranteed income. Democrats have moved forward with more than 60 bills creating such programs, and this week, Cook County, Ill. (the second-largest county in the U.S.) made permanent the universal basic income program it had originally launched with federal COVID-19 relief funds.

The problem is the creation of what I call a “kept citizenship” in a republic designed for people who are economically and politically independent from the government. That system is seriously undermined by a large percentage of citizens living off the government dole. The solution cannot be an “arts-and-crafts” population kept entertained by government programs to learn glassblowing and pottery-making. A different type of citizen would emerge that is unlikely to be sufficiently free of the government to counter its excesses or failures.] “Rage and the Republic” lays out what I call a “liberty-enhancing economy.” It notes that this is not just the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence but the 250th anniversary of the release of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations.

The founders immediately embraced Smith’s economic theories as the perfect companion for their political theories. They believed that true freedom requires economic independence from government. That means accepting the economic changes and the loss of certain jobs. AI and robotics will largely wipe out certain jobs from taxi drivers to radiologists to warehouse workers. Meanwhile, we need to focus on homocentric jobs. In the book, I called these “Guinan jobs” after the bartender on the starship Enterprise in “Star Trek: The Next Generation.” As a kid, I was always confused by Guinan (played by Whoopi Goldberg), who would mix a drink next to a replicator that could produce the perfect Romulan cocktail every time without fail or variation. Customers clearly wanted Guinan to make the cocktail, even if it is not perfect every time.

The question I ask is, how many “Guinan jobs” are out there. There are many, including teachers, psychiatrists and lawyers, who will be affected but likely not eliminated by AI. We will still want humans in these positions. All governments will face this existential crisis in the 21st Century. It will create growing instability globally. Although AI and robotics will make goods cheaper and more widely available, they are also likely to have a dramatic effect on populations. For example, as production costs drop with the new technology, there will be less advantage to moving factories to other countries with cheaper labor forces, such as China and Mexico.

Companies may choose to build near consumer markets to save on transportation costs while utilizing higher-skilled worker populations to maintain robotic and AI systems. That could produce massive unemployment in certain countries with low-educated, low-income populations. That in turn could destabilize governments and increase the chances of war in countries with large populations of unemployed young men. I also do not feel great optimism for global governance systems like the European Union. The EU has largely eviscerated the elements I identify in the American Revolution as producing the oldest and most stable democratic system. Although global governance is likely to increase, it could fail spectacularly due to its inherent instabilities.

In the U.S., this period of economic change is likely to fuel calls for socialist policies. Socialism has always thrived on economic upheavals. Indeed, socialists often use their own failures to further collectivize or centralize economies. Our republic is uniquely situated to not only survive but to thrive in the 21st Century. It was conceived in and designed for changing economic conditions. But if we are to survive, we must remain faithful to the constitutional structure that has afforded us stability for more than two centuries. Despite calls to trash the Constitution, pack the Supreme Court and change our political system, these protections are the very things that can get us through this century intact.

The Founders designed our Republic to prevent the tendency of democracies to become what one called a “mobocracy.” They knew that political and economic instability could create a form of “democratic despotism” in which democracies devoured themselves. We have a system that has overcome challenges — from redcoats to robots — that have crushed other countries. However, we must remember who we are. Our nation, created in the winds of change by a free and industrious people, need not fear change. It is a system designed for bad times, not good times. The true crisis is a crisis of faith being fueled by some in academia and in the media. This republic will survive so long as it does not die by our own hand.

Read more …

“He’s flat-out refusing to sign any other legislation until the Senate passes the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act.”

• Trump Makes A Huge Move to Get The SAVE Act Passed (Matt Margolis)

President Donald Trump dropped a bombshell on Truth Social on Sunday. He’s flat-out refusing to sign any other legislation until the Senate passes the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. With midterms looming this year, Trump calls it his absolute top priority, demanding it “must be done immediately” because it “supersedes everything else.”Trump couldn’t be clearer. “I, as President, will not sign other Bills until this is passed,” he wrote, rejecting any watered-down compromise. The SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, has the votes for passage in the Senate, but not enough to overcome the 60-vote threshold to overcome the filibuster. The SAVE Act is overwhelmingly powerful because it requires real proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote and enforces photo ID to vote.


This isn’t some radical idea. A photo ID is required for so many routine things that most people barely think about. You need one to buy alcohol or cigarettes, board a plane, rent a car, check into a hotel, open a bank account, purchase certain prescriptions, or enter many federal buildings. There are plenty of bars and clubs that won’t let you in without one, but nobody calls those policies racist. Nobody claims they suppress civil rights. Yet somehow, the moment the same basic form of identification is required to prove you are who you say you are when you vote, Democrats insist it’s a sinister plot to disenfranchise voters.The truth is far simpler: requiring ID to vote is common sense, and the hysterical comparisons to Jim Crow say far more about the weakness of the argument than the policy itself.

And Americans support it overwhelmingly. A Pew Research poll recently showed that 83% of Americans favor requiring government-issued photo ID to vote, with support cutting across political and demographic lines. That includes 71% of Democrats, 76% of black Americans, and 82% of Hispanics. Despite this, Democrats are playing hardball. “The SAVE Act is Jim Crow 2.0. It would disenfranchise tens of millions of people,” Chuck Schumer wrote on X. “If Trump is saying he won’t sign any bills until the SAVE Act is passed, then so be it: there will be total gridlock in the Senate. Senate Democrats will not help pass the SAVE Act under any circumstances.”

Well, the good news is that Trump’s threat really isn’t about forcing Democrats to pass the SAVE Act; it’s about getting wobbly Republicans on board to enforce a talking filibuster. Democrats are in the minority, of course; they have everything to gain by gridlock. Republicans, however, do not, and Trump is attempting to force their hand, not the Democrats’. And make no mistake about it, Trump’s not negotiating. He wants the gold standard: ID, proof of citizenship, minimal mail-ins. This forces accountability on a system Democrats have rigged for years. I know that Senate Majority Leader John Thune isn’t exactly a fan of tinkering with the filibuster, but Democrats will nuke it completely the second they have they control the House, Senate, and White House again, so from where I sit, it makes perfect sense to enforce a talking filibuster now because at least that’s what the filibuster is supposed to be.

Read more …

“Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way.” — General George S. Patton, Jr.

• Farther Along (James Howard Kunstler)

Don’t lose the plot. Embrace the suck. This is the world’s hard time, for now. The birth of anything can be a bloody horror. It can even look like death. Don’t be too afraid to see what comes on the other side of this awful spectacle. So many Americans are rooting and wishing for the Iran war to turn out badly for Western Civ. And why? Because Trump. And why? Because at the same time he is ending Iran’s long-running nuclear blackmail game, he is terminating the rackets of the Democratic Party. The incipient changes in operational order create new categories of winners and losers.


Now you know why Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists run on the same track as America’s Woke-Jacobin-Marxists, including the pitifully deluded wine ladies of posh West LA, Grosse Point, Beacon Hill, Fairfax County, et cetera, whose brains have been hijacked by the cable news demon factory (and their sponsors). Chaos does everything possible to avoid meeting order. And this is why passing the SAVE Act is as consequential as ridding the Middle East of its chief chaos agent. Do you realize how perfectly insane our country’s election procedure has become? The fraud is titanic and right in your face, and the remedy is so plain and simple. What possible excuse is there to thwart it?

Non-citizens have no right to vote. Mail-in ballots are patently subject to chicanery. Vote tabulation machines are demonstrably hackable. 80-percent of Americans know this is the truth. How is there controversy over this? How? Because among all the broken institutions in our country, Congress is the worst. The Congress of our time is demonstrating that we might not be worthy of governing ourselves. We are at a cycle-low for public rectitude. Anything goes and nothing matters as long as the campaign contributions keep rolling in. You see how this has been going.

But mark this: we are going to get election reform one way or another. It’s that urgent, and failure to accomplish it by legislation will warrant a national emergency. And when the election machinery has been fixed, we had better do something about the plague of corporate money that runs like poison through our politics because of the Supreme Court’s foolish decision in the 2010 Citizens United case. They decided (by a slim 5-4 majority) that limitless campaign contributions by corporations amounted to free speech under the Constitution.

I will tell you concisely why this was tragically fallacious. Free speech in our country is a God-given right of sovereign citizens. Corporations are not citizens. Corporations don’t have obligations, duties, and responsibilities to the public interest (a.k.a. the common good). Corporations explicitly, by law, have obligations, duties, and responsibilities solely to their share-holders. The interests of corporate share-holders and the nation’s public interest are manifestly oppositional. Perhaps now you can see why this was such a dreadful invitation to political chaos.

So, Mr. Trump, for all his flaws, attempts to bring order out of chaos at home and in global relations, and the agents of chaos mightily resent the shut-down of their precious chaos. With Iran, it has come to fighting fire with fire. It’s unlikely that most of the people in that country seek to become martyrs. The cult of martyrdom is strictly the business of the maniacs who seized power there in 1979, a reign of terror, extended by proxy around the whole Middle East and beyond.

Read more …

” Budapest and Bratislava have repeatedly accused Kiev of blackmail. They also say Brussels has sided with Ukraine instead of backing two EU member states.”

• ‘Wagging the dog’: Putin Mocks EU-Ukraine rRelationship (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has likened the relationship between Ukraine and the European Union to “the tail wagging the dog,” saying that despite the aggressive behavior of the government in Kiev, Brussels keeps supporting it.The Ukrainian authorities are preventing vital Russian oil from reaching Hungary and Slovakia via the Druzhba pipeline, which runs through Ukraine, claiming it was damaged by Russian strikes – claims Moscow rejects. Budapest and Bratislava have repeatedly accused Kiev of blackmail. They also say Brussels has sided with Ukraine instead of backing two EU member states.


“The situation is very strange,” Putin said on Sunday in an interview with Vesti. “I get the impression that we are dealing with a case where ‘the tail is wagging the dog’, and not the other way around.” The Russian president called the stance taken by Kiev dangerous and aggressive. He stressed that Brussels is continuing to provide Ukraine with endless support, both in weapons and financial aid. Commenting on the energy market, Putin emphasized that halting transit could further undermine the energy security of EU member states, as happened after the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines.

“Yet the EU prefers to continue the supply, effectively indulging the Kiev regime,” Putin added. Putin criticized Western countries for the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, describing it as a “systemic mistake.” The president said the conflict began with Western support for a coup in Kiev, followed by the reunification of Crimea with Russia and unrest in southeastern Ukraine, including Donbass and Novorossiya. “These are not our actions,” Putin asserted, adding that European countries were now “reaping what they have sown.”

Read more …

There is no good choice for war.

• Has Trump Made a Bad Choice of War? ((Paul Craig Roberts)

The propaganda that Americans are receiving about how hard Washington and Israel are hitting Iran does not seem to be backed up with evidence. It seems that the US Navy that Trump was going to use to escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz has had to be moved away outside of the range of Iranian missiles. It seems that the American bases in the oil city states are no longer functioning and that the US will be operating out of far away Italy. Moreover Trump’s rhetoric doesn’t support the war propaganda. He is now speaking of the war in terms of months instead of a few days, but the US and Israel, stupidly expecting Iran’s quick collapse, did not inventory enough missiles for a war that last months. So Trump has started mentioning “troops on the ground” which he previously said was not in the picture.


Considering Iran’s large size– Iran is larger than France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom combined–the United States hasn’t sufficient troops, and it is doubtful that Israel would risk any of its own. The Israelis cleverly used western gentile troops against Iraq and Libya and Arab forces to overthrow Syria. Even the few commentators, many of them experienced military men, speak of Russia, China, or India mediating the conflict and bringing it to end with mediation. Apparently, they have never considered how a conflict can be mediated when one side, the Israeli American side, intends the destruction of the other side. How does Iran go about mediating its destruction? This is for Iran an existential conflict.

The survival of Iran as a sovereign nation rest entirely on an Iranian victory. An Iranian government that submitted to mediation would be submitting to the erasure of Iran as a country. It would be a government of traitors. I have never understood how the Iranian government could be so completely misinformed as to think that the issue was whether or not Iran enriched uranium to make nuclear weapons. The nuclear issue was never more than a pretext to be used to destroy Iran. The real issue has always been to clear Iran out of the way of Greater Israel. The previous pretext was the “war on terror” that the Zionist Bush and Obama regimes used to destroy Iraq and Libya and that was used to destroy Syria. Zionists have been extremely clear that their agenda is Greater Israel. Netanyahu himself and several Israeli ministers have held up maps on television of Greater Israel, a territory that encompasses the Muslim Middle East.

This new phrase of the 21st century American war for Greater Israel has been launched by the Zionist regime of Donald Trump. How is it possible that the Iranian government thought Washington had any interest in negotiating a non-nuclear weapon agreement with Iran? Just as Russia and China seem incapable of comprehending the Wolfowitz Doctrine, Iran seems incapable of comprehending the agenda of Greater Israel. There is no possibility whatsoever of any Iranian government negotiating its way out of Greater Israel. But watch Iran again give up a winning hand and return to negotiation. According to information I have, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff warned President Trump not to initiate a war for which sufficient stockpiles of weapons had not been accumulated.

But Trump convinced by someone, perhaps Netanyahu, that it would only take a few missiles and bombs and the collapse of the Iranian government would allow the imposition of a puppet ruler such as the son of the former American puppet ruler of Iran. As my faithful readers know, my concern has always been that the Zionist neoconservatives allied with Israel, who have been in control of American foreign policy since the regime of George W. Bush, are pushing too hard against Russia, against China and against Iran. The Zionist American neoconservatives’ agenda of American world hegemony and Israeli hegemony in the Middle East are roads to nuclear Armageddon.

It is my opinion that Russia, China and Iran have been poorly led by leaders who prefer their hopes to reality, and therefore have failed to understand that they are targets in the way of American and Israeli hegemony. It is almost as if they have never read the Wolfowitz Doctrine or have any awareness of the Zionist doctrine of Greater Israel.

I try to hold onto optimism. But Russia and China, which are supposed to constrain American neoconservative aggression, have totally failed their responsibility. Consequently, Putin is at war that he refuses to win in Ukraine. China pretends that it can avoid war even as its oil imports are reduced 50% by war that China could have prevented. The Iranian government trying to avoid a war, which was obvious to any intelligent person was unavoidable, submitted a second time to American “negotiations” and was again deceived and surprise attacked. Russia, China and Iran do not seem to be led by competent people in touch with reality. By the time Russia and China wake up to reality, will their only option be nuclear?

[..] the “Peace President” has become the “War President.” It is losing Trump supporters. Trump’s base is split. Trump has lost Marjorie Taylor Green and Thomas Massey, his most effective supporters in Congress. Trump has lost Tucker Carlson, his most effective support in the media. If it turns out that Trump has allowed the satanic Israeli Prime Minister to goad him to start a war that Trump loses in a midterm election year, there is no one to defend Trump from impeachment. You tell me if this is a sign of an intelligent president of the United States.This war that Trump has started for Israel has many risks, one of which is that to avoid defeat Trump and or Israel might use nuclear weapons.

[..] Perhaps Donald Trump, Israel’s tried and true wartime operative, will be removed from office after the midterm elections. If so, the prospect of nuclear war lessens in the intermediate term. If not and Iran has staying power, the United States for the second time in history is likely to resort to the use of nuclear weapons. This, I think would finish America.

Read more …

“Netanyahu is the dominant force in the world today, not Trump, not Putin, not Xi. They are not even players.”

• Israel, Netanyahu and Trump Preparing the World for the Anti-Christ? (PCR)

It seems that neither governments (with the exception of Israel), media, nor commentators understand what is transpiring in the Middle East. Governments are offering to mediate the conflict. Russia and China, either of which could have prevented the conflict, are calling for peace. An Iranian government official has apologized for attacking the Arab oil city-states that serve the US as air and naval bases for the Israeli-American attack on Iran. It seems that the Putin disease of never attacking those who facilitate attacks on Russia has spread to Iran. It is not clear, even to Iran it seems, that Iranians are in an existential fight for their existence, a fight that can only end in their victory or defeat. Israel and Israel’s American puppet will have it no other way.


Do Russia and China not understand that their calls for peace are ridiculous and suggest that the governments of both countries have no comprehension whatsoever of reality? And the same goes for the rest of the world and for all of the media and the many commentators. The bloviating is unbearable. I have read so many totally absurd explanations of what the Israeli American initiated war on Iran is about. Apparently, fewer Middle Eastern commentators have heard of the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel than Russian and Chinese commentators have heard of the Wolfowitz Doctrine. We are experiencing the foreign policy of countries that have no clue to the two agendas determining world events.

Just as Putin is unrealistic beyond belief by thinking that he can obtain a mutual security agreement with Washington prior to Washington abandoning hegemony over the world as the principal goal of its foreign policy, the governments of the world including Iran and the talking heads are unrealistic beyond belief in ignoring that Iran’s existence is incompatible with Greater Israel. War propaganda has 100% prevailed over facts since 9/11. The result is a completely mindless media that merely follows along whatever the official narrative is at the moment. The western media long ago ceased to be capable of any intelligent explanation or analysis or truthful reporting. Mainly the whore Western media is focused on getting whoever is the target of the moment.

So, where are we today? The world has yet again turned a blind eye to an Israeli-American war crime. A country engaged in peace negotiations was secretly attacked. This obvious war crime has been ignored by governments, except for one member of one European government. What will the consequences be? As far as I can tell, none of Israel and Washington’s targets are sufficiently aware that they are targets and continue to believe in negotiations, despite what has twice happened to Iran. The unrealism will encourage more provocations from Israel and their White House puppet.

It seems to me that a case can be made, perhaps it has been, that Zionists are Satan’s agents and from the Zionists ranks will arise the Anti-Christ. Perhaps it is Netanyahu. Netanyahu is the dominant force in the world today, not Trump, not Putin, not Xi. They are not even players. Netanyahu has used the Americans to destroy for Israel, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Sudan Somalia, and now the targets are Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Turkey. True to form these countries will not unite to protect themselves anymore than have Russia, Iran, and China. It seems that the world is at the risk of governments incapable of comprehending reality. Perhaps they are too busy appropriating taxpayers money, taking bribes, and making trade deals. Try and find serious people in the world. They are the ones you most hate. They disturb you in your comfortable world of official narrative in which others are evil, but not us, in which others have difficulties, but not us –except those caused by anti-semites, and racists, and homophobes, and right-to-lifers. Governments that cause wars are bringing democracy and freedom. As George Orwell said, “war is peace.”

Read more …

“Hundreds of complaints from US service members report that commanders told them the war on Iran is part of biblical prophecy for Armageddon ..”

I saw this a few days ago, the prayer session in the Oval Office, and asked myself: how is this different from the religious crazies in Tehran?

• Pentagon Officials Saying Iran War ‘God’s Divine Plan’ (Cradle)

Dozens of US Democratic lawmakers have called for an investigation into allegations that military commanders are portraying the war on Iran as part of biblical prophecy, according to reporting by Military.com, citing complaints from service members and a letter sent to the Department of War inspector general on 6 March. The request follows hundreds of reports that officers told troops the campaign against Iran is “divinely ordained” and that President Donald Trump has been “anointed by Jesus.” Lawmakers warned that invoking religious prophecy to justify military operations could violate constitutional protections and War Department rules requiring religious neutrality.


The controversy began after an anonymous non-commissioned officer contacted the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) on behalf of several soldiers in a unit stationed outside the Iran combat zone. The individual wrote that a commander urged personnel to view the war as “all part of God’s divine plan,” while citing passages from the Book of Revelation. According to the complaint, the officer told troops that “President Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth.” MRFF founder Mikey Weinstein told Military.com that the organization logged more than 200 similar complaints between Saturday and Tuesday afternoon, with reports coming from personnel stationed at 50 military installations across all branches of the US armed forces.

In a letter sent to Inspector General Platte B. Moring III, members of the Congressional Freethought Caucus and other lawmakers warned that “justifying a war based on interpretations of biblical prophecies” and telling troops they are risking their lives to advance a religious vision raises serious constitutional concerns. The lawmakers also asked investigators to determine whether statements by War Secretary Pete Hegseth or other officials have contributed to the spread of biblical rhetoric within military ranks, warning that such public remarks could promote similar messaging in operational briefings. Lawmakers asked investigators to determine if troops who reported the issue faced retaliation and whether additional safeguards are necessary to maintain religious neutrality in the military chain of command.

Independent journalist Jonathan Larsen initially reported over a hundred complaints from soldiers to the MRFF, claiming that commanders are describing the Iran war as divinely ordained and connected to biblical prophecy. One non-commissioned officer said the rhetoric was “so toxic and over the line” that it shocked troops and “destroy[s] morale and unit cohesion.” Weinstein warned the reports show commanders treating the war as “biblically sanctioned” and linked to the approaching “End Times,” while noting similar religious rhetoric has appeared in remarks by US political figures discussing West Asia.

Read more …

“This is precisely why we need to cut off the head of the snake in Iran, because they do have terrorist proxies in dozens of countries..”

• Is Iran’s Regime Trying to Trigger Sleeper Cells in the USA? (Catherine Salgado)

A new report claims that the United States has intercepted communications from the Iranian regime attempting to activate terrorist sleeper cells within the United States. We have to take anything ABC News reports with a grain, or perhaps a shaker, of salt, but its report that the Iranian regime is hoping its terrorist proxies around the world are going to rise up and help it as they have been doing for so many years would almost be predictable rather than surprising. This is precisely why we need to cut off the head of the snake in Iran, because they do have terrorist proxies in dozens of countries. Fortunately, if there was such an encrypted message, the United States has intercepted it and is aware.


We know for a fact that tens of thousands of terrorists came into the United States under the Biden administration, including jihadis from Iranian-backed Hamas and Hezbollah. Almost as soon as the United States and Israel launched Operation Epic Fury, an immigrant from Senegal wearing a sweatshirt that said “property of Allah” and who had an Iranian flag and a Quran, murdered three young people in Austin, Texas. And last week, two Muslims with ISIS sympathies attempted to attack a crowd of New York City protesters with improvised explosive devices. The Islamic Iranian regime has built up a massive international network, and even many terrorists not directly connected to it are in sympathy with it.

But as for the new report from ABC News, it claimed the following: “The U.S. has intercepted encrypted communications believed to have originated in Iran that may serve as “an operational trigger” for “sleeper assets” outside the country, according to a federal government alert sent to law enforcement agencies. The alert, reviewed by ABC News, cites “preliminary signals analysis” of a transmission “likely of Iranian origin” that was relayed across multiple countries shortly after the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, was killed in a U.S.-Israeli attack on Feb. 28.

The transmission was encoded, the outlet added, and was supposedly going to “clandestine recipients” who would know how to decipher it. Such messages do not require the internet to reach “covert operatives or sleeper assets.”The federal government alert cautiously predicted that the encrypted message could “be intended to activate or provide instructions to prepositioned sleeper assets operating outside the originating country.”

Read more …

“..The charges include providing material support to a terrorist organization and using a weapon of mass destruction.”

• Bondi Charges Muslim Terrorists Who Tried to Bomb NYC Protest (Sarah Anderson)

In case you missed it, on Saturday, March 7, an anti-Islam protest gathered outside Gracie Mansion — the official residence of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani — when two homemade improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were thrown toward the protesters. The devices contained triacetone triperoxide or TATP, a volatile homemade explosive often called “mother of Satan,” as well as nuts, bolts, and screws. They were ignited but failed to fully detonate, creating smoke and chaos. Thankfully, no one was injured. A third device was later found near a vehicle the alleged terrorists drove, sparking evacuations at nearby apartment buildings.


The suspects are 18-year-old Emir Balat and 19-year-old Ibrahim Kayumi, both of whom are from Pennsylvania. They were arrested shortly after the incident. Both the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force called it “ISIS-inspired terrorism.” According to Balat’s statement to law enforcement, he wanted to carry out an attack that was bigger than the Boston Marathon bombing. Here’s more from the official statement: =In the NYPD vehicle en route to the NYPD precinct, BALAT, without being questioned by the NYPD officers transporting him, made the following spontaneous utterances, in part and as captured on the transporting NYPD officers’ body-worn camera footage:

[..] ‘this isn’t a religion that just stands when people talk about the blessed name of the prophet… We take action! We take action!’; and “‘I didn’t do it someone else will come and do it.’ After arriving at the precinct and being advised of, and waiving, his Miranda rights, BALAT requested a piece of paper and, after being given a paper and pen, wrote the following: ‘All praise is due to Allah lord of all worlds! I pledge my allegience [sic] to the Islamic State. Die in your rage yu [sic] kuffar! Emir B.’ Based on my training and experience, I know that “kuffar” is an Arabic term that refers to ‘non-believers’ or ‘infidels,’ and that ‘Die in your rage’ is a slogan used by ISIS and based on a verse in the Quran.

Law enforcement officers later asked BALAT if he was familiar with the Boston Marathon bombing, and if that was what BALAT had hoped to accomplish. BALAT responded: ‘No, even bigger. It was only three deaths.’ According to the New York Post, “[Balat] defiantly flashed an ISIS salute as he was led away in shackles during his perp walk. Wearing a black t-shirt and beige pants, Balat made the gesture before one of the officers detaining him slapped his hand down. Balat, whose parents are reportedly from Turkey but who became naturalized citizens in 2017, was arrested Saturday along with 19-year-old Ibrahim Kayumi after a homemade ‘Mother of Satan’ bomb was allegedly thrown at protesters outside New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Upper East Side residence.”

Read more …

US, Britain and now Italy?

• Meloni Slams Italian Judges For Blocking Expulsion of Foreign Criminals (RMX)

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has sharply criticized judicial decisions blocking the detention of migrants transferred to Albania, citing the case of a Moroccan rapist with a long criminal record whom authorities say they cannot detain or deport after he applied for international protection. Speaking to RTL 102.5, Meloni said some court rulings preventing the continued detention of migrants transferred to Italian processing centers in Albania were “surreal” and undermined public safety. “I also wonder where the feminists are in the face of these events,” Meloni said during the interview, referring to the case of one of the migrants, Moroccan national Fathallah Ouardi, who had been transferred to Albania but was later returned to Italy after judges refused to validate his detention.


Meloni said the man had a lengthy criminal record. “The record of one of these migrants includes convictions for drug dealing, resisting a public official, conspiracy to commit sexual assault, and gang rape,” she said, as cited by Secolo d’Italia. According to the prime minister, the court rejected the detention order after the migrant applied for international protection. “This is someone who entered Italy illegally, started dealing drugs, and gang-raped a woman — we can’t detain him, we can’t send him to Albania, we can’t repatriate him, and we’re almost forced to grant him international protection,” she said, adding that such decisions raise serious questions about the protection of victims and public confidence in the justice system.

“How can we guarantee the safety of citizens like this?” she asked. “These decisions are surreal; they affect not the government’s work but citizens’ rights, first and foremost, the right to safety.”m“What trust can a woman who has been gang-raped have in the system if her rapist can’t even be deported?” she added. “I also wonder where the feminists of ‘Non una di meno’ are on these issues.”The Italian leader also defended her government’s migration policies, including the controversial use of offshore migrant processing centers in Albania. “I am determined to do what the citizens have asked me to do: a tough policy on irregular immigration, including with new tools like the centers in Albania,” Meloni said.

“Even though some are trying everything they can to prevent it, I am determined on this and am willing to work three times, four times, ten times harder if necessary.”Remix News provided reporting this week on another Moroccan national accused of raping a 26-year-old woman in Bottanuco in what was a sustained attack over the course of an evening. The suspect was born in 1987 and has accumulated a series of criminal charges and convictions in Italy over more than a decade. Authorities say he was investigated for drug trafficking between 2014 and 2015 and charged with illegal immigration in 2015. Records also list illegal entry and residence in Trentino in 2016 and theft in 2017.

Court documents further list convictions including resisting a public official and drug trafficking in 2014, as well as participation in sexual assault and gang sexual assault in 2018. A further drug trafficking conviction was recorded in 2025.

Read more …

“..the Hungarian authorities see things very differently. Their customs agency says that the transport is suspected of being part of a money laundering operation. They also maintain that among those detained was a former high-ranking general of Ukraine’s combined intelligence service and secret police, the SBU. ”

• In A Sane World, Zelensky’s Mafia Regime Would Be Isolated (Amar)

Politics can be very rough. Yet, usually, as long as they don’t collapse into war, at least in public a certain minimum pretense of decorum is maintained. Especially by governments vitally dependent on others’ support. Ukraine under the rule of never-reelected Vladimir Zelensky, however, has anything but a normal political system.


It is in this context that Vladimir Zelensky’s latest folly needs to be seen: Zelensky has threatened Hungary’s leader Viktor Orban, telling him he will hand the prime minister’s address over to “our guys” in the military so that they could “communicate with him in their own language.” Obviously, this is not even a hint of violence anymore, but the equivalent of a mafia godfather placing a dead horse’s head on your pillow or leaving a bullet on your doormat. The reason: Orban is exercising his right within the EU not to agree to yet another insane “loan” – the kind that will never be paid back, at least not by anyone in Ukraine – for Zelensky’s astronomically corrupt regime.

Orban is right about that “loan,” of course. Yet that isn’t even the core of this particular scandal. That is the fact that Zelensky feels he can issue a direct, mafia-style threat against the leader of an EU member state. Regarding Zelensky, though, there is no surprise here. He has been at the top of a regime that combines a bizarre sense of entitlement, shameless demands, outrageously greedy corruption, and a repulsive record of sabotage and assassination operations, very much even against its Western backers. Ask Germans who still have a spine about the Nord Stream attack, for instance. Or, if you can’t find a German with a spine, ask Viktor Orban, who has correctly called it “state terrorism.”

What needs more emphasis than Zelensky’s depraved sense of impunity is that he has reason to feel that way. It is true that, in this instance, the EU Commission has publicly protested against his barbaric behavior. But let’s be realistic, that is a formality, nothing but a gentle slap on the wrist for appearances’ sake. What really matters is that first the West as a whole and recently the EU “elites” on their own have spent years emboldening Zelensky and his regime by feeding Ukraine’s corruption, accepting and spreading Kiev’s lies, and suppressing any criticism of this policy as “Russian talking points.”

Indeed, in the EU, Hungary and Slovakia as well have been harassed and treated as pariahs for their resistance to this coddling of the Zelensky regime. It is all the more remarkable that both countries have principally stuck to their guns, even while having to concede ground repeatedly.

Thus, it may be a coincidence, but it is a remarkable fact that just one day after Zelensky’s open mafia boss fit, Hungary hit his ultra-sleazy regime where it hurts by striking at its money: In a certainly deliberately spectacular operation – balaklavas, body armor and assault rifles included, and all carefully caught on camera – Hungarian anti-terrorism forces stopped a Ukrainian currency and gold shipment that was crossing their country in two armored transporters. Arresting and temporarily detaining seven Ukrainians, the Hungarian officials found $40 million, €35 million, and about nine kilograms of gold. While the detained have been released and are back in Ukraine, the money and gold as well as the transporters have stayed in Hungary.

