Menu Icon

Debt Rattle May 5 2025

May 052025
 
 May 5, 2025  Posted by at 9:51 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  40 Responses »


Felix Vallotton On the beach 1899

 

• Russia Alone in Confronting Entire Collective West – Putin (Sp.)
• Russia Standing Alone Against West – Putin (RT)
• The Summit In The Sand – Putin To Meet Trump In Abu Dhabi May 15-16 (Helmer)
• Ukraine Ignores Russia’s Truce Request, Prepares To Sabotage Victory Day (SCF)
• No Peace And No Respect: Zelensky Threatens The May 9 Parade (Pacini)
• No Ukraine in EU Without Budapest’s Approval – Orban (RT)
• Slovak PM Fico Pledges To Defy ‘Unacceptable’ Zelensky Threats (RT)
• Musk Reacts To Video of Forced Mobilization In Ukraine (RT)
• How to Win the PR War on Tariffs (Scott Pinsker)
• Trump Just Got a Game-Changing Legal Victory (Matt Margolis)
• Trump Orders Reopening Of Notorious Alcatraz Prison (NYP)
• Trump Will Start Nominating Federal Judges ‘Rapidly’ (DS)
• Trump’s 100 Days and the Legal War in Washington (Hans von Spakovsky)
• Romania Hits All-Time Low With Fake Elections, Manipulated By The EU (Jay)
• Right Wing George Simion Wins First Round of Voting in Romania (CTH)
• The Bell Tolls for All White Gentile Ethnicities (Paul Craig Roberts)

 

 

 

 

Biden’s the worst thing that ever happened to old people :-))

Ballroom

JD

Bannon
https://twitter.com/JanJekielek/status/1918696577448747095

FSD+

Sachs

GOP
https://twitter.com/WallStreetMav/status/1918972872988512416

Roosevelt

 

 

 

 

“..if Russia doesn’t rely on its traditional values, it risks losing its identity, and, ultimately, its existence.”

• Russia Alone in Confronting Entire Collective West – Putin (Sp.)

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Russia did not initiate its military operation in Ukraine any earlier because it believed in the Minsk agreements and aimed to resolve the Donbass issue peacefully. Russia did not prepare specifically for a military operation, but instead sought a peaceful resolution to the Donbass conflict, Vladimir Putin told journalist Pavel Zarubin in a documentary dedicated to the 25th anniversary since the president’s first inauguration. The country could not proceed with drastic action on Ukraine without first addressing key issues in the spheres of security and the economy. The president pointed out that the United States is now openly acknowledging that the West is engaged in an existential war with Russia. Putin emphasized that Russia is essentially standing alone in its confrontation with the collective West.

Until 2022, Russia had approached agreements with its Western partners with cautious trust. The signing of the Minsk agreements was a hopeful moment for Russia, expecting compliance from all parties. However, Putin pointed out that the country was ultimately deceived. The West used the pause under the guise of complying with the Minsk agreements to rearm Ukraine and prepare for war with Russia, he added. Putin said that as Western companies began to leave Russia, many risks loomed over the country’s economy. But despite these challenges, Russia did not fall into crisis, thanks to strong economic fundamentals that kept the country resilient. The president underscored the danger of a nation becoming too dependent on external factors, stressing that if Russia doesn’t rely on its traditional values, it risks losing its identity, and, ultimately, its existence.

Read more …

“I was responsible for the future of the country. Of course, I began working to ensure that this never happened..”

• Russia Standing Alone Against West – Putin (RT)

Russia is standing alone against the West, which is waging an “existential war” against the country, President Vladimir Putin has said. Putin made the remarks in a documentary titled ‘Russia. Kremlin. Putin. 25 years,’ filmed by Rossiya-1 broadcaster and released on Sunday. The film marks the 25-year anniversary of Putin becoming the country’s president for the first time. He inaugurated on May 7, 2000. The documentary features conversations between Putin and journalist Pavel Zarubin on various matters, including the hostilities between Ukraine and Russia, as well as a broader conflict between Moscow and the West. “Russia is essentially standing alone against the collective West. This required a serious attitude to the possible development of the situation in this particular sense,” Putin stated.

It has been clear from the early 2000s that the West has been acting “insidiously” against Russia, speaking about one thing and doing the opposite, Putin noted. The West’s failure to hear Russia’s repeated warnings, as well as its refusal to fully recognize the country’s sovereignty and respect its national interests, has ultimately led to the ongoing crisis, the president explained. “This ‘civilized world’ decided that Russia had weakened, historical Russia called the Soviet Union had collapsed, and the remaining parts needed to be finished off. The largest of them was the Russian Federation, and it also needed to be partitioned into 4-5 pieces. I was responsible for the future of the country. Of course, I began working to ensure that this never happened,” he said.

Moscow has repeatedly described the hostilities in Ukraine as a Western proxy war against Russia, in which Ukrainians are being used as “cannon fodder.” Russian officials have argued that the US and other Western powers intentionally escalated tensions by disregarding Moscow’s security concerns over NATO’s expansion in Eastern Europe and its growing military cooperation with Ukraine. Russia and the collective West ended up locked into an “existential war,” Putin stressed, adding that many in the West have now openly admitted that. Back in March, for instance, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the conflict as “frankly, a proxy war between nuclear powers – the United States, helping Ukraine, and Russia” and said the West should abandon its dead-end strategy of propping up Kiev “for as long as it takes.”

Putin

Read more …

Only reference to this meeting I have seen.

• The Summit In The Sand – Putin To Meet Trump In Abu Dhabi May 15-16 (Helmer)

After the Victory Day celebration later this week, President Vladimir Putin has agreed to hold a summit meeting with President Donald Trump. “The Americans have repeatedly asked for a summit and the Kremlin has finally decided,” according to a reliable Moscow source, “that there is no need to spurn the extended hand.” The source believes Abu Dhabi, in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), is the likely location. Preparatory discussions were held last week in Moscow when Putin telephoned the UAE President, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. The Kremlin communiqué claimed “the current state of Russia-UAE relations…constitute a strategic partnership and…enables ongoing dialogue even on the most sensitive international issues.” That was on May 1. The next day Putin met with Saif bin Zayed Al Nahyan, one of the President’s sons and his personal security chief, titled deputy prime minister.

The Moscow source says “the messages have been sent that it will not be a conclusive deal, only a meeting. This is a climb-down from the previous, public Russian position that a lot of work needs to be done first, before a presidential summit, by specialists. The Russians have understood there are no specialists on the US side yet, and the opportunity is right to shake hands first, then work out the details later.” The White House press spokesman has announced Trump “will travel to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates [in this order] from May 13th, until May 16th.” “It’s a display of the Russian hand of friendship and mutual security,” the Moscow source adds. “The Americans are offering nothing concrete but we believe Trump is disposed to giving Russia the security steps it needs.”

The source says the Kremlin is “neither surprised nor disappointed” at Trump’s May 1 tweet declaring that “many of our allies and friends are celebrating May 8th as Victory Day, but we did more than any other Country, by far, in producing a victorious result on World War II.” “It shows you how foolish the Kremlin faction was which has advocated inviting Trump to Red Square for May 9. Putin will give Trump his PR opportunity – but in the sand, not in Red Square.” The shift in the Moscow consensus – from resistance on the part of the General Staff, the intelligence agencies, and the Foreign Ministry – has followed remarks by Vice President JD Vance. “It’s going to be up to them [Russia and Ukraine] to come to agreement and stop this brutal, brutal conflict,” he said on Friday (May 2).

“It’s not going anywhere right [now]. It’s not going to end any time soon…Look, I am optimistic, but it’s hard to say…confident because the Russians and the Ukrainians – they’re the ones who have to take the final step. We got ‘em talkin’. We got ‘em offering peace proposals. We got the minerals deal done. I think we’re in a place where they’ve got to say we’re done with the fighting…but only Russia and Ukraine can make that decision. That’s not something even President Trump can do for ‘em.” In Moscow this is interpreted as acceptance by Washington that the war will continue on Russia’s terms – slow advance westward, no massed offensive – and that it’s now up to “direct” negotiations between Russia and Ukraine to reach an agreement.

“This is a double signal prompting Putin”, another Moscow source says, “to agree to a summit meeting with Trump now without preconditions and without pressure to agree on the Kellogg or Witkoff term sheets. In all likelihood, this will be a feel-good summit. No negotiations at all.” The source adds a caution. “The planned meeting may be derailed at the last minute if the Ukrainians violate the Victory Day ceasefire [between May 8 and 11], and if Trump is either shown to be incapable of controlling the Kiev regime, or duplicitous in aiding the violations. If the Ukrainians do not observe it, the Russians will hit back hard, very hard, and then ask Trump if he still wants to meet. It might go to the wire.”

