Jun 092024
 


George Grosz Apocalyptic landscape 1936

 

EU Could Stop Ukraine Conflict In 24 Hours – Orban (RT)
Macron Building ‘Coalition’ To Send Troops Into Ukraine (RT)
Macron Faces Crushing Defeat In EU Elections (RMX)
NATO Chief Scraps €100 Billion Ukraine Fund Plan (RT)
European Union: From Peace To Bellicosity (Dionísio)
Russia Vows Immediate Countermeasures Should West Take Its Assets (TASS)
Scott Ritter: Another American Voice For Sanity And Peace Cancelled (SCF Op-ed)
Scott Ritter Silenced by Liberal Authoritarians (Patrick Lawrence)
2024 Hillary vs Trump – Not Biden? (Martin Armstrong)
Hillary Clinton Slammed For Using D-Day To Call Trump Hitler (MN)
Alex Jones to lose InfoWars (RT)
Will Hunter Take the Stand? (Turley)
New Texas GOP Platform Calls For Secession Vote, Resistance (ZH)
Israel Kills Over 200 Palestinians to Rescue 4 Captives (Mondoweiss)

 

 

 

 

No convicted felon

 

 

David Sacks

 

 

Putin diverse world

 

 

Pepe

 

 

Maher Bezos
https://twitter.com/i/status/1799284489207624195

 

 

Tucker Massie AIPAC

 

 


Dostoevsky

 

 

 

 

He keeps making sense. That’s why they want to bar him.

EU Could Stop Ukraine Conflict In 24 Hours – Orban (RT)

The West is “within centimeters of a direct conflict” with Russia, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has warned, noting that both the EU and US need pro-peace forces to replace those currently in power in order to avoid this scenario. In an interview with TV2 on Friday, just two days before the European Parliament elections, Orban said that with all the discussions regarding sending additional weapons and even troops to Ukraine, the West “is on a straight road to war.” The prime minister noted that when the conflict began in 2022, most EU countries, including Germany, vowed to only send non-lethal aid to Kiev, such as helmets – and “there was no question of supplying equipment suitable for killing human life to the Ukrainians.” Since then, however, the Western powers have supplied Kiev with a wide range of weaponry and ammunition.

“At the rate this is going, it is not an exaggeration to say that we are centimeters away from the final stop when Western European or American soldiers appear in the territory of Ukraine, we are within inches of a direct collision [with Russia] at this moment,” he warned, lamenting that most leaders currently in power in the West “don’t see it, they want war.” He added, however, that the point of no return has not been reached yet, and to prevent a war with Russia from breaking out, there needs to be a change in Western governments. “We are at the penultimate moment to reverse the outbreak of the war. For this we need to achieve change in Brussels and Washington… If the European leaders wanted peace today, within 24 hours there would be a ceasefire at the front line.

All they would have to do was to say: Dear Ukrainians, a ceasefire is necessary, we need to stop, we will not give more weapons and money until there is a ceasefire and peace negotiations,” Orban said. He added that there would be a greater chance of reaching a peace deal if Donald Trump wins the US presidential election in November and “ends this war within 24 hours,” as he has pledged to do. Orban has insisted that Hungary should refrain from taking part in any potential NATO action in Ukraine, arguing that the military bloc was created with the purpose of defending member states from aggressors, not waging war outside its territory. Hungary has consistently criticized the Western approach to the Ukraine conflict, and opposed NATO’s funding and arming of Ukraine, as well as the sweeping sanctions on Russia – instead calling for a ceasefire and diplomatic solution.

Read more …

Macron makes no sense. So he’s popular..

Macron Building ‘Coalition’ To Send Troops Into Ukraine (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron has gone beyond merely talking about the possibility of deploying NATO troops to Ukraine, taking steps to form a coalition of military trainers who would work inside the former Soviet republic preparing Kiev’s soldiers to fight Russian forces. “We want to have a coalition for reasons of efficiency, and several of our partners have already given their agreement,” Macron told reporters on Friday in Paris. “We will use the coming days to finalize the largest possible coalition capable of responding to Ukraine’s request.” Macron did not identify the countries, other than France, that have committed to sending trainers to Ukraine. He argued that dispatching specialists to do training work inside Ukraine should not provoke a Russian response.

“We are not at war with Russia,” Macron said. “We do not want an escalation, but we want to do everything in our power to help Ukraine resist. Is it an escalation if Ukraine asks us to train mobilized soldiers on its soil? No, that does not mean deploying people – European or allied soldiers – on the front line.” Macron made the comments after hosting a visit by Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. He announced on Thursday that France will send Mirage 2000 fighter jets to Kiev and train Ukrainian pilots. It will reportedly take until around the end of this year to have pilots ready to fly the warplanes. French forces have already trained around 10,000 Ukrainian troops in France and other NATO countries. Lithuania and Estonia have also publicly suggested that they would be willing to deploy instructors inside Ukraine. Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas said last month that NATO trainers were already operating in the battle-torn country.

