Georges Seurat Bathers at Asnières 1884
Kash hoax
WHOA!!! TRUMP FILED A BIG LAWSUIT AGAINST EVERYONE IN THE RUSSIAN HOAX!!! THIS WILL BE HUGE… pic.twitter.com/VRofX7nTVm
— TOMMYTGME (@RAZORTOMMYCUTS) March 26, 2025
Nap Sachs
Jeffrey Sachs pointing out the obvious – that Israel is currently running the foreign policy of the US government. They’re running this White House, but no one dares say the word, while LARPING as “MAGA”, as clearly evidenced by the Signal group chat which was published by the… pic.twitter.com/BxE4SXNDJu
— Patrick Henningsen (@21WIRE) March 27, 2025
Elon Signal
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1904951618162118853
HHS
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1905246820282081292
Tucker votes
Tucker Carlson exposes US Congress passed a loophole to allow illegal migrants to vote
This MUST be undone, we have to secure our voting
“It's illegal, you say, for illegal aliens to vote in a federal election. Well, actually, it's not illegal, it turns out. Congress passed… pic.twitter.com/GDoMsPl8yn— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) March 26, 2025
Doge team
Powerful interview with @elonmusk and the @DOGE team. It's worth watching the whole video.pic.twitter.com/wCPeSh703N
— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 28, 2025
Losing patience? “I said not long ago that we would push them out, but there is reason to believe that we will finish them off,”
• Putin Proposess Temporary Governance of Ukraine Under UN Auspices (Sp.)
The possibility of introducing temporary governance in Ukraine could be discussed under the auspices of the United Nations together with the United States, European countries and Russian partners, Russian President Vladimir Putin said. The introduction of temporary governance in Ukraine would allow democratic elections to be held in the country, Putin added. “And for what? To hold democratic elections, to bring to power a viable government that enjoys the people’s trust. And then begin negotiations with them on a peace treaty, sign legitimate documents that will be recognized throughout the world and will be reliable and stable. This is only one option, I am not saying that there are no others,” the president noted.
The Russian President made other statements regarding foreign policy and the conflict in Ukraine while talking to sailors of the nuclear-powered submarine cruiser Arkhangelsk. Russia has a strategic initiative along the entire front line, the President stressed. Russia controls 99% of the territory of the Lugansk People’s Republic and more than 70% of the territory of the DPR, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, Putin noted. “I said not long ago that we would push them out, but there is reason to believe that we will finish them off,” he added. Russia is ready to cooperate with all countries that want to eliminate the causes of the Ukrainian conflict for a peaceful settlement. Moscow is ready to collaborate with Europe on Ukraine, but the EU behaves inconsistently and constantly tries to “lead Russia by the nose,” he added.
“The curators from Europe have convinced Kiev to continue the war to the last Ukrainian in order to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia,” the Russian president said. Russia will no longer make mistakes based on excessive trust in its so-called partners, Putin stressed. The Russian President mentioned the BRICS countries and the DPRK among the partners Russia is ready to work with for a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine.
“.. the notorious Azov battalion – which receive Western weapons and actively recruit followers – could increasingly exert de facto control in Ukraine..”
• Key Points of Putin’s Idea To Place Ukraine Under UN Control (RT)
Russian President Vladimir Putin has proposed placing Ukraine under a temporary international administration as one possible way of resolving the ongoing conflict. The idea, he said, draws on international precedent and would aim to restore legitimate governance before any peace deal could be finalized. During his meeting with Russian nuclear submarine officers on Thursday, President Putin described a possible international mechanism for stabilizing Ukraine – placing it under temporary external administration coordinated by the United Nations. Here are the key takeaways from Putin’s proposal:
1) Problem: Collapse of legitimacy in Kiev
Putin argued that Ukraine’s constitutional legitimacy has broken down due to the expiration of Vladimir Zelensky’s presidential powers last year and the lack of elections since – rendering all of his government’s claims to authority invalid.
“Presidential elections weren’t held… under the constitution, all officials are appointed by the president. If he himself is illegitimate, then so is everyone else.”2) Consequence: Power vacuum filled by radicals
Putin has warned that groups with neo-Nazi views, such as the notorious Azov battalion – which receive Western weapons and actively recruit followers – could increasingly exert de facto control in Ukraine, potentially replacing formal civilian authorities. “Amid the de facto illegitimacy… Neo-Nazi formations are receiving more weapons,” and could take “the actual power in their hands.” Putin argued that this makes negotiating with Ukraine’s current government even more unreliable and unstable: “It’s unclear who you’re even signing any documents with – tomorrow new people could come and say, ‘We don’t know who signed this – goodbye.’”