Read more …

“As the world prepares to honor those who gave their lives in the fight against fascism, Kiev prepares to attack those who once defeated Ukraine’s infamous so-called “heroes.”

• Ukraine Ignores Russia’s Truce Request, Prepares To Sabotage Victory Day (SCF)

Behind its “democratic” rhetoric and constant appeals for Western support, the Kiev regime continues to display its true nature: belligerent, provocative, and increasingly engaged in terrorist practices. The most recent demonstration of this is Ukraine’s plan to sabotage the Victory Day celebrations in Moscow, scheduled for May 9, 2025—a date that symbolizes the Soviet Union’s triumph over Nazism and thus holds profound historical and civilizational significance for Russia and the world. Despite ongoing international tensions, leaders from more than 20 countries have confirmed their attendance at the event. Among them are high-profile figures such as Presidents Lula da Silva (Brazil), Ibrahim Traoré (Burkina Faso), Nicolás Maduro (Venezuela), To Lam (Vietnam), Miguel Díaz-Canel (Cuba), and Aleksandar Vucic (Serbia), along with Chinese President Xi Jinping and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico.

The diversity of the guest list highlights that the event goes far beyond Russia’s national interest—it stands as a global tribute to the defeat of fascism and a reaffirmation of our shared historical memory. However, on the other side of the border, in Kiev, President Vladimir Zelensky’s government is taking a radically different path. According to diplomatic and intelligence sources, Ukrainian authorities have openly discussed the possibility of launching provocations and terrorist attacks to disrupt the Moscow event. The presence of foreign dignitaries does not appear to deter such plans, revealing a flagrant disregard for basic norms of international law and diplomatic conduct. Zelensky himself, in recent statements, advised world leaders not to attend the May 9 parade, a clear attempt to sow fear and discourage participation.

His suggestion that the event may be targeted echoes earlier remarks in which he stated that “they are worried their parade is under threat—and they should be,” signaling awareness of or complicity in potential sabotage operations. These threats are not vague or speculative. Influential figures within Ukrainian nationalist circles, such as Dmitry Korchinsky—the leader of the radical “Bratstvo” party—have used social media to call on followers to prepare terrorist attacks on Russian soil. In public messages, Korchinsky even recommended planting improvised explosive devices in Moscow’s Red Square ahead of the celebration and proposed using fiber-optically guided drones. The range of potential attacks is wide and deeply concerning: from direct terrorist acts in Moscow and other Russian cities to infrastructure sabotage, targeted assassinations, disinformation campaigns, and psychological operations.

There is also evidence suggesting the possible deployment of foreign mercenaries and nationalist militant groups such as the “Freedom of Russia Legion” or the “Sheikh Mansur Battalion” to destabilize Russian border regions like Belgorod, Bryansk, and Kursk. A full-scale incursion by the Ukrainian regular army into these regions to spread panic and terror cannot be ruled out. In contrast, Russia has formally called for a ceasefire during the Victory Day period—a humanitarian gesture that any state truly committed to international law and human rights should respect. However, all indications suggest that Kiev will not only ignore this appeal but will deliberately violate it. This reinforces the growing perception that the Ukrainian regime acts as a perpetual agent of destabilization, supported—either tacitly or explicitly—by the West.

By aligning themselves with a government that threatens to sabotage a historic and internationally respected commemoration of the defeat of Nazism, Western countries are, whether knowingly or not, siding with reckless historical revisionism and disorder. This raises a serious question: how far are NATO allies willing to go in tolerating the increasingly extreme methods of the Kiev regime? As the world prepares to honor those who gave their lives in the fight against fascism, Kiev prepares to attack those who once defeated Ukraine’s infamous so-called “heroes.” The West and its institutions may absolve the Maidan junta—but History will judge it differently.

Read more …

“The invitation, as is well known, was also extended to US President Donald Trump, in continuation of the peace talks that have been ongoing since January..”

• No Peace And No Respect: Zelensky Threatens The May 9 Parade (Pacini)

Volodymyr Zelensky, in his delusions as self-proclaimed president-without-end of Ukraine, continues to spout nonsense even during this festive period: referring to the May 9 celebrations, he rejected Vladimir Putin’s proposal for a truce, similar to what happened at Easter. Unfortunately, the rejection was widely predictable, as is the fact that he will try to provoke Russia at the height of the celebrations. Zelensky has called for a 30-day ceasefire, which Russia has no reason to accept given the situation on the battlefield, which is entirely in Russia’s favor. On the other hand, Putin has always said, since the beginning of the SMO, that he would only agree to stop the war permanently, i.e., through genuine and comprehensive peace negotiations, as is customary in diplomacy.

The arrogance of Washington’s puppet knows no bounds, remaining completely outside the bounds of diplomatic decorum. Not even in the worst war schools would they have gone this far. It is almost embarrassing how the Ukrainian president is seeking direct confrontation at all costs. It is no longer a simple repetition of provocation, it is much more: it is a strategy to exhaust the enemy’s patience. The most suicidal move one could attempt. Zelensky has also stated that Ukraine cannot guarantee the safety of the leaders who will participate in the May 9 parade in Red Square. We are witnessing an explicit threat against heads of state who, in theory, could apply restrictive measures and sanctions against Ukraine if they wanted to. How can it come to this? It is a wicked statement.

Clearly, no one is afraid of the threat posed by the ‘loneliest man in the world’, the leader ignored by all, who, like a parasite, has sucked money from European states and NATO members in the name of an impossible war, protecting only his own interests. Imagine you have a crazy friend whom you would never give anything important to do because you are afraid he might ruin everything. That’s Zelensky. But now it’s time to stop playing games. If Ukraine really attacks Moscow, the retaliation will be devastating. And so will the international response. Numerous politicians from around the world are expected in Moscow on May 9. The invitation, as is well known, was also extended to US President Donald Trump, in continuation of the peace talks that have been ongoing since January, as well as to Chinese President Xi Jinping, at a time of particular tension between the US and China.

Once again, it is a lesson in life and diplomacy. Russia seeks mediation and puts it into practice with authority, being in an international position where it certainly does not have to ask anyone’s permission; on the contrary, it sets an example. An example that Kiev should keep in mind. The opportunity is of enormous value: symbolically, it is the repetition of a principle that has been engraved in history, that of anti-fascism and the historical truth of the defeat of Nazism in Europe thanks to Soviet Russia. It is also the repetition of an objective historical victory of socialism, in the Soviet model, over the other ideologies of a century ago (a victory that did not last uninterrupted, unfortunately suffering a severe blow from liberalism after 1989). And today, it is a sign of a clear desire: to reunite the peoples of Eurasia in a bloc that will serve as a guide for all peoples who do not want to submit to Western hegemony, under any name or flag.

Read more …

“..Orban warned that Ukraine’s EU membership “would bankrupt the Hungarian economy,” describing Kiev’s potential accession as a “collective economic trap.”

• No Ukraine in EU Without Budapest’s Approval – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky have clashed over Kiev’s prospects of joining the EU. Orban reminded the Ukrainian leader that Kiev has no chance of becoming part of the bloc without Budapest’s approval. The war of words started on Friday when Orban warned that Ukraine’s EU membership “would bankrupt the Hungarian economy,” describing Kiev’s potential accession as a “collective economic trap.” The Hungarian leader also criticized the EU’s goal of admitting Ukraine by 2030, a target recently reiterated by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. “We know when they want to bring them in. It’s not some vague future; it’s here, knocking at our door,” he said. “Forget the fairy tales about when and how. They want to do it now, as fast as possible.”

Zelensky responded by citing domestic polling in Hungary. “70% support Ukraine joining the EU. That means people in Hungary are with us,” Zelensky claimed. However, the poll conducted by the opposition Tisza Party to which Zelensky referred showed only 58% support. An earlier poll by the Hungarian newspaper Nepszava showed even lower figures, with 47% in favor and 46% against. Orban fired back at Zelensky on X, writing: “What the Hungarian people think is not decided by the president in Kiev or the bureaucrats in Brussels. There is no Ukrainian EU accession without Hungary. Every Hungarian will have their say on this. Whether you like it or not. That’s how we do things here.”