Russian officials have warned that any foreign military personnel in Ukraine would be considered legitimate targets for attack, regardless of their duties and locations. The Russian Foreign Ministry said Macron’s “belligerent rhetoric” and provocative statements had escalated the Ukraine crisis. Macron began making public comments about the possibility of troop deployments to Ukraine in February, triggering pushback from some NATO allies and a Kremlin warning that this step would inevitably lead to a direct conflict with Russia. US President Joe Biden reportedly rejected Macron’s proposal to send instructors to Kiev, citing concerns that they could be in the line of fire and spark an escalation.

Read more …

..popular in Brussels, that is. But not at home..

“..unchanged at 15 percent. At the same time, Marine Le Pen’s party is polling at 33 percent..”

Macron Faces Crushing Defeat In EU Elections (RMX)

President Emmanuel Macron’s party will suffer a historic defeat in the European Union elections on Sunday, Hungarian news portal Origo writes. It is not hard to guess that after this huge defeat, he will take even more refuge in foreign policy. Having failed in his own country, he is trying to achieve unquantifiable and non-existent successes in the international world. According to Wednesday’s opinion poll by IFOP-Fiducial, Macron’s party has been unable to improve four days before the European Parliament elections, standing unchanged at 15 percent. At the same time, Marine Le Pen’s party is polling at 33 percent. No governing party in France has lost by such a humiliating margin since 1979, the first European Parliament elections on party lists. True, it is also rare for a governing party to win what can be considered a roughly midterm election; the last time this happened was in 2009 when then President Nicolas Sarkozy won the EU parliament election.

Six French parties are now in the running for the European Parliament. After Marine Le Pen (RN) and Macron (a coalition of four parties), the Socialist Party will be third, with 13.5 percent, but they could easily overtake Macron in the end. The communist, anti-Semitic, pro-Muslim Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s party could get 8 percent, the classic Gaullist, center-right party 7.5 percent and Éric Zemmour’s anti-immigration party, formed just two years ago and unrivaled among young people, 6 percent. IFOP’s seat estimates suggest that the far-left Green Party, still at 5 percent but in steady decline, will be eliminated. Voter turnout is now expected to slightly exceed 50 percent. Macron is currently midway through his second five-year term as president, and according to the French constitution, he cannot run for a third after his current term expires in 2027.

Read more …

“..since the aid was to be collected over five years, this meant NATO “expects the hostilities to continue for this period.”

NATO Chief Scraps €100 Billion Ukraine Fund Plan (RT)

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has ditched a five-year plan to provide Ukraine with €100 billion ($108 billion) in military aid after pushback from members of the bloc, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing people familiar with the matter. In April, several Western media outlets reported, citing diplomatic sources, that Stoltenberg had presented a draft long-term military support plan for Ukraine, designed in part to guard against any cut in US support if former President Donald Trump returns to the White House. Earlier this year, Trump called for restricting aid to Ukraine to loans and insisted that European NATO members match Washington’s level of assistance to Kiev. The Stoltenberg plan was reportedly been questioned by several NATO members who sought clarification from the bloc’s secretary general on where and how the enormous sum of money involved would be obtained.

The unnamed officials told Politico last month that the plan was “confusing” and that the €100 million figure would be revised. Earlier this week, a NATO diplomat told the FT that Ukrainian authorities were “not super thrilled” with the idea either, pointing out that the package would in practice only duplicate bilateral and EU-managed commitments and not actually represent fresh cash. Instead, Stoltenberg is expected to submit an updated plan to provide Kiev with lethal and non-lethal aid of around €40 billion annually, the sources told Bloomberg. The new proposal will reportedly be discussed by NATO defense ministers next week. Under the new plan, which is aimed at providing more transparency about what Ukraine’s supporters contribute, the amount of assistance from each NATO member would be determined on the basis of a percentage of their GDP.

The US would reportedly account for nearly half of the aid, with the other 31 members providing the rest. The sources also told the news outlet that Türkiye has cautioned that any coordination of military assistance for Ukraine could create the perception of greater involvement of the bloc in the conflict. Last month, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said that Budapest was opposed to the initial plan, explaining that since the aid was to be collected over five years, this meant NATO “expects the hostilities to continue for this period.” The diplomat added that Hungary does not plan to participate in arming Ukraine or training its soldiers. The country’s prime minister, Viktor Orban, has expressed the view that NATO is getting closer to war with Russia every week.

Read more …

“..a non-existent Europe will be sung, which, while celebrating “European values”, demands the fracture of continental Europe..”

European Union: From Peace To Bellicosity (Dionísio)

[..] this is what hurts to hear from Euroenthusiasts and Brussels fanboys. But, how is it that your favorite enchanting tale is nothing more than a deferred dream, whose assumptions indicate that, after all, this postponement is eternal, because, within the framework of the European division of labor, it is not up to the peripheral countries to develop high value added activities? And nothing highlights this reality more than the data regarding wage convergence: to the promise of future convergence, it was not just the Portuguese economy that did not live up to it, but all the peripheral economies of the European Union. Growing up, they were never able to converge, with the distances between those in the south and those in central and northern Europe almost always maintaining or increasing. The fact is that the only small and peripheral country that dared to break with this logic was Greece. Today, we all know where Greece ended up.