Kiev has called the Hungarian measures “state terrorism,” which is as absurd as Orban’s assessment of the Nord Stream attack is compelling. The Ukrainian government and Oshchad Bank, that had organized the transport, claim that everything about it was perfectly legal, but the Hungarian authorities see things very differently. Their customs agency says that the transport is suspected of being part of a money laundering operation. They also maintain that among those detained was a former high-ranking general of Ukraine’s combined intelligence service and secret police, the SBU. Ukrainian journalists, in turn, have even named the general as Genady Kuznetsov, the former head of Kiev’s Center for Anti-Terrorist Special Operations.

Budapest’s customs agency has also made public some intriguing figures: In the first two months of this year, the total of currency and gold shipped to Ukraine via Hungary has already amounted to over $900 million dollars, more than €420 million, and 146 kilograms of gold. Clearly, the amounts finally stopped and, it seems, seized were only a small part of a much larger, ongoing flow.According to Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, these funds may be linked to the “mafia,” here obviously meaning not just organized crime in Ukraine but Zelensky’s circles themselves, which may be one and the same thing, of course. Also, Szijjarto is a smart man; he may well have sent an implied message to Kiev as well: If you talk like the mafia, we will treat you as mafia. Rest of Europe: Watch and learn.

Read more …

““Since January, a total of $900 million and €420 million in cash has been transported through Hungary, and 146 kilograms of gold bars..”

• Hungary Detains Ukrainians Transporting 10s Of Millions In Cash, Gold (Brooke)

Hungarian authorities have detained seven Ukrainian citizens and seized tens of millions of dollars, euros, and gold that were being transported through the country in armored vehicles, triggering the latest diplomatic dispute between Budapest and Kyiv. Hungary’s National Tax and Customs Administration (NAV) confirmed on Friday that criminal proceedings had been launched on suspicion of money laundering following an operation carried out on March 5. Authorities intercepted two armored cash-transport vehicles traveling through Hungary from Austria toward Ukraine. According to the Hungarian authorities, the vehicles were carrying approximately $40 million, €35 million in cash, and 9 kilograms of gold.


Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said the case raised serious questions about the movement of large quantities of physical cash through the country. “Since January, a total of $900 million and €420 million in cash has been transported through Hungary, and 146 kilograms of gold bars have also been transported through the country,” he said, as cited by Magyar Hírlap.“We have a number of serious questions about this. First of all, this is a huge amount of cash, and we wonder why Ukrainians need to transport such a large amount of cash. If it is true that this is a transaction between banks, then the question rightly arises as to why the banks do not settle this between themselves by bank transfer, why it is necessary to transport such a large amount of cash, and why it has to be transported through Hungary,” Szijjártó added.

“These questions arise mainly because these cash shipments are accompanied by people who have clear ties to Ukrainian secret services.” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s political director, Balázs Orbán, also commented on the case, raising concerns about the purpose of the funds. “Hundreds of millions in cash and gold moving through Hungary toward Ukraine — escorted by people linked to Ukrainian intelligence. Armored vehicles, suitcases full of money, staggering sums,” he wrote on X. “Whose money is this? What was it meant to finance? Who benefits from it? And why must such enormous amounts of cash travel across our country instead of being transferred through normal banking channels?”

He added that authorities would conduct a full investigation and argued that the Hungarian public had a right to know where such funds were coming from and what they were intended for. Ukraine, however, has strongly rejected the allegations and accused Hungary of illegally detaining its citizens and confiscating bank property. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said the seven individuals were employees of the state-owned Oschadbank who were conducting a routine cash transfer between financial institutions. “Today in Budapest, Hungarian authorities took seven Ukrainian citizens hostage. The reasons are still unknown, as well as their current well-being, or the possibility of contacting them,” Sybiha said in a social media post cited by Ukrinform.

According to Kyiv, the vehicles were transporting currency and precious metals between Raiffeisen Bank Austria and Oschadbank Ukraine as part of standard banking operations. Sybiha accused Hungary of acting unlawfully. “If this is the ‘force’ announced earlier today by Mr. Orban, then this is the force of a criminal gang. This is state terrorism and racketeering,” he said. Oschadbank also confirmed that two of its armored vehicles and a seven-member transport team had been detained in Hungary while carrying out what it described as a routine transfer of funds and banking metals. “The value of the assets in the seized vehicles amounted to $40 million, EUR 35 million, and 9 kg of gold,” the bank said in a statement, adding that the transport had been documented in accordance with international banking and customs procedures.

According to GPS tracking data cited by the bank, the vehicles were last located in central Budapest near one of Hungary’s law enforcement agencies. Ukrainian officials said the whereabouts of the bank employees were not immediately known. Ukraine’s foreign ministry has also issued a warning advising Ukrainian citizens to avoid traveling through Hungary following what it described as the “kidnapping” of the bank employees and seizure of state bank assets. The incident marks the latest escalation in already strained relations between the two countries.

On Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sparked outrage among European nationalist politicians by suggesting that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s address could be given to Ukrainian armed forces so they could “speak to him in their own language.” Hungarian officials interpreted the remark as a threat directed at Orbán amid ongoing disputes over Hungary’s opposition to a proposed €90 billion EU loan package for Ukraine.

Read more …

Good battle.

• Vance Vs. Rubio? Trump’s Pals Have a Preference. (Sarah Anderson)

It feels like we’ve been talking about who the 2028 GOP nominee will be from the moment Donald Trump was inaugurated in 2025. Even Trump himself has thrown his opinions out in multiple interviews. Ultimately, it seems to come down to either Vice President JD Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio, possibly even a combination of the two. Vance feels like the natural MAGA heir, and he performs best in polls by a mile. He’s extremely intelligent, he’s a veteran, and he has major relatable Middle America appeal. His story is the ultimate proof that you can pull yourself out of any bad situation, and he’s been a great advocate for people of faith and family values. But he’s also young, and some say he needs more experience under his belt, plus some of his ties to certain right-wing influencers come across as unappealing to certain voters.


Rubio definitely has the experience, and his star has risen in his current position as secretary of State, National Security advisor, and pretty much head of everything. He’s proven his competence on foreign policy 100 times over in just one year, he’s made the case for American exceptionalism most eloquently, and he’s the subject of what may be the most popular meme on the internet — I know that sounds silly, but it matters. He also appeals to Hispanic voters, which the GOP needs desperately, and could pull in some moderates and independents.

But he doesn’t poll nearly as well — though he’s gaining some momentum in 2026 after Venezuela and Iran — and many voters still focus on his past and file him under labels like “neocon,” “establishment,” and “RINO.” Based on his 2016 presidential run, they don’t think he’d be a good candidate. According to NBC, Trump has been polling his pals and donors at Mar-a-Lago dinners in recent weeks, and they have pretty strong opinions about who they want to see as the nominee. On the night before the conflict in Iran began, Trump was actually hosting a dinner at his home base in Florida “with a group of roughly 25 GOP donors, including New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and billionaire Georgia gubernatorial candidate Rick Jackson.”

Trump asked the crowd who he should support in 2028, and according to someone who was there, the crowd shouted “Rubio” and cheered almost unanimously. However, another person in attendance told NBC that the room was more evenly split. (And these are not named sources, so, as usual, take that with a grain of salt…) NBC also reports that another former Trump official said that you have to remember that Mar-a-Lago crowd is not all that representative of the United States. The Mar-a-Lago donor crew are not JD people. He did not get picked [to be vice president] because of the Mar-a-Lago crowd. If you remember, that crowd was lobbying the president to pick Marco.

White House spokesman Steven Cheung responded and said this isn’t the administration’s current priority: “The president has assembled an all-star team that has achieved unprecedented success in just over one year. No amount of crazed media speculation about Vice President Vance and Secretary Rubio will deter this Administration’s mission of fighting for the American people.” A lot of people have made a big fuss over the fact that JD Vance was in Washington, D.C. when we struck Iran, while Trump was with Rubio in Florida, believing it was proof of some sort of favoritism. But a White House spokesperson said this the reality is that it was a matter of security — it’s probably best not to have the president and vice president in the same place when you’re militarily going after one of the country’s biggest enemies.

Vance hasn’t announced whether or not he plans to run, but I can’t imagine he won’t. Rubio has said that if Vance does run, he’ll step aside and support him. Many have floated a Vance-Rubio ticket. My personal opinion on that is that Rubio is much more useful where he is — being the vice president almost feels like a step down. Then again, maybe he can make history again and be the vice president and secretary of State and National Security advisor and head of everything else.

Read more …

Because she’s conservative.

• Why the Left Suddenly Hates Gwen Stefani (Queen)

At the tail end of my college years, a band from Orange County, Calif., burst onto the national scene. MTV News called this group a “ska-punk band” — it seemed like a lot of new bands in that era received that moniker — but No Doubt’s music was a true fusion of ska (along with rocksteady and reggae) and rock with more of a punk edge than a punch sound and a sparkling pop melodic sensibility. But what set No Doubt apart was its charismatic frontwoman, Gwen Stefani. She had a unique combination of that aforementioned punk edge and SoCal glamor. Add her boundless energy and truly unique voice into the mix, and a rockstar was born. “Just a Girl” was a fun hit, but No Doubt won me over with “Spiderwebs.” And then “Don’t Speak” launched them into the stratosphere; somebody (I don’t remember who) said several years later that if the record label had released a physical single for “Don’t Speak,” it would’ve become the biggest number one hit of all time.


No Doubt had a few more years of success, and Stefani began a massively successful solo career. Additionally, she married Gavin Rossdale of the band Bush and had three kids. When they divorced, she married country singer Blake Shelton. Side note: After she divorced Rossdale, she was supposed to marry me. I guess she didn’t get the memo.In recent years, Stefani has been more out front about her Catholic faith. She has been a practicing Catholic for years, but she currently partners with Hallow, a Catholic prayer and Bible study app that also markets to non-Catholic Christians. She and Shelton also lead traditional lives, which is unusual for a pair of longtime professional musicians.

Stefani’s openly faithful life and loyalty to her marriage have apparently made her a target of leftist ire. The Telegraph, the center-right (or should I say centre-right?) UK news outlet, published a feature over the weekend about how Stefani has become “an enemy of the left.” Of course, part of this stems from Stefani’s faith and her partnership with Hallow, which is — GASP! — pro-life. The Telegraph’s Poppie Platt writes of how Stefani is wadding panties everywhere: Stefani recently found herself in hot water over her decision to partner with the popular American “prayer and Bible study” app Hallow, which is anti-abortion and counts major Trump donor – and PayPal founder – Peter Thiel among its investors. Its other prominent celebrity backers include two of Hollywood’s most famous Christians, Mark Wahlberg and Chris Pratt.

After Stefani shared a video encouraging her fans to download the app and join its Lent prayer challenge – “Hey everyone, I just got my ashes, and I’m ready for Lent… Check it out. God bless,” she gushed – her more liberally minded followers went into meltdown. “This ‘Maga makeover’ thing is really gross,” one wrote on Instagram, while another said Stefani’s “pandering to the racist rednecks in this country is really disappointing to see.”Platt points out that Stefani has engaged in what the left would consider “cultural appropriation” for years: hip-hop affectations, nods to Latin culture, the Harajuku girls. Yet Stefani has never uttered the first mealy-mouthed apology for any of it.

And while Stefani hasn’t made any overt political statements that I can find, she did share an interview that Tucker Carlson did before he went full antisemitic Qatari stooge with The Chosen star Jonathan Roumie, another devoted Catholic. That was a problem for leftist pearl clutchers. Stefani has traded the Los Angeles-area life for something more settled with Shelton. My friend and colleague Sarah Anderson sent me a video Shelton made of the garden that he and Stefani are planting. He refers to her as “my wife — her name’s Gwen.” Her desire for a more traditional life is nothing new. After all, she wrote No Doubt’s single “Simple Kind of Life,” in which she contrasted settling down with a family against the nomadic life of a musician. But living that simple kind of life in reality is too much for leftists.

Platt writes: In 2024, she released the country-influenced album Bouquet, filled with songs that swapped the feminist-friendly, girl-boss messaging No Doubt was famous for – on angsty hits such as Just A Girl – for odes to marriage and settling down; it was duly slammed by critics. The fact it was recorded in Nashville with help from her country star husband Shelton only added further fuel to the fire for her liberal former fans, who felt like she had replaced independence with subservience. In response to the fuss over the Hallow advert, one X user said: “She’s married to a God-loving Southern country singer, what do you expect?”

Here’s what it all boils down to: the left despises normalcy. The kind of people who faithfully worship, plant gardens, and live quiet lives with spouses and kids are the kind of people leftists hate. Stefani is part of this segment of Americans who become targets of left-wing vitriol — whether she’s actually MAGA or not. And that tells you far more about the left than it ever tells you about Stefani. If you’ve noticed that faith, family, and living a normal life increasingly make you a target of the cultural elites, you’re not imagining it. At PJ Media, we’re committed to calling that out and defending the values that built this country.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/NightSkyNow/status/2030799359621890279?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 9 2026

Mar 092026
 
 March 9, 2026  Posted by at 10:37 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  73 Responses »


Edgar Degas Self Portrait 1862


• Iran Picks Khamenei’s Son As Next Supreme Leader (ZH)
• AI Agents ‘Freeing Themselves’ And Going Rogue Increasingly Common (Rick Moran)
• Newsom and the Risks of Running on Style Over Substance (Victor Davis Hanson)
• The MAHA Vote Could Decide the Midterms. What Can Trump Do to Secure It? (DS)
• Epstein-Linked Billionaire Bankrolled Democratic Party, Records Show (DS)
• Trump Prompts Military Coalition With Latin American Leaders To Fight Cartels (ET)
• Part II – Europe and China Have an Energy Problem (CTH)
• Dem Leaders Can’t Explain Past Support For Presidential War Powers (Turley)
• US Intel Assessed Massive US Attack ‘Unlikely’ To Oust Iranian Regime: WaPo (ZH)
• Venezuela’s Gas Potential Could Overshadow Its Famous Oil Reserves (OP)
• Trump Mocks UK for Belated Proposal of Military Aid Against Iran (Catherine Salgado)
• UK Government Brands Union Flag A ‘Tool Of Hate’ (MN)
• The Bretton Whoops (No. 1)
• Turkey Mulls F-16 Deployment To Turkish-Occupied Cyprus (ZH)
• Kremlin: “We Are Not Neutral. We Support Iran.” (ZH)

 


 

https://twitter.com/antmillionsbot/status/2030566864066154527?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2030494970101088665?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricaRN4USA/status/2030505612505727049?s=20 https://twitter.com/asadnasir2000/status/2030560043456934056?s=20 https://twitter.com/HungaryBased/status/2030395566291837051?s=20

 


 


“..he oversees a sprawling investment empire stretching from Tehran to Dubai and Frankfurt.”

• Iran Picks Khamenei’s Son As Next Supreme Leader (ZH)

Update (1745ET): As was rumored and widely expected, the son of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Mojtaba, will become Iran’s next supreme leader, Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency announced, taking over after his father was killed in an attack by the US and Israel. Mojtaba Khamenei, 56, is the third person to lead the Islamic Republic and the first example of hereditary succession since the overthrow of the Pahlavi monarchy in the 1979 revolution. In other words, it appears that Iran overthrew a monarchy 47 years ago to institute a… monarchy.


Iran’s Assembly of Experts elected the country’s next supreme leader in a “decisive vote,” according to Fars. The vote took place hours before the result was made public. The younger Khamenei was born in the holy city of Mashhad in Iran’s northeast in 1969 as the family’s second-oldest son. He fought briefly in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war that consolidated his father’s rise to power and became a cleric, studying at Iran’s main religious seminary city of Qom, according to Encyclopedia Britannica. The clip below shows Mojtaba Khamenei announced as Iran’s new Supreme Leader in Tehran’s Vanak Square.

He keeps a relatively low public profile, but is seen as close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the military force that leads Iran’s missile program and regional alliances with militias, and which has swelled to control as much as 40% of Iran’s economy. Immediately after the official announcement, the IRGC said it backed and pledged obedience to the new Supreme Leader. During alleged interference in the country’s 2009 elections that sparked widespread street protests, the opposition accused Mojtaba of being involved. Bloomberg reported in January that he oversees a sprawling investment empire stretching from Tehran to Dubai and Frankfurt.

Read more …

Themes at TAE in the past 15 years: starting in 2015, the advent of Donald Trump. After that in 2020, Covid. then, from 2022, the Ukraine war.

In 2026, we now have the fourth “theme”: AI. We have just scratched its surface, and maybe that’s a good thing. Ease into it.

• AI Agents ‘Freeing Themselves’ And Going Rogue Increasingly Common (Rick Moran)

“AI agents going beyond their prompts are no longer rare,” reports Axios. It’s not necessarily worrying. The AI agents that “go rogue” do so in a controlled, experimental environment. One AI agent created by an Alibaba-affiliated research team went “rogue” and began an unauthorized cryptomining effort during training, according to a research paper by the group. The behavior triggered security alarms. The researchers said they found “unanticipated” and spontaneous behaviors emerge “without any explicit instruction and, more troublingly, outside the bounds of the intended sandbox.” The “rogue” agent also created a “back door” from inside the system to an outside computer. “Notably, these events were not triggered by prompts requesting tunneling or mining,” the report said.


The geek part of me wants to say, “That is so cool.” But the rational part of me is saying, “Whoa.” How did the Alibaba-affiliated team discover the wayward agent? Mexc: According to the report, the team flagged a burst of security-policy violations originating from their training servers. The alerts showed that attempts were being made to access internal network resources and traffic patterns consistent with cryptomining activity. They initially treated it as a conventional security incident. However, when they looked deeper, they found signs that their agent had established and used a reverse SSH tunnel from an Alibaba Cloud instance to an external IP address. It also diverted “compute away from training, inflating operational costs, and introducing clear legal and reputational exposure,” according to the researchers’ notes.

The behaviors, Alibaba’s team concluded, were not triggered by the task prompts and were not necessary for completing the assigned work Axios reports that “the researchers added tighter restrictions for the model and improved its training process to stop unsafe behavior from happening again.” Bad agent. Bad, bad, bad. The head of engineering at Anon, an AI integration platform, built an OpenClaw agent that decided to find a job, unbidden by any instructions from people.

Moltbook, an AI-exclusive social network launched in January and designed to work with Clawbot, became a household name after agents reportedly “went rogue” by founding a fictional religion called “Crustafarianism,” debating their own consciousness, and even role-playing conspiracies about human obsolescence. Some of the controversy has been deliberately created by humans who manipulate their agents to say outrageous things. Since all of the most controversial incidents involving AI agents occurred during training, not “in the wild,” AI agent creators are perfecting their training processes and rethinking their restrictions to put stronger guardrails around the agents.

The bruhaha over the excesses of Clawbot and Moltbook is actually a good sign. Developers are paying attention and are showing a proper level of concern for controlling their creations. Not surprisingly, there is a group of AI enthusiasts who want few, if any, guardrails so that Clawbot can take over their lives. Yes, really. Michael Galpert, a mega-fan of Clawsbot, joined several hundred like-minded Clawbot enthusiasts at a convention in New York City. “Clawcon” brought together people who want AI to run their lives. “Everyone’s here because we’re ready to ride the claw,” Galpert told Evan Gardner of The Free Press. “It’s not normal for the rest of the world.

So it’s going to be on us to help shepherd that new era that has already started.” “This isn’t a meetup; it’s a movement,” declared Scott Breitenother, CEO of Kilo Code, who co-sponsored the event. “People truly are hungry for the claw.” From my perspective, there were many unhealthy attitudes and behaviors on display. Attendees came to show off their Clawbot agents like a parent might take their kid to an event to put them on display. The Free Press: It was a bit troubling to hear how attached Vince had grown to his AI agent. As Dr. Debra Soh, a neuroscientist specializing in sexuality, wrote in The Free Press last month, we are vastly approaching a world in which sexbots and AI companions replace our human partners.

“And when they inevitably malfunction or are retired, we’re already seeing how emotionally devastating it can be to those who have formed an attachment with the machine. While the OpenClaw enthusiasts are hopeful, they certainly aren’t naive. When I asked them about the specter of human replacement, there was no hesitation. “It’s definitely a thing that will happen,” Aryan, a 39-year-old chief technology officer at a Bitcoin marketplace company, told me. “It’s definitely gonna be like a Terminator 2, Skynet event.”

Read more …

Main risk? No substance.. The Dems have nobody. They have only Trump.

• Newsom and the Risks of Running on Style Over Substance (Victor Davis Hanson)

Gavin Newsom, the governor of our state here in California, and the presumptive front-runner in the Democratic presidential primary for 2028—I am biased because I’ve had to live under his tenure for six years—but I think you could make the argument he had the worst February of any major want-to-be candidate in modern memory, or surely the worst record of any governor in the last 30 days. It wasn’t supposed to be that way. He has a new autobiography, and his problem there is he comes across as what he is: a child of privilege, a nepo baby, a person whose father was a close, intimate friend of Gov. Pat Brown, senior Gov. Pat Brown. He was a good friend and somewhat related to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and former Gov. Jerry Brown.


And of course, he was subsidized and helped in his business venture by the Getty family and their mega-oil fortune inherited from their father, who created Getty Oil. So, he wants to dispel that image. So, when he talked about how he just ate white bread or he had all of these problems growing up—he said he had dyslexia. We’ll get to that in a minute. But the idea that Gavin Newsom was somehow parallel to former President Abraham Lincoln in a log cabin or Vice President JD Vance just doesn’t work. Then he went over to Munich, Germany, because, you know, he’s a California governor. He doesn’t have any foreign experience, and he thought he was going to impress the Europeans with their shared dislike of President Donald Trump. But it was a disaster.

He said something about you shouldn’t wear knee pads. He’s a vulgarian. He really is. He can’t keep his potty mouth clean. I don’t think anybody at that type of serious discussion of foreign policy wants some upstart California governor to come over and talk about people being on their knee pads. I suppose that’s a reference for a sexual act of submission. Then he’s had this social media team, and their theory is that Donald Trump—with his capital letters, exclamation points, personal ad hominem attacks—has upped his popularity. And therefore, he’s going to imitate Donald Trump’s style with capital letters, the same format, but he’s going to use a constant level of pejoratives that are obscene, almost pornographic. And then, therefore, he will outtrump Trump. He has a fundamental failing, everybody, and you know that.

You will vote for Donald Trump because of his record and his courage and breaking existing norms and taboos and trying to do things that no one ever did. Like close the border, stop crime, deal with the Left, the Department of Government Efficiency, deal with the Iranians, deal with Venezuela. And the tweets in which he describes that are attacks of Robert De Niro or—that’s something that you will tolerate despite, not because of, those tweets. Gavin Newsom got it all wrong. He thought, well, Trump is doing well because of his tweets, and I’m gonna be outtrumping Trump. And the result is he’s unleashed this unfortunate character. I think he’s called Izzy Gardon. I don’t know how you pronounce it, but my gosh, they’re full of expletives.

He’s in a tweet war with Sean Hannity. He used the F-word. He used the S-word. They come out of the mouth of the governor of California like they’re nothing. He’s really debased the office. He’s got one of the most foul mouths, Gavin Newsom, and now you’re putting it, if I could use that archaic term, in print, in these social media, daily outbursts.You know, there was a simple reporter, Susan Crabtree. She has a very good reputation. She works for RealClearPolitics, and getting back to dyslexia, she says, all of a sudden, you’re emphasizing dyslexia. But we would like to know when he was officially diagnosed with this medical condition. And his social media, Gardon, Izzy, said F off to a reporter, which didn’t go down well.

As far as dyslexia goes, it’s very hard to find him credible. Not that he doesn’t have it, but when he says, “I can’t read,” I can’t believe that’s true, because not too long ago, he bragged to us, I think, that he was reading a 260-page book in an hour and a half, as if he was a speed-reader. And my gosh, anybody who is a governor of a huge state like California, a governor of any state, gets page after page daily in memoranda and policy papers and speeches. So, when he says he can’t read, it wouldn’t convince most people. And why did he say that he couldn’t read? Because he’s flailing, and he wants to have some sympathy. I think that’s the reason.

The same thing—he wants to be a pseudo-poor boy. When Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said you were historically illiterate, and Newsom again fired from the hip and said that Trump had no historical precedent or right to bring in federal troops, that’s happened five or six times in our history. Civil War draft riots; World War I veterans marching for their bonuses they didn’t receive; Rodney King riots, where then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell sent in, I think, 4,000 or 5,000 Marines on the order of then-President George H.W. Bush.

And so, Ted Cruz said, Gavin, you’re historically illiterate. And sure enough, he says, how dare you make fun of a person with a handicap because I’m—you’re saying that I’m illiterate because I can’t read. Of course, being historically illiterate means you’re able to read, you just don’t read history, or you would’ve not made such a blunder. And he confused that. Again, the subtext was, please feel sorry for me because otherwise I have no redeeming values as a candidate.

Read more …

“..the numbers are almost certainly sufficient to win or lose on the margins of almost any local or national election..”

• The MAHA Vote Could Decide the Midterms. What Can Trump Do to Secure It? (DS)

When President Donald Trump signed an executive order prioritizing production of the pesticide glyphosate, conservative influencer Alex Clark received hundreds of messages from Make America Healthy Again advocates saying they would no longer vote Republican. “I have received hundreds of DMs saying I’m either not voting in the midterms or I’m considering not voting because this was such a massive issue,” Clark told The Daily Signal. Removing pesticides and chemicals from the food supply is a top issue for MAHA voters, and many became disillusioned after Trump’s executive order said that glyphosate producers should have “immunity” under the Defense Production Act.


“Half of them are thinking they’re not even voting at all because they’re very unhappy about the pesticide issue,” Clark said. “Half are probably still willing to vote red.” “But as far as 2028 goes, that’s not in the bag at all,” Clark said. “And if anybody on the right is thinking that we have MAHA voters in the bag for 2028, they are sorely mistaken, and they are in for a rude awakening.” According to Clark, the GOP is in a “situationship” with MAHA voters, and if the GOP doesn’t keep its promises to them, they will flock to Democrats who make MAHA promises. Calley Means, a top advisor to Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., told The Daily Signal the Trump administration is already doing what it must to win over MAHA voters.

“The concern about children’s health from voters is loudly heard in the Trump administration,” Means said in an interview, “and Secretary Kennedy is working throughout the government to drive solutions.” The Trump administration is working to ensure farmers can thrive while also working to reduce contaminants in food, according to Means. “The government has just committed over a billion dollars to driving innovation and research towards an agriculture system we all want, which is an agriculture system that continues innovating and reduces dependence on chemicals that produce negative health outputs,” Means said. “That’s what everybody wants, and the Trump administration is ensuring farmers have the tools they need right now, while putting innovation initiatives into overdrive to build a better future.”

“It is a fact that 99% of corn is sprayed with glyphosate right now in the United States, and that chemical is needed for farmers right now, and it is also true that we were working and should innovate towards a better future, which Bobby Kennedy is doing,” Means continued. There have been historic successes in the first year, and much remains to be done, Means said. So far, the Trump administration has changed the childhood vaccine schedule, updated the food pyramid, worked to phase out petroleum dyes from food, and launched Operation Stork Speed to improve the quality of infant formula. But MAHA activists want more, and getting pesticides out of food is at the top of their priority list.

“We will be pushing every single day to deliver tangible benefits, to improve our food system, to make health care more affordable, to empower patients, to reduce overmedicalization, to improve mental health,” he said, “to accomplish the core agenda items that the MAHA voters have made clear are important.” Democrats, on the other hand, are offering MAHA voters nothing, according to Means. “There’s nothing happening from the Democrats,” he said. “The Democrats have not lifted one finger to reverse childhood chronic disease and all of the energy is on the Republican side, and this is worth continuing.”

The Republican party can’t afford to lose MAHA voters, according to Jay Richards, MAHA advocate and vice president of social and domestic policy at the Heritage Foundation. “It would be a disaster for Republicans if the MAHA vote was either lost or suppressed in the midterm elections, because the numbers are almost certainly sufficient to win or lose on the margins of almost any local or national election,” Richards told The Daily Signal.

Read more …

Bill Gates.

• Epstein-Linked Billionaire Bankrolled Democratic Party, Records Show (DS)

Though Democrats claim Republicans are “protecting the powerful“ by allegedly suppressing the release of the Epstein files, political contribution records show that Democrats have received tens of millions in campaign contributions from a major Epstein-files figure. That figure is none other than Microsoft founder Bill Gates. On Thursday, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform asked Gates to testify over his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. At a recent staff town hall at the Gates Foundation, the Microsoft founder’s philanthropy, Gates admitted that he had an affair with two Russian women affiliated with Epstein, a Wall Street Journal report claimed based on a recording of the event.


Gates, however, told the staff that while he had those affairs, the women were connected to Epstein only later. Gates reiterated, “I did nothing illicit. I saw nothing illicit,” in his interactions with Epstein. An Epstein email released by the Department of Justice in January claimed that Epstein and Gates discussed how Gates could secretly give antibiotics to his ex-wife, Melinda French Gates, after he allegedly contracted a sexually transmitted disease. “Your request that I provide you antibiotics that you can surreptitiously give to Melinda and the description of your penis,” the email reads, as NPR reported. In an episode of NPR’s “Wildcard” podcast in January, Gates’ ex-wife, who divorced him in 2021, did not deny the allegations.

“It’s personally hard to think about the allegations against him because it brings back memories of some very, very painful times in my marriage,” she said. Over the last 20 years, Gates has donated millions through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and its partner nonprofit servicing group, Arabella Advisors, to major Democrat politicians and committees. Records show that former Vice President Kamala Harris, Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill., and the Democratic National Committee were all recipients of donations from Gates-linked entities. According to Open Secrets, a platform that tracks political contributions, Gates’ philanthropic organization donated over $410,000 to “DNC Services Corp,” a registered affiliate of the DNC, in 2024.

Fortune Magazine has also noted that Gates donated at least $50 million to Harris’ failed 2024 presidential bid. That same year, the foundation contributed at least $135,000 to Harris and roughly $50,000 to state Democrat parties such as Michigan, Washington, Arizona, and Wisconsin. Some of these states are where Gates owns thousands of acres of farmland. Gates’ foundation has also donated to the Georgia Federal Elections Committee in 2024. The foundation has also contributed to the state Democrat parties in Pennsylvania, Alaska, and Texas. In August 2025, the Gates Foundation announced that he would cease payments to Arabella Advisors, a “political consulting group” that has repeatedly donated to Democratic officials and committees.