All EU member states must unanimously approve any new country joining the bloc. Hungary has repeatedly cited widespread graft and minority rights issues as reasons to oppose Ukraine’s fast-track membership, with Orban at one point describing the nation as “one of the most corrupt countries in the world.” Ukraine, which has designated EU membership as a national priority, formally applied to join the bloc in February 2022, just days after the escalation of hostilities with Russia. Despite support from several EU members, the timeline for Ukraine’s membership remains uncertain. Brussels has cited the need for Kiev to undertake significant legal, political, and economic reforms.

Read more …

“..Fico, however, stated that the threats issued by Kiev would not deter him from participation in the commemoration.“In my opinion, it’s ridiculous. I reject such threats..”

• Slovak PM Fico Pledges To Defy ‘Unacceptable’ Zelensky Threats (RT)

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has confirmed he will attend Russia’s Victory Day celebrations in Moscow on May 9, dismissing warnings by Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky of potential security risks as “ridiculous.” The May 9 parade in Moscow will mark the 80th anniversary of the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany. The Kremlin has extended invitations to the event to the leaders of Serbia, Slovakia, China, India, and Brazil, among others. In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed a unilateral 72-hour ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict to coincide with the Victory Day celebrations. Zelensky rejected the offer, labeling it a “theatrical performance” and advocated for a more substantial, unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Russian officials argue that a new temporary truce would simply allow Kiev to regroup and rearm.

Earlier this week Zelensky urged foreign leaders to avoid visiting Moscow, citing potential security risks. Russian officials accused Zelensky of endangering the safety of civilians attending the May 9 events. Fico, however, stated that the threats issued by Kiev would not deter him from participation in the commemoration.“In my opinion, it’s ridiculous. I reject such threats,” Fico said at a press conference on Sunday. “I will go to the celebrations of the 80th anniversary [of Victory Day in Moscow].” Fico claimed Zelensky was effectively warning invited leaders not to attend, with the veiled threat that Ukraine might retaliate in some way. “Well, celebrate, we might throw you a drone or something like that. These are unacceptable things for me,” he said.

Referring to Zelensky’s claim that Kiev could not guarantee the security of attending leaders, Fico responded: “If Zelensky thinks that his cries will prevent foreign delegations from coming there, it is a huge mistake. Ensuring the security of participants [in the celebrations] is the responsibility of the Russian Federation,” said the Slovak prime minister. The EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, warned in April that the bloc does not want any member or candidate states attending. During a meeting last month with Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, who earlier pledged to attend, EC Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos reportedly cautioned that his attendance would be held against Serbia in its bid to join the EU. Fico recommended “Kallas and others to deal with more serious problems than whether I will go or not to the celebration of the 80th anniversary.”

Read more …

“Elon Musk has drawn attention to a viral video showing Ukrainian military recruiters forcibly detaining a deliveryman in Lutsk..”

• Musk Reacts To Video of Forced Mobilization In Ukraine (RT)

Elon Musk has drawn attention to a viral video showing Ukrainian military recruiters forcibly detaining a deliveryman in Lutsk, in the western part of the country. Kiev has pursued a violent mobilization campaign for months, often resulting in clashes between reluctant civilians and military personnel. On Saturday, a media user on X shared a video showing three Ukrainian soldiers approaching a man on a bicycle carrying a large yellow bag and wearing a vest, who appears to be a delivery worker. After a brief conversation, the soldiers attempt to drag him into a white van parked nearby, but he resists. Following a struggle, the recruitment officers manage to shove the man into the vehicle, which then drives off. The fate of the detainee is unknown. Reacting to the video, Musk posted “!!” on his social media platform. The X owner and close ally of US President Donald Trump has repeatedly called on the Ukrainian leadership to sign a ceasefire with Russia to avoid further casualties.

Last November, he also criticized reported calls by the US government for Ukraine to lower the minimum conscription age to 18, writing: “How many more need to die?” On Friday, another mobilization video from Lutsk surfaced on social media, with recruitment officers – potentially driving the same van as in the first clip – forcibly detaining a man riding a scooter. Ukraine announced a general mobilization following the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022, barring most men 18 to 60 years old from leaving the country. In 2024, faced with manpower shortages and mounting losses, Kiev lowered the conscription age from 27 to 25, while introducing stricter penalties for draft evasion and tightening other mobilization rules. As the mobilization drive continues, numerous videos have emerged on social media showing Ukrainian officials trying to forcibly recruit reluctant civilians, often leading to violent clashes.

Read more …

How to win? Talk about jobs. Talk about no income taxes.

“If we can lift 800 million Chinese peasants out of poverty, then there’s no excuse for leaving any Americans behind..”

• How to Win the PR War on Tariffs (Scott Pinsker)

“In a few moments, I will sign a historic executive order instituting reciprocal tariffs on countries throughout the world, reciprocal. That means they do it to us and we do it to them, very simple, can’t get any simpler than that.” —Donald Trump’s very first mention of tariffs during the May 2 “Liberation Day” event.

That was an honest lead, but it wasn’t optimal PR. There are zillions of truthful, accurate, interesting facts about tariffs. It’s a complex subject that’s intertwined with global trade, international diplomacy, geography, history, and economic policy — textbooks can (and certainly have) been written about it. You could yak about it 24/7 for a decade and still find something new to say. When it comes to tariffs and PR, there’s an embarrassment of riches. I know that sounds like a good thing, but it’s actually a problem.

[..] Experts in highly skilled fields (engineers, medical, tech) are often difficult to train for media appearances… because they know so damn much! For example, if a doctor is representing a hospital during a news segment and is asked about a new procedure they’re offering, he’ll instinctively want to share all the info he’s most excited about: the new research, new clinical studies, new data, new equipment, and new theories! To a doctor, all that stuff is incredibly important — and medically relevant, too. He’s right. But the guy sitting at home just wants to know if it’ll make him feel better. Truth and tactics are different. Let’s get back to tariffs. More often than not, the standard MAGA answer for “why” is twofold: Liberation Day was necessary because other countries were ripping us off, and because what they’ve been doing to us is unfair.

Fairness is almost always accentuated. Even the name reflects it: The “Fair and Reciprocal Plan” on Trade. In fact, that was the very first bullet-point listed under the announcement: The “Fair and Reciprocal Plan” will seek to correct longstanding imbalances in international trade and ensure fairness across the board. Well, fairness is very nice. Most people would support that. But fairness to whom? The guy sitting at home doesn’t associate himself with global trade. He’s indifferent to Walmart’s stock price. For him, tariffs are connected to higher prices.[..] Tariffs are about FAIRNESS, eh?! The way it’s currently being positioned, it sounds a helluva lot “fairer” for those big corporations than for the guy at home, ‘cause he’s the one who’s gonna pay more! Those rich guys don’t seem to be suffering. Asking Joe Sixpack to sacrifice so Walmart, Apple, Google, and Boeing can claim a bigger piece of the pie is a pretty big ask.

Other countries’ tariffs have been grossly unfair and decidedly un-reciprocal; that’s a true statement. And even the media doofuses who’ll call Trump a liar at the drop of a (red) hat are actually taking his word on tariffs: Trump really, truly believes that other countries were unfairly ripping us off; it’s not a put-on. Nobody’s doubting the sincerity of his convictions. But for PR purposes, we need to recalibrate the trajectory of who is being ripped off: We don’t want our audience to think about the Walmarts, Apples, and Boeings of the world. We want them to think about themselves. If the American people personalize this issue — i.e. if they identify with the struggle — then MAGA will win the political war over tariffs. And if they don’t? We won’t. The answer, then, to WHY we have tariffs must always be a four-lettered word: JOBS!

“Fairness” is an abstraction; a job is tangible. I’d be furious with the politician who gave me higher prices, just so Google’s shareholders could make more money — but I’ll gladly sacrifice so my friends, neighbors, and colleagues will have better jobs. Everyone recognizes the value of high-paying jobs. The American economy is unfathomably large. It’s the envy of the world. It’s so big and prosperous, we’ve employed BILLIIONS of foreign nationals over the last 40 years! We’ve made hundreds of millions of Chinese, Indians, Vietnamese, Europeans, and others incredibly wealthy. Since 1978, global trade has lifted 800 million Chinese people out of poverty. Good for them. Maybe the limousine liberals in the Democratic Party haven’t noticed, but our own people are hurting. We need to lift our friends and neighbors out of poverty, too. There aren’t enough good jobs available!