They accused the country of stealing, lying, falsifying, all because the respective government committed the “crime” of wanting to pay its people the same as workers in central and northern European countries earned. The largest European countries, which constantly exceed deficit limits, have never been subject to the “excessive deficit procedure” and austerity measures to correct it. Furthermore, in the Portuguese case, between funds received and the purchase of products and services provided by central and northern Europe, between 1996 and 2023, this country gave more than it received, explaining the real meaning of this European adventure. According to the Bank of Portugal, between what came in and what went out, the country had a negative balance of 61 billion euros. In conclusion, the carrot that attracts the donkey, European structural funds, are nothing more than disguised loans, disguised in the form of “investment”, but whose return is worth more to those who give them – the countries of northern and central Europe – than for those who receive them.

The “investment” in funds thus constitutes a double benefit: economic and political control over the beneficiaries of the subsidies; economic return in the medium and long term. The fact that these funds are allocated under strategies (Lisbon strategy; Strategy 2020 and 2030) designed in Brussels, determines that they do not aim to solve the real problems of peripheral countries. European funds aim to solve the problems that peripheral countries have so that they can be used as instruments to enrich central countries. The instrumentalization that the countries of central and northern Europe make of the eastern countries, with regard to the strategy of domination of Russian and Slavic lands, finds parallels in the countries of southern and Mediterranean Europe, namely by taking advantage of the intercontinental geographic links that such countries they mean, in addition to their significance as destination markets and as reserves of qualified and cheap labor, which is formed, satisfactorily, with the European Union’s own funds.

It is, therefore, imperative to dismantle and denounce this cycle of exploitation, whose benefits are not distributed equitably and which tends to maintain relative differences over time, a difference that aims to keep this cycle untouchable. Furthermore, coupled with this political-economic dimension, another one is added, which the conflict taking place in Ukraine unmasks. Peripheral and distant countries were suddenly elected as enemies of Russia, without their people being taken into account, who unconsciously watched the transfer of their funds to the war effort. The most tragic thing is that whoever denounces the failure of this European project is accused of being “anti-European”, as if this were the only possible formulation, as if human history did not have cemeteries full of inevitable stories. When this European Union enters its bellicose phase, it is more fundamental than ever to talk about a Europe of peace, cooperation and friendship between people. A Europe in which openness does not mean submission.

The upcoming elections for the European parliament will be yet another moment during which very little will be said about the European Union, its autocratic character, its macrocephalism. Instead, a non-existent Europe will be sung, which, while celebrating “European values”, demands the fracture of continental Europe. While celebrating “union”, it forces a country to give up it’s history and replace it with a whitewashing revisionism of their fascist past. While it demands the surrender of its economy, it replaces it with eternal dependence from the political power of monopolies, represented in Brussels. Belonging to the European Union begins to resemble those dreams that delight us while we sleep, but when we wake up, we realize that they are just that, dreams. The European project cannot survive even the light of day, much less when one wakes up.

Read more …

“..including in Europe. There is much more of their property and funds in Russia than America’s..”

Russia Vows Immediate Countermeasures Should West Take Its Assets (TASS)

Moscow will not wait to retaliate to the confiscation of its assets in the West, with a slew of political and economic countermeasures in its holster, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told a briefing on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF). “They are planning to pledge Russia’s virtual reserves without preliminary permission, with future revenues from them not only to be immediately pocketed by the West but also spent on some other military ventures aimed against Russia. We will naturally respond appropriately to such steps, as we have always done. We have a range of political, economic countermeasures against those attempting to get hold of Russian reserves,” she said. “One should think long and hard before deciding to go ahead with this as countermeasures will follow,” the diplomat added.

In May, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree on compensation for damage caused to Russia and its Central Bank due to the US’ unfriendly actions, Zakharova noted. “A similar mechanism may be applied to other countries as well, including in Europe. There is much more of their property and funds in Russia than America’s. Moreover, the US and the EU have already proven that they can no longer be regarded as reliable jurisdictions for foreign investors, whose investment can at any time be confiscated or stolen,” she said, adding that “those actions have no legal basis behind them, being simply outright theft.”

Read more …

“In the laudable spirit of 1930s U.S. Marine Major General Smedley D Butler, they have shown how “war is a racket”.

Scott Ritter: Another American Voice For Sanity And Peace Cancelled (SCF Op-ed)

The sinister prevention of Scott Ritter travelling to speak and broadcast from Russia this week by United States authorities is a sure sign that the Western imperialist warmongers are afraid of the truth. Indeed, there is a dark shadow cast on their pretensions of “democracy and freedom” – ironically in a week that supposedly commemorates the D-Day landings and the historic fight against fascism. The former U.S. Marine and United Nations weapons inspector has gained worldwide respect as an independent political commentator and analyst. Ritter has become a powerful critic of the United States and NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine. He has staunchly appealed for dialogue and diplomacy, warning that the reckless provocations by Washington and its allies towards Russia are driving the world to a nuclear conflagration. This week, Ritter was due to fly from New York to Istanbul, on his way to attend the St Petersburg International Economic Forum in Russia.