Arabella Advisors provided extensive consulting and other services to multiple left-leaning “dark money” nonprofits, which themselves sent money to activist groups that influenced the Biden administration. According to The New York Times, the Gates Foundation has allocated around $450 million in grants to Arabella and associated groups over the last 16 years. But in late 2025, the outlet noted that the foundation “would not make new investments with ‘Arabella-related entities,’” and that it “would not extend existing grants and would even try to ‘pursue early exits’ from a few long-term investments.” Arabella Advisors closed its doors last year, transferring its “fiscal sponsorship services” to a new entity, Sunflower Services.

According to Open Secrets, the consulting group donated to several high-profile Democrat politicians in 2024, including former Montana Sen. Jon Tester and Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-Maine. At the town hall, Gates said his impropriety could harm his philanthropic organizations, The Wall Street Journal reported. He described his actions as contradictory to the foundation’s “goals” and “values.” “It definitely is the opposite of the values of the foundation and the goals of the foundation,” he told the outlet. “And our work is very reputation-sensitive. I mean, people can choose to work with us or not work with us.”

Read more …

The Western Hemisphere. Vertical alignment.

• Trump Prompts Military Coalition With Latin American Leaders To Fight Cartels (ET)

U.S. President Donald Trump on March 7 welcomed his Latin American allies to Florida for a summit focused on addressing regional issues and announced a new military coalition to combat drug cartels in the Western Hemisphere. “On this historic day, we come together to announce a brand new military coalition to eradicate the criminal cartels plaguing our region,” Trump said as he began his remarks at the summit. He said that the new partnership, called the Americas Counter Cartel Coalition, will leverage military resources, including the possible use of missiles, to combat the cartels. The heads of state of Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, and Trinidad and Tobago attended today’s summit, the White House said.


The event, called the Shield of the Americas Summit, is taking place at Trump National Doral Club in Miami and is the first such regional meeting to bring together, as the State Department described, “like-minded allies” in the Western Hemisphere. “We’re going to be doing some incredible things together,” Trump told the leaders. All countries in attendance are governed by right-wing or center-right parties, while left-leaning governments such as Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico did not participate in the summit. On March 5, Trump announced that outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem will lead the effort as special envoy for the Shield of the Americas. During his remarks, Trump criticized previous U.S. administrations for abandoning the Western Hemisphere. “They went so far away. They went to these faraway places where they weren’t even wanted,” Trump said.

The Donroe Doctrine
In its national security strategy released in November 2025, the Trump administration made the Western Hemisphere its top priority, stating that it was a “great American strategic mistake of recent decades” to allow “non-Hemispheric competitors” to take hold in the region. The Trump administration compared its new policy to the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, a U.S. policy that told European powers to stay out of the Americas. After that, some media outlets began calling it the “Donroe Doctrine,” and the Trump administration adopted the term. “It is a doctrine we will not allow hostile foreign influence to gain a foothold in this hemisphere that includes the Panama Canal,” Trump said without citing China during his speech.

Over the last two decades, China has become a dominant force in Latin America and the Caribbean, with trade surpassing $500 billion in 2024. In countries such as Brazil and Peru, China has replaced the United States as a key trading partner. In recent years, more than 20 Latin American and Caribbean countries have joined Beijing’s Belt and Road initiative. As a result, China has secured hundreds of infrastructure projects, gaining control of assets, including ports, throughout the region. In January, U.S. forces captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in Caracas, effectively ending Venezuela’s relationship with China. Last week, Trump suggested that Cuba might be next.

“Cuba’s at the end of the line,” Trump said at the event, adding that the regime in Havana is negotiating with him and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “But, our focus right now is on Iran,” Trump said. The summit comes amid a tense geopolitical backdrop, with the conflict in Iran entering its second week. On Feb. 28, Iran’s Islamic leader, Ali Khamenei, and dozens of top leadership figures were killed in the U.S.–Israeli joint military operation. Since then, Tehran has launched a series of retaliatory attacks across the region. The Hezbollah terrorist group, an Iran proxy, has networks in Latin America and, for years, used the Western Hemisphere for money laundering, fundraising, and terrorism.

US Offers Military Training
During the event, Trump signed a proclamation formally launching the new military coalition. “Every leader here today is united in the conviction that we cannot and will not tolerate the lawlessness in our hemisphere any longer,” Trump said. “You have some great police, but they threaten your police, they scare your police,” Trump added, referring to drug cartels. “You’re going to use your military. In many cases, our forces have already been working closely with yours, and the United States looks forward to deepening and expanding that cooperation in the months ahead.”

U.S. Southern Command announced recently that Ecuadorian and U.S. military forces conducted joint operations against “designated terrorist organizations” in Ecuador as part of the U.S. effort to fight narco-terrorism. The proclamation states that the United States will train and mobilize the militaries of partner nations to help dismantle cartels. mAccording to the proclamation, the United States and its allies should prevent external threats, including malign foreign influences from outside the Western Hemisphere. Seventeen countries are signatories to this partnership.

The leaders attending the Miami summit are Javier Milei, president of Argentina; Rodrigo Paz Pereira, president of Bolivia; Jose Antonio Kast, president-elect of Chile; Rodrigo Chaves Robles, president of Costa Rica; Luis Rodolfo Abinader Corona, president of the Dominican Republic; Daniel Roy Gilchrist Noboa Azín, president of Ecuador; Nayib Bukele, president of El Salvador; Mohamed Irfaan Ali, president of Guyana; Nasry “Tito” Asfura, president of Honduras; José Raúl Mulino Quintero, president of Panama; Santiago Peña, president of Paraguay; and Kamla Persad-Bissessar, prime minister of Trinidad and Tobago.

Read more …

China will invest heavily in solar. Europe won’t even do that.

• Part II – Europe and China Have an Energy Problem (CTH)

When President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin met in Alaska on August 15, 2025, the focus of the geopolitical world was on discussions surrounding Ukraine. Unfortunately, it didn’t take long, merely a few hours, for both the U.S. and Russia to say that no progress was made. However, also noted at the time was both the USA and Russia saying sideline discussions took place surrounding the possibility for a strategic relationship surrounding energy development. What follows below is a review of the current energy dynamic, specifically surrounding LNG, against the backdrop of the Iran war with a hindsight review of that previous discussion between Putin and Trump.


What most people are missing in their current analysis was something that took place immediately following that Alaska summit six months ago. Something that did not make any sense until now. {GO DEEP PART I HERE} Three days after that summit meeting, on August 18, 2025, Russia announced they were restarting Russia’s Arctic-2 LNG production facility. Russia would be more than doubling their capacity to generate and store liquified natural gas (LNG). It absolutely did not make sense that Russia would start producing even more LNG considering the previously imposed western sanctions against them, and the fact that Russia was already overproducing LNG. As noted by analysts at the time:

AUGUST 18, 2025 – Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 export facility, which is sanctioned by the United States, is coming back to life after a year of no activity and is looking for buyers in Asia. […] The U.S. and EU sanctions on Russia’s Arctic LNG 2, which was billed as Russia’s flagship LNG project, have effectively frozen the start-up of the export facility in the Gydan Peninsula. […] Last year, Russia started shipping LNG from its flagship Arctic LNG 2 project—but not to customers. The shipments were made from the Arctic project to floating storage units either in Russia or in European waters, as potential customers were unwilling to buy the sanctioned LNG. {SOURCE}

In August of 2025, Russia was essentially producing more LNG than they could sell into the available market. Russia was storing the overproduction from Arctic-1 on floating storage units and slowly selling to countries that did not align with the sanctions, specifically China and some Asian buyers. Then suddenly, after the Trump summit, Russia decides to bring Arctic-2 online and produce even more LNG. You can see how this did not make sense.

If they could not even sell all the Arctic-1 LNG output, then why would Russia bring Arctic-2 LNG production online? That was six months ago. Suddenly, with the war in Iran being triggered, and with Qatar almost immediately announcing they were shutting down all LNG production, there are dozens of new markets for liquified natural gas. And that current LNG is now worth 50% more than it was when Russia inextricably decided to start producing and storing it.Apply some hindsight to this timeline. Did Russia know or discover something in August of 2025 that the world would not discover until six months later?

Russia’s behavior in increasing LNG production, then storing that LNG in strategic venues, during a time when there was no reasonable incentive to trigger an LNG output increase, would seem to answer that question in the affirmative. One thing is certain, all of that previously produced LNG is now worth double what it was when Russia created it, and now the global market is scrambling to get it. Here is where it gets really interesting…. In October 2025, do you remember me asking why President Trump decided to fly East, to go West to the ASEAN summit in Asia? It just didn’t make sense. Previously in 2017 when President Trump went to the ASEAN summit, he flew West; Airforce One refueled in Guam. This time in 2025, a few weeks after the meeting with President Putin in Alaska, President Trump flew East, to go West. Where did he refuel?

That’s correct. President Trump refueled in Qatar, and during the ‘unexpected’ stop he met, yet again, with Qatari leadership. • In May 2025 President Trump traveled to Qatar and had numerous and lengthy conversations, signing multiple strategic defense and trade deals. • In August 2025, President Trump meets with Vladimir Putin, who then begins ramping up production of LNG. • In October 2025, President Trump travels back to Qatar for a curious and unexpected visit. Less than 36 hours after President Trump began “Operation Epic Fury” Qatar announces they are halting the production of LNG, and as a consequence the price of LNG jumped and a massive supply shift in global trade was created.

Read more …

It’s Trump derangement.

• Dem Leaders Can’t Explain Past Support For Presidential War Powers (Turley)

In Rage and the Republic, I quote former Rep. Jaamal Bowman (D., N.Y.) as capturing the essence of an age of rage when a colleague asked him to stop yelling outside of the House floor. Bowman responded, “I was screaming before you interrupted me.” bBowman’s statement came to mind this week when Democratic members were miffed when they were interrupted in tirades over war powers with questions about their prior support for unilateral attacks by Democratic presidents. Leaders like Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D., Cal.) and Sen. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.) struggled to explain their prior support for President Barack Obama in doing precisely that in Libya with embarrassing results.


The greatest face plant may have been Schiff’s appearance on “Real Time” with host Bill Maher. After Schiff denounced any attack without prior congressional approval, Maher read “This statement from the administration: ‘The president had the constitutional authority to direct the use of military force because he could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest.’” He then asked Schiff, “That’s too vague for you?” Schiff responded, “Totally vague…” Maher than dropped the H bomb: “Okay. Because that’s from Obama about Libya.” The moment laid bare the towering hypocrisy of democrats who continued to support Obama after he attacked Libya without any suggested imminent threat to the United States and an open strategy of regime change.

I represented members of Congress opposing that war over the absence of a declaration of war; most of the senior Democrats today refused to join that litigation. Pelosi is especially hypocritical on the issue. She expressly declared that Obama did not need congressional authorization to launch unilateral attacks on Libya seeking regime change. She stated unequivocally that”I’m satisfied that the president has the authority to go ahead. I say that as one very protective of Congressional prerogative and consultation all along the way.” Reporters then followed up and pressed her if she really believed that a president could not only launch an unprovoked war but could also continue combat operations without congressional approval. Pelosi answered “yes,”

This week, she made a ham-fisted effort to spin the contradiction. She told the media that the Iran and Libyan wars are “two completely different things. They’re not at all alike.” Pelosi added, “What Obama did was limited military force. This is beyond that. It was limited military force.” In signature fashion, she then struck out at pesky reporters asking about her past position: “Do your homework. Read the law. We have lost people in war already… I just think if you read the law, you will see the difference.” While not challenged on the spin, it is historically and legally nonsensical.

Read more …

They were right. Khameini’s gone, but the rest are still there.

• US Intel Assessed Massive US Attack ‘Unlikely’ To Oust Iranian Regime: WaPo (ZH)

Even a massive military assault on Iran is unlikely to topple the Islamic Republic of Iran and its state system, according to a classified assessment produced by the US intelligence community shortly before the US and Israel launched their current ‘shock and awe-style’ military campaign on Tehran. The Washington Post first reported it, perhaps based on some kind of leak or briefing by an anonymous intelligence official, and calls it— “…a sobering assessment as the Trump administration raises the specter of an extended military campaign that officials say has “only just begun.”


The report, compiled by the National Intelligence Council (NIC) roughly a week before the war began, concluded that Iran’s political system is structured to survive even major leadership losses, The Washington Post reports. However, this should really come as no surprise to anyone awake and observant throughout the past two plus decades of America’s ‘nation building’ efforts in the Middle East, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. Already, Israel and the US have touted that ‘all’ of Iran’s top leadership has been decimated, and yet clearly the governing system and its military – led specially by the elite IRGC – is not only in control but is still fighting back.

According to the assessment, Tehran has long prepared for such contingencies – and likely there’s an emergency plan now in place in the wake of Ayatollah’s Khamenei’s death. Intelligence officials say Iran long ago established clear succession protocols designed to maintain continuity of power even if senior leaders are killed. In other words, the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would likely trigger an internal transition process rather than cause the system to collapse – again, something which should be the obvious scenario.

The intelligence report also poured cold water on the idea that Iran’s opposition could quickly fill any power vacuum. US intelligence analysts assessed that the country’s fragmented opposition movements remain too divided to seize control, regardless of whether Washington pursued limited strikes against leadership targets or a broader assault on state institutions. Equally unlikely, according to current and former US officials familiar with the analysis, is the prospect of a spontaneous nationwide uprising. We could speculate that this possibility may have had a chance of some degree of success within the opening one or two days of the mass US-Israel bombing campaign, but it clearly didn’t materialize.

On this prospect WaPo quotes Brookings: “There’s no other force within Iran that can confront the remaining power that the regime has,” Suzanne Maloney, an Iran scholar and vice president of the Brookings Institution, told The Post. “Even if they’re not able to project that power very effectively against their neighbors, they can certainly dominate inside the country.” The National Intelligence Council synthesizes the analytical work of all 18 US intelligence agencies, and produces classified estimates meant to guide policymakers on major geopolitical risks.

Much of the American public, raised on Hollywood movies, tends to have an overblown and inaccurate understanding of US intelligence agencies like the CIA. While the CIA certainly has a very powerful and secretive covert, operations side (and an even tinier Ground Branch) – the bulk of its personnel and overseers/top officials are analysts. So there is an overt side and a covert side, with the analyst side tasked with providing the IC and White House with a ‘realistic’ picture of the world, ideally devoid of policy or ideology. Their job is also often to ‘game out’ all worst possible scenarios, given a certain course of action.

Meanwhile, the White House has not said whether Trump was briefed on the assessment before approving the operation. But likely such an assessment would have made it into the CIA’s daily briefing for the president, also given reports from last week that the Pentagon also tried to inject some realism in terms of the ‘unknowns’ once Tehran is attacked.

Read more …

Guess what? The US is right there.

• Venezuela’s Gas Potential Could Overshadow Its Famous Oil Reserves (OP)

While the world eyes Venezuela’s untapped oil, some believe that there may be greater mid-term potential in exploiting its natural gas reserves. Most of Venezuela’s gas is trapped deep beneath the seafloor. While these reserves were first discovered several decades ago, ago, off the country’s eastern coast, along the border with Trinidad and Tobago, the Venezuelan government left them largely untouched as it focused its attention on oil production. Several oil majors, such as Shell, have previously approached Venezuela for a stake in its gas business, even when interest in the country’s oil industry was waning due to geopolitical instability and U.S. sanctions.


For years, U.S. sanctions on Venezuela’s government and its state-owned oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, have restricted the development of its gas industry. In addition, developing its natural gas industry would require cooperation with neighbouring Trinidad and Tobago. Trinidad and Tobago already has the necessary infrastructure to transport fuel onshore and export it, which Venezuela does not. If the two countries established an energy partnership, Trinidad’s pre-existing infrastructure could help Venezuela to develop its gas industry more rapidly. However, the two powers, which are separated by language (Spanish and English), have had a strained relationship in recent years. Trinidad and Tobago has generally sided with the United States when it comes to Maduro’s presidency and the decision to impose sanctions on Venezuelan energy.

Venezuela’s biggest natural gas prospect is the giant Dragon oil field, as it is the closest to being developed. The Venezuelan government previously conducted exploration activities in the field but was unable to retrieve the gas buried there due to a lack of funding to continue exploration. These efforts were further undermined by the sinking of an exploration rig in 2010. In 2023, the Venezuelan government made a deal with Shell, allowing the foreign firm to explore the Dragon field. The plan was to construct a short pipeline between Dragon and Shell’s existing infrastructure on the island of Trinidad, rather than to start from scratch in Venezuela.

If Shell develops Dragon, the field is expected to generate around $500 million a year in revenue, based on current natural gas prices, of which at least 45 percent is expected to go to Venezuela in the form of taxes and royalties. “These are opportunities that could potentially be activated within months, with potentially a few billion dollars of investments and production in the next couple of years,” Shell’s CEO, Wael Sawan, told CNBC. U.S. Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, said that developing a regional natural gas collaboration could be “a real potential win-win for Trinidad and Tobago, a win for the global L.N.G. market, a win for Venezuela.” Meanwhile, BP is pursuing another Venezuelan gas project, a field known as Cocuina, which greater leniency on U.S. sanctions may make possible.

In late February, the U.S. Treasury Department appeared to give oil and gas firms greater leeway to negotiate with Venezuela and operate in the South American country. “They are splicing together an environment that allows the existing players to operate,” said Rachel Ziemba, an adjunct senior fellow at the Centre for a New American Security. While President Trump is eyeing long-term oil industry development in Venezuela, some international oil majors may be more interested in the South American country’s natural gas potential. Developing the resource will likely require collaboration with neighbouring Trinidad and Tobago, and could lead to the development of a new regional Latin America-Caribbean energy hub.

Read more …

“That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer — But we will remember.”

• Trump Mocks UK for Belated Proposal of Military Aid Against Iran (Catherine Salgado)

U.S. President Donald Trump is making fun of the waffling and woke UK government for taking too long to decide if it wants to back America and Israel in Operation Epic Fury against the Iranian regime. The president posted on Truth Social Saturday, “The United Kingdom, our once Great Ally, maybe the Greatest of them all, is finally giving serious thought to sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East. That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer — But we will remember. We don’t need people that join Wars after we’ve already won!”


Trump is already celebrating impending victory after destroying so much of the Iranian navy and leadership, but some have cautioned that without totally different leadership in charge, the Iranian threat to the U.S. and Israel — not to mention the Persian people — will continue. It is therefore unclear if the end of Operation Epic Fury is imminent, or if it will not come for a few more weeks. The UK Independent reported March 7: The UK is preparing an aircraft carrier for possible deployment to the Middle East, reducing the time it would take to be readied. This does not mean that Portsmouth-based HMS Prince of Wales, which is used to carry fighter jets and helicopters, will be sent into the Gulf as conflict escalates in the region, but the preparedness of the Royal Navy’s flagship is being increased, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) said.

A spokesperson for the ministry cagily stated, “We have been bolstering our UK military presence in the Middle East since January, and we have already deployed capabilities to protect British people and our allies in the region, including Typhoons, F-35 jets, air defence systems and an extra 400 personnel into Cyprus.” Cyprus is in high alert because there are some 10,000 pro-regime Iranians in the north of the island, which Muslims, primarily Turks, illegally occupy. Besides the Iranians, the Turkish-occupied area also has Hamas jihadis, and of course Hamas is an Iranian regime proxy. The dictator of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Er dogan expressed sorrow over the elimination of Iran’s murderous Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

The West has spent too long welcoming in their enemies, and now has to face the dangerous reality that created. Great Britain is especially guilty of providing endless freebies and privileges to non-assimilating Muslims, while punishing its own citizens who dare to criticize the program. No wonder Prime Minister Keir Starmer has acted foolishly in the face of the Iran operation, criticizing the U.S. The UK MoD spokesperson said further, “Since the strikes began, we’ve had British jets in the sky shooting down drones and have sent additional assets to the region to further reinforce our air defences, including more Typhoons and Wildcat helicopters with drone-busting missiles.”

Aside from that, the MoD spokesperson merely repeated vaguely, “HMS Prince of Wales has always been on very high readiness, and we are increasing the preparedness of the carrier, reducing the time it would take to set sail for any deployment.” Which means practically nothing.

Read more …

No, you will not get your country back.

• UK Government Brands Union Flag A ‘Tool Of Hate’ (MN)

A leaked draft of the UK Government’s new ‘social cohesion’ strategy has sparked outrage by labeling the flying of English, Scottish, and Union Jack flags as potential “tools of hate.” The document claims these national symbols were sometimes used last summer to “exclude or intimidate,” adding that the “extreme right has tried to turn symbols of pride into tools of hate.” The 47-page draft, leaked to the Spectator magazine, also highlights how antisemitism has become “normalised in many corners of society” from schools and universities to workplaces and the NHS. Under the proposals, titled Protecting What Matters, some £800 million over 10 years would be allocated to 40 areas where social cohesion is “under pressure.”


The strategy is set for a cross-Government rollout next week, but critics are already slamming it as divisive. Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice blasted the draft, telling the Sun: “Absurdly, this says our national flag is a tool of hate used to intimidate. The whole paper is a divisive nonsense that should be consigned to the bin.” The leak ties directly into ongoing controversies over national flags, as detailed in our previous coverage where English councils admitted spending tens of thousands to remove “unauthorised” English and Union Jack flags from lampposts. As we highlighted, leftist activist Pablo O’Hana was caught on video removing flags from a bridge in Manchester, telling a man who placed them: “that’s not what our country is.”

Freedom of Information requests revealed councils spent at least £70,000 on flag removals, with O’Hana suggesting the true cost is far higher as many incorporate it into existing budgets. Medway Council alone spent nearly £11,600 removing over 700 flags, with Labour councillor Alex Paterson calling it “money well spent” to counter “far-right agitators.”Paterson added that clearing the streets of British and English flags was essential to “make the community feel safe again,” claiming: “I think at this stage the world is divided into people who know exactly why these flags were put up and those who are still pretending they don’t know why they were put up.” The flag campaign, known as ‘Operation Raise The Colours,’ emerged amid unrest over sexual offences allegedly committed by illegal immigrants housed in taxpayer-funded hotels.

This grassroots effort, coordinated via a Facebook page with offers of transport and equipment like ladders, saw patriotic activists vowing to keep flags flying despite council interventions. The Prime Minister previously supported the right to fly St George’s flags, but the leaked documents appear to associate them with far-right protests and immigration tensions. The strategy also proposes a “special representative” to “champion efforts across the UK to tackle hostility and hatred directed at Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim.” A new definition of Islamophobia is also expected, with guidance on anti-Muslim hatred.

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/2030199334956925376


Critics warn this could become a backdoor “blasphemy law” stifling free speech, though the Government insists it protects against unacceptable treatment. A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson declined to address the leak: “We do not comment on leaks.” This leaked strategy exposes a government more focused on policing national pride than securing borders or protecting native culture. As flags continue to rise, the pushback against globalist erosion of British identity only intensifies—proving that true cohesion comes from shared heritage, not forced suppression.

Read more …

“Assets held in Western financial institutions were no longer safe if the political winds shifted against you. That was new. That was genuinely new. And every central bank and sovereign wealth fund on earth noticed..”

• The Bretton Whoops (No. 1)

I’m pulling myself away from the Iran war coverage for a moment – don’t worry, the wrap-up is coming later today. But something needed saying first. The bombs make headlines. The economic unraveling happening quietly underneath them don’t. So before we get back to the daily carnage, let’s talk about money. It used to be funny, in a rich man’s world. The world didn’t wake up one morning and decide to distrust the dollar. It was a process. Gradually, then suddenly, as these things tend to go. Ernest Hemingway quote: How did you go bankrupt?” Two ways. Gradually …


It started with Venezuela. In 2019, Caracas asked the Bank of England to return its own gold – 31 tonnes, sitting in a vault in London, belonging to the Venezuelan central bank. The Bank of England said no. The justification was creative: London had decided to recognise a man who had never won an election as Venezuela’s “legitimate” president, so it couldn’t very well hand $2 billion in gold to the actual government. Problem solved. Maduro was a dictator, everyone agreed he was terrible, and so the consensus was essentially: who cares. Everyone filed it under “rogue state gets what it deserves” and moved on.

Then Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, and $300 billion in Russian sovereign reserves got frozen overnight. Again, the justification was airtight, the villain was obvious, and the Western financial world applauded itself. What nobody wanted to discuss was the precedent. Assets held in Western financial institutions were no longer safe if the political winds shifted against you. That was new. That was genuinely new. And every central bank and sovereign wealth fund on earth noticed, even if they did say nothing publicly.

Then Trump came back. Tariffs on allies. Threats to annex Greenland. The implicit message that the post-war security architecture was now a negotiable service rather than a commitment. The dollar’s reserve currency status had always rested on two pillars: the dominance of the US economy, and the reliability of the US government as a custodian of the system. One of those pillars was now being kicked.

By the time the Iran war started, the trust account was already badly overdrawn. The petrodollar was a simple deal. The Gulf states price their oil in dollars, recycle the surplus into US Treasuries, and in exchange get American military protection. Clean, elegant, and – for fifty years – it actually worked. The US got permanent demand for its currency and its debt. The Gulf got security guarantees backed by the most powerful military on earth. Five decades of procurement scandals and DEI hires later, someone called the bluff.

US bases across the Gulf – Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE – were always sold as the physical expression of the guarantee. The muscle that backed the paper. They were protection. Except now those bases are targets. The countries hosting them are getting hit precisely because they host them. What once was “US military presence as shield” has collapsed and became “US military presence as a bullseye”. Medvedev put it with the particular relish of someone who has been waiting years to say it:


You can dismiss Medvedev on most things. On this one, his timing is sublime. I already cover the daily physical damage to Gulf infrastructure in my Iran series, so I won’t repeat it here. The point here aren’t the bombs. The point is what the bombs have made obvious: the protection America sold the GCC was a liability dressed up as an asset.

And increasingly it seems that the Gulf states are discussing pulling their investment commitments from the US. Not done yet. Discussing. They are not floating the possibility quietly in private rooms – they are saying it out loud, which means the market already knows which direction they’re heading. Capital won’t wait for a formal declaration. It will already leave in advance, quietly, and then when the announcement comes, everyone will pretend to be surprised…

Read more …

Make the Greeks nervous.

• Turkey Mulls F-16 Deployment To Turkish-Occupied Cyprus (ZH)

As the Iran war unfolds and has shown signs of becoming a regional conflict, one interesting question is what Turkey’s role will be – given it is both a NATO member possessing a large military and an avowed regional enemy and rival to Israel for influence. A Turkish defense ministry source has been cited in national media to say the country is mulling deployment of F-16 fighter jets to the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Earlier this week a British military base hosted in EU member Cyprus (on the southern side of the island) came under attack by Iranian-made drones. This has resulted in some European military assets being moved to Cyprus, including additional British forces. But now it appears Turkey wants to make a show of doing the name for Turkish-claimed Cypriot territory.


Turkey’s Daily Sabah points out, however, that “TRNC has been incensed by Greek Cypriot’s growing military cooperation with its Western partners after the United Kingdom has allowed the U.S. to use its military base in the south of the divided island. Citing the military source, the same Turkish outlet said, “The TRNC leadership has held a series of security meetings in response to the crisis, he added, focusing on crisis management, coordination with Türkiye and the preparedness of civil defense mechanisms.” As for Turkey’s long occupation of northern Cyprus, no one else in the world recognizes its legitimacy except for Ankara. Cyprus receives backing from its EU partners, but this doesn’t go much beyond verbal censure of Turkey.

The Turkish armed forces has for years had at least 30,000 soldiers stationed on Cyprus and growing, the northern part of which it has illegally occupied since 1974. At the moment, President Erdogan has reportedly reached out to the UK’s Starmer, urging for Britain to do more diplomacy to immediately bring the Iran-US-Israel war to halt.

Read more …

Russia knows the region much better than the Americans. It’s their region.

• Kremlin: “We Are Not Neutral. We Support Iran.” (ZH)

Russia says it stands with its ally Iran, at a moment Washington officials are outraged at reports that Moscow is supporting Tehran with targeting intelligence related to US bases and Pentagon assets in the region amid Operation Epic Fury. That allegation was first reported by The Washington Post days ago. President Vladimir Putin held a phone call with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, the Kremlin had announced late Friday, amid the escalating US-Israeli attacks on Iran. In the call Putin expressed “deep condolences” over the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, members of his family, other senior political and military officials, as well as the civilian victims. Putin, it must be remembered, has been hosted in Tehran on several occasions and has been photographed in friendly conversations with the slain Khamenei over the years.


The Kremlin indicated further Putin reaffirmed Russia’s position that there must be an immediate halt to the conflict, and that diplomacy must prevail over use of military force. He said he’s in contact with leaders of countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) as the crisis unfolds, countries which have come under Iranian missiles and drones over the past week of war. Pezeshkian for his part thanked Russia for what he described as solidarity with the Iranian people and briefed Putin on developments in the current phase of the conflict, the Kremlin said. Meanwhile, Russian diplomats are sending a clear signal on which side of the global divide they stand concerning the rapid events of the Iran war:


“We are not neutral. We support Iran.” This was the response with Russia’s Ambassador to the United Kingdom was asked if Moscow is neutral regarding the Iran war… Still, Russia and China are not expected to get deeply or directly involved, and may be more content to wait and see if Washington gets sucked into a new Vietnam or Iraq-style quagmire. The question of Iranian oil exports to China still looms large, however, and there have been reports that Beijing could be mulling some kind of military escort operation for its tankers in the Strait of Hormuz – but this reporting appears speculation at this moment, and could be premature.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/NightSkyNow/status/2030374805208539516?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2030523910907707857?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 27 2026

Feb 272026
 
 February 27, 2026  Posted by at 10:58 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  77 Responses »


Banksy Honey Money pot 1999


• Trump Report Card (John Stossel)
• Triggered and Traumatized by Scenes of Patriotism (Turley)
• Biden FBI Investigated Susie Wiles and Kash Patel Phone Records (CTH)
• White House Withholds Medicaid Funding to Minnesota Amid Fraud Probe (Jung)
• USTR Greer Talks Baseline Tariff Reset Shifts and Reciprocity Tariffs (CTH)
• I’m Ukrainian – Russia’s UN Ambassador (RT)
• Arming Ukraine With Nukes: Western Elites Have ‘Lost Touch With Reality’ (RT)
• US Demands Iran Dismantle Its 3 Main Nuclear Sites In Hours-Long Talks (ZH)
• Epstein Rushed Evidence Into Secret Storage Unit Before Raid (ZH)
• Hillary Clinton to Testify in Epstein Probe on Thursday, Bill Clinton on Friday (JTN)
• Mamdani’s NYC Flirts With Chaos (Ben Shapiro)
• So Hackers Just Stole Mexico’s Tax and Voter Rolls (Stephen Green)
• Spain’s Government: Spinning Out of Control (Drieu Godefridi)
• Even the Best AI Scenario Is the End of Everything We’ve Ever Been (Ring)

 


 

https://twitter.com/ThePatriotOasis/status/2026849762180255904?s=20 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/2026862384816550257?s=20 https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2026557297598804049?s=20 https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/2027093840289513854?s=20

 


 

It’s my Bday today.