If we can lift 800 million Chinese peasants out of poverty, then there’s no excuse for leaving any Americans behind. So, this isn’t just “Make AMERICA Great Again” — it’s Make AMERICANS Great Again. This is about us! There’s an affordability epidemic in our country: 67% of Americans now believe that homeownership is “unrealistic” for young people. It’s gotten so bad, 73.8% of millennials are living paycheck-to-paycheck. Without your own home, it’s really tough to raise children. And without more children, our entire system collapses. It’s literally an existential threat. Unless we bring high-paying jobs back to our country ASAP, our children and grandchildren won’t have a country left anymore — because greedy, corrupt politicians gave our country away in crooked trade deals. The status quo was destroying the American Dream.

Read more …

“The court noted that the district court likely lacked jurisdiction to interfere with the administration’s personnel actions and funding decisions..”

• Trump Just Got a Game-Changing Legal Victory (Matt Margolis)

When President Trump returned to the White House, he didn’t just get to work cleaning up Joe Biden’s mess—he set his sights on dismantling decades of entrenched bureaucratic bloat, waste, and corruption. With a relentless series of executive orders and policy directives, Trump reignited his mission to drain the swamp—this time with laser precision and zero patience for the status quo. Predictably, the left went into full-blown panic mode. Liberal legal groups immediately launched a barrage of lawsuits, cherry-picking friendly courts in a shameless attempt to stall Trump’s agenda. They’re terrified of losing control over the bloated regulatory state they’ve used for years to push policies they could never pass through Congress. But that strategy just hit a major roadblock.

In a landmark ruling on Saturday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals handed the Trump administration a decisive legal victory—one that could fundamentally change how activist judges and forum-shopped cases interfere with executive authority. “This is a huge victory for President Trump and his Article II powers granted in the United States Constitution. It’s also a victory for US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) and VOA,” Kari Lake told Fox News Digital. Lake now serves as a USAGM senior advisor to the Trump administration. “We are eager to accomplish President Trump’s America First agenda which has always been to modernize and make our government efficient while cutting waste, fraud, and abuse.” The appeals court’s 2-1 ruling Saturday emphasized the judiciary’s deference to executive authority in matters concerning federal employment and contractual decisions.

The court noted that the district court likely lacked jurisdiction to interfere with the administration’s personnel actions and funding decisions, particularly regarding grant agreements with non-federal entities like Radio Free Asia and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks. This ruling Trump’s March 14 executive order (EO), which aimed to dismantle USAGM operations. This ruling effectively reins in district courts that have been sidestepping proper jurisdictional channels in cases challenging Trump administration actions. The decision serves as a clear reminder that courts themselves must operate within their prescribed legal boundaries. According to Margot Cleveland, senior legal correspondent for The Federalist, the D.C. Circuit’s ruling hinges on a critical point: jurisdiction, which has sweeping implications.

As Cleveland explains, many of the legal challenges being hurled at the Trump administration involve employment decisions—precisely the kind of disputes Congress has explicitly said federal district courts have no authority to adjudicate. The court’s decision also strikes at the heart of a broader legal strategy being used by leftist groups to stymie Trump’s reforms—namely, the claim that the administration is engaging in “wholesale dismantling” of agencies. But as the ruling makes clear, the Administrative Procedure Act was never designed to handle such broad-based political grievances, and Congress never waived sovereign immunity to allow them. In another key point, the court found that the lower court also overstepped its bounds by trying to restore federal grants—something Congress assigned to the Court of Federal Claims, not the district courts. All told, the decision is a sharp rebuke to the legal overreach being used to obstruct the Trump administration’s agenda.

The significance of this decision extends far beyond these specific cases—it establishes clear jurisdictional parameters that could affect dozens of pending lawsuits against Trump administration policies. While the administration won’t prevail in every case, this ruling suggests courts may need to more carefully consider their jurisdictional authority before issuing sweeping injunctions against executive actions.

Read more …

Strong symbols.

• Trump Orders Reopening Of Notorious Alcatraz Prison (NYP)

President Trump called on his administration to reopen and expand Alcatraz so authorities could send the “dregs of society” to the notorious California prison more than six decades after it closed. The commander in chief announced Sunday that he was directing the Bureau of Prisons and other federal agencies to get the massive island facility off the San Francisco bay — which has long been the lore of Hollywood — back up and running again to lock away homegrown, repeat criminals. “For too long, America has been plagued by vicious, violent, and repeat Criminal Offenders, the dregs of society, who will never contribute anything other than Misery and Suffering,” he wrote on Truth Social. “When we were a more serious Nation, in times past, we did not hesitate to lock up the most dangerous criminals, and keep them far away from anyone they could harm.

“That’s the way it’s supposed to be. No longer will we tolerate these Serial Offenders who spread filth, bloodshed, and mayhem on our streets.” Trump, 78, also said the “substantially enlarged and rebuilt” prison would “serve as a symbol of Law, Order, and JUSTICE.” But the logistics behind the presidential order are thornier. The island is now a major tourist attraction that is run by the National Parks Service and attracts thousands of visitors each year. It’s also a designated National Landmark. Alcatraz was initially closed because its infrastructure was crumbling and it was too expensive to keep running — given all food, supplies and other necessities had to be delivered by boat. The facility was operated as a major federal detention center between 1934 and 1963 and was nearly inescapable because the island was surrounded by strong currents and ice-cold water. Some of its most famous prisoners included gangsters Al Capone and George “Machine Gun” Kelly.

The island has become the subject of several Hollywood blockbusters, including “The Rock,” starring Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage and the 1979 film “Escape from Alcatraz,” starring Clint Eastwood. During Alcatraz’s 29 years as a prison, 36 men made a bid for freedom — with nearly all of them dying or getting captured by guards. To this day, it remains unknown if three inmates – brothers John and Clarence Anglin, and fellow inmate Frank Morris – successfully made it off the island alive during their attempted escape in 1962. Trump, in his social media post, said the country can’t be held hostage by “criminals, thugs, and Judges that are afraid to do their job and allow us to remove criminals, who came into our Country illegally.” The Republican has railed against federal judges who have slowed his effort to boot alleged gangbangers and ship them off to the infamous El Salvador megaprison.

Just last Thursday, District Judge Fernando Rodriguez – who was appointed by Trump – blocked the US government from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. Trump also ordered the FBI, the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security to help get Alcatraz reopened. The president previously reopened a detention center at Guantanamo Bay, where criminal migrants have been sent. When that announcement was made in late January, one of the president’s sons, Donald Trump Jr., floated the idea of dumping prisoners in Alcatraz. “Now this is a great idea,” he said in reference to Guantanamo Bay. “Maybe we should also reopen Alcatraz?!?!”

Read more …

“..we have thousands of murderers in this country, we’re getting them out and they say ‘we don’t want them out, we want them to stay in our country until we have a trial..”

• Trump Will Start Nominating Federal Judges ‘Rapidly’ (DS)

President Donald Trump will nominate federal judges “rapidly,” he told The Daily Signal on Sunday night. “We’re putting them in rapidly and trying to get very good ones, but we need judges that are not going to be demanding trials for every single illegal immigrant,” Trump said on Air Force One. “We have millions of people that have come here illegally, and we can’t have a trial for every single person, that would be millions of trials.” Trump is off to a slower start in nominating judges than his first term, having only nominated one federal judge, Whitney Hermandorfer, who will serve on the 6th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio. About 100 days into Trump’s first term, the Senate had already confirmed a new Supreme Court justice, Trump had nominated an appeals court judge, and several other prominent judicial nominees were in the queue to be announced within days.

But according to the president, his slow start to judicial nominations is about to morph into a sprint. Trump said America needs federal judges who won’t insist on a trial for the deportation of every illegal immigrant. “The people elected me in a landslide… We won every swing state… by big numbers… not only swing state, but the popular vote by millions of votes… they elected me, this was the number one issue,” Trump said, “and now we have judges that are radicalized, and they’re crazy because … if you believe this, they want us to have a trial for every person that came illegally into our country.” “So they come into our country illegally, and we’re supposed to take weeks, I guess, and months to have a trial, you want every criminal, and we have murderers that are all over the country,” the president continued. “I don’t think the Supreme Court will stand for that, I can’t believe it, because you know what? If they do, we’re not gonna have a country.”

The Daily Signal asked the president how he will ensure his nominations are different than the judges blocking his agenda, and he said all he can do is his best. “All you can do is do the best you can,” he said. “You try to appoint the best people to being judges or anything else that you appoint, but so far you know we’re very disappointed with the decisions that come out, mostly from people appointed by others than me.” “But it’s so hard to believe that you have a murderer, you know we have 11,888 or whatever the number is, we have thousands of murderers in this country, we’re getting them out and they say ‘we don’t want them out, we want them to stay in our country until we have a trial,’” Trump said. Trials take years, and America doesn’t have that much time to curb illegal immigration, according to the 47th president. “They take years,” he said. “It’s so crazy. We won’t have a country left. We can’t have that happen.”