The annual forum is attended by thousands of delegates from all over the world. He was hauled off the flight by U.S. police officers and his passport was confiscated before being escorted from the airport. There was no official explanation for the draconian interdiction to his travel plans. The U.S. State Department refused to comment on the matter, saying it was a private matter. However, there is no doubt, whatsoever, that the humiliating move was politically organized by powerful people, as Ritter claims. It was aimed at preventing him from going to Russia simply because of his outspoken political views. That is an incredible infringement of democratic rights and a revelation of the dark forces at work, which are now increasingly public and blatant. The incident is a grave illustration of how legally protected free speech rights are being trampled on in the United States and other NATO countries. Numerous other instances of censorship and “cancelling” are testimony to the intensity of the information war that the Western states are waging, not just against supposed foreign adversaries but against their own citizens.

Millions of Western citizens are being denied access to important independent news and other media simply based on official designation by unaccountable Western authorities that said information is “Russian disinformation”. Russian news outlets such as RT and Sputnik are banned from being accessed through normal channels. Scott Ritter is one of several respected American voices of sanity and genuine intelligence who are banished from so-called mainstream Western media. Other figures include Professors John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs, former ambassador to the Soviet Union Jack Matlock, former CIA analysts Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson and former senior Pentagon experts Doug Macgregor and Earl Rasmussen. All of these figures are articulate and informed critics of the U.S.-led NATO proxy war in Ukraine. They have been eminently capable of explaining how the war was fomented through illicit intervention in Ukraine over many years and how the prospects for a diplomatic and peaceful settlement are deliberately being sabotaged by Washington and its NATO vassals.

In the laudable spirit of 1930s U.S. Marine Major General Smedley D Butler, they have shown how “war is a racket”. The war in Ukraine has been sold to the world based on a fetid pile of lies and Russophobic prejudices. A heinous fraud is taking place, putting the world’s future at imminent peril. Scott Ritter, like the other voices cited above, is never or rarely interviewed on the corporate-controlled Western media channels precisely for the reason that the critical analysis he and they articulate debunks the war propaganda emanating from the U.S. government and its NATO allies – propaganda that is pumped and laundered non-stop to the Western public and presented as “news”. No dissenting voices are permitted under the tyranny that is Western imperialist warmongering. Just ask Robert Fico, the Slovakian prime minister who was shot and seriously wounded by a gunman on May 15 because, as Fico believes, he opposes the NATO war against Russia.

As the Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw once said, assassination is just an extreme form of censorship. A demonstration of the nefarious propaganda system was seen this week during the 80th anniversary of the D-Day Normandy landings. U.S. President Joe Biden and other Western leaders used the commemorative event in France to issue doom-laden warnings that “democracy is under attack” and to portray the war in Ukraine as a re-run of the standing up to Nazi Germany in World War Two with Russia projected as the reincarnation of Hitler’s Third Reich. The whole D-Day pomp and ceremony was a travesty. And yet such nauseating distortion of history was relayed to Western audiences by the likes of CNN and BBC, to mention just two channels, as if it were a noble reflection. Democracy and freedom are under attack alright – from Biden and the rest of the Western ruling elite whose basis of oligarchic power is increasingly appearing as outright fascism – albeit with “liberal” sounding rhetoric.

Read more …

“..I sense things may get a great deal worse from here on out..”

Scott Ritter Silenced by Liberal Authoritarians (Patrick Lawrence)

It is not difficult to be astonished these days, given how many things going on around us warrant astonishment. To pull something out of a hat at random, the Democratic apparatus has openly, brazenly politicized the judicial system—weaponized it, if you prefer—in its determination to destroy Donald Trump and now has the temerity to warn in the gravest terms that a second Trump term would mean… the politicization of American justice. Again at random, in The Washington Post’s June 7 editions George Will tells us President Biden “has provided the most progressive governance in U.S. history.” Yes, he wrote that. Give in to your astonishment. It is interesting in this case to note that, during the reign of Ronald Reagan 40 years ago, our George thought big government was bad, bad, bad. Now it is a fine thing that Biden is “minimizing the market’s role by maximizing the government’s role in allocating society’s resources and opportunities.”

Apart from turning his own argument hourglass upside-down, this assessment of our swiftly declining president is preposterously, right-before-your-eyes false. You cannot tell the AC’s from the DC’s these days. But this is not the half of it in the way of astonishing events, things done, things said and such like. Last week, as many readers will have noticed, Scott Ritter, the former weapons inspector and now a widely followed commentator, was about to board a plane bound for Turkey when armed police officers stopped him, confiscated his passport and escorted him out of Kennedy International Airport. Ritter was booked to transit through Istanbul for St. Petersburg, where he planned to attend the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, an annual gathering. Here is Ritter recounting this incident in an interview with RT International: “I was boarding the flight. Three officers pulled me aside. They took my passport. When asked why, they said, “Orders of the State Department.” They had no further information for me. They pulled my bags off the plane, then escorted me out of the airport. They kept my passport.”