3) Suggestion: UN-led temporary external administration
Putin proposed the use of a UN-led transitional authority, referencing prior international missions such as in East Timor, Papua New Guinea, and parts of former Yugoslavia. “In such cases, international practice often follows a known path – under UN peacekeeping, through what is called external governance, a temporary administration.”
4) Purpose: Restoring constitutional order and setting legal framework for stable peace
The main goal, according to Putin, would be to organize democratic elections and install a functioning, legitimate government trusted by citizens and recognized globally. He stated that only such leaders could sign peace agreements that would be recognized worldwide and upheld over time. “Why do this? In order to hold democratic elections, in order to bring to power a government that is capable and enjoys the trust of the people, and then begin negotiations with them on a peace treaty, sign legitimate documents that will be recognized worldwide and will be reliable and stable.”
5) Not the only option – but a viable one
Putin emphasized that this idea is not the only possibility, but an example drawn from historical precedent. “This is just one option… I’m not saying other options do not exist, but it is hard right now, or maybe even impossible, to lay everything out clearly because the situation is changing so fast,” he said.
6) Multilateral cooperation beyond the West
Putin said such an initiative should involve not just the UN or the US, but a broader coalition, including BRICS nations and others Russia considers reliable. “We will work with any partners – the US, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, BRICS countries… and, for example, North Korea.” He also stressed that Russia remains open to working with the EU, even though Moscow’s trust in the Western European countries has been fundamentally undermined by their manipulation of peace efforts as a tactic to buy time and rearm Ukraine.
“They have made a bargain on the war in Ukraine, and they have lost the war. They cannot accept peace imposed by Russia and America.”
“..it will be a strategic agreement between Russia and America. Then in this framework, in this kind of agreement, Europe has nothing to do and nothing to suggest..”
• EU Leaders Fear Peace in Ukraine – French Army Veteran (Sp.)
US President Donald Trump’s efforts to secure peace in Ukraine have caused panic among European leaders like Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer and Friedrich Merz, who desperately want to “escape from their political death,” retired French Army Colonel Alain Corvez tells Sputnik. “They have made a bargain on the war in Ukraine, and they have lost the war. They cannot accept peace imposed by Russia and America. So they are doing things that are completely unrealistic and illogical,” says Corvez, an international strategy consultant and former international relations consultant for France’s Defense and Interior Ministries. Macron and the likes of him do not care about Ukraine – all they care about is “their own fate” amid the prospects of the European Union’s dissolution.
Macron’s decision to oppose the Black Sea ceasefire deal conditions is a “stupid decision,” Corvez notes, as France and other European powers hold no sway in the Ukrainian conflict peace process. “They are not able to do anything unless they want to declare war on Russia, which is the first nuclear power in the world, which is completely stupid,” he observes. “But unless they declare war to Russia, they have no option. They have nothing that they are able to do.” France’s plans to establish some kind of buffer zone in Ukraine is “absolutely impossible” as well, since “peace will be established by Russia and America with an agreement, a strategic agreement, which will officialize the necessity of security for Russia and that Ukraine would be neutral and not in NATO.”
“And then it will be a strategic agreement between Russia and America. Then in this framework, in this kind of agreement, Europe has nothing to do and nothing to suggest, and it’s impossible to send troops to control a buffer zone along the Dnepr or along any other rivers or lines,” Corvez adds.
Imagine the talk at birthday parties in Denmark.
• US Planning To Annex Greenland Since 1860s – Putin (RT)
Washington has long harbored plans to get its hands on Greenland, and the ongoing tensions around it should be taken seriously, Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned. Speaking at the International Arctic Forum in Murmansk on Thursday, Putin touched upon the ongoing tensions around Greenland, a Danish semi-autonomous territory, and US President Donald Trump’s repeated promises to annex it. Trump invoked the topic of Greenland once again on Wednesday, claiming the US ownership of the island is needed to “properly defend a large section of this Earth” and would be universally beneficial – including for Denmark. “We have to have the land because it’s not possible to properly defend a large section of this Earth – not just the US – without it. So we have to have it, and I think we will have it,” he said.