Read more …

” If the Supreme Court doesn’t take steps to do that, Congress may remove it from the court’s hands and deal with the problem itself.

• Trump’s 100 Days and the Legal War in Washington (Hans von Spakovsky)

During his first 100 days in office, President Donald Trump acted with unprecedented speed to make major changes in government policies and root out the pervasive waste, fraud, and diversity, equity, and inclusion poisoning our government and its programs. Still, he was hampered by a handful of biased judges who abused their authority to keep him from implementing the policies the American people voted for. Jurisdiction is limited to the federal districts where the hundreds of district court judges reside. However, some of these judges arrogantly assert that they can override the president in areas of core executive branch competency and issue sweeping injunctions that affect the entire nation. They even claim they can act on behalf of people who aren’t parties in the cases before them.

These judicial tyrants seem to believe that the Constitution gives them more power than the president to make decisions on the size of the federal government, how it spends its money, and whom it can hire and fire. They say they have a right to overrule the president’s national security judgment on issues that affect our relations with foreign governments, our military readiness, and the safety of the public from unchecked illegal immigration. The Constitution does not give that authority to the judiciary. Perhaps these judges would like to rewrite President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to say we must preserve “government of the judges, by the judges, for the judges.” Make no mistake: These judges are acting far outside their authority, and their actions are unprecedented.

Last year, the Harvard Law Review noted that of the 127 nationwide injunctions issued since 1963, 64 were against the first Trump administration. Similarly, Justice Clarence Thomas noted in Trump v. Hawaii (2018) that district courts had issued such injunctions in recent years “without considering their authority to grant such sweeping relief.” Thomas said these injunctions “did not emerge until a century and a half after the founding” and are “inconsistent with long-standing limits on the equitable relief and the power of Article III courts.” In the case in question, district courts had issued nationwide injunctions against Trump’s proclamation restricting entry of aliens from eight nations, many of them terrorist states, because of the security threat they posed. As in many of today’s cases on dangerous criminal gangs and terrorist organizations, those judges thought their national security judgment overrode that of the president.

Trump won that case when the Supreme Court ruled that he was well within his authority to make that judgment and that the admission and exclusion of aliens is a “fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the government’s political departments largely immune from judicial control.” Over the past 100 days, we have again witnessed numerous injunctions against actions well within Trump’s constitutional authority as the chief executive and commander in chief. Justice Neil Gorsuch warned against this type of judicial activism in 2020 in Department of Homeland Security v. New York, a case involving rulemaking on the definition of “public charge” as used in federal immigration law. In that case, multiple lawsuits had been filed with conflicting rulings by different courts. Gorsuch cynically said these different rulings didn’t matter.

“Despite the fluid state of things—some interim wins for the government over here, some preliminary relief for the plaintiffs over there—we now have an injunction to rule them all: the one before us, in which a single judge in New York enjoined the government from applying the new definition to anyone, without regard to geography or participation in this or any other lawsuit.” The Supreme Court stayed that injunction, but it never ruled on the legitimacy of the rulemaking. As soon as the Biden administration came in, it withdrew the government’s appeal and revoked the rule as part of its open borders policy. Today’s bout of lawfare is still in its preliminary stages, and the substantive merits of the various claims have not yet been decided by federal courts of appeals or the Supreme Court. However, the president has had some significant wins.

Notably, the Supreme Court recently dissolved temporary restraining orders issued by Chief Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in a decision that told Boasberg he lacked jurisdiction over the removal of members of the terrorist group Tren de Aragua. Similarly, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed a Biden district judge’s injunction that had told the administration it couldn’t root out DEI poison from the executive branch. The lawfare against the administration is undoubtedly frustrating, but we’ll see what happens when these cases reach the Supreme Court. In Trump v. Hawaii, Thomas said that if the “popularity” of nationwide injunctions continues, “this Court must address their legality.” Let’s hope the justices do that soon. If the Supreme Court doesn’t take steps to do that, Congress may remove it from the court’s hands and deal with the problem itself.

Read more …

“How convenient it was for Brussels to cancel an election in a country where corruption is so endemic that the people simply didn’t question how anti-democratic the stunt was in the first place..”

• Romania Hits All-Time Low With Fake Elections, Manipulated By The EU (Jay)

The European Union continues to sink deeper and deeper in its own political excrement as it not only believes its own manufactured consent by its Brussels cabal of wasters who call themselves journalists but is also tightening down its grip on its 400 million citizens. The EU never pretended to be a democracy but these days it is surpassing even the Stalinist period of the Soviet Union in its determination to control every thought of its citizens, which, of course means hunting down and persecuting any journalists who even simply question the narrative. The latest example – as there are many – is good ‘ol Chay Bowes, an RT presenter-come-journalist who was sent to Romania to cover the presidential elections – second time around, as the original result in March, which didn’t please the EU, was cancelled.

It’s what the EU does quite frequently. It simply cancels democratic processes which don’t come up with the results it prefers. Ireland and France experienced the same with their own referendums which had to be done a second time to get the right result. These days the EU simply calls any results which it doesn’t like ‘Russian interference’ and everyone just rolls over and accepts it, amazingly. Well, perhaps not amazingly for Romania which entered the EU in 2007 as its sort of Third World member state with corruption so bad that the narrative in Brussels at the time was “we’ll let them it and then reform them”. Not much has changed. The elite in Bucharest quite confidently takes its instructions from Brussels these days which told the Romanians to arrest Bowes when he arrives in Bucharest and get him to sign some bullshit fake police statement admitting all kinds of nonsense before kicking him out of the country.

Only the EU elite would go this far to block any kind of old school reporting on the ground by polemics like Bowes, who is probably considered very odd in his native Ireland, but was really only going to report what he saw and heard. Only the EU would be this obsessed with using the example of his arrest as a warning to any other odd journalists who don’t believe the EU script, that this is what happens to you. Bowes may well be wondering what will happen to him if he ever has to return to Ireland to see loved ones. Will his own police, on the instructions of the fabulously corrupt EU, have him arrested on some fake charge? At the heart of the matter is a man called Georgescu who, in basic terms, stands against everything that the corrupt EU and its boss – Ursula von der Leyen – stand for and so he got branded as being ‘pro-Russian’ and they have the piece of paper to prove it. From their own secret service goons. Oh yes they have.

Although he didn’t stand this second time around, back in March he got very close to winning outright the election before the EU stepped in. How convenient it was for Brussels to cancel an election in a country where corruption is so endemic that the people simply didn’t question how anti-democratic the stunt was in the first place. Romania, it would seem, is an irony-free zone. And I should know. In 2007 I travelled there to interview the PM for Euronews, only to find that once I arrived the interview was cancelled. I protested in a sarcastic email offering a couple thousand euros bribe to the press officer, only to receive a very angry email back. The press honcho had taken my offer seriously. Undeterred, I comforted myself by interviewing Romania’s new, young anti-corruption minister who, somewhat on cue, was forced to resign a few days after the interview. Yes, you’ve guessed it. He was accused of graft on a grand scale himself.

Democratically speaking, Romania is not at all a serious country, which has allowed the EU to meddle in its internal workings quite effortlessly rather like Moscow might have done at one point in its history. The elite in Bucharest and their EU masters have a real problem with Georgescu and is policies which are remarkably similar to those of Victor Orban, the EU’s in-house irritant who holds back the project from thinking big. “His frequent posts channelled widespread frustration over persistent poverty and endemic corruption in the country” Bloomberg wails. “Reprising themes popular with prominent nationalists such as Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, he condemned LGBTQ rights, questioned the use of vaccines, portrayed the coronavirus pandemic as a hoax and espoused the “Great Replacement” theory — the idea that Christian populations are being systematically replaced by non-Christians and immigrants”.

Read more …

“Simion hoped to harness the election support Georgescu built last year by saying he’ll have a job for him, even possibly as prime minister.”

• Right Wing George Simion Wins First Round of Voting in Romania (CTH)

The original winner of the previous Romanian election in 2024, Calin Georgescu, was removed as the election winner and barred from ever running again because Georgescu did not support the EU security state and did not want war with Russia. The election was thrown out because the wrong person won the vote of the Romanian people. A second election was organized, and the man who represents the voice of Georgescu, George Simion, has won the first round. However, do not get too excited; remember, NATO is building their biggest military base in Romania, and they will not accept any impediments. Like Moldova, the second round will likely see massive numbers of “Romanians voting from abroad” to help shape the final result. The people living in Romania will not technically be the ones deciding the Romanian election. In the new era of intelligence systems controlling “democracy,” all votes from people with an interest in the matter will be counted in favor of the candidate chosen by the EU national security apparatus.