No passport, no freedom to travel, no explanation. I have it on good authority that Ritter subsequently advised other Americans who were to attend the St. Petersburg events not to risk it. I have had countless conversations over many years in which the question considered has been “Is this as bad as the 1950s?” The matter has been especially vital since the Russiagate fiasco began during the Clinton–Trump campaign season in 2016. It was in the ensuing years that the authoritarianism implicit in American liberalism from the first burst upon us like some weird grotesque out of a Dr. Seuss book. I always urge caution when invoking comparisons between our corruptions and ideological extremes and those of the McCarthy era. Hyperbole and exaggeration never serve one’s understanding or one’s argument. But the confiscation of Scott Ritter’s passport on the instructions of Antony Blinken’s State Department seems to me a radical step too far.

The liberal authoritarians now in command of the nation’s major institutions, the House of Representatives among the only exceptions, have just signaled they are quite prepared to act at least as undemocratically as the House Un–American Activities crowd, the FBI and the rest of the national-security state did during the 1950s to preserve their political hegemony. When I think of confiscated passports I think of Paul Robeson, the gifted singer, the courageous political dissenter, the civil rights advocate—whose documents were seized in 1950 because he refused to indulge in the Cold War paranoia that was already prevalent. His performing career collapsed and he nearly went broke before a Supreme Court decision restored them in 1958. Or I think of all the screenwriters, novelists, poets, painters and activists whose papers were canceled while they were in Mexico—or in France or in Sweden or in England—to avoid HUAC and expatriation turned into exile.

And when I am finished thinking of these people, about whom there is a rich, inspiring literature, I think of how far America descended into a derangement we tend to look back upon in some combination of wonder, derision and contempt. We can no longer look back in this fashion. The revocation of Scott Ritter’s passport, along with the destruction of the judicial system, the myth-spinning about our purported leaders and all the rest pushes this in our faces. Let us give this a moment’s thought to see if we can determine what is likely to be in store. Why Scott Ritter, I have wondered these past few days. Of all the dissident commentators of too many stripes to count, why Scott?

I reply to myself, “Because Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer, a former U.N. arms monitor in Iraq and he enjoys big-time credibility as a patriotic American.” His voice, in short, is the sort that can carry weight in sectors of the voting public that may well prove key in determining the outcome in the Trump–Biden election this Nov. 5. Viewed in this context, I take the full-frontal suppression of Ritter’s rights last week as very likely tied to the liberals’ political prospects, other than brilliant as they are at this point. Censorship, suppression of various kinds taking various forms, “canceling”—these are nothing new, of course. But I sense things may get a great deal worse from here on out.

Read more …

“I still cannot see how the Neocons will allow Trump to win. There goes their dream of World War III..”

2024 Hillary vs Trump – Not Biden? (Martin Armstrong)

The press is starting to actually report that Biden is losing it. This is how they float a balloon to see if it will fly. The August Democratic Convention has been rumored for some time that they will DRAFT someone else to replace Biden. He swore he would never debate Trump. This may be setting the stage for him to step aside. The Neocons are delighted with Hillary, for she has been among the Neocons all along. She will have no problem nuking Russia. This will certainly make things interesting. Bill Clinton actually had cigar sex with an intern in the Oval Office when he was President! There was a phone call when he was getting into a Hummer, and he commented on the phone that he was sitting on the floor in the Oval Office on the seal of the USA at that moment. As the Washington story went, that is why the Republicans made a big deal out of his actions. Everyone had encounters with staff or lobbyists.

The staff of John McCain was very concerned about him and a lobbyist. However, Bill Clinton lied to the American people about it on national television. He paid off Paula Jones $850,000. That was far more than Trump paid Stormy Daniels, who was NOT even an intern as Monica and the famous blue dress. Clinton’s $850,000 payment to get rid of a sexual harassment claim while he’s President had NO criminal court charges for what was the same thing. Why was Clinton deemed exempt from what happened with Trump and Stormy?” The Democrats have been praying that the Criminal Convictions of Trump on these issues, which have nothing to do with his performance as President, are greatly disappointing. People are seeing through this onslaught against Trump, which the Neocons keep pushing for World War III ASAP. A vote for the Democrats is clearly a vote for World War III. If Hillary gets in, you better dig a bunker real deep under your house.

The polling averages haven’t budged in the direction that Democrats were hoping. At RealClearPolitics, Trump led Biden in head-to-head matchups by 0.8 percent on May 30, the day of the guilty verdict. Now, his lead is at 1.1 percent. In five-way surveys that include minor candidates, Trump’s lead at RCP has dropped from 2.2 percent on May 30 to 2.1 percent now. FiveThirtyEight’s average of polls that include Biden, Trump, and Kennedy show the Republican’s lead slipping marginally from 1.7 percent on May 30 to 1.4 percent now. Our computer has projected a Republican win on 4 out of 6 models. Two are quite dramatic. I still cannot see how the Neocons will allow Trump to win. There goes their dream of World War III. We are running our models on the likely outcome. This may end up being very surprising to many. We will let you know when it is ready.