The statements of the US president should be taken seriously, Putin warned, pointing out the US has been harboring plans to annex Greenland for over a century and a half already. “Everyone knows about the US plans to annex Greenland. You know, this may surprise someone only at first glance. And it is a deep mistake to believe that this is some kind of extravagant talk of the new American administration,” Putin warned. The American plans to seize Greenland date back to 1860, but at the time they did not get supported by the Congress, the Russian president pointed out. “Let me remind you that by 1868, the Alaska purchase was being ridiculed in American newspapers. It was called madness, an ‘ice box,’ and ‘the polar bear garden’ of Andrew Johnson, then-US president. And his Greenland proposals failed,” Putin said.
The US, Germany, and Denmark also neared a land-swap deal in 1910, with the proposed agreement ceding Greenland to America, Putin noted. However, the deal ultimately fell through. From the early 19th century to the 1950s, Greenland was a territory under the full control of Denmark. During World War Two, it was occupied by the US after Denmark proper was captured by Nazi Germany. Currently, the island hosts a US military base and the infrastructure for an early warning system for ballistic missiles. In recent decades, the island has grown increasingly autonomous and was granted home rule in 1979, ultimately receiving the right in 2009 to declare independence if a referendum passes.
“I understand Steve Witkoff. He is a clever and energetic person who thinks that everyone should be aware of the things he regards as obvious. Judging by the statements he made during his conversation with Tucker Carlson, the essence of this conflict is clear to him,” Lavrov said..”
• Zelensky Lashes Out At Trump Envoy Witkoff (RT)
Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has reproached US President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, accusing him of disseminating “Kremlin narratives.” Zelensky made the remarks on Wednesday in an interview with European broadcasters, including France 2. He accused Witkoff, a key official in opening negotiations on resolving the Ukraine conflict, of taking Moscow’s side and “helping” Russian President Vladimir Putin. “I believe that Witkoff really does quote Kremlin narratives very often. I believe that this will not bring us closer to peace. And I believe that, unfortunately, this will weaken the American pressure on Russia. We can only fix this information backdrop through our actions. We’re trying to do that,” Zelensky stated.
“Witkoff’s statements are very much a hindrance to us, because we are fighting Putin and we really do not want him to have many helpers,” he added. Zelensky was apparently referring to remarks made by Witkoff in a recent interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson, during which the special envoy spoke about the status of former Ukrainian territories that have joined Russia, describing the issue as “an elephant in the room” that “no one wants to talk about.” “They’re Russian-speaking. There have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule,” Witkoff said. “The Russians are de facto in control of these territories. The question is: Will the world acknowledge that those are Russian territories? Can Zelensky survive politically if he acknowledges this? This is the central issue in the conflict,” he added.
The remarks outraged Kiev, with the head of Ukraine’s Foreign Affairs Committee, Aleksandr Merezhko, condemning what he called “disgraceful, shocking statements” and urging Washington to dismiss “completely unprofessional” Witkoff from his role. Witkoff’s statements were welcomed by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, however, who suggested that, judging by his remarks, the special envoy had understood the very “essence” of the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev. “I understand Steve Witkoff. He is a clever and energetic person who thinks that everyone should be aware of the things he regards as obvious. Judging by the statements he made during his conversation with Tucker Carlson, the essence of this conflict is clear to him,” Lavrov said in an interview with Russia’s Channel 1 this week.
He is Russian by birth.
• Zelensky Speaks Of ‘Hatred Of Russians’ (RT)
Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has admitted that his “hatred” of Russians is one of the driving forces propelling him to “keep going” in the conflict against Moscow. In an interview with the French daily Le Figaro published on Wednesday, Zelensky identified the emotion as one of his three key psychological drivers since the escalation of the conflict in February 2022. Zelensky said he hated “Russians who killed so many Ukrainian citizens,” adding that he considered such an attitude appropriate in wartime. His other motivations included a sense of national dignity and the desire for his descendants to live “in the free world.” Ukrainian officials have accused Russia of being a historic oppressor while Zelensky has previously touted Ukrainians’ “love of freedom” as a trait that distinguishes them from Russians.