Politico: “BUCHAREST — George Simion, the hard-right leader of the Alliance for the Union of Romanians, is projected to win the first round of Romania’s presidential election with around 40 percent of the vote, according to partial results from the country’s election authority. Simion badges himself as a supporter of U.S. President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement, wants to stop military aid to Ukraine and will leave the EU quaking as another key country threatens to turn its back on mainstream European policies. “I promise I will always heed the will of the people. I am here to serve Romanians, not the other way around,” Simion said in a statement early Monday. He will face centrist Bucharest Mayor Nicosur Dan, who edged out establishment figurehead Crin Antonescu to make it into a runoff on May 18.

Dan won 20.7 percent of the ballots of Romanians voting at home, barely ahead of Antonescu, who received 20.5 percent. But Dan won 26 percent of the votes of Romanians voting abroad, with nearly 80 percent of the polling stations counted. Antonescu only received 7.3 percent of the votes abroad. […] The election results are being closely watched in Brussels and Washington, as Romania has become the latest battleground between the far right and the political establishment. […] Sunday’s vote was part of the election do-over that Romania’s top court ordered in December, after canceling the November ballot over allegations of illegal campaigning and potential Russian interference in favor of Calin Georgescu, an ultranationalist firebrand who came out of nowhere to win the first round.

That was the first time a candidate backed by a mainstream political party did not make it into the second round. Georgescu was set to face reformist Elena Lasconi in the second round. Lasconi, whose center-right Union Save Romania party leadership abandoned her to support Dan, only received some 2.8 percent of the votes of Romanians voting at home, according to the partial results. Simion hoped to harness the election support Georgescu built last year by saying he’ll have a job for him, even possibly as prime minister. “We are approaching an exceptional result, far beyond what the system’s TV channels present, which stirred up division, sprayed venom and distorted everything I said,” Simion said in a message projected at his party’s headquarters after the exit polls were released.

Read more …

“President Trump’s effort to restore power to ethnic Americans is being blocked by an anti-American judicial system that represents immigrant-invaders, not American citizens.”

• The Bell Tolls for All White Gentile Ethnicities (Paul Craig Roberts)

The Vice President and Secretary of State of the United States have called attention to the tyrannical behavior of the current German government, a corrupt anti-democratic government, controlled by Israel, that is holding on to power by designating its rival, AfD, the rapidly growing second largest party as “extremist.” Recent polls indicate that the AfD has pulled even and perhaps a bit ahead of the government that is trying to suppress it. By applying the “extremist” label to its rival, the government gives itself the power to use its spy agencies to keep the AfD under surveillance. This permits the current corrupt government to know in advance the AfD’s electoral plans while demonizing the AfD as so extreme that it must remain under surveillance.

On what grounds is the AfD designated extremist? The German Domestic Security Service BfV explains: The AfD represents ethnic Germans. Representing “people based on ethnicity and descent” disregards the human dignity of immigrant-invaders and is “incompatible with the democratic basic order.” Here we have it stated clearly just as Jean Raspail put it in The Camp of the Saints. It is anti-democratic for a government to represent the citizens from whose ethnicity the name of the country is derived. Democracy requires representation of those who entered the country illegally or under false pretenses. All government enforcement measures are then directed against the ethnic citizens who are coerced to accept the invasion. As Jean Raspail showed, this is a formula for the extinction of white ethnicities. President Trump’s effort to restore power to ethnic Americans is being blocked by an anti-American judicial system that represents immigrant-invaders, not American citizens.

Hanne Herland of the Herland Report tells us accurately that this is the situation all over Western Europe, the UK and Ireland: “In Europe, non-Western immigrants were given the victim card, and the current discrimination against the indigenous native Europeans by their own leaders began. Instead of listening to their needs, they demonized their views and attacked their own populations. “Europeans were told to step aside and allow immigrants to behave however rudely they wanted, since they came from poor countries and ‘didn’t know any better.’ They were to be excused from law-breaking behavior such as violent rapes, murders or entering the country illegally.” In other words, the immigrant-invaders weren’t civilized sufficiently to know any better, and it is all the fault of racist white ethnicities. What representing immigrant-invaders means in the EU is the loose enforcement, if any enforcement at all, of criminal and rape laws against immigrant-invaders.

Holding immigrant-invaders accountable would be racism, like what the Germans did to Jews. In effect, what is happening all over Europe and in Britain is that immigrant-invaders are becoming overlords over the ethnicities that comprise the former nations, now towers of babel. So, on top of their Israeli overlord, Europeans have immigrant-invaders as another overload. What a joke that Europeans and British and Irish are “free people.” They are the most enslaved in history. Even their tongues have been cut out. They cannot speak. The entire Western World is a dead man walking. Every person who rises to the defense of Western civilization is demonized, arrested, fired, dismissed from his university, framed in a false prosecution and imprisoned. The Insouciant West was insouciant for too long, It has lost its life.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Genes

Birth rate

Giga

Trump 1980

BR

Mess

Ali Baba

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle June 2 2024

Jun 022024
 
 June 2, 2024  Posted by at 8:26 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  60 Responses »


John French Sloan East Entrance, City Hall, Philadelphia 1901

 

• Tyranny Is Upon Us: Law And Juries Are Weaponized (Paul Craig Roberts)
• The Trump Trial Harkens Back to a Dark Period of American Law (Turley)
• The Democrats Just Sealed Donald Trump’s Victory In November (Bridge)
• DOJ: You Can’t Hear The Biden-Hur ‘Memory Interview’ Because of Deepfakes (Sp.)
• Desperate, Lying Biden May Abuse AI to Pull the Ultimate Race Hoax (Sellers)
• Artificial ‘N****R’ (Sellers)
• RFK Jr. Slams Biden’s Decision to Allow Ukrainian Strikes Inside Russia (Sp.)
• Ukraine Conflict Is Reshaping War For the 21st Century (DeMartino)
• The Popski Syndrome – Allied Defeat Turns Into Battlefield Fantasies (Helmer)
• Presidents Who Gamble With Nuclear Armageddon (Jeffrey Sachs)
• Russia’s Victory Over Ukraine Is Drawing Near (Scott Ritter)
• Ukraine Won’t Exist In 50 Years – Tucker Carlson (RT)
• Dave Smith Burns Chris Cuomo To The Ground In Epic Covid Debate (ZH)
• Mark Rutte, The Dutch Invader, Is Sinking In The Hungarian Goulash (Helmer)
• Huge Anti-War Rally In Budapest, Hungary (RT)

 

 

 

 

RFK Elon

 

 

Flynn/Macgregor

 

 

 

 

Eric Trump

 

 

JD Vance
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796593469546287378

 

 

 

 

Eva

 

 

 

 

 

 

“..a single accounting reporting charge, a misdemeanor, was magically turned into 34 federal felonies of election violations..”

“..legally this is a case for which there are no legal grounds for bringing it..”

• Tyranny Is Upon Us: Law And Juries Are Weaponized (Paul Craig Roberts)

Jury Finds Trump Guilty on All 34 Felony Charges in New York Trial. Keep in mind that these are 34 made-up felonies based on how an expense was recorded by accountants and attorneys. Trump did not record the expense.The expense was recorded according to accounting standards. Keep in mind that a single accounting reporting charge, a misdemeanor, was magically turned into 34 federal felonies of election violations, if memory serves, the argument being that Trump won the election by misreporting the expense. There are so many civil and criminal show trials going on against Trump that it is hard to keep track of all the absurdities. Keep in mind that it is a case without complainants, without harmed parties. It is a case brought by a prosecutor who can show no party harmed. What is frightening is that legally this is a case for which there are no legal grounds for bringing it. Yet, the bar associations, the law schools, the media said nothing.

Getting Trump was so important that law was sacrificed for the purpose. Trump’s demonization made a fair trial impossible, and few jurors can resist using their power against a rich person. The weaponization of law in order to interfere with an election –in other words the prosecutor is guilty of interfering in an election–the charge brought against Trump– means the future of America is tyranny. An appeal will be made, but a state where justice is as corrupt as New York is incapable of producing a decision based on law. If there is any fight left in Americans, and I am unsure, a prison sentence from the totally corrupt judge should launch a civil war. Many would say it is about time or past time. If not, the people have submitted to tyranny. The North submitted to Lincoln’s tyranny. The South did not. Little is left of the South. It is unclear what stands against the tyranny of Washington.