Read more …

For decades, comparing someone to Hitler was taboo. Now it’s normal.

Hillary Clinton Slammed For Using D-Day To Call Trump Hitler (MN)

Two time presidential loser Hillary Clinton used the 80th anniversary of D-Day as a way of attacking Donald Trump and comparing him to Hitler. Hillary directly compared the fight against Nazi Germany during World War Two to voting against Trump in the upcoming election. Worse still, Clinton equated those who will vote against Trump to soldiers who put their lives on the line in the Normandy landings. Hillary disabled the comments on the post because the consensus among pretty much everyone who saw it is that it is disgusting and completely lacking in respect. As we highlighted earlier, Joe Biden couldn’t stay awake in France at the ceremony to mark the 80th year since the historic D-Day invasion of Normandy, France on June 6, 1944. Biden also used the occasion to attack Trump and also compare voting against him to fighting against Hitler.

Read more …

He’ll be around..

Alex Jones to lose InfoWars (RT)

Right-wing commentator Alex Jones has agreed to liquidate his assets in a bid to pay a court-imposed fine of $1.5 billion. Among Jones’ assets is the parent company of InfoWars, a platform used by the shock-jock to broadcast news, views, and conspiracy theories for more than two decades. Jones filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2022, after a Connecticut judge ordered him to pay the families of the Sandy Hook massacre victims $1.5 billion in damages. Jones had claimed on air that the mass shooting – in which a gunman killed 20 elementary school children and six adults – was staged by the US government in a plot to usher in draconian gun control laws. In filings made to a Texas bankruptcy court on Thursday, Jones’ lawyers requested that the Chapter 11 bankruptcy be converted into a Chapter 7 liquidation, as “there is no reasonable prospect of a successful reorganization” of his debts.

According to court documents, Jones’ assets will not be enough to cover the $1.5 billion fine. However, the Sandy Hook families agreed last year that Jones could liquidate his holdings in order to pay a minimum of $85 million over the next 10 years. In a motion filed earlier this week, the families stated that they want Jones to liquidate Free Speech Systems LLC, the parent company of the InfoWars platform, which has also sought bankruptcy protection. Jones founded InfoWars in 1999, and by 2017, the website was receiving around 10 million monthly visits – eclipsing many mainstream news sites. In his nightly broadcasts on InfoWars, Jones has launched tirades against Democrats, liberals, globalist politicians and NGOs, international financiers, and anyone else he accuses of helping usher in the ‘New World Order’ – a tyrannical system of global governance predicted by American conspiracy theorists since the 1980s.

In an interview with Jones earlier this year, American journalist Tucker Carlson noted that many of the Texan firebrand’s predictions – that the World Trade Center would be destroyed in 2001, that the federal government would introduce mask mandates during the Covid-19 pandemic, and that “a giant war” would break out in Ukraine in February 2022 – came true. Speaking on InfoWars last weekend, Jones claimed that the American “deep state” had orchestrated the legal campaign against him, adding that he was “out of options.” On Friday’s broadcast, Jones said that InfoWars would likely close down within several weeks, but that he may “relaunch” under a different brand.

Read more …

“The risk of testimony is that Hunter could burst into flames on the stand and torch any chance to nullify the crime..”

Will Hunter Take the Stand? (Turley)

This weekend, the Hunter Biden team is reportedly debating whether to have him take the stand on Monday, a move rife with risk. Most criminal defendants avoid such appearances given the potential damage of a withering cross examination. Those risks were evident in the recent testimony of Hunter’s daughter, Naomi, which backfired badly on key points. I have sometimes been in the minority among defense attorneys and legal commentators on this question. In celebrity trials, a jury can feel alienated or even disrespected by a defendant not taking the stand. That was the case, in my view, with Martha Stewart. When a defendant brings forth a host of others to speak for him or her, the refusal to testify can become more glaring and concerning. Hunter Biden is in that position. He has had a host of relatives testify, including his daughter Naomi. When you put your daughter on the stand and subject her to a tough cross examination, many jurors can wonder how you can stay safely behind the defendant’s table.

Yet, Naomi’s testimony is precisely why defense counsel are risk adverse on the question. She gave moving testimony on her love for her father and his struggle with addiction. However, her attempt to establish that Hunter was not using drugs at the time of his gun purchase fell apart on cross examination. She testified that she was thrilled during this period with how “healthy” and clean her father appeared: “He seemed like the clearest I had seen him since my uncle died…I told him I was so proud of him and I was proud to be able to introduce Peter to him.”

Prosecutors showed her text messages that told a different story. In some, Naomi appears alarmed by her father’s conduct and lack of responses. On October 18, for example, she texted “I’m sorry daddy, I can’t take this, I don’t know what to say.” That message coincides with messages from Hunter seeking to score drugs from a guy named Mookie and stating that he was doing crack in a car. In other messages, Naomi complains that he was not responding. She finally received a response when, at 2 a.m, Hunter asked her to have her boyfriend drop off keys to a truck for him in Manhattan. Naomi was asked if she saw the drug residue or paraphernalia in the truck. Any cross examination would focus less on Naomi than it would on Mookie.