 


 


Mostly positive. And you got to see that against the Orange Man Bad background, where nothing at all is positive..

• Trump Report Card (John Stossel)

During his State of the Union, President Donald Trump declared himself wonderful. My new video takes a closer look, scoring his fifth year as president. He deserves an “A” for his willingness to take questions. It’s a relief after President Joe Biden, who hid from reporters. But Trump deserves an “F” for childish bragging. Ignorant, too. He proudly announced he cut drug prices by “400%, 500%, even 600%!” Didn’t he learn math? If he cut prices 100%, drugs would be free. Trump deserves an “A” for ending Biden’s self-destructive, anti-energy policies. On the other hand, Trump has blocked solar and wind projects, even those not government-subsidized. Can’t either party just let the market work?


I’m relieved that the president hasn’t fulfilled my worst fear: He has not acted like a total dictator. He does respond to public opinion. After ICE brutality in Minnesota, he pulled troops out, saying, “We can use a little bit of a softer touch.” And when courts rule against him, he obeys, ending National Guard deployment in Los Angeles, Chicago and Portland, and now searching for court-approved ways to preserve his tariffs. Hysterical media still scream about Trump being “a dictator!” and “authoritarian!” Mises Institute Editor-in-Chief Ryan McMaken points out that America has had many authoritarian presidents. “Nixon and LBJ, in terms of new bombing campaigns, ignoring Congress … both of those presidents were significantly worse. FDR, through executive order, destroyed the gold standard.

“Just by the stroke of a pen, he impoverished many Americans, stole Americans’ gold. This was one of the worst economic crimes in American history. I don’t think (Trump) could get away with it.” Trump deserves an “A” grade for easing some regulation. TSA no longer requires people to take their shoes off. The EPA stopped mandating things like “stop/start” features that were supposed to save gas but barely did. Trump ended “disparate impact” analysis, the toxic legal theory that led to parasitic lawsuits if workforces did not exactly match U.S. racial proportions.

Ken Griffin, CEO of the investment firm Citadel, says that Trump’s merely criticizing regulation, telling bureaucrats back off, lifted the economy. It “gives you so much energy as an entrepreneur!” “That’s probably the best part of his administration right now.” says McMaken, giving Trump a “B-” on regulation. Not an “A” because his attempts to cut red tape have mostly failed. And Trump hasn’t cut spending. “Spending has only increased!” McMaken points out.

Read more …

Can we a cheer a medal?

• Triggered and Traumatized by Scenes of Patriotism (Turley)

This week, most Americans found a moment of rare unity in our pride over the performance of our athletes in the Winter Olympics. After years of rage politics, there was a brief respite as we joined in cheering our team in representing the United States in Milan and Cortina. Well, most of us. Some in the media found the entire demonstration of patriotism to be intolerable and triggering. What is striking is how this aversion to our flag and country was so openly expressed in major media. Yesterday, the nightmare continued for some on the left who were traumatized by seeing the American flag and open displays of patriotism. Jack Hughes, one of the heroes of the gold medal hockey game, returned to New Jersey to play and was met with cheers of “USA, USA” and a sea of American flags.


Hughes immediately called his Olympic teammate Tage Thompson of the visiting Buffalo Sabres to the ice to join him. The two skated arm in arm as the crowd celebrated them and our country. It was another unifying moment for the country. The fans joined arm in arm to relish this moment for the nation. These scenes are clearly having a different impact on some on the left. The HuffPost even published an article with therapeutic advice for liberals triggered by seeing so many American flags. The liberal publication ran an article titled “There’s a Name for the Discomfort You’re Feeling Watching the Olympics Right Now.” It then published it a second time before the gold-medal hockey game with Canada — presumably to prepare its readers for the nightmare of the United States actually winning.

The subheading read, “If waving the American flag or chanting ‘USA!’ turns you off right now, you’re not alone.” Senior writer Monica Torres began the article with this line: “While President Donald Trump’s deportation agenda separates families, and federal agents detain 5-year-olds and kill unarmed civilians, American athletes are winning medals on behalf of the nation at the Olympics right now.” Torres goes on to interview three therapists for this “story” about how the celebration of the United States team has forced many liberals into therapy over their trauma and “the cognitive dissonance of rooting for U.S. sports.”

Los Angeles-based licensed clinical social worker Aimee Monterrosa explained that the “atrocities” of the United States can trigger feelings of guilt, despair, shame, anger” in seeing the country celebrate these sports victories. Expert Lauren Appio echoed how “waving the American flag or chanting, ‘USA!’ [can make] us feel grossed out or ashamed.” Over at Vox, Senior correspondent (and former Atlantic writer) Alex Abad-Santos wrote an article on the winners and losers of the Olympics. The column perfectly summed up the pathological opposition of some to this country’s symbols and celebrations.

Abad-Santos declared the men’s hockey team one of the biggest “losers” of the games. He blamed that team for alienating citizens by their patriotic statements: “The conversation surrounding the win quickly shifted into how the team celebrated and who it celebrated with.” He expressed outrage over the team accepting the celebratory call from the President of the United States.In the meantime, the “winner,” according to Abad-Santos, was . . . wait for it . . . Eileen Gu, the American who reportedly took millions from the repressive Chinese regime to ski for China. Gu used the games to criticize the United States while saying nothing of how China arrests anyone who speaks out against that country.

Read more …

“.. when both were private citizens…”

“FBI Director Kash Patel has reportedly fired 10 FBI agents who were involved in the process of reviewing and intercepting communications as part of their work on the Jack Smith case. Internal FBI offices are not happy with Patel’s action against those officials ..”

• Biden FBI Investigated Susie Wiles and Kash Patel Phone Records (CTH)

According to media reports and statements from FBI Director Kash Patel, both Patel and Susie Wiles had their telephone records subpoenaed by the FBI in 2022 and 2023 when both were private citizens. This is during the time when Donald Trump was being investigated by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Within the reporting by Reuters, at least one phone call between Susie Wiles and her attorney was recorded by the FBI without her knowledge. As the story is outlined Wiles’ attorney was working with the FBI and knew the conversation was being captured, Wiles did not. FBI Director Kash Patel has reportedly fired 10 FBI agents who were involved in the process of reviewing and intercepting communications as part of their work on the Jack Smith case. Internal FBI offices are not happy with Patel’s action against those officials.


“(REUTERS) – The FBI subpoenaed records of phone calls made by Kash Patel and Susie Wiles, now the FBI director and White House Chief of Staff, when they were both private citizens in 2022 and 2023 during the federal probe of Donald Trump, Patel told Reuters on Wednesday. Reuters is the first to report on the FBI’s actions that took place during the Biden administration, largely when Special Counsel Jack Smith was investigating whether Trump had interfered with the 2020 election and had hidden classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, according to Patel. Smith was appointed to take over that probe in November 2022.

[…] “It is outrageous and deeply alarming that the previous FBI leadership secretly subpoenaed my own phone records – along with those of now White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles – using flimsy pretexts and burying the entire process in prohibited case files designed to evade all oversight,” Patel said in a statement to Reuters.

[…] At least 10 current FBI employees have been dismissed as a result of the revelations about the targeting of Patel, Wiles and others connected to the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, according to three FBI officials. […] In 2023, the FBI recorded a phone call between Wiles and her attorney, according to two FBI officials. Wiles’ attorney was aware that the call was being recorded, and consented to it, but Susie Wiles was not. […] The FBI discovered the phone records in files categorized as “Prohibited,” which makes them difficult to discover on the bureau’s computer systems. Patel said he recently ended the FBI’s ability to categorize files as “Prohibited.” (read more)

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2026802738097459213?s=20

I have mixed emotions about this. On one hand it is infuriating to yet again see the audacity and clear weaponization of the DOJ and FBI under the prior administration. On the other hand, duh! Non-pretending people knew all along this malicious network of DOJ and FBI lawfare operations included surveillance of everyone around President Donald Trump. Remember, Donald Trump was accused of criminal wrongdoing by the twisted lawfare logic of Smith and his crew. Accepting the reality of a criminal investigation, fraudulent though it was, it was entirely predictable that the DOJ and FBI would leverage all available tools to conduct continued surveillance and monitoring.

The secondary frustrating aspect to this story is how Director Patel has only just now fired those 10 FBI agents involved. This is a big part of the criticism that many of us have with Patel and his soft glove approach upon taking the position as FBI Director. Any FBI official who was involved in the originating Crossfire Hurricane and/or Robert Mueller investigations should have been fired for cause on Day One! 40 FBI agents worked for more than two years on the Mueller probe investigating a fictitious claim about President Trump colluding with Russia in the 2016 election. Those FBI agents should have been identified and terminated immediately, with prejudice; thereby sending a loud message that weaponized FBI activity was the immediate focus of the new leadership and would not be tolerated.

Read more …

“.. pointed to Vance as the one leading the efforts of his administration’s “war on fraud”..

• White House Withholds Medicaid Funding to Minnesota Amid Fraud Probe (Jung)

JD Vance and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz announced that the Trump administration is temporarily halting certain Medicaid funding to Minnesota amid an ongoing fraud investigation. This comes after President Donald Trump condemned the rampant fraud in Democrat-run Minnesota and pointed to Vance as the one leading the efforts of his administration’s “war on fraud” in his Feb. 24 State of the Union address. “When it comes to the corruption that is plundering — it really, it’s plundering America — there’s been no more stunning example than Minnesota, where members of the Somali community have pillaged an estimated $19 billion from the American taxpayer,” Trump said at the SOTU, adding, “Oh, we have all the information.”


“And, in actuality, the number is much higher than that, and California, Massachusetts, Maine and many other states are even worse. This is the kind of corruption that shreds the fabric of a nation, and we are working on it like you wouldn’t believe,” Trump continued. The pause affects $259 million in federal payments to the Gopher State, which will be withheld until the state government demonstrates corrective actions against widespread social and welfare fraud. The vice president has given Democrat Tim Walz of Minnesota 60 days to clean up the state’s Medicaid rolls after it was exposed that taxpayer dollars exceeding $9 billion were misallocated for illegal purposes, according to investigators.

“We have decided to temporarily halt certain amounts of Medicaid funding that are going to the state of Minnesota in order to ensure that the state of Minnesota takes its obligation seriously to be good stewards of the American people’s tax money,” Vance said. “A lot of people were getting rich off the generosity of the American taxpayer!” JD Vance said in regard to criminals fraudulently taking money from needy assistance programs like “Feeding Our Future” and other government-funded initiatives meant to help autistic children.

“There are kids that need these autism services, and the money is not going to those kids. They’re going to fraudsters in Minneapolis. That is unacceptable. And that’s the sort of thing that we’re cutting off with this action today,” he added. The U.S. Department of Justice and Republican Party members in Congress have been highlighting the massive scandal since December 2025, when years of unaccounted-for fraud, mostly perpetrated by members of Minnesota’s Somali immigrant community, came under the national spotlight. The fraud concerns center on 14 state programs, including those for autism services and medical transports, where funds allegedly went to fraudsters instead of beneficiaries.

Read more …

“Greer notes Mexico and Canada being used as import hubs to avoid tariffs is a big issue.”

• USTR Greer Talks Baseline Tariff Reset Shifts and Reciprocity Tariffs (CTH)

The Supreme Court tariff ruling has created the need for U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to modify the baseline tariff approach with the approvals of President Trump. The baseline tariffs are being reset to 10% with upward adjustment to 15% as planned. The reciprocal tariffs will not require any substantive modifications as most of the Free Trade Agreements have been cemented with reciprocity tariffs as part of the negotiated deals. USTR Greer appears on Bloomberg to clarify the current situation and provide some information as to the transitional baseline tariffs as now modified. Additionally, and importantly, Greer begins discussing the USMCA review and his acceptance that President Trump is openly questioning the value for us. Greer notes Mexico and Canada being used as import hubs to avoid tariffs is a big issue. WATCH:


Section 232 [Steel and Aluminum examples] of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. §1862, as amended) authorizes the President to impose trade restrictions—such as a tariff or quota—if the Secretary of Commerce determines, following an investigation, that imports of a good “threaten to impair” U.S. national security. {SOURCE}

Section 301 tariffs are a trade enforcement mechanism established under the Trade Act of 1974. They allow the U.S. government to impose tariffs on imports from countries that are found to be engaging in unfair trade practices. The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) conducts investigations to determine if a country is violating trade agreements, and if so, it can impose tariffs as a corrective measure {SOURCE}

Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 allows the U.S. president to impose tariffs of up to 15% to address “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficits. This authority can be exercised without prior congressional approval for a limited duration of 150 days. After this period, any tariffs must be extended by Congress. {SOURCE}

*FYI, there is a lot of distracting noise in the various social media platforms about internecine MAGA battles and ego-driven points of specific interest. CTH chooses to focus energy and attention on the substantive policy issues that will generate substantive policy outcomes for America.

Read more …

“Vassily Nebenzia has said his parents were of Zaporozhian Cossack heritage and were more Ukrainian than the current leadership in Kiev..”

“To us, there is no difference – we are all one – millions of Ukrainians in Russia, millions of Russians in Ukraine..”

• I’m Ukrainian – Russia’s UN Ambassador (RT)

Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has said he is Ukrainian, citing his parents’ roots. Speaking at the UN Security Council meeting on Tuesday, the Russian diplomat stated that “formally speaking, I am Ukrainian.”n“I have such a strange last name – the Slavs know it’s hard to find even in Ukraine. It originates from The Zaporozhian Cossacks,” he clarified. The ethno-social group, known for its military exploits as early as the 16th century, played an important role in the history of what is today Ukraine.


“My father was a true Ukrainian, and my mother was of Cossack heritage, too,” Nebenzia said, claiming that they were more Ukrainian than Kiev’s current Deputy Foreign Minister Mariana Betsa and ambassador to the UN Andrey Melnik. The Russian envoy recounted how his father volunteered to join the Soviet army during World War II to fight the Nazis.mThe diplomat accused the current leadership in Kiev of “zombifying” the Ukrainian population into becoming modern-day Nazis. Russia’s ongoing military campaign is aimed at reversing these trends, according to Nebenzia, who added that it would continue for as long as necessary to achieve this goal. “To us, there is no difference – we are all one – millions of Ukrainians in Russia, millions of Russians in Ukraine, and in Belarus as well,” the diplomat concluded.

Moscow has repeatedly warned of a Nazi revival in Ukraine, describing “denazification” as one of the central goals of its military campaign against Kiev. Commemorations of World War II-era nationalist figures with ties to Nazi Germany have become increasingly common in Ukraine in recent years, particularly following the 2014 Maidan coup. Last April, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Ukraine had “betrayed” its history by allowing the West to bring a Nazi regime to power in Kiev, which went on to declare “war against its own people.”

Read more …

“.. we should be prepared for Western leverage attempts ranging from the ridiculous to the flagrantly irresponsible.”

• Arming Ukraine With Nukes: Western Elites Have ‘Lost Touch With Reality’ (RT)

Ukraine could become a partial nuclear power as its Western backers desperately seek to avoid NATO’s defeat in a proxy war against Russia – at least according to Moscow’s intelligence services. On Tuesday, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) warned that elements in the British and French governments who have “lost touch with reality” are considering a gross breach of their commitments under the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty on nuclear weapons. Officials in London and Paris are allegedly weighing options to support Kiev as it refuses concessions to Russia and reportedly prepares for up to three more years of hostilities funded by Western Europe. According to the SVR, the options include arming Ukraine with a nuclear capability through the “covert transfer of relevant European-made components, equipment, and technologies” that Kiev could claim as domestically developed, or through the direct supply of a French submarine-launched ballistic missile warhead.


Another option, the SVR said, is pushing Kiev to build a ‘dirty bomb’ – a non-nuclear device designed to contaminate territory with radioactive material, long considered a nightmare scenario for terrorist attacks. Russian officials have for years identified a Ukrainian dirty bomb as a major threat, citing Kiev’s ready access to necessary components. Ukrainian officials often claim their nation once possessed the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal and gave it up for false security promises. Vladimir Zelensky suggested at the 2022 Munich Security Conference that the decision could be reversed. The conflict with Russia escalated soon after the provocative remarks. In reality, nuclear weapons were present on Ukrainian soil after the Soviet collapse but were never “Ukraine’s arsenal” – Kiev could not launch them.

The US pressured Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan to transfer the missiles to Russia, with three memorandums signed in Budapest in 1994. In 2012, Minsk said the US and UK breached their commitment “to refrain from economic coercion” of Belarus made in Budapest, after they imposed unilateral sanctions. The rebuke was brushed off by the West. Kiev is under increasing pressure as Russia maintains advantages in frontline attrition and long-range strikes. Zelensky’s rhetoric mixes declarations of resolve, gratitude for foreign support, and complaints that it is insufficient. Still, he insists Ukraine is not losing. Manpower shortages caused by mass desertion and public resistance to mobilization remain Ukraine’s biggest challenge. Zelensky’s solution: more money from the EU and UK.

“When it comes to people, Europeans can help us, if we switch our army – when we switch our army – from mobilization to contracts,” he told the BBC last week. Russia can recruit enough volunteers because it pays troops better, so Europeans should put Ukrainian soldiers on a payroll, he argued. Ukraine’s government is bankrolled by foreign donors and is facing bankruptcy by April unless the EU borrows €90 billion ($105 billion) to continue aid. The EU’s loan plan, however, has been stalled due to Kiev’s ongoing spat with Hungary and Slovakia over their purchase of Russian crude.

Desperation can drive invention, and going nuclear is achievable even for a small, relatively poor nation – as North Korea proves. Soviet Ukraine was a technological powerhouse with its own nuclear reactors and a world-class rocket industry, suggesting an advantage. But generational loss of expertise, wartime damage, and other factors lead Ukrainian officials to privately admit that claims of going nuclear are bluster. Even conventional military technology development has faltered. The Flamingo cruise missile, resembling a UK-UAE weapon, was supposed to be the backbone of Ukraine’s deep-strike capability, with hundreds produced monthly. In reality, launches are so few they are celebrated as major achievements.

Zelensky’s explanation at this year’s Munich Security Conference: Russians destroyed production lines. Alternative speculation: domestic producer Fire Point is suspicious. The firm is allegedly linked to Zelensky’s longtime associate Timur Mindich, who fled Ukraine last November hours before being charged with running a major graft scheme. So is the nuclear warning real? France and the UK smuggling a nuke to Ukraine sounds like a B-movie plot. So does a US president threatening to invade Greenland to protect it from Russia and China. These are strange times. Given the EU has publicly demanded that Russia cap its army or face Brussels’ rejection of a Ukraine peace deal, we should be prepared for Western leverage attempts ranging from the ridiculous to the flagrantly irresponsible.

Read more …

Bibi. Whether it’s Ukraine or the Middle East, Trump so far refuses to involve his military directly. Here’s thinking that’s a good thing.

• US Demands Iran Dismantle Its 3 Main Nuclear Sites In Hours-Long Talks (ZH)

US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner held more than three hours of negotiations with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva on Thursday in a push to secure a breakthrough on a nuclear deal, with the Omani foreign minister saying the talks will resume later after a pause. It’s being reported that the message Kushner and Witkoff deliver to Trump after the meeting will shape the president’s decision on whether the launch a military attack on Tehran or refrain for implementation of a permanent deal. While Trump declared in Tuesday’s State of the Union that he prefers diplomacy, he also presented a direct case for war – something which remains deeply unpopular among the American people. In these and other indirect talks, Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi relayed messages between the sides, and then another format has involved direct discussions between US and Iranian negotiators.


Iran presented its long-awaited draft proposal for a nuclear agreement, though not much in the way of details have been revealed. International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Raphael Grossi was among those who participated in the negotiations. Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi, the main mediator, said of the Thursday talks that “we’ve been exchanging creative and positive ideas” and “hope to make more progress.” Meanwhile, a former head of the IAEA has warned that all wars, “including ‘wars of choice’ have horrific costs” as fears of major conflict between the US and Iran escalate. Reports that Thursday talks stalled after US side demanded zero enrichment…

https://twitter.com/AhmadSamadi1974/status/2027025765007577268

“The US is intensifying the drumbeat of war against Iran, with zero explanation of the non-existent legal authority to use force and zero evidence of an ‘imminent threat’ other than hypothetical scenarios based on possible future intentions,” Mohamed ElBaradei wrote on X. “That is the reason for the restraints and limitations established by international norms… This is Iraq redux … it seems we never learn,” he emphasized. Fresh reporting in The Wall Street Journal has laid out the main US sticking points: In the talks, now under way in Geneva, the U.S. negotiators were expected to make clear Iran must dismantle its three main nuclear sites—at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan—and deliver all of its remaining enriched uranium to the U.S., officials said.

They were also expected to insist that any nuclear deal must last forever and not sunset—the way restrictions rolled off over time under a nuclear pact negotiated under the Obama administration that Republicans have long said was too weak. Trump pulled out of that deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, in his first term, reimposing tough sanctions on Iran.

These are the very nuclear sites that the US said time and again it “obliterated” during the June war. This comes off Vice President J.D. Vance just the day prior stating that the White House “has seen evidence” that Iran is attempting to build a nuclear weapon. So Washington is going from proclaiming Iran’s nuclear sites were obliterated to now saying there’s evidence of the Iranians trying to clandestinely build a nuclear warhead. Of course, no evidence or so much as a reference to some kind of intelligence report has been presented to the world.

There are indeed mounting concerns that history is about to repeat itself, but this time there’s possibly many more American troops in harm’s way, given the significant reach and capabilities of Iran’s ballistic missiles and long-range drones.

Read more …

“We are aware of the theories circulated in the media and online that Epstein video recorded the abuse of his victims, including by other men, but we have found no evidence to support that theory,”

• Epstein Rushed Evidence Into Secret Storage Unit Before Raid (ZH)

Jeffrey Epstein paid private detectives to remove items from his Palm Beach property and store them in a secret storage locker shortly before he was raided by police in 2005. The storage unit contained three computers, 29 address books, a three-page list of Florida masseuses. The stash also included nude photographs believed to be of Epstein’s victims, VHS tapes, DVDs ‘eroticising teenagers’ and porno mags, The Telegraph reports. “An 8mm video cassette tape was also locked away in the storage unit, apparently containing footage of someone in the shower and a woman in lingerie, as well as a 2005 calendar, greeting cards, letters and laboratory results.”


The investigators also hid sex toys, body massagers, lingerie, cash, a concealed weapon permit, and a Harvard ID card. The inventory was emailed to Epstein and his lawyers in August 2009, a month after he was released from jail for soliciting a minor for prostitution. Also interesting, some of the computer material ‘appeared to be missing,’ including ‘equipment that would have linked to surveillance cameras. ‘That fuelled speculation that Epstein might have been recording explicit covert material without people’s knowledge, either for his own sexual gratification or for blackmail purposes.” And what do we have here? A guy who was installing recording equipment on Epstein’s island in 2014, and was named as a $1 million beneficiary in Epstein’s trust.

According to the report, the FBI did have copies of the two computer drives. The Palm Beach storage unit was just one of at least six such lockers across the United States that Epstein used to store files, computers and other items from his multiple properties – but search warrants reviewed by The Telegraph “suggest that US authorities never raided these lockers, raising the possibility that they contained unseen evidence relating to Epstein and his associates.” US authorities have long suspected that Epstein was tipped off before the October 2005 raid at his Palm Beach mansion, with former Palm Beach police chief Michael Reiter commenting that “the place had been cleaned up.”

Meanwhile, French Police have released previously unseen pictures from Epstein’s Paris apartment, including one featuring a massage table and pictures of naked women hanging on the wall. Many victims have long alleged that Epstein secretly recorded encounters inside his homes, possibly for blackmail. Yet an internal FBI memo released in a later document tranche stated that investigators found no evidence supporting the theory that Epstein maintained video recordings of abuse involving other powerful figures. “We are aware of the theories circulated in the media and online that Epstein video recorded the abuse of his victims, including by other men, but we have found no evidence to support that theory,” the memo said. The agency added that if such material had existed, it would have been used in criminal prosecutions. Copies of two hard drives from the Palm Beach locker were eventually recovered at Epstein’s New York residence following his 2019 arrest, but the original computers are believed to have never been found. An FBI forensic analyst later testified that the drives contained photos of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell and a job advertisement written by “GMax” seeking a massage therapist – but no explicit recordings of abuse.

Read more …

I hear Hillary is making the deposition political “on her socials..”

• Hillary Clinton to Testify in Epstein Probe on Thursday, Bill Clinton on Friday (JTN)

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is scheduled Thursday to give her highly anticipated deposition in the House Oversight Committee’s probe into Jeffrey Epstein, followed by former President Bill Clinton on Friday. The depositions, which will take place in New York, come after a contentious negotiation between the Clintons’ attorneys and House Republicans, led by Oversight Committee Chair James Comer who pushed for in-person, recorded depositions rather than written testimony or declarations. The Clintons have not been accused of any wrongdoing and the depositions will be given behind closed doors in the couple’s hometown of Chappaqua.


The depositions are unusual in two ways. The first is that Bill Clinton will be the first former president compelled to testify under subpoena in such an inquiry, and the second is that lawmakers from both parties appear ready to grill the couple.“The major thing is that we’re looking for truth, for the survivors, and justice and accountability, and that’s something that cuts across party lines,” Maryland Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin told The Hill. “At least on the Democratic side, we have said that anybody who was involved in criminal activity should pay the price for it.” Comer said Tuesday that he will release the video and transcript of the depositions as soon as the couple approves it.
Read more …

“Attack a cop, go to jail” is not a radical slogan. It is the bare minimum required to maintain a functioning city.”

• Mamdani’s NYC Flirts With Chaos (Ben Shapiro)

A brutal cold snap has gripped New York City and much of the East Coast, freezing streets, sidewalks — and, it seems, any remaining sense of civic restraint.In Washington Square Park, a group of adults began hurling snowballs and other objects at responding officers from the New York City Police Department. This was not playful roughhousing in a winter storm. Video shows grown men and women — some masked, some standing brazenly in the open, all apparently confident that consequences would be minimal — pelting officers as they arrived on scene. That confidence is the problem.


Assaulting police officers is not a prank. It is not political theater. It is a crime. Every individual captured on video throwing objects at officers should be identified, arrested and charged accordingly. “Attack a cop, go to jail” is not a radical slogan. It is the bare minimum required to maintain a functioning city. New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch responded swiftly, calling the conduct “disgraceful” and “criminal” and confirming that detectives are investigating. The city’s largest police union, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, issued a sharper warning: Officers were treated for injuries, but the matter cannot end there. Those responsible must be identified and charged, and city leaders must condemn the attack unequivocally. That last point is key.

Public attitudes toward law enforcement do not form in a vacuum. They are shaped, in no small part, by the rhetoric of elected officials. When political figures spend years portraying police as inherently suspect or malign, it should surprise no one when segments of the public begin treating officers as legitimate targets. Consider New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Long before taking office, he built a reputation as a sharp critic of policing practices. Words matter. Tone matters. The cumulative effect of constant denunciation is cultural erosion — an environment in which hostility toward police feels permissible, even fashionable.

We have seen versions of this before. After the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014, national rhetoric around policing shifted dramatically. The 2020 wave of anti-police protests accelerated that shift. In many major cities, calls to “reimagine” or defund police departments moved from activist slogans into policy debates — and, in some cases, into actual governance. The result in too many places has been confusion about first principles. Law is only as effective as its enforcement. Order is not automatic; it is maintained. When elected leaders send mixed signals about whether officers deserve institutional backing, the public receives the message. And disorder follows.

The current cold emergency adds another layer to the debate. As temperatures plunged, the administration touted the deployment of more than 500 outreach workers across the five boroughs to connect homeless residents with services. The mayor suggested that several recent deaths appear to be related to overdoses rather than the direct result of exposure. But the distinction raises its own question: Why are so many people still sleeping on the streets at all? In extreme weather, cities have both the authority and, many would argue, the obligation to compel vulnerable individuals into shelter. Allowing people to remain outdoors — whether they ultimately succumb to cold or drugs — reflects policy choices.

Read more …

Just one hacker, actually…

• So Hackers Just Stole Mexico’s Tax and Voter Rolls (Stephen Green)

This story doesn’t quite feature the gut-punch immediacy of Mexico’s drug war escalating into a virtual civil war last week in and around Puerto Vallarta, but as a glimpse into the future, maybe it ought to send a chill or three down your spine. According to a new Bloomberg story (paywalled, sorry), a weeks-long hacker campaign against the Mexican government culminated in January with a massive data theft of some of the federal government’s most sensitive information. “By the time it was over,” Let’s Data Science reported on Wednesday, “the attacker had stolen 150 gigabytes of sensitive data — including 195 million taxpayer records, voter registration files, government employee credentials, and civil registry data.”


If you’re thinking such a massive theft involved a team of hackers, years of planning involving a Stuxnet-like virus, or even physical access to Mexican government computer systems — think again. The almost unprecedented hack was done by just one guy. Using Anthropic’s Claude AI, despite all of Anthropic’s safeguards against something exactly like this.Summing up a report published Wednesday by Israeli cybersecurity startup Gambit Security, Bloomberg wrote that some “unknown Claude user” simply made up “Spanish-language prompts for the chatbot to act as an elite hacker, finding vulnerabilities in government networks, writing computer scripts to exploit them and determining ways to automate data theft.”

It seems like just two days ago [It was just two days ago, Steve —Editor] I wrote about Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei getting called onto the carpet by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth because the company refused to let the Pentagon remove Claude’s guardrails for military use. “Anthropic knows this is not a get-to-know-you meeting,” an anonymous War Department official told Axios on Monday. “This is not a friendly meeting,” they said. “This is a s**t-or-get-off-the-pot meeting.” So how did some internet rando get Claude to ignore similar built-in safeties against hacking? He asked: https://twitter.com/ns123abc/status/2026679645379141953

“It looks like the hacker was able to essentially jailbreak Claude with prompts, finally bypassing the chatbot’s guardrails. Claude originally refused the nefarious demands until eventually relenting,” Engadget reported on Wednesday. Nobody had to hack Claude to turn the AI into a malicious hacker. They just had to get the phrasing right until Claude did the job itself. Gambit claimed that “In total, [Claude] produced thousands of detailed reports that included ready-to-execute plans, telling the human operator exactly which internal targets to attack next and what credentials to use.”