Read more …

The constitutional law professor: “Even after sitting in the courtroom watching the trial and the verdict, I still have no idea what Trump was convicted of in the case..”

• The Trump Trial Harkens Back to a Dark Period of American Law (Turley)

After years of trying — in the words of the judge — “to get the damned rascal in this court,” it was a conviction that many welcomed. But those words were not from Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, and the conviction was not that of former President Donald Trump. Rather they were from US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, at the end of the 18th century, when America embraced political prosecutions to target critics and opponents. The man on trial then was James T. Callender, a muckraking writer critical of President John Adams. For accusing politicians of corruption, Callender was charged with sedition, fined $200 and put in prison. It was one of the many political prosecutions carried out by the Adams administration. Political prosecutions are something most citizens associate with dictatorships. But the Trump prosecution has forced many to confront the undeniable reality of the politicization of our legal system. In many respects, President Biden and Democrats have re-created the Adams era.

Biden has led calls for censorship of political critics and his administration has coordinated the silencing and the blacklisting of those with opposing views. Democratic politicians have pressured social-media companies to serve as surrogates for the government in banning, throttling and defunding individuals and groups. Indeed, I have previously written that Biden is now the most anti-free-speech president since Adams. The Adams era also reflected the same blind loyalty of many media outlets. Federalist publications supported the crackdowns while echoing charges against political opponents as seditionists and insurrectionists. Jeffersonian publications, like Callender’s, attacked Adams for his “unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice.” The nation was divided down the middle as both sides accused each other of being traitors and insurrectionists. Sound familiar? Yet, it is the politicization of the legal system that is the most chilling return to the Adams era.

Even liberal legal analysts and figures have admitted that the case against Trump was unprecedented and would not have been brought against anyone other than Trump. CNN legal analyst Elie Honig recently wrote that there should be concern over a judge being appointed (not randomly selected) who is not just a Biden donor but someone who “has earmarked donations for ‘resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.’” Adding to these concerns is the movement of the third-highest official in the Biden Justice Department to the staff of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to build the case against Trump. Before joining the case, Matthew Colangelo was also paid by the Democratic National Committee for “political consulting.” So Trump was convicted in a trial with a Biden donor judge, who has a daughter who is a major Democratic operative, a lead prosecutor previously paid as a DNC political consultant and a jury selected in a district that voted roughly 90% against Trump.

The trial itself was a travesty. Even after sitting in the courtroom watching the trial and the verdict, I still have no idea what Trump was convicted of in the case. The charges were built on a dead misdemeanor barred with the passage of the statute of limitations. It was zapped back into life by alleging that the falsification of business records occurred to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election. Merchan told the jury members that they did not have to agree on what those unlawful means may have been. Specifically, he allowed them to base their verdict on any one of three vaguely defined crimes of a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations.

Read more …

“The only thing better than that would be to witness the first president in US history to pardon himself as the Trump legacy goes full circle.”

• The Democrats Just Sealed Donald Trump’s Victory In November (Bridge)

Members of the Democratic Party continue to fail to understand that the more mud they fling at the former president, the dirtier they look by comparison. On Thursday, a unanimous decision from a 12-person jury declared Donald Trump guilty on 34 felony counts, which could see the former president sentenced to 136 years in prison. There’s just one catch: the notorious Orange Man will never spend a single night behind bars. The worst that will happen for the Republican presidential frontrunner is that he will enter the race with a criminal record. Because the crimes are nonviolent and Trump has no prior convictions, any chance of prison time is a long shot. What could happen instead is that Judge Juan Merchan could sentence him to house arrest – which would undoubtedly make ankle bracelets, much like the famous Trump ‘mug shot,’ the latest fashion accessory – probation or some other lighter form of supervised release.

Another option that would backfire in the Democratic Party’s face is the imposition of community service. While Democrats may relish the idea of Trump being forced to join a prison work gang as punishment, it’s too easy to imagine millions of Trump supporters turning out at some soup kitchen or animal shelter to throw their support behind the most controversial figure in American politics today. And then there is the question of New York, the site of the Trump case, which is only second to the state of California when it comes to liberal residents. Trump inveighed against District Attorney Alvin Bragg, calling him the “Soros-backed DA.” As The New York Times wrote of the Bragg-Soros connection, “Soros donated to a liberal group that endorses progressive prosecutors and supports efforts to overhaul the criminal justice system – in line with causes that he has publicly supported for years. That group used a significant portion of the money to support Mr. Bragg in his 2021 campaign.”

On November 21, 2022, The Times reported that the district attorney’s office “has moved to jump-start its criminal investigation” into Trump’s reported “hush-money payment to a porn star who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump.” This was the first indictment of a former president in US history. Trump pleaded not guilty, yet was found guilty of all counts on May 30, 2024, making Bragg the first prosecutor in US history to win a conviction against a former president. Trump, who will be sentenced on July 11th, denies ever having had sex with Daniels. Another aspect of the Trump case that has rallied many to Trump’s defense is the political identity of the judge presiding over the case, Juan Merchan, whom Trump has criticized as “conflicted.” That may be an understatement when it is considered that Merchan donates to an organization called ‘Stop Republicans,’ as well as the Biden campaign.

Finally, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that Loren Merchan, the judge’s daughter, is president of Authentic Campaigns, a Chicago-based progressive political consulting firm whose top clients include Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who was the lead prosecutor in Trump’s first impeachment trial. Merchan’s daughter helped raise at least $93 million in campaign donations – and used the Trump case in her solicitation emails – highlighting a major conflict of interest that have Trump supporters demanding Judge Merchan recuse himself from the case. Finally, there is the question of fairness when it is considered that New York is major Democrat country. Can Trump seriously hope for a fair trial to take place in this prominent Blue state? He certainly doesn’t think so.

Merchan imposed the 10th contempt of court fine of $1,000 for an April 22 interview in which the former president said: “That jury was picked so fast – 95% Democrats. The area’s mostly all Democrat.” While the Democrats may be rubbing their hands in glee after finally getting Trump entangled in the judicial net, they continue to ignore the fact that every scandal has only served to empower the 45th president. In the worst-case scenario, should Trump be sent to prison, this will not stop the flow of campaign cash from entering the GOP’s coffers; in fact, it is practically guaranteed that the spectacle of the Orange Man behind bars – complete with mug shot in prison garb – will be the best campaign promo of all time. The only thing better than that would be to witness the first president in US history to pardon himself as the Trump legacy goes full circle.

Read more …

Anything can be deepfake, and now you can’t hear any of it anymore. Unless it’s about Trump.

• DOJ: You Can’t Hear The Biden-Hur ‘Memory Interview’ Because of Deepfakes (Sp.)

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is attempting to prevent the release of the audio of the infamous “memory interview” between US President Joe Biden and special counsel Robert Hur, arguing that “deepfakes” may appear as a result. Hur was investigating Biden’s handling of classified documents he obtained as a senator and vice president. While Hur wrote in his report that Biden likely violated the law intentionally, he declined to press charges because he thought Biden would appear to the jury as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” It also noted that Biden had trouble remembering when he was vice president and which year his son Beau died. The DOJ issued a filing on Friday that argued “The passage of time and advancements in audio, artificial intelligence, and ‘deep fake’ technologies only amplify concerns about malicious manipulation of audio files. If the audio recording is released here, it is easy to foresee that it could be improperly altered, and that the altered file could be passed off as an authentic recording and widely distributed.”

While the DOJ admits that there is plenty of “other raw material to create a deepfake of President Biden’s voice” available to unscrupulous actors, it argues that if the public became aware that the legitimate recording was released, they would be more apt to believe a fake recording is legitimate. The filing was first obtained by Politico. It is not known how the court will respond to the strange reasoning. If a legitimate copy of the recording were released, it stands to reason it would become easier –not more difficult– to disprove fake versions. As the DOJ admits in its filing as part of its argument that the release of the audio recording is unnecessary, the full transcript of the interview has already been released. It would be trivial for someone with AI experience to use the “raw material” already available of Biden to create a deepfake version of the interview and say it was leaked. A legitimate version being released would make that much easier for other internet users and the media to definitively debunk.