Any decision to put Hunter on the stand is obviously dependent on your defense strategy. As I have previously written, all of the defenses suggested by Abby Lowell in his opening argument collapsed within two days. That includes the suggestion that someone else checked the box on the form denying that Hunter was using drugs. These claims seem so unbelievable and unsupported that they might insult a jury. However, the real strategy in this open-and-shut case appears to be simple jury nullification. The defense is trying to get one or more jurors to ignore the law and the evidence to acquit Biden. Nullification efforts in the case appear to be a combination of both political and social association. First and foremost, this is Bidentown. It is the hometown of President Joe Biden and voted overwhelmingly for him in past elections. It is the opposite of the Manhattan trial of former President Donald Trump. This is the best possible jury pool for a Biden.

Second, all of the jurors testified to knowing someone with drug problems. Hunter has written moving accounts of his struggle with addiction. Some jurors may resist convicting someone who has seemingly overcome the scourge of addiction. So, if this is a nullification strategy, does Hunter testifying help or hurt? The answer is that it could seal the deal or shatter it with jurors. Hunter will make a good witness on his struggle to overcome drugs and alcohol abuse. He can claim little or no memory of the gun store purchase. Hearing from him directly can establish a connection, even a bond, with jurors that could reinforce a nullification vote. However, it will also subject him to cross examination by prosecutors who have been lethal in their well-planned and well-executed case. They can delve into his texts and the later intervention by his family to deal with his self-destructive lifestyle. He also faces the potential of triggering new criminal offenses through perjury.

That latter concern is particularly real after the formal referral of three House committees to Attorney General Merrick Garland. Hunter is accused of lying to Congress in his recent testimony on key issues under investigation. While many expect Garland to ignore the referral to protect the President and his family, the allegations are compelling and the Justice Department has previously prosecuted individuals in cases with far less support. This would appear a relatively easy perjury prosecution, but the politics may be insurmountable for Garland. Most attorneys would advise Hunter to remain behind the defense table and not take the stand. After all, this is a great jury rendering a verdict on a Biden in Bidentown with the First Lady seated behind him for much of the trial. They just need one. The risk of testimony is that Hunter could burst into flames on the stand and torch any chance to nullify the crime. We will know soon. However, if Hunter checks this box and testifies, it is the one decision that he will not be able to blame on others.

Read more …

The Texas Stock Exchange intrigues me.

New Texas GOP Platform Calls For Secession Vote, Resistance (ZH)

Reflecting plummeting patience with overstepping federal overlords, the Texas Republican Party has adopted two platform planks that call for legislators to assert state sovereignty, and to schedule a secession referendum in the next general election after November’s. “This historic vote at the 2024 Republican Party of Texas Convention represents a substantial shift towards enhancing state sovereignty and exploring the potential for Texas to operate as an independent nation,” said the Texas Nationalist Movement (TNM) in a statement. “It reflects the growing sentiment among Texans for greater autonomy and the protection of our rights against federal overreach.” Fittingly, that historic vote took place in San Antonio — home of the Alamo, aka “the cradle of Texas liberty.” Though it represented a setback, the 1836 Battle of the Alamo was a key chapter in the fight for independence that culminated in Texas becoming a self-governing republic.

The first plank asserts that the US government is infringing on powers reserved to Texas and all other states, and calls for unwarranted federal laws to be thwarted by Texas government. It also affirms the right of Texas to secede: “Pursuant to Article 1, Section 1, of the Texas Constitution, the federal government has impaired our right of local self-government. Therefore, federally mandated legislation that infringes upon the 10th Amendment rights of Texas shall be ignored, opposed, refused, and nullified. Texas retains the right to secede from the United States, and the Texas Legislature should be called upon to pass a referendum consistent thereto and pass the Texas Sovereignty Act as filed in the 88th Legislative Regular Session as HB 384.”

The second plank is a pointed directive to put the question of secession to the people of Texas in the next general election: “The Texas Legislature should pass a bill in its next session requiring a referendum in the next General Election for the people of Texas to determine whether or not the State of Texas should reassert its status as an independent nation. This referendum should be a legislative priority.” From the San Antonio convention, here’s a brief but interesting clip of the Texas Nationalist Movement’s Nate Smith speaking in support of the independence-minded platform planks — and ably fielding a question from a delegate who suggests TNM is guilty of treason.

We’d have liked to hear Smith answer his critic’s attempted second question — as to whether Smith had recited the Pledge of Allegiance earlier that day as part of convention rituals. It’s likely the questioner would have next pointed to the pledge’s reference to “one nation…indivisible.” In making a case for why patriots shouldn’t pledge allegiance, Brian McGlinchey has argued that, of several objectionable components of the pledge, “‘indivisible’ should give greatest offense to American patriots. The very existence of the United States — created by secession from the British empire — is a testament to political divisibility as a foundational human right…By reciting the Pledge of Allegiance and proclaiming the United States of America ‘indivisible,’ Americans disclaim their human right of self-determination.”