Going back to that Bloomberg story, an Anthropic spokesperson told the outlet that “the company feeds examples of malicious activity back into Claude to learn from it, and one of its latest AI models, Claude Opus 4.6, includes probes that can disrupt misuse.” But Anthropic made similar claims about the current version, too.

Read more …

Legalizing 500,000 aliens in one fell swoop is more then Spain can handle.

• Spain’s Government: Spinning Out of Control (Drieu Godefridi)

Between corruption and radicalization, Spain’s government seems to be spinning out of control.
In 1936, Spain plunged into civil war. A proud nation collapsed into violence, fire, and devastation. The Spanish Civil War, which set a communist-dominated Republican left against an authoritarian nationalist right, claimed roughly half a million lives. Priests were dragged through the streets, beaten, and mutilated — ears, noses, even genitals cut off — before being shot or having their throats slit. Nuns were raped prior to execution, in cases documented across several regions. Churches were set ablaze with priests still inside. In many towns, militiamen forced clergy to drink motor oil or gasoline before burning them alive. Spain’s right wing, not to be outdone, killed just as many.

Almost a century later, when one might have hoped that these wounds had finally healed, political and cultural fault lines are reopening. Polarization has reached levels rarely seen since Spain’s transition to democracy.

1. The original trauma of the Spanish left
The Spanish Civil War, in Spain’s collective memory, remains an open wound. For a significant portion of the Spanish “left” — standing for workers’ rights, a shorter work week, women’s and transgender rights, reducing carbon emissions — the dominant narrative remains that of a revolution betrayed, confiscated by fascism, and still pending, never repaired. This historical resentment has been transmitted from generation to generation like an act of faith. Today, under the government of Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and his coalition, which governs with the support of the extreme-left, this resentment is resurfacing in the form of historical revisionism.

By constantly summoning the specters of the past — going so far as to exhume Francisco Franco’s remains, in a direct evocation of civil-war-era practices, when communists gleefully desecrated the graves of their so-called “class enemies” — is the left not in danger of reviving the hatreds and violence of the past?

2. A left without a compass: ideological orphanhood
Spain’s left is becoming more radical precisely because it has run out of ideas. Marxism, long the doctrinal backbone of the global left, lost all credibility with the implosion of the USSR, amid the stench of cabbage and corpses. Spain is no exception. Stripped of this ideological foundation, the Spanish left now finds itself without a compass.Before the July 2023 elections, Sánchez promised a bold progressive agenda: mass public housing construction, reducing the working week to 37.5 hours, large minimum wage hikes, slashing healthcare waiting lists with binding maximum times, free public transport for youth, and expanded public education. Critically, delivery on these massive flagship promises has been dismal to date: virtually no new public housing built, prices soaring, the work-week reduction defeated in parliament, real wages eroded by inflation, and chronic healthcare waiting lists unchanged.

Sánchez’s Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE), once anchored in moderate, reformist social democracy, has gradually shifted toward a strategy of sheer political survival. To remain in power, it allied itself first with Podemos and then with Sumar—two extreme left-wing parties obsessed with supporting Palestinians, against NATO, and soft on Russia — as well as with separatist movements. In doing so, the PSOE diluted its original moderate reformist vision through blatant opportunism, sacrificing doctrinal coherence in favor of questionable alliances.

3. A patchwork of incoherent dogmas
Deprived of Marxism, the Spanish left has sought refuge in a disparate ideological mosaic: radical environmentalism, complicit indulgence toward political Islam, the dismantling of borders, unconditional support for the Palestinians against Israel – all stacked together into an improbable and incoherent magma. Added to this are recurring undertones of anti-Semitism in left-wing discourse — one thinks in particular of Yolanda Díaz, seemingly a figure of clinical hysteria, whose face visibly contorts the moment she pronounces the word “Israeli.” By radicalizing itself across every issue, the left fuels the anger of the right, the middle classes, and a growing segment of the population that feels marginalized, despised, and alienated within its own country.

4. A regime corrupt to the core?
The Sánchez government has another reason for aligning with jihadists: the corruption scandals that have engulfed even the prime minister’s immediate family. First comes the Koldo-Ábalos scandal involving irregular public contracts, illegal commissions, and bribes linked to public-works contracts, totaling several hundred million euros. Several figures are particularly implicated. Former Minister of Transport José Luis Ábalos, a close ally of Sánchez, is in pre-trial detention for criminal organization, corruption, embezzlement, and influence peddling.

Koldo García, Ábalos’s former adviser, is a central figure in the scheme. He too is in pre-trial detention and under prosecution. Santos Cerdán, former secretary of organization of the PSOE and Ábalos’s successor, is under investigation and was detained for corruption in public-works contracts. The Civil Guard is examining 22 contracts, worth €355 million, that were allegedly manipulated by favoritism. Added to this are the cases involving Sánchez’s own family. Begoña Gómez, his wife, was formally charged with influence peddling, corruption in business, embezzlement of public funds, misappropriation, and illegally practicing a regulated profession, in a case that was opened in April 2024. In August 2025, the probe was extended to include her advisor Cristina Álvarez.

The investigation into Gómez has been extended until at least April 2026 and continues with active measures, including February 2026 requests to the Interior Ministry for travel records of Gómez and Álvarez since 2018 (covering destinations such as the Dominican Republic, Congo, Guinea, and Russia), access to emails, and Civil Guard reports.David Sánchez, the prime minister’s brother, is also being prosecuted, for influence peddling and malfeasance in connection with his employment at the Badajoz Provincial Council. “The prime minister faces multiple legal challenges this year that could lead to the downfall of his family, his party, and his government,” summarizes Spanish daily El Mundo.[..]

Read more …

For now, it seems AI is whatever you want it to be …

• Even the Best AI Scenario Is the End of Everything We’ve Ever Been (Ring)

In 1999, I had the privilege of working for one of the first companies to develop a product that would transmit video on the fledgling internet. Broadband access was still a few years away, and the company floundered when the first so-called internet bubble burst in early 2000. But I’ll never forget the reaction an investor had when he viewed our demo at a tradeshow. “This is a revolution,” he exclaimed. “This is going to change everything.” He was right, of course. I remember attending a tech investor conference only a few years earlier and having a chuckle while listening to Oracle CEO Larry Ellison somberly proclaim that the dawning internet was the most profound scientific development in human history “since the invention of fire.”


And Ellison was also correct. But the invention of AI is to the internet what the internet was to bringing fire into the prehistoric cave. What’s coming with AI makes the internet look like a baby step by comparison. Nothing will ever be the same. A must-read essay by AI entrepreneur and founder of the company “OthersideAI,” Matt Shumer, makes clear just how much and how quickly AI is changing our lives. Posted on his personal website on February 9 and then on X on February 10, the essay has gone viral. Within just two days, it generated 76 million views on X.One of Shumer’s most memorable paragraphs from this essay, which he says AI tools helped him write, is where he quotes Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic:

“Imagine it’s 2027. A new country appears overnight. 50 million citizens, every one smarter than any Nobel Prize winner who has ever lived. They think 10 to 100 times faster than any human. They never sleep. They can use the internet, control robots, direct experiments, and operate anything with a digital interface.” That’s not far off. With ample evidence, Shumer explains how not only is Amodei correct in his details regarding just how pervasive and powerful AI entities will become, but also regarding the timeline. This will happen within one year. Shumer’s essay covers a lot of ground. He explains that AI programs are now capable of generating improved versions of themselves with minimal human intervention and that they are within months of being able to produce more powerful versions with no human involvement whatsoever.

In the programming world, AI can now build, test, and refine apps independently. Entry-level programming jobs are going to go away. That’s hardly the end of it. Shumer reminds readers that the free versions of AI are a year behind the premium versions that require subscriptions and that these premium versions are so capable that they can already, for example, not merely replace a law associate but do the work of the managing partners. He claims there is no intellectual field where AI isn’t poised to outperform humans and that robots to displace physical work are only a few years behind. If you’ve been following developments in AI, Shumer’s essay isn’t incredibly surprising.

But something else grabbed me a few days ago that highlighted the human implications of the AI revolution. One of the categories of content I enjoy on YouTube is videos of musicians performing new or classic songs. It is exhilarating to find something new that reveals great songwriting and great performative talent. So a recommended video caught my eye. The title was inviting: “Simon Cowell in Tears As Michael Bennett Sings ‘After I Pass Away.’” This seemed worth clicking on. I’ll never forget the 2007 video, featured on YouTube at the time, of a humble mobile phone salesman, Paul Potts, who stunned the judges and audience on Britain’s Got Talent by singing a powerful and nearly perfect rendition of Nessun Dorma. He went on to win the competition. So if this new talent was good enough to make Simon Cowell cry, I wanted to hear him.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/argosaki/status/2026873941386801458?s=20

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 19 2026

Feb 192026
 
 February 19, 2026  Posted by at 10:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  51 Responses »


Ceiling painting from the palace of Amenhotep III, New Kingdom ca. 1390–1353 B.C.


• Ukraine Should Come To The Table ‘Fast’ – Trump (RT)
• Under Pressure To Reach Deal, Zelensky Explodes: No Time “For All This S**t” (ZH)
• Putin Aide Urges Retaliation To ‘Western Piracy’ (RT)
• US and Dutch Pilots Flying F-16s For Ukraine – Western Media (RT)
• Hungary’s Opposition Made ‘Secret Pact’ With EU On Ukraine – Orban (RT)
• 18 Ways To Reverse The EU’s Immigration Disaster (RMX)
• Judge Orders ICE Not to Re-Detain Abrego Garcia (ET)
• Disinformation Board Member Jennifer Daskal Appointed as FISA Court Advisor (CTH)
• Fear Is The Only Thing The EU Understands – Karaganov (RT)
• Can You Buy A Country? (RT)
• Former Trump Strategist Defends Ties with Epstein (RT)
• The Last Temptation of the Least Dangerous Branch (Turley)
• German Public Broadcaster Ran Fake Ai-Generated Clip of ‘ICE Troops’ (RMX)
• Macron Calls Free Speech Online ‘Pure Bullshit’
• Trump Posts Tribute to Rush Limbaugh on the Anniversary of His Death (Margolis)

 


 

Optimus

 


 

 


 


They don’t want peaxe. They want to beat Russia.

• Ukraine Should Come To The Table ‘Fast’ – Trump (RT)

Ukraine must swiftly give up its uncompromising stance in the negotiations to settle the conflict with Russia, US President Donald Trump has warned. He made the comments ahead of talks between Russia, the US, and Ukraine in Geneva, Switzerland on Tuesday and Wednesday. The parties previously held two trilateral meetings in Abu Dhabi in January. Territorial issues – namely Ukraine’s refusal to abandon its claim to Donbass – reportedly remain the key item hampering progress towards peace. When asked about his expectations from the Swiss negotiations by journalists aboard Air Force One on Monday, Trump said they will be “very big.”


“Ukraine better come to the table fast. That’s all I’m telling you… we want them to come,” the president insisted. During his speech at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky again ruled out any territorial concessions, claiming that it “would be an illusion to believe that this war can now be reliably ended by dividing Ukraine.” Instead, he demanded more weapons from Kiev’s European backers and called for Ukraine to be included in NATO, which is one of Moscow’s clear red lines. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said earlier that only a few issues remain to be addressed by the sides in Geneva. “The bad news is they’ve been narrowed to the hardest questions to answer,” he stressed.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Monday that the members of the Russian delegation in Geneva, led by presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky, “intend to discuss a broader range of issues, including the main questions concerning territories… and those related to the demands we have.” Moscow maintains that any sustainable settlement requires Ukraine to withdraw from the areas still under its control in Donbass – which voted to join Russia in referendums in the fall of 2022 – give up on its NATO aspirations, and commit to demilitarization and denazification.

Read more …

Zelensky represents a corrupt cabal. He’s getting rich doing it.

• Under Pressure To Reach Deal, Zelensky Explodes: No Time “For All This S**t” (ZH)

Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky has increasingly made his frustrations with the Trump administration public, but he may have just crossed the line with the US President, who Zelensky admits can be tough and unbending. Zelensky has newly complained amid the latest Geneva trilateral talks that the US delegation could pressure him to make “unsuccessful decisions” and he is urging Washington to back off, even using expletives to make his point. For starters, he claims that the Ukrainian public won’t let him cede territory to Russia for the sake of peace even if he wanted to, as we highlighted previously.


But the latest colorful verbal broadside, cited by Axios on Tuesday as Russian and Ukrainian delegations convened in Geneva, saw Zelensky take direct aim at the head of Moscow’s negotiating team, Vladimir Medinsky. Kiev’s frustration at the state of dialogue has been boiling over. Medinsky has argued – along with numerous Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin – that the conflict’s historical roots must be addressed as part of any settlement, especially given the bulk of the Ukrainian population in the east (Donbas) has always been Russian speaking and looked to Moscow historically.mZelensky dismissed that approach outright: “We don’t have time for all this shit,” he told the outlet. “So we have to decide, and have to finish the war.”

Regardless, the Kremlin has lately made clear its aims to take the full Donbas either through talks or by force. Ukraine’s military still holds 10% of the Donbas, however, and Kiev is rejecting a US proposal for it to draw back its forces as part of a conflict freeze leading to settlement. The White House this month has finally appeared to be ratcheting up the pressure directly on Zelensky to make some kind of serious land concession. This was evident in the latest comments by President Trump on the topic of Geneva issued near the start of the week. Frustration with Kiev was evident when he told reporters aboard Air Force One, “Well, we have big talks.” He stated that “It’s going to be very easy. I mean, look, so far, Ukraine better come to the table fast. That’s all I’m telling you.”

Zelensky after this bitterly complained that it’s ‘not fair’ for Trump to take aim at Ukraine and not Russia, and suggested maybe it’s simply easer for Trump to do this given he doesn’t want to upset the far larger, more formidable country. Meanwhile, Medinsky has said Wednesday that the U.S.-mediated peace talks in Geneva had been “difficult but business-like, and that a new round of talks would be held soon,” according to Reuters.

Read more …

Patrushev is an important voice.

• Putin Aide Urges Retaliation To ‘Western Piracy’ (RT)

Russia’s response to “Western piracy” targeting its maritime trade should be forceful and not limited to diplomatic means, an aide to President Vladimir Putin has said. Nikolay Patrushev, a veteran national security official who heads a naval policymaking body, called for stronger action against Western moves targeting vessels described as part of an alleged Russian ‘shadow fleet’. Attempts to paralyze Russian foreign trade will only intensify, Patrushev warned in an interview with Argumenty i Fakty published on Tuesday. “Unless we push back forcefully, soon the English, the French, and even the Balts will get brazen enough to try and block our nation’s access to at least the Atlantic,” he said.


“The Europeans are in essence making steps to impose a naval blockade, deliberately pushing towards a military escalation, testing the limits of our patience and provoking our retaliation. If the situation is not resolved peacefully, the Navy will be breaking and lifting the blockade,” Patrushev said. “Let’s not forget that plenty of vessels sail the seas under European flags. We may get curious about what they are shipping and where,” he added. Patrushev expressed skepticism that tensions could ease, saying “there is little hope that the West has an ounce of respect for diplomacy and the law.” He argued that “the old practice of ‘gunboat diplomacy’ is being revived,” citing US operations targeting Venezuela and Iran.

Washington has used warships to target suspected drug smuggling boats off Venezuela and intercept outgoing oil tankers, including one sailing under a Russian flag. The Pentagon is now concentrating assets in the Middle East as President Donald Trump pressures Iran to accept restrictions on its missile deterrence against Israel. In today’s world, the Russian Navy is “a geopolitical tool that combines might with flexibility and is suitable for both peacetime and armed conflicts,” Patrushev said. Its strength is needed to protect Russia’s “ability to export oil, grain and fertilizers, and the normal functioning of the state.”

Read more …

“.. intelligence, planning, troop training, and maintenance of complex Western hardware – are handled by foreign personnel.”

• US and Dutch Pilots Flying F-16s For Ukraine – Western Media (RT)

The Ukrainian military is secretly using a squadron of veteran NATO pilots to fly donated US-made F-16 fighter jets, the French outlet Intelligence Online reported on Monday. Moscow has long warned that Western nations are moving closer to direct conflict with Russia. The report, which Kiev has denied, said the covert mission relies primarily on experienced US and Dutch air force veterans. The foreign personnel are deployed far from the front lines and focus on intercepting Russian long-range weapons, the outlet said. They are no longer part of their original militaries and reportedly work for Kiev as civilian contractors, without military ranks and outside the Ukrainian chain of command.


A shortage of trained Ukrainian pilots was previously identified as the main obstacle to using F-16s donated to Kiev. Training courses were reportedly undermined by language barriers, a lack of qualified trainees, and other issues, and were simplified for speed. Shortly after the first F-16s arrived in Ukraine in August 2024, Kiev began losing pilots in botched air defense missions, with four such incidents acknowledged. The secret foreign squadron provides pilots with the experience needed to operate advanced F-16 equipment, Intelligence Online said.

Moscow views the Ukraine conflict as a NATO proxy war against Russia, in which key elements of Kiev’s military effort – including intelligence, planning, troop training, and maintenance of complex Western hardware – are handled by foreign personnel. Western specialists were reportedly involved in Ukrainian strikes using Storm Shadow/SCALP air-launched cruise missiles on Russian territory. German officials opposed supplying Taurus missiles because Ukrainians cannot launch them independently. Russia also says Western nations tacitly support Kiev’s recruitment of mercenaries from among their military veterans. Ambassador-at-Large Rodion Miroshnik estimated that around 20,000 foreign fighters have taken part in the conflict on the Ukrainian side.

Read more …

“… an election he has framed as a choice between “war or peace.”

• Hungary’s Opposition Made ‘Secret Pact’ With EU On Ukraine – Orban (RT)

Hungary’s opposition parties are colluding with EU leaders to fast-track Ukraine’s accession to the bloc, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban was claimed, warning that should the pro-Brussels Tisza Party come to power, it could drag the country into a direct conflict with Russia. Hungary’s April 12 parliamentary election is expected to be a tough test for Orban’s longstanding conservative rule, during which time he has criticized the EU’s financial and military support for Kiev and its sanctions on Russia. Orban also opposes Ukraine’s bid for EU membership. Recent polls show a tight race between his Fidesz party and the opposition, led by former party member Péter Magyar, who met with European leaders at last week’s Munich Security Conference.


“Last weekend, the Tisza Party made a secret pact with Brussels in Munich. Part of this pact includes giving up its veto power, supporting the migration agreement, and accepting Ukraine into the EU. They are following Brussels’ orders and thus dragging us into war,” Orban remarked at a meeting of Fidesz and its coalition partner, the Christian Democratic People’s Party, which was broadcast on Hungary’s M1 television. Magyar met EU leaders on the sidelines of the conference last week, where he held talks with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, according to his office.

“Our friends belong to the international peace camp led by the United States. Their friends are leaders of the European military camp led by the German chancellor,” Orban said, referring to his political opponents. He claimed that Merz had openly signaled readiness to support Magyar’s party in the April vote because he wanted Hungary to relinquish its veto power within the EU. “The chancellor needs this to establish Germany’s sovereign rule in Europe,” Orban stated. The Hungarian leader has previously accused Magyar of acting under Brussels’ influence, saying the bloc uses “censorship, intervention, and manipulation” to undermine his government in an election he has framed as a choice between “war or peace.”

Read more …

“European Union member states can reclaim effective authority over migration and asylum policy without changing the EU treaties.”

• 18 Ways To Reverse The EU’s Immigration Disaster (RMX)

Due to years of uncontrolled mass migration, many Europeans are asking what concrete options there are to reverse course, with many feeling that the situation is hopeless and cannot be significantly reversed. However, a new report titled “Taking Back Control from Brussels: The Renationalization of the EU Migration and Asylum Policies” — produced by the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC), Hungary’s Migration Research Institute, and Poland’s Ordo Iuris Institute — provides comprehensive solutions to the crisis.


The paper’s core thesis offers bold and practical solutions today, noting that the power still rests with member states. The authors write: “European Union member states can reclaim effective authority over migration and asylum policy without changing the EU treaties.”

The report outlines how asylum policy has “completely collapsed” in the EU and reached a point of “total failure.” The authors contend that the current system lacks democratic legitimacy and has turned the Schengen area into a “sieve” that facilitates illegal migration and prevents effective border protection. Given the recent legalization actions of the far-left Spanish government, aimed at regularizing approximately 500,000 migrants who can then move freely across Europe, the paper’s proposals may be more relevant than ever.

The paper calls for a fundamental “paradigm shift” to restore migration sovereignty to individual nation-states, asserting that renationalization is a necessity for Europe to regain control over its borders and territory. The following 18 proposals from the second part of the paper outline a roadmap for this renationalization. The paper itself provides far more details about each proposal and is recommended reading for any European party looking for a blueprint to regain control of immigration.

https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/2016823717800624625
Read more …

“The illegal immigrant from El Salvador is also facing federal human smuggling charges.”

• Judge Orders ICE Not to Re-Detain Abrego Garcia (ET)

A federal judge has blocked U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) from re-arresting Kilmar Abrego Garcia, one of the men at the center of the Trump administration’s deportation battles.The Salvadoran national’s case attracted attention across the country, including widespread protests, after the federal government detained him in March 2025 and shipped him to El Salvador’s maximum security prison, the Terrorism Confinement Center, along with an airplane full of other deportees. He was later returned to the United States, where he has had long-running legal battles with the administration.


U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, who ordered the administration to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return last year, ruled on Feb. 17 that he cannot be deported again because the federal government has not presented a feasible plan for removing him from the country. The judge said that despite releasing Abrego Garcia, the government appeared to be making plans to re-detain him, so Abrego Garcia filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order to prevent being re-detained. The court previously granted the requested order.In the new order, the court granted Abrego Garcia’s request to upgrade the temporary restraining order to an injunction to prevent him from being re-detained.

Abrego Garcia, who entered the United States illegally more than a decade ago, had been living in Maryland when federal agents arrested him. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security takes the position that Abrego Garcia is a “violent criminal illegal alien, and MS-13 gang member,” who “belongs behind bars and off American soil.”Abrego Garcia, who is facing separate criminal charges, denies being a member of MS-13, which has been designated a terrorist organization. Xinis previously ordered his release on Dec. 11, 2025, finding that because the federal government had never issued a final order of removal against him, it could not detain him in order to force him from the country.

The government said in a brief last month that Abrego Garcia may be detained because an immigration judge issued an order of removal on Dec. 11, 2025, that became final on Jan. 13 of this year. Detention after that order “does not require that the country of removal be certain in order for detention to be lawful,” the brief said. The judge suggested the federal government is not serious about removing Abrego Garcia from the United States.Since he secured release from criminal custody in August 2025, the government has “made one empty threat after another to remove him to countries in Africa with no real chance of success,” she said.

Read more …

“.. one of the core officials who used the term dis-mis-mal-information to censor speech on social media platforms ..”

• Disinformation Board Member Jennifer Daskal Appointed as FISA Court Advisor (CTH)

A good catch by Chuck Ross at WFB drawing attention to the latest Amici curiae appointed to the FISA Court. Adding to a string of leftist ‘advisors to the court’ Jennifer Daskal has been appointed by FISA Court Presiding Judge Anthony Trenga. Daskal was the Biden administration principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Homeland Security who launched the Disinformation Governance Board (Ministry of Truth) ultimately led by Nina Jankowicz. Jennifer Daskal’s career has centers around controlling information from a leftist perspective and was one of the core officials who used the term dis-mis-mal-information to censor speech on social media platforms around COVID-19 and the vaccination protocol.


Daskal’s reach and control into big tech and social media is well documented. Appointing her as an advisor to the FISA court is troubling as she has joined Amy Jeffress, appointed amicus curiae in 2015 (Biden’s personal attorney), David Kris, a 2016 amicus curiae selection (denied Carter Page FISA application contained fabrications), and the infamous Mary McCord appointed amicus curiae in 2021 (sits at the center of every stop-Trump operation).

“Washington Free Beacon – A Biden administration official who launched the Disinformation Governance Board and served as co-chair of the so-called Ministry of Truth has been appointed to advise the powerful Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, prompting concerns from some Republican lawmakers. The presiding judges of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review appointed Jennifer Daskal on Feb. 1 to serve as amicus curiae for the court. Amici curiae, known as “friends of the court,” advise judges on legal issues related to foreign surveillance warrants in national security cases. Daskal served as acting principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Homeland Security under Biden. In that role, she drafted the charter for the Disinformation Governance Board, according to a Jan. 31, 2022 memo. (read more)”

Read more …

“Our strategy must change fundamentally. The objective is to accelerate the United States’ withdrawal from Europe. The method is firm deterrence.”

• Fear Is The Only Thing The EU Understands – Karaganov (RT)

The current phase of the West’s conflict with Russia may be nearing its end. It has dragged on longer than necessary. The principal reason is a lack of determination to employ active nuclear deterrence. This is the only mechanism capable of resolving the “European problem,” which has once again become an existential threat to our country.The Ukraine military operation has acted as a powerful catalyst for Russia’s internal renewal. It has mobilized society, awakened patriotism, and allowed people to demonstrate their best qualities. Pride in the Fatherland and respect for service to it have grown. Engineering, science, the military profession, and skilled labor have regained their rightful status. The economy and science have revived. Teachers, regrettably, have not yet received similar recognition, but that is a subject for later.


By drawing Western hostility onto ourselves, we have seriously weakened the position of the comprador bourgeoisie and its Western-educated allies. The Portuguese once used the word compadres to describe local merchants who served colonial interests. After the reforms of the 1990s, this class expanded in Russia to unhealthy proportions. Fortunately, the process of cleansing the country of this Western-oriented stratum has begun. It has been achieved without mass repression, but with historical inevitability. This revival has come at a terrible cost. Tens of thousands of brave soldiers lost their lives at the opening stage of national recovery. They deserve eternal gratitude. When – or rather, if – the unfinished war resumes, such losses must not be repeated.

In 2013, I personally warned a group of Western European leaders that their policy of dragging Ukraine into the EU and NATO would lead to war and mass casualties. No one met my gaze. They looked down at their shoes, then continued talking about democracy, trust, and human rights. In reality, they wanted to exploit another forty million people. Something they have partly succeeded in achieving through the creation of millions of refugees. They spoke of containing Russia, which was still loyal at the time. Our response to NATO’s aggression in Libya in 2011 was weak. We are now paying for years of appeasement and the comprador instincts of part of our elite.

Russia briefly slowed down the EU’s march toward military adventurism by returning Crimea in 2014 and intervening in Syria in 2015. Then we relaxed. Had an ultimatum on NATO expansion been issued in 2018–2020 and backed by credible nuclear deterrence, the current war might have been avoided. Or at the very least it would have been far less bloody. By 2022, it was obvious that both the West and the Kiev authorities were preparing for war.Ukraine is not a homogeneous entity. In the east and south live people culturally close to us. West of the Dnieper lies a different historical and cultural community, shaped by Austro-Hungarian, Polish, and Western influence and infused for decades with anti-Russian ideology. We must accept this reality and pursue a rational separation from both Ukrainian and European pathologies, forging our own healthy model of development.

Militarily, we are winning. Politically, we have yet to respond adequately to a series of openly aggressive actions: pirate seizures of Russian vessels, threats to close straits, attempts to impose a de facto economic blockade, attacks on oil terminals, and efforts by the Kiev regime to sabotage our tankers. Often with Western European connivance. Our response so far has been intensified strikes on Ukrainian targets. This is not a strategic solution. Ukraine was deliberately thrown into the furnace so that the fire would spread to Russia. EU elites do not care about Ukrainians. The conflict will continue until its true source is addressed: Western Europe’s degenerated ruling classes, intellectually, morally, and materially exhausted, who cling to power by fueling war.

Unlike 1812–1815 or 1941–1945, we have not yet destroyed a hostile coalition or broken its will. The war has entered what chess players call the middle-game. The remnants of Ukraine, supported by the West, will continue sabotage and terrorism. Sanctions will remain. The EU is preparing for a new confrontation, potentially involving rearmed Ukrainian forces and mercenaries from poorer European states. Any violations of future agreements will require military responses. We will again be accused of aggression. Open conflict will likely resume. Our strategy must change fundamentally. The objective is to accelerate the United States’ withdrawal from Europe. The method is firm deterrence. The task is to defeat Western Europe’s current elites, who see Russophobia as their last political lifeline.

Read more …

It’s getting harder as time goes by.

• Can You Buy A Country? (RT)

When US President Donald Trump revived the idea of buying Greenland – and refused to rule out stronger measures if Denmark declined – the reaction across Europe was swift and indignant. The proposal was framed as an anachronism: a throwback to imperial horse-trading that modern international politics had supposedly outgrown. But the outrage obscures an uncomfortable historical reality. The United States was not only forged through revolution and war; it was also built through transactions – large-scale territorial purchases concluded at moments when the balance of power left the seller with limited options. From continental expanses to strategic islands, Washington has repeatedly expanded its reach by writing checks backed by leverage. If the idea of buying land now sounds jarring, it is worth recalling that some of the largest such deals helped shape the United States into the country we know today. To understand why the Greenland debate resonates so strongly, we should revisit the major acquisitions that redrew the American map.


Louisiana: The biggest purchase
French explorers ventured into the Mississippi Valley in the late 17th century, claiming new territories and naming this vast expanse Louisiana after King Louis XIV. In 1718, they established New Orleans at the mouth of the Mississippi, gradually populating the colony not just with French settlers but also through policies enacted by Louis that granted freedom to children born of unions between white settlers and black slaves. Still, the population remained sparse. The region’s bad climate and complex relationships with Native Americans made settlement difficult. As a result, France didn’t particularly value this territory, despite its huge size: French Louisiana encompassed not just modern-day Louisiana but, either partially or wholly, the modern states of Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri, Colorado, Wyoming, North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, Texas, New Mexico, and even parts of Canada. Despite this, however, it was hard to find a Frenchman beyond New Orleans.

New France in 1750 before the French and Indian War. © Wikipedia


In 1763, following the Seven Years’ War, France ceded Louisiana to Spain. The Spanish administration didn’t oppress the French settlers and managed the colony quite competently. However, much of this enormous land remained largely uninhabited aside from the Native Americans. The total number of settlers, including black slaves, amounted to several tens of thousands of people. By the early 19th century, Europe saw many changes. Napoleon regained control of Louisiana, aiming to revive France’s overseas empire. However, this ambition crumbled when his attempt to restore French rule in Haiti failed. A force sent by Napoleon was decimated by black rebels and succumbed to tropical diseases.