Zelensky, whose presidential term expired last year, was elected in 2019 on a platform of defusing tensions with Moscow and reconciling ethnic Russian Ukrainians in Donbass, many of whom opposed the 2014 Western-backed coup in Kiev. However, his initial diplomatic efforts were thwarted by radical Ukrainian nationalists in the body politic.Since the coup, Kiev has enacted various policies undermining the rights of ethnic minorities, with Russians as the primary target. Moscow has accused Zelensky of intensifying the crackdown, particularly by attacking the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the country’s largest religious denomination, which now faces potential prohibition for having historic links with Russia.
In a recent interview, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov asserted that Zelensky caters to “the segment of the population that holds radical, ultra-right, revanchist, Banderite views,” as his image as a national leader increasingly deteriorates. “Zelensky does not want to display weakness, as he realizes that his days are numbered,” the Russian official claimed.
“..the FBI investigating attacks on Tesla cars and facilities is nothing but “lawfare” and “political weaponization.”
• Rep. Goldman: FBI Probe of Tesla Attacks “Political Weaponization” (Turley)
For many of us who were long active in Democratic politics, it is becoming increasingly difficult to recognize the party as a new generation of foul-mouthed, censorship-supporting, mob-enabling leaders take over. That sense returned this week when Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-NY) claimed that the FBI investigating attacks on Tesla cars and facilities is nothing but “lawfare” and “political weaponization.” Goldman’s latest controversy captures how Democrats have now entirely cut the cords of decency and moderation that once tethered their party to the mainstream of our society. Democratic leaders have been fueling the attacks on Musk and his companies, even putting national security interests aside to seek to punish him. Goldman (and other Democrats) have previously pushed back on criticism of Antifa and left-wing attacks.
However, Goldman’s criticism of the FBI task force on these widespread attacks is otherworldly. Goldman this week declared: “This is the political weaponization of the DOJ. Trump uses his official authority to defend his benefactor Elon Musk. The FBI then creates a task force to use our law enforcement to ‘crack down’ [sic] on adversaries of Musk’s [sic]. Where are the Republicans so opposed to ‘lawfare’?” There are have widespread attacks on Tesla charging stations, vehicles, and dealerships, including multiple arson attacks. It is clearly political violence orchestrated against an American company and American property owners, including individual citizens, to push consumers away from buying Musk products and associations.
That sounds a lot like the definition of terrorism. The Justice Department defines domestic terrorism as “Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.” I have long criticized the expansion of terrorism definitions. However, this fits even the narrowest definitions. It is political violence designed to intimidate and harm those with opposing political views. The fact that they are lone wolves like Daniel Clarke-Pounder, 24, who set himself on fire after throwing Molotov cocktails, does not change that criminal intent. The Democrats have long been accused of belittling or dismissing the seriousness of such crimes. That was the case with Molotov-cocktail throwing lawyers in New York who were given relatively light sentences under the Biden Administration.
It is also evident in the reaction to the recent attack on a conservative in the New York subway. There is a sense of license among some on the left in carrying out attacks on those on the right. This is how rage rhetoric of leaders like Goldman can fuel violent rage in the most unhinged elements of their party. As I previously wrote: “What few today want to admit is that they like it. They like the freedom that it affords, the ability to hate and harass without a sense of responsibility. It is evident all around us as people engage in language and conduct that they repudiate in others. We have become a nation of rage addicts; flailing against anyone or anything that stands in opposition to our own truths.” Once released by the rage from the confines of reason and civility, it is easy to dismiss the investigation of political violence as “political weaponization.” In attacking the FBI investigation, Goldman is the very voice of an age of rage.
“Goldberg said he gained access to a Signal group chat from a user identified as “Mike Waltz.”
Why on earth would Waltz do that? Up to him to explain/ Or deny.
• Signal Leak A ‘Witch Hunt’ – Trump (RT)
US President Donald Trump has cast doubt on the Signal messaging platform following the leak of a private conversation among senior members of his administration about military strikes in Yemen. He has dismissed the media response to the episode as a “witch hunt.” The Trump administration confirmed this week that a journalist had been mistakenly added to a private chat on Signal discussing a planned attack on Houthi militants. The US launched large-scale airstrikes on March 15 in the Yemeni capital Sanaa and the northern province Saada, reportedly killing dozens, in response to Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping. Asked by reporters on Wednesday about the leak, Trump said he was not concerned, insisting that “there was no harm done, because the attack was unbelievably successful.”