The Texas Nationalist Movement’s GOP convention success comes on the heels of a state Republican Party controversy over the issue. Despite TNM having amassed more than 139,000 signatures requesting that a secession question be placed on the March 5 primary ballot, the Texas GOP’s leadership refused to include it. TNM appealed to the state supreme court, which refused to hear the controversy. The party chair who presided over that decision, Matt Rinaldi, is out. Now, party’s top two officials are both signers of the “Texas First Pledge.” In addition to promising to place the interest of Texans “before any other nation, state, political entity, organization, or individual,” signatories commit to bringing about a secession referendum and, if it is approved by a majority of Texans, to work for an expeditious exit from the union.

After seceding from Mexico, Texas was an independent country from 1836 to 1845 and, economically, is extraordinarily well-suited for independence today. It’s by far the largest oil producer of any US state, accounting for a whopping 42% of American production, with no other state exceeding even 10%. It has deep-water ports, abundant agriculture, and is a major high-tech hub. There’s fixin’ to be another feather in Texas’s hat. As we examined earlier this week, the booming Lone Star State economy — and rising aggravation over compliance costs and woke regulations — has spurred BlackRock, Citadel Securities and other investors to back a new challenger to the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq: the Texas Stock Exchange.

Read more …

“..there are 120 captives still held in the Gaza Strip, including 43 who have been killed since October, many reportedly by Israel’s own forces..”

Israel Kills Over 200 Palestinians to Rescue 4 Captives (Mondoweiss)

At least 210 Palestinians were killed and hundreds of others were injured on Saturday [June 8] in the central Gaza Strip, in what Israel is celebrating as a “heroic” military operation to rescue four Israeli captives that were being held in Gaza. Palestinian media reported intense bombardment in the early afternoon local time in various areas in the Nuseirat and Deir al-Balah in the central Gaza Strip. Video footage from the main market in the Nuseirat refugee camp showed crowds of Palestinian civilians fleeing under the sound of heavy artillery fire. Al Jazeera reporter Anas al-Sharif reported that Israeli forces “infiltrated” the Nuseirat refugee camp in trucks disguised as humanitarian aid trucks. The Gaza government media office said in a statement that Israeli forces launched an “unprecedented brutal attack on the Nuseirat refugee camp” directly targeting civilians, and that ambulances and civil defense crews were unable to reach the area and evacuate the wounded due to the intensity of the bombing.

The media office added that according to its count, at least 210 Palestinians were killed and an estimated 400 others were injured during the Israeli operation. Video footage published on social media showed dozens of bodies of men, women and children lying in the streets in the Nuseirat area, as well as bloodied and injured civilians being rushed to the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in Deir al-Balah. Al Jazeera quoted Dr Tanya Haj-Hassan with Doctors Without Borders as saying the emergency department at Al-Aqsa Hospital “is a complete bloodbath … It looks like a slaughterhouse.” “The images and videos that I’ve received show patients lying everywhere in pools of blood … their limbs have been blown off,” she told Al Jazeera, adding “That is what a massacre looks like.”

As the death toll from the central Gaza Strip continued to rise, Israeli reports emerged that four Israeli captives were rescued in the operation and transferred back to Israel. The four captives were identified as Noa Argamani, 26, Almog Meir Jan, 21, Andrey Kozlov, 27, and Shlomi Ziv, 40. They were all reportedly taken on October 7th from the Nova Music festival in southern Israel close to the Gaza border. According to Israeli media, the four captives were found in good health, and were transferred to a hospital in Israel where they were reunited with their families. One member of the Israeli special forces was killed during the attack. Israeli newspaper Haaretz cited Israeli military spokesman Daniel Hagari as saying the captives were “rescued under fire, and that during the operation the IDF attacked from the air, sea, and land in the Nuseirat and Deir al-Balah areas in the center of the Gaza Strip.”

Haaretz added that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant approved the operation on Thursday evening. Netanyahu hailed the operation as “successful,” while Gallant reportedly described it as “one of the heroic operations he had seen in all his years in the defense establishment, according to Israeli media. The families of Israeli captives held a press conference on Saturday afternoon in reaction to the news. Relatives of the four captives rescued on Saturday praised both the Israeli military and the government. Some relatives of the remaining captives still being held in Gaza demanded an end to the war and a prisoner exchange in order to secure the release of those still being held in Gaza.

On Saturday evening local time, spokesman for the Qassam Brigades Abu Obeida said “the first to be harmed by [the Israeli army] are its prisoners”, saying that while some of the captives were freed in the operation, a number of other Israeli captives were reportedly killed. The Israeli government and military have not commented on the reports that Israeli captives were killed in the operation. It is reported that there are 120 captives still held in the Gaza Strip, including 43 who have been killed since October, many reportedly by Israel’s own forces.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Pediatricians

 

 

Nightmare

 

 

 

 

Fauci whipping boy

 

 

Firedog

 

 

Hamster

 

 

Black deer

 

 

Breach

 

 

 

 

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