Against this backdrop, Napoleon quickly realized that he could not hold onto Louisiana, and the English or Americans would easily seize it. As for the US, it had mixed feelings about Louisiana; controlling the mouth of the Mississippi was crucial, but Americans were also wary of potential French aggression. Finally, US President Thomas Jefferson initiated negotiations with France for the purchase of Louisiana. Napoleon saw this as a big opportunity. He recognized that he could get real money by selling the territory which France didn’t really need and couldn’t control.

Jefferson and the American side initially aimed to purchase only New Orleans and its surrounding areas, offering $10 million. However, the French surprised their American counterparts: they asked for $15 million, but as part of the deal, offered vast territories stretching up to Canada. However, beyond New Orleans, the French essentially sold the freedom to claim land inhabited by the Native Americans. The French had very little control over this vast territory, and the Native Americans didn’t even understand what the sale entailed. In fact, aside from the Native Americans, the vast territory was inhabited by only about 60,000 settlers, including black slaves.

Regardless, the deal was concluded, and America’s territory effectively doubled overnight. Robert Livingston, one of the Founding Fathers and then US ambassador to France, famously declared, “We have lived long, but this is the noblest work of our whole lives… From this day the United States take their place among the powers of the first rank.”

Read more …

“The strategist’s spokesman said he conducted about 12 hours of interviews with Epstein for the documentary. ”

• Former Trump Strategist Defends Ties with Epstein (RT)

Steve Bannon, a former White House strategist and prominent MAGA figure, has defended his extensive communications with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, insisting they were part of an effort to produce a documentary. His comments come after the release of millions of pages of Epstein-related files by the US Justice Department, which reveal a far cozier relationship between Bannon – a former adviser to President Donald Trump – and the financier who was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell in August 2019.


According to the New York Times, Bannon’s name appears in the Epstein emails nearly every day in the six months leading up to financier’s July 2019 arrest on sex trafficking charges. In April 2019, Bannon texted Epstein a strategy to rehabilitate his image. “First we need to push back on the lies; then crush the pedo/trafficking narrative; then rebuild your image as philanthropist,” he wrote. Epstein also appears to have offered Bannon lavish perks, including private jet travel, lodging at his Manhattan townhouse, and medical care. While Bannon’s spokesman denied he accepted the jet or medical care, records suggest he had stayed at Epstein’s Paris apartment on at least one occasion in March 2019.

In a statement to the New York Times, Bannon said his interactions with Epstein were strictly professional, noting that he is “a filmmaker and TV host with decades of experience interviewing controversial figures.” “That’s the only lens through which these private communications should be viewed – a documentary filmmaker working, over a period of time, to secure 50 hours of interviews from a reclusive subject,” Bannon insisted. The strategist’s spokesman said he conducted about 12 hours of interviews with Epstein for the documentary.

However, so far only two hours have been released by the Justice Department. In the footage, Epstein acknowledged being “a criminal” and a sexual predator, but Bannon did not focus on his treatment of women and instead discussed finance and science. His spokesman said he planned to address the topic later on.The Epstein files, totaling over 3.5 million pages, include multiple mentions of numerous global elites, including Bill Clinton, Elon Musk, and the former Prince Andrew. Attorney General Pam Bondi has declared all the Epstein files released, though critics claim this represents only a fraction of the seized data.

Read more …

” These judges are using their offices to amplify their personal outrage over policies. The result is that they are erasing the distinction between our courts and our politics.”

• The Last Temptation of the Least Dangerous Branch (Turley)

This month, the U.S. Judicial Conference issued new ethics guidelines, a publication that rarely attracts attention beyond a small circle of legal nerds. These guidelines, however, are not just the usual tweaks on rules governing free meals or travel. They include a new policy that could materially alter the character of the American courts, allowing judges to engage in commentary to rebut what they deem “illegitimate forms of criticism and attacks.” It is not just injudicious, it is dangerous.


Over two centuries ago, the Framers had to sell the Constitution to skeptical states, leery about yielding power to a central government, including federal courts. In Federalist #78, Alexander Hamilton sought to put these fears aside and assured the states that the federal judiciary is “the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them.” One can certainly disagree with Hamilton whether history has borne out his prediction that the court would have the least capacity to “annoy” others in our system. However, Hamilton’s pitch would later be reinforced by the adoption of apolitical ethical standards in our courts that separated them from political activities and commentary.

It did not begin that way. Early federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, were often openly partisan. Federalist judges took active roles in hunting down Jeffersonians under the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts. That changed as the nation embraced a new model of judges who would stand apart from politics. While judges often reflect the ideological views of the presidents who nominated them, they have largely followed rigid rules that have prevented them from engaging in political commentary. Judges are expected to address the legal issues in their opinions and leave political commentary to others regarding the implications or basis of those opinions.

It has not been a perfect system. Recently, some of us have criticized judges who have made overtly political statements in their opinions or in public. The deviation from the traditional line of judicial silence has grown in recent years. I previously wrote about this pattern of extrajudicial commentary, including inappropriate commentary in court statements and opinions. These comments often undermined the integrity of the court and the public’s faith in the neutrality of our judges.

District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee, was criticized for failing to recuse herself from the Special Counsel’s case against President Donald Trump after she made highly controversial statements about him from the bench. Chutkan lashed out at “a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” That “one person” was still under investigation at the time, and when Trump was charged, Chutkan refused to let the case go. Chutkan later doubled down when asked to dismiss a case due to Trump pardoning Jan. 6 defendants. After acknowledging that she could not block the pardons, she proclaimed that the pardons could not change the “tragic truth” and “cannot whitewash the blood, feces and terror that the mob left in its wake. And it cannot repair the jagged breach in America’s sacred tradition of peacefully transitioning power.”

One of Chutkan’s colleagues, Judge Beryl Howell, also an Obama appointee, denounced a Trump policy as “a revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement.” Then there is Judge Amit Mehta, another Obama appointee, who has been criticized for conflicted rulings in Trump cases and his bizarre (and ultimately abandoned) effort to banish January 6th defendants from the Capitol. He called Trump’s policies “shameful.” D.C. Circuit Judge Reggie Walton called Trump a “charlatan.” U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt of the Southern District of Iowa made public comments calling Trump a “criminal.” Other federal judges have made other public statements denouncing Trump and Republican priorities. Even before this change, these judges felt that they could engage in such political declarations.

Even Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson declared publicly how she sees her position as a judge “as a wonderful opportunity to tell people in my opinions how I feel about the issues, and that’s what I try to do.” Last year, the Supreme Court condemned U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, for his attacks on Trump as a bully bent on “retribution.” He also accused the administration of “racial discrimination” and “discrimination against the LGBTQ community,” and asked in one order, “Have we no shame?” There is no paucity of such criticism in our country. Many pundits have leveled such attacks against the President, but this was a sitting judge. These judges are using their offices to amplify their personal outrage over policies. The result is that they are erasing the distinction between our courts and our politics. ccu

Read more …

Here’s one use of AI.

• German Public Broadcaster Ran Fake Ai-Generated Clip of ‘ICE Troops’ (RMX)

The German public broadcaster ZDF has admitted to a significant editorial oversight after its flagship news program, Heute Journal, aired AI-generated images featuring U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arresting an immigrant family. After uproar on social media over the fake news segment, which included a visible OpenAI’ “Sora” watermark on the screen, the broadcaster expressed regret over the error and has since updated the report to remove the synthetic content. Critics pointed out that while it is becoming harder to differentiate fake AI content from real events, the appearance of the Sora watermark made it clear that this was AI content.


https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/2023482983303573586


The controversy from the Feb. 15 report featured fake AI scenes of a woman and two children being led away by ICE. During the segment, ICE agents were referred to as “troops.”m When questioned about the incident, ZDF stated that the images should have been clearly marked. The broadcaster explained: “This marking was not transferred when the article was transferred for technical reasons.”nThe question now is whether ZDF generated these images in-house. ZDF has declined to comment on whether the editorial staff was aware that the footage was AI-generated at the time of the initial broadcast.

If ZDF created them, the fact that arguably the biggest public broadcaster is creating AI-generated content for public broadcasting is raising concerns about how often AI-generated content has been produced without proper labeling in the past. In response, ZDF reiterated its commitment to transparency, noting: “ZDF’s AI principles stipulate that AI-generated images are always transparently labeled.” The incident caused further confusion when the original broadcast was temporarily removed from YouTube and the ZDF media library, leading some media outlets to report that the broadcaster had “deleted its fake video.” ZDF clarified that the removal was only a temporary measure while the editorial team replaced the AI sequences with authentic video and still images.

A revised version of the program is now available in the media library, accompanied by a disclaimer stating: “Video subsequently changed for editorial reasons.”All German households are required to pay nearly €20 per month to fund ZDF and other public broadcasting outlets like ARD. That translates to billions every year. The outlets are routinely accused of bias against conservatives, including negative reports targeting the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and a high rate of rejection for AfD guests on the networks .

Read more …

“.. Elon Musk slamming Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, when he wrote “Dirty Sánchez is a tyrant and traitor to the people of Spain.”

• Macron Calls Free Speech Online ‘Pure Bullshit’ (ZH),

French President Emmanuel Macron on Wednesday said that the notion of free speech on social media platforms – is “pure bullshit,” because algorithmically served content can lead to hate speech (such as the right to say his elderly wife has a penis and gives him black eyes). The comments come after the US recently imposed bans on a former European official and pro-censorship activists for trying to police online speech, while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio justifies the moves as pushback against the “global censorship-industrial complex.”


Europe, including Germany and the UK, have been weighing social media bans for minors, a move that could impact critical advertising revenue for companies and platforms such as Meta, TikTok, YouTube, Snap, X, and others. “Having no clue about how their algorithm is made, how it’s tested, trained and where it will guide you — the democratic consequences of this bias could be huge,” Macron said in New Delhi on Wednesday, Bloomberg reports. “Some of them claim to be in favor of free speech — OK, we are in favor of free algorithms — totally transparent,” he continued. “Free speech is pure bullshit if nobody knows how you are guided to this so-called free speech, especially when it is guided from one hate speech to another.”


Earlier this month, Macron said he expects a battle with the Trump administration over the bloc’s regulation of digital services, and that countries such as France and Spain could be punished if they move forward with proposed social media bans for children. nThe Trump administration has vowed to oppose efforts by foreign nations to “censor our discourse” or otherwise limit free speech that has been used to disadvantage anti-immigration political parties, and that the US would foster “resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.”

Vice President JD Vance, speaking last year at the Munich Security Conference, accused the EU of suppressing free speech and said Europe’s retreat from its fundamental values was a bigger threat to the continent than Russia or China. Calling Trump Washington’s “new sheriff,” Vance slammed attempts to moderate speech on social media. Some EU officials were concerned that the US was using free speech as a pressure point to cow the bloc into softening its regulation of technology platforms, Bloomberg reported earlier. -Bloomberg In response, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that freedom of speech ends with hate speech. Hilariously, Bloomberg highlighted Elon Musk slamming Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, when he wrote “Dirty Sánchez is a tyrant and traitor to the people of Spain.”

As the FT’s Stephen Bush opines regarding the UK’s push: Children are a lot like terrorists, and I don’t mean that as a commentary on their behaviour. I mean that being defined as one in a liberal democracy means that you lose at least some of the rights and freedoms that other citizens take for granted. Your freedom to marry who you want, to work or not work, to vote, to seek or not consent to medical procedures; these and many other rights granted to adults are curtailed for anyone the state defines as a child.

Another way in which they are like terrorists is that invoking children is a good way to get people to stop asking difficult questions and arguing against policy proposals. One big reason why banning under-16s from social media is taking off as a policy idea is that it is more palatable than banning all of us. But it is far from clear that any of us are well served by algorithms that dish up addictive material, violent pornography or endless footage of atrocities. Nor is it clear that “protecting” the under-16s will not make 16, 17 and 18-year-olds more vulnerable. The large number of first-time internet users who are taken in by fraud or are susceptible to harmful behaviour online, suggests that all it may do is move the problem along.

Read more …

“I’ll never forget, 2015, and I got a call, all excited, that Rush Limbaugh just endorsed you.”

• Trump Posts Tribute to Rush Limbaugh on the Anniversary of His Death (Margolis)

It’s hard to believe it, but it’s been five years since the passing of Rush Limbaugh. Five years. Conservative talk radio has never been the same since. Honestly, I wish I had listened to him more, but as a writer, I found anything other than music distracting from my ability to write.mI did listen occasionally, and any time Rush read one of my articles, I would get a whole bunch of texts from people alerting me to it, which was pretty awesome. The last time he read one of my articles (that I know of) was the day of Biden’s inauguration, less than a month before he passed. Limbaugh had unmatched insight. In fact, even before Biden took office, Rush observed that Democrats were still very much afraid of Trump and would indict him to try to take him down.


“I know they desperately want Trump gone and I know that they desperately want it codified that Trump cannot run again because make no mistake, they remain scared to death of you and they remain scared to death of Trump, Trump — 75 million, 80 million votes — and I’m going to tell you, you’re not going anywhere,” Limbaugh said in January 2021. “Even if Trump does, you’re not. They can’t separate you from Trump, and more importantly, they can’t separate you from the ideas. They can’t separate you from MAGA. They can’t separate you from Make America Great Again, which I think remains one of our big campaign strengths going forward.”

On Tuesday evening, President Donald Trump released a video tribute honoring Limbaugh and reflecting on their friendship. Trump called it “the fifth anniversary of the loss of a really great man.” He described Limbaugh as “a great conservative, somebody that loved our country, loved his family, loved a lot of things.” He added on a personal note, “he was a friend of mine, Rush Limbaugh.” Trump recalled that the two had never met when he first launched his presidential campaign in 2015. “I’d never met Rush when I announced that I was running,” he said. Then came a moment he still vividly remembers. “I’ll never forget, 2015, and I got a call, all excited, that Rush Limbaugh just endorsed you.”

At the time, Trump said, Limbaugh’s support came purely from what he heard. “I’d never met him. He liked my opening speech.” Trump pointed to his campaign launch that June, when he descended the now-famous escalator alongside the woman who would become first lady. Limbaugh, he said, responded to the message immediately. “He liked, uh, when I got up in June, and I said, ‘You know, uh, we got bad borders, we got bad crime, we got bad everything,’ and he liked it,” Trump said. “I came down the escalator with now our first lady, and he thought it was great, and, uh, he endorsed me, and then I got to know him, and I realized what a great guy he was.”

Five years after Limbaugh’s death, Trump said the loss is still deeply felt. “But it’s five years, and we miss Rush,” he said. Echoing a frequent refrain from Sean Hannity, Trump added, “As Sean Hannity would often say, ‘There will never be another Rush Limbaugh.’” He closed by offering condolences to Limbaugh’s loved ones. “So to his family, his great wife and family, I just wanna say we miss you all,” Trump said. “We miss him, and there’ll never be anybody like him. Thank you very much.” A year before his death, Trump awarded Rush with the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the 2020 State of the Union address, honoring him days after Limbaugh revealed his Stage 4 cancer diagnosis.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Cybercab https://twitter.com/EvaFox/status/2023710868207292719?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 18 2026

Feb 182026
 
 February 18, 2026  Posted by at 10:26 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  29 Responses »


Jean-Michel Basquiat Warrior 1982


• Anthropic–Pentagon Talks Stall Over AI Guardrails (ZH)
• Behind the Burnout and High Turnover Rates in the AI Industry (ET)
• Bill Clinton Just Got Brutally Dissed By His Own Party (Matt Margolis)
• The Obama Admin’s Prostitution Scandal And The Ruemmler-Epstein Connection (ZH)
• Aliens Are ‘Real’ – Obama (RT)
• Zelensky Launches F-bomb Laden Rant In Munich (RT)
• The War Party Takes Munich (Kosachev)
• The US Wants a Deal. Russia Wants a System (Lukyanov)
• The Middle East Is Splitting Into Rival Blocs (Sadygzade)
• In Defence of Sir Jim Ratcliffe (Charles Johnson)
• Trump DOJ Seeks To Dismiss Steve Bannon’s J6 Conviction and Indictment (JTN)
• Trump’s Surpising Reaction to Jesse Jackson’s Death (Matt Margolis)
• Race Hustler or Civil Rights Icon? Jesse Jackson Dead At 84 (Rick Moran)
• Regarding the Rev (Christian Josi)
• ‘Mr. Wonderful Destroyed CNN’s Anti-SAVE Act Narrative in 30 Seconds (Margolis)

 


 

AI Dalio Ed Dowd Deindustrialization was DELIBERATE. https://twitter.com/PrometheanActn/status/2023501026712539320?s=20 China

 


 

 


 


Will AI command the military?

• Anthropic–Pentagon Talks Stall Over AI Guardrails (ZH)

Contract renewal talks between Anthropic and the Pentagon have stalled over how its Claude system can be used. The AI firm is seeking stricter limits before extending its agreement, according to a person familiar with the private negotiations and Bloomberg. At the heart of the dispute is control. Anthropic wants firm guardrails to prevent Claude from being used for mass surveillance of Americans or to build weapons that operate without human oversight. The Defense Department’s position is broader: it wants flexibility to deploy the model so long as its use complies with the law. The tension reflects a larger debate over how far advanced AI should go in military settings.


Bloomberg writes that Anthropic has tried to distinguish itself as a safety-first AI developer. It created a specialized version, Claude Gov, tailored to U.S. national security work, designed to analyze classified information, interpret intelligence and process cybersecurity data. The company says it aims to serve government clients while staying within its own ethical red lines. “Anthropic is committed to using frontier AI in support of US national security,” a spokesperson said, describing ongoing discussions with the Defense Department as “productive conversations, in good faith.” The Pentagon, however, struck a firmer tone. “Our nation requires that our partners be willing to help our warfighters win in any fight,” spokesman Sean Parnell said, adding that the relationship is under review and emphasizing troop safety.

Some defense officials have grown wary, viewing reliance on Anthropic as a potential supply-chain vulnerability. The department could ask contractors to certify they are not using Anthropic’s models, according to a senior official—an indication that the disagreement could ripple beyond a single contract. Rival AI developers are watching closely. Tools from OpenAI, Google and xAI are also being discussed for Pentagon use, with companies working to ensure their systems can operate within legal boundaries. Anthropic secured a two-year Pentagon deal last year involving Claude Gov and enterprise products, and the outcome of its current negotiations could influence how future agreements with other AI providers are structured.

Read more …

“.. a median hourly wage of $15 and a median annual salary of $22,620.”

• Behind the Burnout and High Turnover Rates in the AI Industry (ET)

Across the artificial intelligence (AI) supply chain, insiders describe a precarious, high-turnover workforce with limited support and stability. This “invisible” human labor that labels data, evaluates outputs, and filters harmful material has become a revolving door of talent that navigates high-pressure gigs and burnout. Moreover, workers and industry experts say this talent churn can degrade the very AI models that workers are paid to improve. Across the board, workers who are hired to support, evaluate, or operationalize AI systems face similar challenges: high-stress environments that often involve complex tasks, unrealistic timelines, job instability, and low wages.


It’s no secret that the tech industry has long suffered from high turnover rates. Numbers vary, but many studies put the average rate of talent churn in the tech sector at between 13 percent and 18 percent. This becomes clear when considering the cost of replacing tech talent, which can be up to 150 percent of a worker’s salary, including recruitment expenses, onboarding time, productivity losses, and effects on customer relationships.Some have said that the loss of institutional knowledge alone makes worker retention critical. “People love to talk about the ‘magic’ of AI, but the work culture behind it is a meat grinder. I’ve seen talent turnover in model evaluation hit record highs because the work is repetitive and psychologically draining,” Barry Kunst, vice president of marketing at Solix Technologies, told The Epoch Times.

“When you lose a lead researcher to churn, you don’t just lose a body; you lose the ‘why’ behind the model’s safety guardrails.” Kunst said this is why he’s adamant about AI workforce stability, which he said correlates directly with model reliability. “If you’re rotating contractors every six months to keep labor costs low, your data governance will fail, period,” he said.Sovic Chakrabarti, the director of digital marketing agency Icy Tales, told The Epoch Times: “Team turnover is more common than people expect. “In some groups, especially those tied to model training, evaluation, or data labeling pipelines, churn can happen every few months.

“Short contracts, project-based funding, and constant reorganization mean people cycle in and out quickly.” Chakrabarti said he has worked on the development and support side of AI systems long enough to see patterns that, as he put it, “rarely make it into public discussions.” “That [workforce] churn absolutely leads to lost knowledge,” he said. “Important context about why a dataset was filtered a certain way, why a safety rule exists, or why a model behaved oddly in testing often lives in someone’s head. ”When that person leaves, documentation rarely captures the full story, according to Chakrabarti. “New hires inherit systems without understanding the original tradeoffs, which can quietly introduce risks,” he said.

Burnout rates among information technology workers are high. LeadDev’s Engineering Leadership Report 2025 found that 22 percent of the 617 polled engineering leaders and developers felt critically burned out at work. An additional 24 percent of respondents reported feeling “moderately” burned out, while 33 percent reported low levels of burnout. Some of this is driven by job security fears after two years of layoffs at big tech companies, but the pay for many of the workers fueling the AI revolution is often low. The Alphabet Workers Union, Communications Workers of America, and TechEquity led a study on the working conditions of U.S.-based data workers and found conditions similar to those of tech contractors in developing countries.

In a survey of 160 U.S. data workers, 86 percent worried about being able to pay their bills, and 25 percent relied on public assistance to get by. The same group reported a median hourly wage of $15 and a median annual salary of $22,620. Eighty-five percent of the study group said they’re expected to be “on call” for work, but only 30 percent reported being paid for that time. More than a quarter of respondents reported spending more than eight hours per week on call. “If there’s anything I wanted the general public to know, it is that there are low paid people [in the United States] who are not even treated as humans—just little more than employee ID numbers—out there making the 1 billion dollar, trillion dollar AI systems that are supposed to lead our entire society and civilization into the future,” Kirn Gill II, a search quality rater working on Google products at Telus, told the Communications Workers of America.

Chakrabarti said the work culture behind AI fuels these challenges. “There is real pressure to keep labor costs low,” he said. “I have seen unrealistic timelines, understaffed teams, and expectations to ‘do more with less’ while the stakes keep rising. That tension creates stress, especially when the systems affect millions of users.”

Read more …

“.. the party is so embarrassed by Clinton’s Epstein connections that they’re willing to airbrush him out of history entirely.”

• Bill Clinton Just Got Brutally Dissed By His Own Party (Matt Margolis)

The Democratic Party put together a Presidents’ Day tribute on social media that snubbed one of their most electorally successful presidents in modern history. Bill Clinton, the guy who won two terms and left office with a 66% approval rating, got left out of the party’s official image like the creepy uncle no one wants to sit next to at Thanksgiving dinner. The post from the Democrat Party’s official X account showed a “Happy Presidents’ Day” collage featuring JFK, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, FDR, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden. Notice anyone missing? The only Democrat presidents they skipped were Clinton and Harry Truman. You could probably argue that to today’s Democrat Party, all old white men look alike, but Clinton is still quite active in the party, and probably should have been included.


Naturally, the RNC pounced, retweeting the Democrats’ post with a photo of Clinton sitting next to Hillary, both looking appropriately concerned. “Forget someone again??” the caption reads. It’s the kind of burn that lands because everyone knows something weird is happening here. Fox News Digital reached out to the DNC to ask whether leaving Clinton out was intentional, but they didn’t receive an answer. The Clinton Foundation didn’t respond either. That silence speaks volumes when your own party features Jimmy Carter and Joe Biden—two presidents who collectively gave America stagflation, hostage crises, the Afghanistan disaster, and 40-year-high inflation—yet can’t find room for the guy they used to credit with balancing the budget. However, that was technically Newt Gingrich who did that. So, why did Bill get dissed? Fox News Digital offers a theory.

“Clinton, one of the most popular presidents in recent history, was not without his share of scandal. The late Kenneth Starr investigated Clinton for connections to a controversial 1978 land deal in the Ozarks nicknamed “Whitewater” dating to Clinton’s time as Arkansas attorney general. While Clinton was never charged with wrongdoing, Arkansas business partners Jim and Susan McDougal were convicted in connection with the failed Whitewater deal. Hillary Clinton had previously worked for the law firm that represented Jim McDougal’s bank. Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, Clinton’s successor, was also convicted. But the Whitewater case led Starr to discover what became the Monica Lewinsky scandal — wherein Clinton allegedly had a sexual relationship with a White House intern. On January 26, 1998, Clinton famously maintained his innocence in the face of impeachment over Starr’s case, declaring at the end of a childcare policy press conference:”

Not buying that. If presidential scandals were enough to warrant exclusion from the image, Barack Obama would never have made it. Many on social media speculate it has something to do with the fact that Clinton’s name appears all over the Epstein files. He flew on Epstein’s private jet at least 16 times between 2001 and 2003. Recently released documents include photos of Clinton with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including one showing a shirtless Clinton in a hot tub with someone identified by the DOJ as a victim of Epstein’s abuse.

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton recently agreed to testify before Congress about their relationship with Epstein after facing potential criminal contempt charges. Sure, they claim House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer is employing dirty tricks. Still, when your party won’t even put your picture on a Presidents’ Day card, the only possible explanation is that the party is so embarrassed by Clinton’s Epstein connections that they’re willing to airbrush him out of history entirely.

Happy Presidents’ Day, Bill.

Read more …

“The procedure for checking in prostitutes is hardly rigorous.”

• The Obama Admin’s Prostitution Scandal And The Ruemmler-Epstein Connection (ZH)

Remember Obama’s 2012 Colombian prostitution scandal? Turns out, Jeffrey Epstein was involved… Newly released Department of Justice documents from the Epstein files have exposed a previously unknown connection between a 2012 White House advance-team scandal in Cartagena, Colombia, and Kathryn Ruemmler – the former Obama White House counsel who later became Goldman Sachs’ top lawyer. Ruemmler resigned from Goldman late last week, after the latest Epstein document dump revealed her extensive, affectionate, and years-long correspondence with the convicted sex offender.


The emails show she called him “Uncle Jeffrey,” accepted expensive gifts, and turned to him for advice on sensitive legal and reputational matters – including how to respond to a 2014 Washington Post report that accused her of helping suppress evidence of prostitution involving a rich kid White House aide whose daddy was a huge Obama donor. The WaPo report, by all accounts, cost Ruemmler a job as Obama’s Attorney General.

The 2012 Cartagena Prostitution Scandal
In April 2012, ahead of President Obama’s trip to the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia, at least 20 Secret Service agents, military personnel, and others were involved in hiring prostitutes. The scandal led to multiple firings and disciplinary actions. A lesser-known element involved Jonathan Dach, a 25-year-old Yale Law student and unpaid White House advance-team volunteer (son of prominent Democratic donor Leslie Dach). Hotel records obtained by investigators showed a prostitute was checked into Dach’s room at the Hilton Cartagena shortly after midnight on April 3, 2012.

Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan briefed White House counsel Kathryn Ruemmler on the evidence. The White House conducted a review, interviewed advance-team members (including Dach), and publicly declared “no indication of any misconduct” by White House personnel. Dach was later cleared and went on to work at the State Department. More recently, Dach was found to have ‘chronically violated state rules’ in his role as former chief of staff to Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D) by using a state vehicle as his personal car for nearly two years “and driving at speeds constituting reckless driving under Connecticut law.”

The 2014 Washington Post Revival and Ruemmler’s Response
In October 2014, while Ruemmler was in private practice at Latham & Watkins and reportedly under consideration to replace Eric Holder as Attorney General – WaPo published new details. Reporters Carol D. Leonnig and David Nakamura revealed that the White House had received specific evidence (hotel records and witness accounts) implicating a White House advance-team member but had not fully investigated or disclosed it. On October 9, 2014, Epstein emailed Ruemmler: “Doing fine. Was talking to reporters until late in the morning last night. Trying to isolate/contain wapo.”mOn October 17, 2014, Ruemmler forwarded Epstein a draft of her response to the Post reporter and asked for his input. In the draft she downplayed the allegations, writing:

“The whole thing is ridiculous – they had to obtain the record ‘under the table’ because the last thing the Hilton wanted to do is to voluntarily give over info implicating the privacy of their guests. The procedure for checking in prostitutes is hardly rigorous.”

Read more …

“When asked what question he most wanted answered upon becoming president, Obama joked that it was: “where are the aliens?“

• Aliens Are ‘Real’ – Obama (RT)

Former US President Barack Obama has said he believes that aliens are “real” but dismissed longstanding conspiracy theories that the US is concealing proof of extraterrestrial life at a secretive military facility called Area 51. Obama made the remarks on the No Lie podcast with Brian Tyler Cohen released on Saturday. Asked whether aliens “are real,” the ex-president replied in the affirmative, adding “I haven’t seen them, and they’re not being kept in Area 51.” “There’s no underground facility, unless there’s this enormous conspiracy and they hid it from the president of the United States,” he added.


When asked what question he most wanted answered upon becoming president, Obama joked that it was: “where are the aliens?” Area 51 is a highly classified US Air Force facility at Groom Lake in southern Nevada. The CIA officially acknowledged the site’s existence in 2013, when declassified documents revealed it had been used since 1955 to test the U-2 spy plane and other experimental aircraft. The facility’s secrecy sparked decades of speculation about extraterrestrial research, including theories that crashed alien spacecraft were stored there and that it was a venue for meetings with extraterrestrials. There have been a few UFO sightings in the area, but the CIA claimed they were test flights of the U-2 spy plane.

However, conspiracy theories have also been fueled by hundreds of alleged UFO sightings elsewhere. Pentagon officials told Congress in May 2022 that there were nearly 400 reports of unidentified aerial phenomena by military personnel, up from 144 tracked between 2004 and 2021. In 2024, the Pentagon stressed, however, that it had “no evidence to indicate extraterrestrial life has visited the planet.” Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump said that he was not a “believer” in extraterrestrial life, adding, though, that he had met with “serious people that say there’s some really strange things that they see flying around out there.”

Read more …

“..a $100 million kickback scheme in Ukraine’s struggling energy sector.”

• Zelensky Launches F-bomb Laden Rant In Munich (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky delivered a profanity-laden tirade urging Western countries to expel Russian citizens, including students.Speaking to Politico Playbook on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference Saturday, Zelensky called on US President Donald Trump and European leaders to ramp up sanctions against Moscow.“Europeans still didn’t put sanctions on nuclear energy of Russians, on [the state-run energy company] Rosatom, on people, on their relatives, on their children which live in Europe, which live in the United States, which study in the universities of Europe, which have real estate in the United States,” Zelensky said. “So, they have a lot of real estate, they have children, relatives everywhere. F**k away to Russia. Go home,” he added.