He dismissed the media’s interest as “a witch hunt,” accusing journalists of exaggerating the situation after a question about whether the administration was downplaying the scandal. “I think Signal could be defective, to be honest with you,” Trump said. “We use Signal, and everybody uses Signal, but it could be a defective platform, and we’re gonna have to find that out,” he added.On Monday, The Atlantic magazine published a report by editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg revealing a discussion among senior administration officials about military strategy for targeting the Houthis. Goldberg said he gained access to a Signal group chat from a user identified as “Mike Waltz.” The chat, titled “Houthi PC small group,” reportedly included Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and other cabinet officials. The group had been engaged in what The Atlantic described as a “fascinating policy discussion” in the days leading up to Trump’s order for the strikes.
Following the White House’s denial that any classified information was leaked, The Atlantic released additional screenshots on Wednesday. Hegseth has insisted that “nobody was texting war plans.” Asked whether the leaked material was classified, Trump replied: “Well, that’s what I’ve heard. I don’t know[.]” National Security Adviser Mike Waltz has taken “full responsibility” for the incident, calling it “embarrassing” in a Fox News interview on Tuesday. Trump defended Waltz amid calls for his resignation, telling reporters “I guess he said he claimed responsibility.” He also rejected speculation about Hegseth’s future, stating the defense secretary “had nothing to do with this” and that he is doing an “excellent job.” Signal dismissed media reports of possible “vulnerabilities” on Tuesday, calling its software “the gold standard for private, secure communications.”
Tulsi Signal
https://twitter.com/PapiTrumpo/status/1904938349883797850
677 district judges, and Trump gets the same one all the time.
• Trump Says ‘Disgraceful’ That Boasberg To Preside Over Signal Lawsuit (JTN)
President Donald Trump on Thursday criticized Judge James Boasberg for having been assigned another important case regarding him and his administration – this one for a lawsuit brought against top officials over a journalist accidentally being included in their group chat about a planned Houthi air strike. Boasberg, who serves on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and was appointed to the bench by President Barack Obama, and is also presiding over a case on whether the administration has the authority to deport illegal migrants under the Alien Enemies Act. (An appeals court on Wednesday denied a request to overturn his ruling early this month to temporarily halt the deport effort.)
“How disgraceful is it that “Judge” James Boasberg has just been given a fourth “Trump Case,” something which is, statistically, IMPOSSIBLE,” he wrote on TRUTH Social. “There is no way for a Republican, especially a TRUMP REPUBLICAN, to win before him.” He said Boasberg had massive “Trump derangement syndrome.” The watchdog group American Oversight filed a group chat lawsuit against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the National Archives and Records Administration.
“Plaintiff American Oversight brings this action … to prevent the unlawful destruction of federal records and to compel Defendants to fulfill their legal obligations to preserve and recover federal records created through unauthorized use of Signal for sensitive national security decision-making,” the lawsuit reads. Trump’s senior national security officials accidentally shared sensitive details about strike plans on the Houthi group in Yemen with editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg through the encrypted messaging app Signal.
Russiagate ain’t dead. This line is peculiar: “..he said that Howell found “reason to believe that the former President would ‘flee from prosecution.’” How would a President do that? Put on a wig?
• Judge Declines Trump Admin Request T0 Recuse Herself From Perkins Coie Case (ET)
A federal judge has declined a request by the Trump administration that she remove herself from overseeing a lawsuit challenging an executive action targeting Perkins Coie LLP, accusing the Justice Department of attacking her character in an effort to undermine the integrity of the judicial system. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell wrote in a March 26 ruling that a Trump administration filing seeking her recusal was “rife with innuendo” and that none of the claims it put forward “come close to meeting the standard for disqualification.” “Though this adage is commonplace, and the tactic overused, it is called to mind by defendants’ pending motion to disqualify this Court: ‘When you can’t attack the message, attack the messenger,’” U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell wrote in a March 26 ruling.
President Donald Trump’s action issued on March 6 prevents law firm Perkins Coie from doing business with federal contractors and blocks its lawyers from accessing government officials. Additionally, it suspends any active security clearances held by individuals at the firm, pending a review of whether such clearances are consistent with the national interest. Perkins Coie was hired by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee in 2016. According to the presidential action issued by Trump, the law firm has engaged in “dishonest and dangerous activity” that has affected the United States “for decades.” The firm sued the administration over the order in federal court in Washington on March 11, alleging Trump’s actions violated its rights under the U.S. Constitution.
Roughly a week after Trump’s executive action was first issued, Howell temporarily blocked the administration from enforcing much of it, finding the law firm was likely to win its lawsuit. Last week, the Department of Justice (DOJ) asked for the case to be moved to another judge in Washington’s federal court, citing Howell’s public comments about the president and her connection with key aspects of the case. “This Court has not kept its disdain for President Trump secret,” Chad Mizelle, acting associate attorney general at the DOJ, wrote in a motion seeking her disqualification. “It has voiced its thoughts loudly—both inside and outside the courtroom.”
Speaking inside the court, Mizelle also pointed to now-former special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump, during which he said that Howell found “reason to believe that the former President would ‘flee from prosecution.’” The judge also “pierced attorney-client privilege, ordering President Trump’s attorney to testify before a D.C. grand jury” investigating his alleged retention of classified documents in the South Florida case, he said. Mizelle added that Howell also previously rejected Trump’s view that the indictments against individuals involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol were a “national injustice” and called his supporters “sore losers.” In her 21-page ruling, Howell wrote that when the DOJ “engages in this rhetorical strategy of ad hominem attack, the stakes become much larger than only the reputation of the targeted federal judge.”
“This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented,” she added. The judge said she welcomed the Trump administration’s opportunity “to set the record straight, because facts matter.” “Every litigating party deserves a fair and impartial hearing to determine both what the material facts are and how the law best applies to those facts,” she wrote. “That fundamental promise, however, does not entitle any party—not even those with the power and prestige of the President of the United States or a federal agency—to demand adherence to their own version of the facts and preferred legal outcome.”
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan. It’s a small world.
• Appeals Court Halts Judge’s Order Requiring Musk to Hand Over DOGE Records (ET)
A federal appeals court has temporarily blocked a discovery order from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan that would have required Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to turn over documents and respond to written questions about their role in advising cuts in certain parts of the federal government. In a ruling issued on March 26, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted an emergency stay of Chutkan’s March 12 order, which had largely granted limited, expedited discovery to a coalition of 13 Democratic-led states, requiring Musk and DOGE to produce documents and respond to questions within 21 days. The appeals court ruled that Musk and DOGE had “satisfied the stringent requirements for a stay” and showed that they are likely to prevail in their claim that the lower court must resolve their motion to dismiss before allowing discovery to proceed.
“In particular, petitioners have shown a likelihood of success on their argument that the district court was required to decide their motion to dismiss before allowing discovery,” the three-judge panel wrote in its ruling. Following the appellate court ruling, Chutkan entered a minute order acknowledging the decision. She canceled a status hearing previously scheduled for March 27. The case, brought by New Mexico and a coalition of 12 Democratic-led states, challenges the legality of DOGE’s sweeping cost-cutting efforts, which have included the cancellation of federal grants and mass terminations of government employees from jobs identified by DOGE as unneeded. The plaintiffs argued in their original complaint that Musk is effectively running DOGE without Senate confirmation, allegedly in violation of the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.
“Oblivious to the threat this poses to the nation, President Trump has delegated virtually unchecked authority to Mr. Musk without proper legal authorization from Congress and without meaningful supervision of his activities,” the plaintiffs allege. “As a result, he has transformed a minor position that was formerly responsible for managing government websites into a designated agent of chaos without limitation and in violation of the separation of powers.” In a subsequent motion for a temporary restraining order against Musk and DOGE, the states further accused Musk of unlawfully exercising sweeping executive power without Senate confirmation by directing federal agencies to fire employees, cancel contracts, dismantle programs, and access sensitive government data.
In response, government lawyers urged the court to reject the emergency motion. They argued that the states had failed to show any imminent or irreparable harm, and said the restraining order sought was overly broad, legally unsupported, and disconnected from core constitutional claims made by the plaintiffs. Even if Musk were improperly appointed, they argue, sharing data with him or others at DOGE does not, by itself, constitute an illegal exercise of government power. Musk also is not empowered to act without the president’s approval, they said.
Chutkan partially sided with the Democrat-led states on March 12, ordering Musk, DOGE, and related entities to turn over documents related to firing federal workers and altering government databases. She also required DOGE to identify everyone who has led or worked at the agency since President Donald Trump took office, and list all agencies where DOGE or Musk canceled contracts, cut grants, or terminated employees. Trump and Musk have both said that DOGE has been assisting various agencies that have fired or offered buyouts to tens of thousands of federal workers since Trump returned to office on Jan. 20, 2025.