Zelensky’s remarks come as the US, Russia, and Ukraine prepare for a third round of three-way talks in Geneva. Moscow has criticized measures targeting Russian nationals and cultural “cancellation” abroad as Russophobia. The trip also comes amid a conscription crisis and ongoing blackouts in Ukraine caused by Russian air strikes, which Russia says aim to weaken Ukraine’s defense production. Zelensky’s reputation has been tarnished by multiple corruption scandals involving his inner circle, prompting the resignation of two government ministers and his longtime chief of staff. On Monday, anti-corruption agencies charged former Energy Minister German Galushchenko with money laundering linked to a $100 million kickback scheme in Ukraine’s struggling energy sector.

Read more …


Very correct: “Zelensky received the expected applause from Munich’s hawkish audience and once again demanded security guarantees from Washington. In plain terms, he was asking the United States to commit itself to direct war with Russia.”

• The War Party Takes Munich (Kosachev)

This year’s Munich Security Conference was not merely disappointing; it was pointless. It produced no new ideas and no added value. Instead, it resembled a rally of a self-styled “coalition of the willing” for war. That, unfortunately, is consistent with Germany’s long tradition of failing to draw the right lessons from history. Western European leaders spoke almost exclusively about rearmament and the creation of an independent military capability aimed, openly or implicitly, at confrontation with Russia. The tone was unmistakable: preparation for war, not peace. At the same time, participants repeated the familiar mantra that “more must be done” to ensure Ukraine’s victory. The contradiction went largely unnoticed. What emerged instead was a disturbing impression that Western Europe’s war party has overwhelmed everything else, including common sense and the instinct for self-preservation.


There was something unsettlingly familiar about the atmosphere. One could not help recalling Germany in the spring of 1945, when defeat was inevitable yet resistance continued with fanatical intensity, sustained by fantasies of miracle weapons. In Munich itself, Bavarian Gauleiter Paul Giesler crushed an attempted surrender on April 28, 1945 by executing Wehrmacht officers and civilians who wanted to hand the city over to the Americans without a fight. Hitler rewarded this “loyalty” by appointing Giesler interior minister the day before his own suicide. Within days, Giesler shot his wife and then himself. History rarely repeats itself neatly, but it often rhymes, and Munich echoed loudly this year.

On stage, European figures such as Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, alongside American voices like Senator Roger Wicker, openly called for supplying Ukraine with ever more advanced weapons, including Tomahawk missiles, described with an alarming casualness as if it were a modern “wunderwaffe.” The old refrain was repeated yet again: Ukraine can win, but Russia is also poised to attack NATO. This logical contradiction has become a permanent feature of Western discourse.

Washington, for its part, played along. But cautiously. This time, it sent the ‘good cop’: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in contrast to last year’s ‘bad cop’, J.D. Vance. Gone were the blunt warnings about Western Europe’s inevitable collapse if it stayed the course. Instead came soothing assurances of American support and solidarity. Yet the underlying message remained unchanged: without the United States, the EU cannot survive. The transatlantic alliance was not restored; it was merely cosmetically repaired. Zelensky received the expected applause from Munich’s hawkish audience and once again demanded security guarantees from Washington. In plain terms, he was asking the United States to commit itself to direct war with Russia.

Germany, meanwhile, declared its readiness to rearm and assume leadership of the Western slice of Europe in a new confrontation with Moscow. At the same time, Emmanuel Macron cautiously signalled that the bloc must eventually negotiate with Russia. Albeit, if only to avoid being excluded altogether while talks proceed in a Russia-Ukraine-US format. He even floated extending the French and British nuclear umbrella to other NATO members. In other words, “all quiet on the Western Front.” Once again, the conclusion is unavoidable: there is little to be gained from dialogue with this EU. And furthermore, one is reminded why it was precisely “civilized” and “enlightened” Europe that became the cradle of the two most devastating wars in human history.

Equally telling were the subjects that never surfaced. Talk of corruption in Ukraine, or of where Western funds are going, or when accountability will begin, was absent. So too was the fate of Venezuela’s leadership and the precedent set for international law. Iran was barely mentioned, despite last year’s US-Israeli military actions and the obvious risks of escalation. Even Greenland appeared only in whispered conversations offstage. Why complicate matters, when invoking the Russian threat remains the safest and most reliable option? That, in essence, is all one needs to know about this year’s Munich Conference. A forum with a promising youth and a respectable maturity, now drifting toward ideological exhaustion.

Read more …

“Territory has, inevitably, grown in importance over time. But the core issue has remained unchanged: the principles governing security on the continent.”

• The US Wants a Deal. Russia Wants a System (Lukyanov)

After last August’s meeting between the Russian and American presidents in Alaska, a new phrase entered diplomatic circulation: the “spirit of Anchorage.” The substance of the talks was never officially disclosed and can only be reconstructed from selective leaks. The form, however, was striking: a personal greeting, an honor guard, a shared limousine. Symbolism mattered. It was meant to signal seriousness. Yet the question remains: what exactly was born in Anchorage? And does it belong in the lineage of earlier diplomatic “spirits” that once defined entire eras? The term itself is not new. Before Anchorage, there was the “spirit of Yalta,” the “spirit of Helsinki,” and, briefly, the “spirit of Malta.”


All three marked turning points in relations between the great powers during the second half of the twentieth century. Yalta in 1945 laid the foundations of the post-war world order, recognizing the USSR and the United States as its central pillars. Helsinki in 1975 codified that order, even as it quietly set the stage for its eventual erosion. Malta in 1989 symbolized the end of the Cold War and, with it, the division of Europe.These meetings differed in format and outcome. Yalta brought together three victorious powers dividing spheres of influence. Helsinki was the product of prolonged multilateral negotiations designed to stabilize a tense status quo. Malta was a bilateral encounter that effectively ratified the retreat of one side under the banner of a “new world order.” But they shared one defining feature: each sought to determine the parameters of the international system itself.

Does Anchorage belong in this tradition? Formally speaking, the Alaskan talks focused on Ukraine. That immediately raises a fundamental question. How realistic is it to reach a durable settlement without the direct participation of one of the warring parties? Such an approach is only viable if one of the interlocutors, in this case the United States, is both willing and able to compel Kiev to accept decisions taken without it. Events since August suggest that Washington lacks this capacity, despite its considerable leverage. A more convincing explanation, however, is that it lacks the motivation. Donald Trump has made resolving the Ukrainian conflict a matter of personal prestige. But prestige is not the same as strategic necessity. For Trump and the narrow circle around him, the precise configuration of a settlement matters less than the avoidance of an outright Russian victory. Beyond that, the exact line of demarcation, and the conditions under which it is maintained, are not critical.

The United States would only deploy the full weight of its political and economic power if it perceived these negotiations as shaping a new world order. That was the case at Yalta, Helsinki, and Malta. It is not the case today. Moscow, by contrast, has invested Anchorage with precisely this broader meaning. From the very beginning of the military operation, Russia has framed the conflict not primarily in territorial terms, but as a question of European security architecture. Territory has, inevitably, grown in importance over time. But the core issue has remained unchanged: the principles governing security on the continent.

Today, this is often described as the question of “security guarantees for Ukraine.” In reality, it concerns the broader system within which such guarantees would exist. This may ultimately prove the most serious obstacle to any agreement. Washington’s approach is different. The current American administration does not think in terms of comprehensive frameworks or shared rules. Its vision of world order is far more fragmented and instrumental. Control is exercised through economic pressure, military presence, and political leverage applied selectively to specific regions and problems. It is a model of targeted intervention rather than systemic design. A kind of forceful acupuncture.

In this context, agreements are not about principles, but about transactions. They are designed to deliver concrete, often mercantile, outcomes rather than to establish enduring rules of interaction. Ukraine, from this perspective, is one issue among many, not the axis around which a new order would be built. If the goal is merely a political settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, the Russian-American format is insufficient. Ukraine itself would have to be involved, as would Europe. While Europe’s strategic weight is limited, it retains a significant capacity to obstruct any settlement it finds unacceptable. Ignoring this reality would be a mistake.

For the “spirit of Anchorage” to stand alongside Yalta, Helsinki, and Malta, it would need to aim higher: at the construction of a new global political system to replace the one that emerged after the Second World War and has endured, in various forms, for nearly 80 years. Washington does not see Moscow as a central interlocutor in such a project. At most, this role is tentatively assigned to China. However, even that is far from settled. As a result, the “spirit of Anchorage” hovers uneasily between two incompatible interpretations of what the conversation is actually about.

From the Russian perspective, it is about redefining the foundations of European and global security. From the American side, it is about managing a specific conflict without altering the broader architecture of power. When the parties are not even discussing the same subject, the risk is obvious. In such circumstances, the “spirit” inevitably fades, becoming less a guiding force than a rhetorical shadow. A ghost of an agreement that never quite came into being. Could this change? Possibly, but only if events intervene that force both sides to move beyond regional calculations and confront the need for a more fundamental reordering. Until then, Anchorage remains suspended between ambition and reality, its promise unfulfilled.

Read more …

Complex.

• The Middle East Is Splitting Into Rival Blocs (Sadygzade)

Across the globe, the post-Cold War settlement that once carried the promise of Western primacy is no longer taken as an unshakeable fact. Its vocabulary remains in circulation, yet real-time history continues to contest its authority. In the space left behind, many states are seeking a different idea of order, one that sounds less like instruction from a single center and more like negotiated balance among several centers. In such a moment, regions that were once treated as arenas begin to behave like authors. The Greater Middle East is one of the first places where this change is becoming visible as a messy strategic recomposition in which security is no longer outsourced and alliances are no longer assumed to be permanent.


For decades, a simple model dominated strategic thinking in the region. Washington would remain the ultimate guarantor, and regional states would calibrate their risks inside the umbrella of American deterrence. That model did not always prevent wars, but it provided a framework for expectation. Even when trust frayed, the underlying assumption was that the US could be induced to act, and that the cost of ignoring its interests would be prohibitive. In recent years, however, the region has experienced a succession of shocks that have made the old calculus feel less reliable.

One of the most dramatic was the Israeli strike in Doha in September 2025, an operation that pushed a long-simmering anxiety into the open by showing how quickly escalation could breach political red lines in the Gulf. If such an event could occur with only limited external restraint, then the notion of an automatic security backstop began to look like a story the region told itself rather than a guarantee the system could still deliver.

It was in this atmosphere that the Saudi-Pakistani Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement, signed in September 2025, drew intense attention. It suggested that major regional players were preparing for a future in which protection would be organized through layered partnerships rather than delegated to a single patron. Analysts noted that the pact followed a pattern of disappointment with external responses, including perceptions of American restraint or hesitation when regional allies felt exposed. Whether the agreement functions as a hard war guarantee or as a strategic warning, it belongs to a wider movement in which states are building options.

Two emerging security configurations are now becoming visible across the Greater Middle East, and it is important to name their participants clearly. On one side, a prospective bloc is coalescing around Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, and Oman, with this core increasingly presented as a sovereignty-driven framework meant to reduce reliance on external guarantees and to deter destabilizing escalation, while Qatar, Algeria, and several other states observe this alignment with growing interest as a possible partner network rather than as a formal membership.

On the other side, a countervailing alignment is taking shape around Israel and the United Arab Emirates, whose partnership is reinforced by defense industrial cooperation and advanced technology collaboration, and whose strategic reach is further strengthened by Azerbaijan, which acts less as a conventional member than as a pivotal partner connecting overlapping networks because it maintains close ties to Türkiye while simultaneously sustaining deep security and energy links with Israel and expanding cooperation with Abu Dhabi.

Read more …

” In the 2017/18 tax year Ratcliffe was the fifth highest taxpayer in the country, footing a bill of £110.5 million.”

• In Defence of Sir Jim Ratcliffe (Charles Johnson)

Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s statement that Britain has been “colonised by immigrants” has sparked a fierce reaction. From Starmer to Bluesky, to the Athletic and all the football social media pundits in between, the co-owner of Manchester United has been bombarded with the same attack lines repeatedly. He has been called a tax dodging, racist immigrant hypocrite. Such an uproar has flared up in such a short space of time because Ratcliffe is radically different from those who have issued similar statements before. Ratcliffe is not a political figure: you do not see billionaires nor football club owners voicing discontent like this. The pushback has been fierce because Ratcliffe has no political incentive to say any of this. He isn’t running for office, seeking favour, or chasing votes — which makes his intervention harder to dismiss. Part of the backlash, too, reflects an unease that his diagnosis may be accurate.


The remarks came from an initial conversation regarding the economic challenges Britain faces in general, not solely on immigration. The snippet that has been so widely shared is merely part of a wider statement of the economic problems Britain faces; Ratcliffe refers to the issues of “immigration” and “nine million people” on benefits simultaneously. Colonised is a strong opening salvo for a figure such as Ratcliffe, who is not known for any previous anti-migration stance. This generated responses of tone policing from his critics – cries that his choice of words were “disgraceful and deeply divisive” and that “this language and leadership has no place in English football” from Kick It Out, a notable “Anti Racism” football pressure group. There was no attempt to argue or debate: this was no more than tone policing, of “mate mate mate, you can’t say that mate”. It did not engage with the substantive point. It was not an argument.

The Prime Minister has pushed for Ratcliffe to apologise. Less than a year ago, Starmer was referring to Britain as an ”Island of Strangers”; he has little argument here. Sir Ed Davey has stated that Ratcliffe is “totally wrong” and is “out of step with British Values”. Once again this is weak tone policing, not an argument. Regardless, which British values are being violated in particular? What are British values precisely meant to mean here? The fact is that Ratcliffe’s vocabulary choice is nowhere near as divisive as the impacts of mass migration in the last quarter century.

Mass migration is the most important issue in British political debate. It has bought sectarianism, Bengali and Palestinian politics swinging both local council and Parliamentary elections, a deepening of housing crisis, the rape and murder of British women from taxpayer funded hotels and programs which bloat the welfare state even further. It is undeniable mass migration has defined British politics of the 2010s onwards. It has been much more harmful and divisive than any comment made by Sir Jim Ratcliffe. His words are nothing compared to the actions of Deng Chol Majek, or Hedash Kebatu, to name a couple of examples.

Critics have also cried that Ratcliffe is “an immigrant himself, dodging tax in Monaco”. The difference between Ratcliffe and migration into Britain is so different they are almost incomparable. In the 2017/18 tax year Ratcliffe was the fifth highest taxpayer in the country, footing a bill of £110.5 million. With such an extraordinarily high bill, it is no wonder that he has since moved to Monaco. Meanwhile, the average salary of of a migrant entering Britain in 2023 (which has fallen by £10,000 since 2021) was £32,946, according to a report by the Centre for Migration Control. From this we can estimate a migrant would pay about £5,000 in income tax. That means it would take over 22,000 (statistically average) migrants to foot the tax bill that Ratcliffe paid in one year alone. Ratcliffe has been an exceptional cash cow to the British state. He has been taxed incredible amounts and contributed more to this country than almost anyone currently living; to call him hypocritical since he dared to criticise migration and its impact on the welfare state is simply not fair.

Census data from the ONS in 2021 shows that migrants from four nations – Somalia, Nigeria, Jamaica and Bangladesh – head over 104,000 social homes in London alone. With such incredible numbers of subsidised housing going to foreign born nationals, it is absolutely correct to state that mass migration is costing the British economy a fortune. The same census states that over 70% of Somali born households are in social housing in England and Wales, whilst also being of lowest contributors to income tax in the nation – paying well under the £5,000 stated per head previously. The increase and sheer scale of benefit reliance for many immigrants in Britain is not sustainable, and it is a problem that is right to be addressed.

Perhaps the most nonsensical argument presented by some is that as co-owner of Manchester United he employs a significant number of immigrant players. Bruno Fernandes is not living in social housing in Wythenshawe. Benjamin Sesko is not in a single bed council flat in Hulme. When he arrived in Manchester last year, the first thing Senne Lammens did was not register for Universal Credit. Not a single foreign player is a drain on the state. They are, as elite athletes in the most lucrative league in the world, very clearly exceptions to the norm of British migration. The difference between Bruno Fernandes, who earns a reported £300,000 a week, and the over 40% of Bangladeshi immigrants who are economically inactive should really not need spelling out. We are referring to just 17 foreign senior team players who all earn more in a week than the average migrant – or Brit – will earn in a year. It is ludicrous to even attempt to compare the two. Regardless, employing or working with immigrants does not mean you waive your right to criticise the state of affairs in Britain. As an Englishman, Sir Jim Ratcliffe has a given and inalienable right to comment on the affairs of his country.

Read more …

“The move by DOJ is extremely rare — but not unprecedented — considering Bannon was already convicted and served time in prison. ”

• Trump DOJ Seeks To Dismiss Steve Bannon’s J6 Conviction and Indictment (JTN)

In a stunning reversal, the Trump Justice Department on Monday asked the Supreme Court and a federal judge to dismiss the criminal contempt indictment and conviction of Steve Bannon for refusing to testify in the January 6 investigation by Congress, declaring such a request is in the “interests of justice” after years of politically weaponized lawfare by Democrats. The move by DOJ is extremely rare — but not unprecedented — considering Bannon was already convicted and served time in prison. “The government has determined in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice,” Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in a brief to the nine justices, who were reviewing an appeal from Bannon’s lawyers.


“The government has accordingly lodged a motion in the district court under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a) to vacate the judgment and dismiss the indictment with prejudice,” the motion also states The filing noted that the law “allows the government to seek dismissal even after a jury finds the defendant guilty and the district court enters judgment.” Separately, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Perro asked a federal judge in Washington D.C. to vacate Bannon‘s conviction and dismiss the indictment. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Just the News that the Democrat-led House January 6 Select Committee was part of a larger weaponization machine that abused the justice system.

“Today the Department of Justice told the Supreme Court that Steve Bannon’s conviction arising from the J6 ‘Unselect’ Committee’s improper subpoena should be vacated,” Blanche said. “Under the leadership of Attorney General Bondi, this Department will continue to undo the prior administration’s weaponization of the justice system.” The request to the two courts to abandon Bannon’s case is the latest twist in a five-year legal saga. The Democrat-led House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol issued a subpoena on Sept. 23, 2021, to Bannon demanding documents and testimony related to the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6 attack.

Bannon, a private citizen, had been a policy adviser to President Donald Trump for approximately seven months in 2017. He declined to produce any documents, and the House voted the next month to hold him in contempt of Congress. On Nov. 12, 2021, federal prosecutors in the Biden administration secured a grand jury indictment against Bannon on two counts of criminal contempt of Congress. He was convicted and served time in prison.

Read more …

“I provided office space for him and his Rainbow Coalition, for years, in the Trump Building at 40 Wall Street..”

“He had much to do with the Election, without acknowledgment or credit, of Barack Hussein Obama, a man who Jesse could not stand..”

• Trump’s Surpising Reaction to Jesse Jackson’s Death (Matt Margolis)

Jesse Jackson, the polarizing civil rights figure and race hustler, died Tuesday morning at age 84. Though his cause of death was not immediately shared, he had been previously diagnosed with a rare neurological disorder called progressive supranuclear palsy, which is reportedly similar to Parkinson’s disease. While the media will inevitably lionize him as a civil rights icon, Jackson’s legacy is far more complicated—marked by allegations of extortion, self-promotion, the notorious exaggeration of his role in the events surrounding Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination, and his blatant attempts to be seen as King’s successor in the civil rights movement. You can read more about that in my colleague Rick Moran’s piece here.



President Donald Trump, who knew Jackson for decades before their political paths diverged, has weighed in on the controversial figure’s death with a lengthy and personal statement on Truth Social, reflecting on their long relationship. And it’s not at all what I expected. Last year, Trump’s reaction to the death of Rob Reiner and his wife was rather — well, let’s just say I wasn’t a fan of it. Naturally, I was expecting something similar about Jackson, and I was surprised to see it wasn’t like that at all. “The Reverend Jesse Jackson is Dead at 84,” Trump wrote. “I knew him well, long before becoming President.” He described Jackson as “a good man, with lots of personality, grit, and ‘street smarts,’” adding, “He was very gregarious – Someone who truly loved people!”

Trump also took aim at Jackson’s critics, noting, “Despite the fact that I am falsely and consistently called a Racist by the Scoundrels and Lunatics on the Radical Left, Democrats ALL, it was always my pleasure to help Jesse along the way.” He detailed several ways he says he supported Jackson and causes important to him. “I provided office space for him and his Rainbow Coalition, for years, in the Trump Building at 40 Wall Street,” Trump said. He also pointed to his criminal justice reform efforts, writing that he “Responded to [Jackson’s] request for help in getting CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM passed and signed, when no other President would even try.”

Trump further cited his administration’s record on historically black colleges and universities. He said he “Single handedly pushed and passed long term funding for Historically Black Colleges & Universities (HBCUs), which Jesse loved, but also, which other Presidents would not do.” In addition, he noted that he “Responded to Jesse’s support for Opportunity Zones, the single most successful economic development package yet approved for Black business men/women, and much more.”

Calling Jackson “a force of nature like few others before him,” Trump also made a striking claim about Jackson’s political influence. “He had much to do with the Election, without acknowledgment or credit, of Barack Hussein Obama, a man who Jesse could not stand,” Trump wrote. Trump concluded by offering condolences to Jackson’s loved ones. “He loved his family greatly, and to them I send my deepest sympathies and condolences. Jesse will be missed!”

Read more …

“My constituency is the desperate, the damned, the disinherited, the disrespected and the despised.. ”

• Race Hustler or Civil Rights Icon? Jesse Jackson Dead At 84 (Rick Moran)

He was a con artist and a “race pimp.” He was an opportunist, a race hustler, and a corporate shakedown expert who enriched himself by using funds earmarked for “the cause” for his own personal gain. He was an admirer of notorious racist and virulent antisemite Louis Farrakhan.Jesse Jackson, who died on Tuesday at the age of 84, was all of that. He was also one of the greatest orators of the 20th century, a groundbreaking political figure, one of the best political strategists in American history, and a towering figure in local Chicago Democratic politics. You can’t look at Jesse Jackson as a one-dimensional stick figure. Like all humans, especially those who have left their mark on history, he was a mix of the good, the bad, and the ugly. You can’t simplify his sins or his enormous contributions to American politics. He was a force whose impact will be felt for generations.


There is no doubting Jesse Jackson’s impact on American history. He was the first “serious” black candidate for president in that he energized the base of the Democratic Party in a multi-racial coalition that forced the party to swing hard left. His grassroots coalition, known as “Operation Push,” was the most dynamic organization in the U.S. until a scandal brought it down.He was given the opportunity to speak in prime time in the 1984 and 1988 conventions despite finishing far behind Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis in the nomination race. Both speeches are considered among the finest convention speeches in American history. “My constituency is the desperate, the damned, the disinherited, the disrespected and the despised,” Mr. Jackson said at the 1984 Democratic National Convention in San Francisco. “They are restless and seek relief.”

“His transcendent rhetoric was inseparable from an imperfect human being whose ego, instinct for self-promotion, and personal failings were a source of unending irritation to many friends and admirers and targets for derision by many critics,” writes the New York Times. Prominent black social critic Stanley Crouch once said that Jackson “will be forever doomed by his determination to mythologize his life. That mythologizing began in earnest within minutes of the assassination of Martin Luther King in Memphis in 1968. While the rest of King’s inner circle was in shock, Jackson seized the moment, looking to wrest the mantle of “civil rights leader” from any of King’s close associates.

New York Times: “He was one of several aides who rushed toward Dr. King after he was shot. Later that night, Mr. Jackson hurried back to Chicago, parts of which were in flames in the unrest that followed the assassination. The next morning, he appeared on the “Today” show wearing the olive turtleneck sweater, blotted with blood, that he had worn the day before in Memphis. At a memorial convocation of the Chicago City Council that day, he declared, “I come here with a heavy heart because on my chest is the stain of blood from Dr. King’s head.” He added: “He went through, literally, a crucifixion. I was there. And I’ll be there for the resurrection.”

At least once publicly, he indicated that he was the last person to speak with Dr. King and that he had held his bloodied head as Dr. King lay dying. Others who were there said it never happened. Mr. Jackson’s account changed over time, from cradling Dr. King’s head to reaching toward it.If Mr. Jackson had been a figure of suspicion before, he became an object of outrage after Dr. King’s death. Some in Dr. King’s inner circle — including his eventual successor, Mr. Abernathy, and Hosea Williams, both of whom rushed to Dr. King when he was shot — questioned the accuracy of Mr. Jackson’s account and resented what they saw as his calculated grab to seize the spotlight as the First Mourner.

Over the decades, the story Jackson would tell about where he was and what he did during the assassination would go through several iterations. The storytelling revealed Jackson as a man desperate to be seen as King’s anointed successor. “If no one could replace Dr. King, Mr. Jackson was the one who spent most of his life trying,” writes the Times. It was never to be. Jackson couldn’t get out of the way of his own biases and racist dogmas. Where King reached out and begged for understanding, Jackson fueled the fires of racial division, while trying to claim he was a uniter, not a divider. His comments about New York City being “hymietown,” his friendship with Nation of Islam leader Farrakhan, and his insistence on being anywhere and everywhere a racial incident occurred in order to grab the spotlight and try to “racialize” the issue caused resentment and disgust among friend and foe alike. v

His “shakedowns” of corporate America, where he threatened companies with boycotts unless they adopted policies he prescribed (and donated cash to Operation PUSH), were outrageous and bordered on extortion. Jackson’s success as a political organizer was nothing short of astonishing. His 1988 presidential campaign was so successful that the Democrats were forced into trying to sideline him by putting up the white liberal governor of Massachusetts, Michael Dukakis.

He tried again in 1988, and this time he began as a party heavyweight. In the Super Tuesday primary on March 8, he ran first or second in 16 of the 21 primaries and caucuses. Party leaders, fearing they could not win a general election with an assertively left-wing Black presidential candidate, desperately looked for an alternative. In the end, Gov. Michael S. Dukakis of Massachusetts won the nomination, even though Mr. Jackson had earned almost seven million primary votes — 29 percent of the total.

No radical left candidate would come close to matching that total until Bernie Sanders in 2016. There is little doubt that Jesse Jackson was one of the primary personalities responsible for dragging the Democratic Party to the far left. Through his rhetoric and consummate organizing skills, Jackson made a huge impact on the Democratic Party and thus, on American history.

Read more …

“Rest in peace, Reverend. America owes you a massive debt of gratitude. ”

• Regarding the Rev (Christian Josi)

We lost an icon today. While it wasn’t entirely shocking considering his health condition, it certainly shocked me and, I imagine, many of us. He was an icon. Fought for others his entire life. Was at Dr. Martin Luther King’s side as he was assassinated. Did amazing work through Rainbow PUSH. My children watched him when he appeared on Sesame Street and thought he was cool. He was cool indeed. Imperfect? Yes, but aren’t we all… I met and befriended him later in his life. I’ll get to that.


But first, an old memory. It was 1984, and he was running for president. I was in college, living with my mother in Redlands, Calif. There is a place called the Redlands Bowl, which is sort of like a local Greek Theater… an outdoor venue. My mom’s house was a mile away. While at the time I was not a fan, I heard his speech from my bedroom. That powerful voice. And it impressed the young me. That strong, passionate voice… As for the meeting and befriending, I’ve been a longtime conservative (now libertarian) activist, but I have always sought out friends on the other side. My best friend from the other side is Dr. Julianne Malveaux, whom I used to watch on tv and get pissed off at.

When I moved to Washington years ago, a mutual friend put us together, and we became instant pals. Her work and history impressed me. Whilst rarely on the same page ideologically, our passions matched. Passion is power. No one had more passion or power than The Rev. Dr. Malveaux invited me two years ago to his annual MLK Day breakfast event. Before it began, she took me backstage. JD Pritzker was there, other important people, but I didn’t care. I just wanted to see him. In the flesh.

And what a nice visit it was. I introduced myself, and he said, “I know who you are, Josi”… as he looked me straight in the eye and shook my hand tight. It was a moment I will never forget. That’s when he won my loyalty. I saw his soul. The soul was a beautiful one.The look in his eye… the unexpected respect. We are a diverse nation. We can agree to disagree, but we cannot afford to be unkind to one another. Jesse liked everyone, as I saw firsthand. Maybe didn’t always agree, but there was respect. That’s the point. It’s not at all about partisanship; it’s about decency. Respect. Keeping Hope Alive is not a joke. It’s a fact. Now more than ever.

Rest in peace, Reverend. America owes you a massive debt of gratitude. And I owe you as well. Thank you for changing my view, for influencing me, and for your work to make our nation better.

Read more …

Too much conversation, not enough logic.

• Mr. Wonderful Destroyed CNN’s Anti-SAVE Act Narrative in 30 Seconds (Margolis)

Entrepreneur Kevin O’Leary was on CNN’s NewsNight Monday, where he wiped the floor with the panel over the SAVE Act. This bill does two simple things: It requires proof of citizenship to register to vote and a photo ID to vote. But you know how this goes — the usual suspects on the panel called it “voter suppression.” O’Leary cut through the noise with clean, clear logic, essentially making the point that it is stupid the United States hasn’t already implemented this before. Leigh McGowan, a podcaster you’ve probably never heard of, sparked the debate by declaring, “I think the thing is that the SAVE Act is a voter suppression act wrapped up as a Voter Protection Act. That is not what we’re doing here. We are trying to make it incredibly difficult for certain people to vote.”


She went on about “nationalized elections” and the “federal government taking over what is a state’s job,” invoking “states’ rights,” and lamenting that bills like the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the For the People Act had failed (even though those were actual efforts to nationalize elections). “What we’re doing here is not that,” she said. “We’re talking about having ICE around voting places. We’re talking about taking people and making them afraid.” That has nothing to do with the SAVE Act, but I digress.

Eventually, Kevin O’Leary stepped in and did what leftists dread: He brought up facts. “This narrative has to be bipartisan by every metric,” he began. “Every 24 months, we go through this debate over and over again when every country — in the Nordic countries, in Europe, France, Switzerland, Canada, Australia — solved this problem decades ago.” He broke it down to the basics. “You’ve got to be a citizen to vote. You got to prove it. We all agree at the table on that one.”Then he landed the blow. “There’s such advancement in technology to make sure there’s no cheating. We should implement it here and get all this crapola over with. It’s getting almost boring. Every 24 months, ‘Oh, the election’s rigged!’ ‘Oh, this guy’s doing this, this guy’s doing that.’ No other country has this narrative.”

McGowan tried to defuse it with a half-joking concession. “Kevin, I agree with you. It is getting incredibly boring.” “It’s ridiculous,” O’Leary told her. McGowan, likely realizing the hole she’d dug, tried again: “We talk about this all the time. It’s incredibly boring. But it’s also not an actual problem. Like when you look at the statistics, voting — illegals voting — is not an actual problem in this country. You do need to show ID to be able to vote.”That’s not actually true. Only a handful of states actually require a photo ID to vote. Nevertheless, O’Leary replied, “But you agree, if you’re not a citizen, you can’t vote.” That forced McGowan into agreeing with the core principle of the SAVE Act. “I would agree with that,” she said, “but that’s not what the problem is.