“..it is now on the automakers, from the Big Three to Volkswagen and beyond, to bring back good union jobs to the U.S.,”
• Auto Workers Union Applauds Trump’s New Tariffs (JTN)
The United Auto Workers Union (UAW) on Wednesday applauded President Donald Trump’s new tariffs on cars and autoparts coming into the United States from other countries.The president announced the new 25% tariffs at the White House earlier Wednesday, stating that he expects all car companies to expand operations in the U.S. or relocate their businesses to the U.S. if they are not already in the country. The UAW said in a news release that the move marks the “beginning of the end of a thirty-plus year ‘free trade’ disaster,” which “devastated the working class” in the U.S. Ending the race to the bottom in the auto industry starts with fixing our broken trade deals, and the Trump administration has made history with today’s actions, UAW President Shawn Fain said in a statement.
“The UAW/ and the working class in general couldn’t care less about party politics; working people expect leaders to work together to deliver results. “These tariffs are a major step in the right direction for autoworkers and blue-collar communities across the country, and it is now on the automakers, from the Big Three to Volkswagen and beyond, to bring back good union jobs to the U.S.,” he added. The announcement comes ahead of next week’s “liberation day,” where Trump is expected to impose large scale tariffs on U.S. allies and trading partners, including Canada and Mexico. Those tariffs are expected to go into effect on April 2.
Spreading far and wide: “..German automakers currently have 330 automotive suppliers in Mexico..”
• Auto Tariffs: German Carmakers Face Billions in Losses (CTH)
The atomic sledgehammer that President Trump just delivered to the German auto industry simply cannot be overemphasized. A 25% tariff on imported cars and car parts completely negates hundreds of billions in pre-positioned investment dollars by German auto companies in Mexico. To give scale to the impact on Germany, consider that German automakers currently have 330 automotive suppliers in Mexico according to information from VDA. Audi (a subsidiary of Volkswagen) has no U.S. production sites; every Audi sold in America will be subject to a 25% tariff. The Audi brand access to the U.S. market was/is 100% dependent on Mexico, including for manufacturing the Q5 SUV, its top-selling U.S. model. According to prior reporting from Politico, “Volkswagen’s most popular model for American consumers is the Tiguan, an SUV that is entirely manufactured in Mexico.
The German automaker sold over 30,000 of the vehicles in the final quarter of last year, a nearly 50 percent year-over-year increase.” But wait, it gets worse…. French-Italian-American automaker Stellantis is the most exposed of Europe’s automakers as it makes Jeep and RAM models in Mexico. The tariffs will make European automakers’ Mexican factories completely redundant. They could make them in Germany for the same tariff impact. Making them in Mexico is now useless. They were only being made/assembled in Mexico to gain access to the U.S. market without tariffs. This reality will push all EU automakers to shift production to the U.S. There could also be an explosion in UAW membership depending on where in the USA the EU car companies end up manufacturing.
The auto industry is only one industry, but it is a huge economic driver for multiple countries, especially those countries who depend on access to the U.S. market in order to sell their cars and trucks. German automakers will need three things, quickly: (1) Subsidies from German govt to help offset the impact of tariffs [Short term 2-5 years]. (2) Shift production of autos for U.S market into USA [Make in USA]. (3) Interim access to new markets to help offset the anticipated drop in demand [think Russia without sanctions]. Each of these facets plays into current geopolitics. That’s mainly just the German impact. Then overlay Canada and Mexico (big impact), along with South Korea and Japan (lesser impact due to pre-positioned manufacturing/assembly in the USA). The auto-tariffs carry a huge economic outcome around the globe.
“The new US president has shelved the rainbow banners of BLM and the alphabet soup of Western liberalism..”
• Liberalism Is Dead, This Is What Comes After (Trenin)
The phrase “changing world order” has become a familiar refrain in international affairs. But what’s often missed is how rapidly that change is now unfolding – and who is accelerating it. Regime changes in international relations are usually the result of crises: wars between great powers or upheavals within them. This was the case in 1939-1945 and again in 1989-1991. Usually, the problems accumulate over years and decades, and the resolution comes unexpectedly: the slow movement of tectonic plates suddenly accelerates dramatically, an avalanche begins that rapidly changes the landscape. We have had the opportunity to observe something similar in recent weeks. The most striking thing is that the main factor in the changes has been the leadership of the state which until now has defended the remnants of the old world order most stubbornly, even fiercely.
The fall of unipolarity, once long predicted and cautiously awaited, has arrived ahead of schedule. The United States, long the enforcer of liberal internationalism, is no longer trying to stop the shift toward a multipolar world. Under Donald Trump, it has joined it. This pivot is not a mere campaign promise or rhetorical shift. It is a structural break. In the space of weeks, the US has gone from resisting the multipolar order to attempting to dominate it on new terms – less moralism, more realism. In doing so, Washington may inadvertently help deliver the very outcome that previous administrations worked so hard to prevent. Trump’s turn has broad and lasting implications. The world’s most powerful actor has abandoned the guardianship of liberal globalism and embraced something far more pragmatic: great power rivalry.
The language of human rights and democracy promotion has been replaced with “America First,” not just domestically, but in foreign relations as well. The new US president has shelved the rainbow banners of BLM and the alphabet soup of Western liberalism. Instead, he waves the American flag with confidence, signaling to allies and adversaries alike: US foreign policy is now about interests, not ideologies. This is not theoretical. It is a geopolitical earthquake. Firstly, multipolarity is no longer hypothetical. Trump has shifted the US from an enforcer of unipolarity to a player in multipolarity. His doctrine – “great power competition” – aligns more with the realist tradition than with the post-Cold War liberalism that dominated Washington for decades.
In this view, the world is made up of sovereign poles: the US, China, Russia, India – each pursuing its own interests, sometimes in conflict, sometimes overlapping. Cooperation arises not from shared values, but from shared necessities. This is a world Russia knows well – and one in which it thrives. Secondly, Washington’s pivot to realism means a fundamental shift in how it engages with the world. The era of liberal crusades is over. Trump has defunded USAID, slashed “democracy promotion” budgets, and shown a willingness to work with regimes of all types – so long as they serve American interests. This is a departure from the binary moral frameworks of the past. And ironically, it aligns more closely with Moscow’s own worldview. Under Trump, the White House no longer seeks to export liberalism, but to negotiate power.
Thirdly, the West, as we knew it, is gone. The liberal “collective West” – defined by shared ideology and transatlantic solidarity – no longer exists in its previous form. The US has effectively withdrawn from it, prioritizing national interest over globalist commitments. What remains is a fractured West, split between nationalist-led governments like Trump’s and more traditional liberal strongholds in Brussels, Paris, and Berlin. The internal clash between these two visions – nationalism versus globalism – is now the defining political struggle across the West.
“..leaking classified documents to foreign media and orchestrating leaks from high-level government offices, allegedly with Netanyahu’s own approval..”
• Will This Scandal Be The End Of ‘Unsinkable’ Netanyahu? (Sadygzade)
A major scandal known as “Qatargate” has erupted in Israel, involving alleged Qatari interference in Israeli politics. At the center of the investigation is Eliezer Feldstein, former chief aide to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He was arrested in November 2024 on charges of leaking classified documents to foreign media and orchestrating leaks from high-level government offices, allegedly with Netanyahu’s own approval, under the pretext of combating disinformation.
The investigation revealed Feldstein’s connections with Qatari authorities. While serving as an employee of the press office in Netanyahu’s administration, Feldstein had for several years combined his government work with private practice, offering political consulting and branding services. One of his clients was Qatar. Specifically, on behalf of Doha, Feldstein and his team of Israeli consultants developed a reputation protection strategy during preparations for the 2022 FIFA World Cup. Later, they helped Qatari brands regain their positions in Gulf markets that had been lost during the 2017-2021 diplomatic crisis.
Chemo
Oncology expert Dr Patrick Soon-Shiong's "profound" realisation will blow your mind:
"When you get chemotherapy [it] wipes out your NK and T Cells [and] the only thing that protects your body against cancer is your Lymphocytes, meaning the NK cells and T Cells." pic.twitter.com/e8gsx9Gxf3
— Humanspective (@Humanspective) March 26, 2025
Hee haw
https://twitter.com/AMAZlNGNATURE/status/1904910177347772736
Chewey
This dog is better at apologizing than most of us! pic.twitter.com/8yZGYLCBxd
— B&S (@_B___S) March 26, 2025
Ketchup
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1905211149940830537
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