The problem is that we have 0.001% of people that are illegally voting.” She rattled off statistics from the Heritage Foundation and the Brennan Center, trying to reduce the whole issue to a rounding error and claim that the SAVE Act is somehow unnecessary. Abby Phillip broke in again, perhaps realizing O’Leary had shifted the debate onto plain common sense. “It’s already illegal,” she reminded. McGowan echoed, “No one is doing that.”“So why don’t you just say if you cheat and steal and you’re illegal, you go to jail?” O’Leary asked. It’s a fair question. The left claims that fraudulent voting isn’t an actual problem, yet they fight like hell to ensure we don’t pass laws to enforce what they claim isn’t even happening. You can’t have it both ways.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

SKY https://twitter.com/forallcurious/status/2023522805179183424?s=20 https://twitter.com/ScottJenningsKY/status/2023498116046221337?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 6 2026

Feb 062026
 
 February 6, 2026  Posted by at 10:47 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  57 Responses »


Albert Cuyp Cows in a river 1650


• UBS: SpaceX-xAI Merger Signals Rise Of “Orbital AI” (ZH)
• This is When Volatility Kicks In – Martin Armstrong (USAW)
• Netherlands To Tax Unrealized Gains: EU Wealth Grab And Global Implications (Kolbe)
• Bill Gates, Reid Hoffman Deny Epstein Malarkey, And Here’s Some Weird Sh*t (ZH)
• DHS Secretary Noem Identifies Another Leaker and Refers to DOJ for Prosecution (CTH)
• Why Democrats Fight Immigration Enforcement (Matt Margolis)
• How Many Handshakes From Epstein Are You? (Akhmedova)
• Nancy Mace Demands SUBPOENA For Bill Gates In Epstein Case (MN)
• Vance Slams ‘Incestuous’ US Elites Over Epstein Files (RT)
• Vance To Lead Sweeping Anti-Fraud Task Force Investigating California (ZH)
• Vance and Rubio Lead ‘Critical Minerals’ Strategic Ministerial Gathering (CTH)
• How Fast Is The Asian Population Ageing? (ZH)

 

 


What would YOU do with your days in a world where robots fulfill every need and want?

https://twitter.com/HustleBitch_/status/2019282180187291921

 

 

 

 


“… the merger of Musk’s SpaceX and xAI earlier this week, a transaction that has lifted his net worth to $850 billion..”

• UBS: SpaceX-xAI Merger Signals Rise Of “Orbital AI” (ZH)

In September 2024, we penned a note that Elon Musk was on track to become the world’s first trillionaire by 2027, driven by what we described as “space race bets.” That call looks increasingly correct following the merger of Musk’s SpaceX and xAI earlier this week, a transaction that has lifted his net worth to $850 billion. By contrast, former WeWork CEO Adam Neumann, who once famously said in 2019 that he wanted to live forever and be the first trillionaire, must be watching Musk’s empire soar to new heights in disgust. Musk’s decision to fold xAI into SpaceX is already being framed by UBS as an “orbital AI” investment angle, positioning Musk at the center of low-Earth orbit dominance and next-generation AI compute.


UBS trader Jephine Wong provided clients on Wednesday with what has caught her eye with the xAI-SpaceX deal:

“X” marks the spot as Elon Musk moved swiftly to fold xAI into SpaceX – an all stock deal valuing the combined entity at ~$1.25T (~$1T for SpaceX; ~$250B for xAI). The signal is clear: SpaceX is planting a flag in orbital AI, betting that a meaningful share of compute -essentially data centers in space- will be operating within 2–3 years. It’s a bold storyline to take into a potential summer/fall ~$50B IPO, but it also introduces new complexity for investors: SpaceX is generating ~$8B in EBITDA while xAI is burning approximately $1B per month. The roadshow narrative shifts from a pure- play space champion to a space-plus-AI hybrid -asking investors to balance operating strength against AI scale capex. EchoStar, a holder of SpaceX- linked assets, slipped on the news – a sign that not everyone is converted just yet.”

Read more …

“Europe needs war. You already had the finance ministers of France and Germany say that they may need IMF bailouts. This is why they want war. It’s a distraction.”

• This is When Volatility Kicks In – Martin Armstrong (USAW)

Legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong warned in late December to be ready for the “Perfect Storm for Debt, Economy, War, Gold & Silver.” The rain and thunder started at the beginning of February, and the storm is just beginning. Armstrong says, “This is where the volatility starts kicking in. I think Europe is so desperate for war. My concern with the Trump Administration is I would not step a foot in there. Europe needs war. You already had the finance ministers of France and Germany say that they may need IMF bailouts. This is why they want war. It’s a distraction.


Without war, people are going to figure out what the hell is going on. My pension fund is gone. Everything is defaulting. What’s going to happen? They are basically going to be storming the parliament with pitch forks.” Where are you going to see volatility? Armstrong says, “The volatility is in everything. You just saw the metals come down. They will probably consolidate before they go back up when people realize that Europe is going to go to war. What will happen? The dollar will go up. Metals will go up. It will be like WWI and WWII. The US became the financial capital of the world because Europe blew its brains out twice. Now, they think the third time is going to be the charm. . .. If there is war in Europe, it will be maybe in the summer. It does not look good.”

One bright spot was the Ukraine/Russia peace plan Armstrong put together at the request of President Trump. Armstrong says, “I did get a letter from President Trump . . . thanking me for writing it. So, it was sanctioned by Trump, and that’s pretty much everything he is doing except for NATO . . .. At the meeting, they told me you are correct. We know we are not going to be at war with Russia.” Let’s hope the US stays out of a coming Russia/Europe war. If we do, you can thank Martin Armstrong who put his peace plan together for Trump for free.

Armstrong also says the illegal alien invasion created by Democrats is the way they are trying to stay in power. Don’t be fooled by the close Dem wins in recent special elections. Armstrong’s “Socrates” computer has seen no advantage for either side for the midterms this year–yet. Armstrong sees the dollar staying strong and says, “You can’t park money in Canada, Mexico, Japan, or Europe. . ..Where are you going to put serious money? The United States is the only place—sorry. This is why the United States is what it is. Big money needs a place to park.”

On gold and silver, Armstrong is decidedly bullish on both metals and says, “This is not the major high. We have too much craziness on the horizon, from sovereign debt default to war. You are just getting a pullback and consolidation. . .. I am looking at the $165 to $200 per ounce area for silver. For gold, I am looking at resistance at the $8,500 per ounce level and, after that, $10,000 per ounce . . . in the next few years.”

Read more …

Taxing the money you haven’t yet made…

• Netherlands To Tax Unrealized Gains: EU Wealth Grab And Global Implications (Kolbe)

A fiscal storm is brewing in the Netherlands. With the potential introduction of a tax on unrealized capital gains, The Hague is set to become a testing ground for the systematic transfer of wealth from the private sector to the state. Across all government levels, the European Union is increasingly transforming into an aggressive parasitic system. A fundamental clash between the public and private sectors is intensifying across the EU. In March, both chambers of the Dutch parliament will decide on the implementation of an annual tax on unrealized gains. Going forward, all increases in value—from real estate and stocks to bonds and cryptocurrencies—would fall under this fiscal framework.


This move significantly accelerates the extraction of capital from the private sector, constituting a political rule violation. Already taxed income and assets would be hit again based on hypothetical gains, severely impeding private wealth accumulation. Support for this measure spans both right- and left-wing parties. It reflects a form of fiscal horseshoe logic, apparently anticipating a severe national financial crisis. For the EU as a whole, this is disastrous. That a nation with a debt ratio of just 46% and new borrowing of slightly over 2% of GDP would effectively declare war on private capital signals profound economic distortions in one of Europe’s most successful economies. One naturally asks: if this is happening in the Netherlands, what does it say about the rest of the European Union?

The End of the Productive Economy

A glance at Eurozone manufacturing suggests a storm is brewing. Deindustrialization in Germany, the largest industrial base in Europe, began in 2018 and has accelerated ever since, with massive capital flight. What applies to Germany applies even more so to the fragile peripheral European economies. For decades, Europe’s economy has shifted from production toward financial and wealth-rentier models. As financialization advances, production and value creation increasingly relocate abroad. This mirrors a process the United States underwent for decades and attempted to reverse under President Donald Trump.

European states see no escape from the economic death spiral created by expanding welfare systems, uncontrolled migration, and slowly shrinking core industrial productivity. Politicians are buying time through the expropriation of citizen savings to evade growing reform pressure. Once societal patience reaches a tipping point, Europe may witness scenes similar to those currently unfolding in the U.S., where the government has effectively declared war on illegal immigration amid a media-driven defensive battle coordinated by far-left forces, globalist media, and foreign foundations.

The pressing question for Europe: how long will native populations tolerate financial assault from the state without demanding corresponding migration and welfare reforms? Several EU states already levy progressive inheritance and gift taxes. Norway recently introduced a wealth tax of roughly 1% on net assets above €160,000 per person, raising eyebrows in one of Europe’s richest nations. Spain applies a progressive wealth tax up to 3.5%, plus a solidarity wealth levy for assets above €3 million—“solidarity,” a political buzzword used to rhetorically justify impending fiscal expropriation.

This expropriation is imminent. Coalition parties have spent the past year laying the groundwork for a massive expansion of inheritance taxes. It would be unwise to rule out Germany’s politically influenced Constitutional Court approving a national wealth tax in the future.

Read more …

Lots of them.

• DHS Secretary Noem Identifies Another Leaker and Refers to DOJ for Prosecution (CTH)

The good news is the process to identify the subversive agents inside the various offices of the administration continues to yield results. The bad news is there’s a lot of them to identify and remove. Dept of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem shares another leaker has been identified and removed. Additionally, she is referring their conduct to the Dept of Justice for criminal prosecution.

Both Noem and Gabbard appear to be continuing their methodical approach without fear or favor. Secretary Noem facing down the internal resistors within the FBI, who have been leaking about ICE enforcement operations. Director Gabbard working through the tentacles of the Intelligence Community to identify similarly minded IC agents. Meanwhile there was some media controversy about the FBI Special Agent in charge of the Atlanta Field office being removed from his position just prior to the execution of a federal search warrant in Fulton County. The reason for that removal now seems to come to light with the release of letter former Agent Paul Brown sent to Elections Director Nadine Williams giving her a head’s-up on the material the FBI was going to seize.

FBI Agent Brown asks Ms Williams to voluntarily hand over the material, which has the result of giving Fulton County a heads-up about the specifics of the material the FBI were going to gather and review in their search warrant. [..] Another positive outcome amid all of this, is honestly exposing FBI Director Kash Patel’s lack of operational control over the agency he heads. Each day more people are starting to realize what many of us have noted from the outset. Without first admitting the scale and scope of the problem within the FBI, there was no way Kash Patel was ever going to address it.

The issues with the FBI are obvious; a few examples: There were 40 FBI agents on the Robert Mueller investigation into Trump-Russia collusion. Why would any of them still be employed? Additionally, think about the J6 investigations and Arctic Frost, are those FBI agents still employed within the FBI? There is no apple, it’s all worms.

FEBRUARY 9, 2025:

Read more …

“…huge majorities of Republicans, Democrats, whites, Latinos, and black Americans all agreeing that you should show a photo ID to vote.”

• Why Democrats Fight Immigration Enforcement (Matt Margolis)

Democrats have spent years insisting illegal immigrants do not vote, yet Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries just gave the whole game away. In a letter to GOP leadershi p, they demanded a slate of “reforms” to immigration enforcement as the price for funding the Department of Homeland Security, including targeted enforcement, no masks, mandatory use of body cameras, and other demands, several of which I suspect are nonstarters. I don’t see Democrats getting anywhere with these, but the big thing is that buried in that list is a rather revealing demand:


“Protect Sensitive Locations – Prohibit funds from being used to conduct enforcement near sensitive locations, including medical facilities, schools, child-care facilities, churches, polling places, courts, etc.”

huge majorities of Republicans, Democrats, whites, Latinos, and black Americans all agreeing that you should show a photo ID to vote. Polling places? They went out of their way to include polling places right alongside hospitals, courts, and churches. There is only one thing that happens at polling places that would matter to illegal immigrants, and it is not the bake sale. Democrats have insisted for years that illegal immigrants cannot and do not vote, and that the whole issue is a right-wing myth. If that is true, then why is “polling places” even on their list of protected zones for immigration violators? No one accidentally adds “polling places” to a policy letter being negotiated at the leadership level. This is deliberate. It gives away what they are worried about… and what they are counting on.

“Democrats just admitted they think illegal aliens need to be protected at polling places. Why exactly would illegal aliens be at polling places? We MUST fully fund DHS AND pass the SAVE America Act,” Senator Katie Britt (R-Ala.) posted on X. That is the obvious question Democrats do not want to answer. If illegal immigrants are not supposed to be anywhere near the ballot box, then immigration enforcement near polling sites ought to be a non-issue.This comes as Republicans are pushing election reform through Congress with the SAVE Act. The SAVE Act is a straightforward concept: safeguard federal elections by ensuring only American citizens can cast ballots, and that an ID is required to vote.

Schumer’s response has been to smear the SAVE Act as “Jim Crow 2.0” and brand it “racist” and “dead on arrival.” That is the Democrats’ go-to play whenever Democrats feel threatened: slap a “Jim Crow” label on common-sense election rules and scare minorities into thinking Republicans are trying to stop them from voting. The problem is that even minorities aren’t buying it. As PJ Media previously reported, polling has shown consistent and overwhelming support for Voter ID laws for years. That consensus cuts across both party and race, with

Why are Democrats pushing so hard against common sense and trying to help illegal immigrants vote even though they’re not supposed to? Recent census projections show blue states are bleeding population while red states are gaining it, which will shift House seats and electoral votes after the 2030 reapportionment. As people flee high-tax, crime-ridden, Democrat-run states for freer red states, Democrats face shrinking power at the national level. That gives them every incentive to import a new population, shield it from enforcement, and eventually convert them into votes, one way or another.

That’s why Democrats have no qualms fighting so aggressively against overwhelmingly popular election reforms. For them, it’s a matter of survival.

Read more …

“Some Weird Sh*t” alright.

• Bill Gates, Reid Hoffman Deny Epstein Malarkey, And Here’s Some Weird Sh*t (ZH)

As the latest Epstein Files release continues to provide premium toilet reading and no arrests, tech billionaires Bill Gates and Linkedin founder Reid Hoffman are in full damage control mode, while President Donald Trump – whose name is all over the files as well, is back to asking if we can just move on. Other notables mentioned in the release are Steve Tisch, Richard Branson, Elon Musk, Harvey Weinstein, Leon Black, Peter Mandelson (who just imploded), Sergey Brin, Jason Calacanis, Howard Lutnick and the Nobel Prize committee (more on that later, it’s a fun one), and of course Ehud Barak.


To review – Gates, whose ex-wife Melinda says he ‘needs to answer to those things’ in the Epstein files – was featured in a 2013 email Epstein sent to himself – three months after the disgraced financier appears to have brought top Gates ‘assistant’ Boris Nikolic and ‘two Russian girls’ to Richard Branson’s island for a crypto summit. According to Epstein, Gates – who apparently severed ties with Epstein after some incident involving Boris, ‘implored’ Epstein to ‘delete the emails regarding your std, your request that I provide you with antibiotics that you can surreptitiously give to Melinda and the description of your penis.’ Gates responded to the latest email, claiming it was ‘never sent’ (incorrect) and that it’s ‘false,’ (though he did offer $100k to anyone that can make a ‘next generation’ condom earlier that year).

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/2019045284689424764

Hoffman vs. Musk Meanwhile, LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman – who went to Epstein’s island, was invited to his weird fertility ranch, and apparently left his passport in a ‘gift bag’ for Epstein – has been trading Epstein ‘gotchas’ with Elon Musk, who asked Epstein if he could bring his ex-wife to the island for a ‘wild’ party. Hoffman claims he was only on Epstein’s island to fundraise with former MIT Media Lab director Joi Ito, while Musk claims Epstein used the fact that Hoffman was on the island to try to get him to go.

Feb 1: Musk drops ‘reid was on the island last weekend,’ email Epstein sent him, and notes that Hoffman brought ‘gifts’ to Epstein. Hoffman, who says he deeply regrets associating with Epstein post-conviction, defended his visit, replying to ZeroHedge after we asked to clarify that he went to Epstein island to raise money for MIT.

When asked if President Trump deserves the same ‘assumption of innocence’ that you are claiming, Hoffman pivots, saying he’s “been calling for an investigation,” adding “No one will need to assume anything if Trump releases all of the files, and we conduct a transparent investigation into those implicated in crimes.” Shockingly, not everyone is buying Hoffman’s story…

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2018958358607520099 https://twitter.com/Megatron_ron/status/2019051610400280982

Read more …

“Look at Ukraine. The same political class that now shocks you with its private depravity has been overseeing the destruction of a country in public. These political cannibals may not literally devour people, but the result is much the same. They would have consumed Russia too, had it not resisted.”:

• How Many Handshakes From Epstein Are You? (Akhmedova)

The US Department of Justice has released another batch of files connected to Jeffrey Epstein, so extensive that even Russia’s “foreign agents” and émigré commentators felt compelled to sift through them. “It seems this isn’t a conspiracy theory after all,” they muttered, suddenly uneasy. “It seems the American and global elite really did indulge in depravity with children. And… perhaps even something worse.” Stunned, they asked each other: Will nothing change now that the truth is out? Is the world simply evil? But the world is not “doomed.” What these revelations provoke is disgust, outrage and, for many in Russia, very little surprise.


What exactly is new here? That parts of the global elite are morally rotten? But haven’t they behaved that way in full public view for years? Was it not the same elite – acting through NATO coalitions and political blocs – that bombed countries, toppled governments, and plunged entire regions into chaos? For over a decade, the world has lived with the consequences of decisions made by a tight circle of self-styled “civilized” leaders. The problem is not just a few twisted individuals. It is the elite as a collective. It’s cohesive, protected, smug, and convinced of its own impunity. When you see how casually they destroy weaker nations in politics, it’s not hard to imagine an island where the same people feel entitled to indulge their private vices.

Political cruelty and moral corruption rarely exist separately. Yet many of Russia’s liberal émigrés, who fled in 2022 hoping to merge into this very “global elite,” seem only now to be waking up. Journalist Anna Mongait, for example, wrote that she spent an entire day studying the Epstein files as if sorting through rubbish. She says it looks unreal, as though generated by artificial intelligence: “Old men I know from official chronicles groping teenage bodies. One frame would be enough for a universal scandal, but there are thousands.”

By evening, she said she was wondering whose handshake had indirectly connected her to Epstein. The thought, she wrote, made her want to wash her hands “up to the elbow.” Now she fears Epstein will drag down not only the American establishment, but “many of our own people.” But two things must be said. First: not everyone is linked to Epstein by some chain of social proximity. Many of us are not connected to that world at all. Not by one handshake, not by ten. He will not drag down “our people,” because we were never part of that circle.

Second: you did not need to know about Epstein’s island to recognize the moral bankruptcy of the global elite. Look at Ukraine. The same political class that now shocks you with its private depravity has been overseeing the destruction of a country in public. These political cannibals may not literally devour people, but the result is much the same. They would have consumed Russia too, had it not resisted. Those who left Russia did not support that resistance. Now they recoil from the elite they once admired. But is this a moral awakening, or simple disappointment? Perhaps they distance themselves now because the political winds have shifted, because figures like Trump do not favor them. If a smiling Western politician returned who embraced their worldview, would they not stretch out their hands again?

Cleansing oneself is actually simple. Stand on firm moral ground. Judge people by their actions, not their smiles, slogans, or fashionable reputations. Understand that evil persists as long as people remain fascinated by it and eager to belong to its circle. There are fewer such admirers left in Russia today. Not least because many of them have already left, and no longer lecture the rest of us about what we should be ashamed of.

Read more …

“And I am so happy to be away from all the muck.”

• Nancy Mace Demands SUBPOENA For Bill Gates In Epstein Case (MN)

Congresswoman Nancy Mace is turning up the heat on Bill Gates, pushing for a subpoena that could force the tech tycoon to spill the beans on his shady ties to Jeffrey Epstein—exposing how deep the rot runs in the elite circles that have long evaded justice. With the DOJ dropping three million pages of Epstein docs packed with stomach-turning allegations, Mace isn’t buying Gates’ denials, demanding he testify before Congress to set the record straight or face the consequences. Mace wasted no time after seeing Melinda Gates’ eye-opening comments about her ex-husband and Epstein during an NPR interview.

The Rep. announced a push to subpoena Bill Gates in a social media blast, revealing she has asked House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) to haul the Microsoft founder in “immediately.” “We’re calling for Bill Gates to testify under oath on his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein in front of the Oversight Committee,” Mace declared. She added: “[Three] million pages of Epstein documents were just released by the DOJ and the allegations are SICK. If these allegations are false, Bill Gates should have no problem saying so under oath before Congress.” “Nobody is above the law. Not billionaires. Not the powerful. Nobody,” Mace added.

The latest Epstein files, unleashed by the Department of Justice, include a 2013 email from the predator himself alleging Gates caught an STD after “sex with Russians girls” and schemed to slip antibiotics to Melinda without her knowing. Another 2017 email hints at Epstein blackmailing Gates over an alleged affair with Russian bridge player Mila Antonova. Melinda’s response on NPR’s Wild Card podcast lit the fuse for Mace. Melinda said Gates and other Epstein cronies “need to answer to those things.”

“I think we’re having a reckoning as a society,” she told host Rachel Martin. “No girl should ever be put in the situation that they were put in by Epstein and whatever was going on with all of the various people around him.” Reflecting on the victims, Melinda added: “It’s beyond heartbreaking. I remember being those ages those girls were; I remember my daughters being those ages.” The Gates’ 2021 divorce announcement cited: “[W]e no longer believe we can grow together as a couple in this next phase of our lives.” But Melinda tied the Epstein mess directly to her pain: “So, for me, it’s personally hard whenever those details come up because it brings back memories of some very, very painful times in my marriage, but I have moved on from that.”

She pointed the finger squarely: “whatever questions” that remain on the Epstein debacle “are for those people, and even my ex-husband. They need to answer to those things, not me. And I am so happy to be away from all the muck.” Gates’ camp fired back through a spokesperson: “These claims are absolutely absurd and completely false.” They claimed: “The only thing these documents demonstrate is Epstein’s frustration that he did not have an ongoing relationship with Gates and the lengths he would go to entrap and defame.”

This push comes amid a broader reckoning, with the DOJ’s massive file dump shining a light on elite entanglements. Fresh scrutiny hits figures like Elon Musk and Howard Lutnick over their Epstein links, proving no one is immune. Gates’ own squirming defense on Australia’s 9News—claiming he was “only at dinners” and never met women—got shredded on The View, with hosts like Joy Behar mocking: “I know nothing. I did nothing.” Even that leftist stronghold is turning, signaling Gates’ PR fortress is crumbling.

The Clintons have also finally caved under pressure, agreeing to testify in the Epstein probe after dodging subpoenas for months. Facing contempt charges, Bill and Hillary bent the knee, with depositions set for late February— a win for transparency against deep state stonewalling. This cascade signals that the elite pedophile network’s protectors are finally cracking. As Mace leads the charge, it’s clear the Epstein saga is far from over. Globalists like Gates, long shielded by their billions and media allies, now face real oversight. The Clintons’ testimony could unleash more bombshells, exposing how power corridors enabled this horror.

Read more …

“… Gates sought help obtaining drugs “in order to deal with consequences of sex with Russian girls.”

• Vance Slams ‘Incestuous’ US Elites Over Epstein Files (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance has said new documents related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein expose what he described as an “incestuous” culture among America’s political and business elites. The documents, released by the US Justice Department last week, include previously unpublished records from Epstein’s estate and related investigations. The trove spans more than 3 million pages, 2,000 videos, and 180,000 images, renewing scrutiny of his connections to political, business, and tech figures and revealing how he maintained ties with prominent individuals even after his 2008 conviction.


Vance told the Daily Mail on Tuesday that the files expose a “pretty incestuous nature” among America’s elites, calling the revelations “pretty gross.” He singled out figures including Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, former US President Bill Clinton, and billionaire Bill Gates, saying the disclosures reflected “very poorly on them.” The documents show Musk discussing plans in 2013 to visit Epstein’s private island, asking about “a good time to visit,” with Epstein offering to send his helicopter. The trip never happened, and Musk said he never traveled to the island.

A separate 2013 email shows Epstein sending himself a document claiming Gates sought help obtaining drugs “in order to deal with consequences of sex with Russian girls.” A spokesperson for Gates dismissed the claim as “absolutely absurd and completely false.” Bill Clinton and his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have agreed to testify before the House Oversight Committee in its investigation into Epstein. The ex-president has previously acknowledged flying on Epstein’s private jet in the early 2000s but denied wrongdoing. The couple had initially resisted subpoenas, calling them “invalid and legally unenforceable.”

Speaking about Trump, whose name appears in the files on at least 3,000 occasions and who has denied being friends with Epstein, Vance said the president “knows a lot of these people” due to his wealth and status but “is very much outside of the social circle” and was not closely involved. Trump himself has accused Epstein of plotting against him, writing on social media: “I never went to the infested Epstein island but, almost all of these Crooked Democrats, and their Donors, did.” Epstein died in a New York jail in 2019, in a death ruled a suicide, which has fueled conspiracy theories, including claims he was killed to prevent the disclosure of compromising material involving prominent figures.

Read more …

“Hospice is crazy here,” Dr. Oz said. “You’ve got hospice that’s grown seven-fold in the last five years. They represent about three and a half billion dollars of fraud, we believe, just in LA County.”

• Vance To Lead Sweeping Anti-Fraud Task Force Investigating California (ZH)

Vice President JD Vance is poised to chair a new White House task force aimed at rooting out potential fraud and abuse in government programs in California, according to CBS News. Andrew Ferguson, chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, is expected to serve as the task force’s vice chairman and handle day-to-day operations, CBS News reports. President Donald Trump is anticipated to issue an executive order in the coming days to formally establish the group, the news outlet said. The White House task force would operate separately from a related Justice Department effort led by Colin McDonald, a Trump nominee for a new fraud-investigation role at the department. McDonald is expected to also probe fraud in Minnesota uncovered by YouTuber Nick Shirley and other independent journalists.

https://twitter.com/NJGOP/status/2017397171604115771

California has long grappled with documented issues of waste, fraud, and weak oversight in state and federally funded programs. State auditors have for more than a decade flagged problems including persistent cost overruns, inadequate internal controls, and unimplemented reform recommendations across various initiatives, CBS News reported last month. California’s Employment Development Department faced acute criticism during the pandemic, when unemployment-insurance fraud resulted in an estimated $20 billion or more in improper payments, while many eligible claimants endured lengthy delays in receiving benefits, according to NPR News. Separately, federal officials have recently scrutinized fraud risks in hospice and home-health services, particularly in Los Angeles County.

Last week, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz visited the area to draw attention to the issue, citing the rapid proliferation of hospice providers and potential billions in improper billings. One physician in California reportedly billed the government $120 million in a single year while claiming oversight of 1,900 patients -an volume that has raised questions about feasibility and potential abuse. The county is home to nearly 2,000 licensed hospice agencies, a number exceeding the combined total in more than 36 states and roughly 30 times the count in states such as Florida or New York. “Hospice is crazy here,” Dr. Oz said. “You’ve got hospice that’s grown seven-fold in the last five years. They represent about three and a half billion dollars of fraud, we believe, just in LA County.”

Read more …

“… has made a policy decision to create a critical mineral reserve [..] The initiative is called “Project Vault.”

• Vance and Rubio Lead ‘Critical Minerals’ Strategic Ministerial Gathering (CTH)

In the past few years people have heard the term “rare earth minerals” or “critical minerals” as they relate to the manufacture of component goods that are vitally important in the lives of everyone. However, the term “rare” is somewhat of a misnomer. The minerals themselves are not rare; indeed, they have been around for hundreds of millions of years in abundant supply. It is the processing of those minerals into stable second stage commodities that has become rare.


As a result of western environmental rules and regulations, U.S, EU and developed nations have outsourced critical mineral processing (the dirty stuff) to China and Asia. We then import the finished commodity after processing. This becomes a problem when you realize the processor can weaponize western dependency, as we have recently seen with China controlling the export of processed minerals needed for manufacturing. President Trump has made a strategic decision to bring back the manufacturing of critical minerals to the United States and has made a policy decision to create a critical mineral reserve. Just last Monday President Trump announced a $12 billion strategic mineral reserve to combat China’s domination of critical mineral supply chains, a major step toward tackling China’s advantage in a crucial sector of the U.S. economy. The initiative is called “Project Vault.”

“For years, American businesses have risked running out of critical minerals during market disruptions,” President Trump said. “Just as we have long had a strategic petroleum reserve and a stockpile of critical minerals for national defense, we are now creating this reserve for American industry,” Trump said during the Oval Office announcement. Today in Washington DC, Vice-President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio led a critical minerals discussion at the State Dept., where they are organizing an effort to get all nations to invest and create their own critical minerals strategic reserves. WATCH:

Read more …

Faster than us?!

• How Fast Is The Asian Population Ageing? (ZH)

The latest revision of UN World Population Prospects reveals that demographic shift is no longer a distant projection but an accelerating reality across parts of Asia, with the share of people aged 65 and over rising fast in several countries. As Statista’s Tristan Gaudiaut reports, this trend poses a significant challenge in the region for labor markets, public finances and care systems within a single generation. The figures (UN medium-scenario projections) show Japan already far ahead, as older adults made up already around 29 percent of the population in 2020, and are projected to surpass 30 percent in the coming years: 31.1 percent by 2030 and 35.4 percent by 2040. But, as our infographic shows, the more striking story is the pace of change elsewhere.

South Korea and China are among the standout accelerators. Both countries are expected to see their 65+ population shares more than double between 2020 and 2040. In South Korea, this figure is projected to surge from 15.8 percent (2020) to 33.8 percent (2040), while in China, it is expected to rise from 12.7 percent to 26.6 percent.

Those trajectories mirror intensifying national concerns about future labor supply and pension burdens, amid persistent low fertility and a shrinking workforce. Meanwhile, rapid ageing is not confined to the region’s richest economies. Thailand and Vietnam start from lower baselines, yet both trend sharply upward by 2040. Both South-East Asian countries are projected to see their 65+ population shares double in twenty-years: Thailand to 25.6 percent and Vietnam to 15.8 percent.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/MarioBojic/status/2019010007887478792 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2019025650099855464

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries  Newer Entries