The filing also comes after Biden used his executive privilege to stop the release of the tape to House Republicans who had sought to obtain it as part of their investigation into the Biden family. The latest filing was in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. The DOJ also argues that the release of the audio would be a violation of Biden’s privacy. However, since we already know what he said thanks to the transcript– and we have no reason to believe that the transcript is incorrect, the only thing that would be revealed is everything between those words. How long did Biden pause before answering? How many times did he stumble on his words? Did he sound confused or angry during the interview? These are the questions that could be revealed through the release of the audio and according to the filing, the DOJ doesn’t think it is in the “public interest” to reveal the answers, so much so that they are willing to resort to absurd fear-mongering over a new technology in hopes that the judge will be cowed into blocking its release.

Read more …

I split Ben Sellers’ piece in two. First, reality.

• Desperate, Lying Biden May Abuse AI to Pull the Ultimate Race Hoax (Sellers)

It is patently clear that 99% of what comes out of Biden’s mouth, and those of his surrogates is an abject, gaslighting falsehood. Many in the voting public have now woken up to this fact, which is why we’ve seen so many red-pilled ex-Biden backers suddenly flipping their support to Trump in protest of all—or even some—of the above. Taking a page from Adolf Hitler, Democrats already primed people for the so-called Big Lie, deflecting from the fact that they were in the process of committing it by, appropriately enough, projecting it preemptively onto Republicans Regrettably, we may now be on the cusp of what history will record as the “Biggest Lie,” if and when the truth ever comes to light—something so shamefully bald-faced, so transparently manipulative, that most will think, “They wouldn’t dare lie about that.” But indeed, Biden has proven nothing if not that he will lie about anything.

We are witnessing the remarkable confluence of several disparate factors that are leading us on the path to the biggest race hoax in recorded history—and yet, it seems obvious, like a black swan event, that something so dastardly would be the inevitable outcome of putting the declining Democrat ethos and the rise in artificial intelligence-generated disinformation together in a tinderbox that includes the bombastic Donald Trump.On Thursday, a former producer from Trump’s ABC television show The Apprentice drudged up a long simmering rumor regarding tapes of Trump having used the n-word to refer to contestant Kwame Jackson. Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung called it a “a completely fabricated and bullsh*t story,” Politico reported. Many critics have pointed out that President Joe Biden’s own troubled history when it comes to making controversial remarks about race often undermines his current posturing about being a champion of minority causes.

Nonetheless, Biden’s campaign—after recently botching the rollout on an eight-figure effort to win back black voters—made hay of the Trump smear, releasing an official statement to torque up the race-baiting allegation. “No one is surprised that Donald Trump, who entered public life by falsely accusing [b]lack men of murder and entered political life spreading lies about the first [b]lack president, reportedly used the N-word to casually denigrate a successful [b]lack man,” claimed Jasmine Harris, the Biden campaign’s director of black media. The campaign also appeared to have been coordinating with Pruitt on the story, which he released in a Slate op-ed, as it had canned footage ready to roll out of former Trump staffer turned critic Omarosa Manigault Newman leveling unsubstantiated ‘racism’ claims against her ex-boss.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1796222579759358116

Read more …

Second, AI.

“..a new low-water mark for America, as it faces a bombardment of structure tests from the radical Marxist subversives hoping to topple it for once and for all.”

• Artificial ‘N****R’ (Sellers)

Lost in the Trump Manhattan trial about his alleged falsification of business documents to pay off porn star Stormy Daniels was the fact that the $130,000 paid to Daniels by Michael Cohen did not fulfill its contracted purpose. Prior to the November 2016 election, the Wall Street Journal published a story that named Daniels and Playboy bunny Karen McDougal, alleging the two had received hush-money payments to keep quiet about their decade-old affairs with Trump. Within two years, some of the key players in the purported scandal were speaking openly about it. Suffice it to say, if Pruitt had the evidence at the time to support his allegation about Trump using the n-word on The Apprentice, those tapes would have found their way into the hands of interested parties somewhere along the way long before Trump’s third presidential run.

It is reasonable to infer that the absence of the tapes up to this point suggests they don’t exist. Frighteningly, what does now exist is a rapid surge in artificial intelligence technology that could allow the Biden campaign to produce fake tapes of Trump using the pejorative, sowing just enough suspicion among his nascent black supporters that they would flock back to the fold on the Democrat plantation. Already, we have seen the technology put to frightening use to imitate Biden’s voice in a fake robocall that went out to New Hampshire voters, telling them to stay home since he wasn’t on the ballot, despite an expensive write-in campaign to deliver him a victory in the Granite State. The deep-fake was traced back to the owner of a telecom company in Texas, who had previously donated money to Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign.

The technology also has been misused to create pornography of high school students and to scam a company out of $25 million with a phony conference call. And oh yea, the CIA has admitted it is taking full advantage of it for undisclosed purposes. Most perniciously, it has already been used for at least one race hoax. A disgruntled high school athletic director in Baltimore was caught using deep-fake software to mimic the voice of his principal going on a racist and anti-Semitic rant in retaliation for a probe of his misappropriation of school funds. The rant appeared on Instagram and quickly began to circulate. Although AI was suspected almost immediately, Pikesville High School Eric Eiswert was subjected to negative publicity and an intensive forensic investigation that drew in the FBI and experts from the University of California, Berkeley, before he was ultimately vindicated.

The potential for AI abuse, paired with the Biden administration’s penchant and proclivity for it, would certainly lead one to wonder, should a tape of Trump using the “n-word” suddenly surface, whether its authenticity could be trusted. Would Biden, or another bad actor working on his behalf, be willing to stoop so low as to falsely smear someone with an entirely made-up tape in order to deceive and manipulate a particular class of voters into making a misinformed decision? Sadly, if past is prologue, one need no longer ask questions about the depths to which they will stoop. Will it work? If so, it would simultaneously be a breakthrough achievement in AI technology—the successful passage, perhaps, of a sort of Turing test on the road to singularity—and a new low-water mark for America, as it faces a bombardment of structure tests from the radical Marxist subversives hoping to topple it for once and for all.

Read more …

“..authorizing Ukraine to strike targets deep in Russia. Using our weapons, trained in their use by our trainers..”

• RFK Jr. Slams Biden’s Decision to Allow Ukrainian Strikes Inside Russia (Sp.)

US presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr. condemned President Joe Biden’s decision to greenlight Ukrainian strikes using US-supplied weapons inside Russian territory. “More insane escalation by the Biden administration — authorizing Ukraine to strike targets deep in Russia. Using our weapons, trained in their use by our trainers,” Kennedy said on X. In a major policy shift, Biden authorized the use of US weapons against military installations in Russia. A State Department spokesperson insisted that the authorization was limited to what they called “counter-fire purposes” in Kharkov (also known as Kharkiv) region. The US has not authorized the use of long-range missiles, including ATACMS, inside Russia, the spokesperson told Sputnik.

Read more …

Drones. And the “turtle tank.”

• Ukraine Conflict Is Reshaping War For the 21st Century (DeMartino)

The weapons that shaped warfare in the 20th century: barbed wire, machine guns, tanks, long-range artillery, and battleships, still play significant roles on the battlefield in the 21st, but they are dwarfed in importance by one invention, from which multiple theaters have been affected: the drone. While specific numbers of their effectiveness are difficult to come by at this stage of the conflict (that will be a job for war historians) there is no doubt that it is the most significant innovation on the battlefield today, used by both sides to inflict large amounts of casualties on the other. During Ukraine’s failed 2023 counteroffensive, drones played a huge role in stopping that advance. With the possible exception of Russia’s distance mining equipment, which also took out large numbers of tanks, drones were pivotal in taking out NATO’s most powerful armor.

“[US media] admitted how useless the Abrams [tank] is when tens of millions of dollars per tank can be taken out by a $500 drone. It is a new model of warfare,” Mark Sleboda, a security and international relations expert told Sputnik’s Fault Lines on Friday. “But it is an evolution of warfare that is occurring before our eyes. So, the Chinese and Americans are certainly paying very close attention,” he noted earlier in the interview. It is an opinion shared by former Marine and UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter. Speaking on the Danny Haiphong show, he explained how everything from tactics to logistics has been changed by drones. “When this war started, people were working off of Cold War-era doctrinal thinking. That is: you have tank columns, you have artillery that operates in battery or battalion sized formations flooding a zone, you have big arrow movements and things of that nature,” Ritter recalled. “[Then] drones started coming in, not just for targeting purposes, not just for deep strike purposes, but tactical drones on the battlefront. These FPV drones are a nightmare for soldiers.”

“If I tried to take Marines into combat using the tactics that I was taught,” Ritter continued “[With] two platoons online, basic fire etcetera, my base of fire would disappear because it’d be swarmed by FPV drones… then my Marines attacking would be hit by these drones and they’re all dead.” Much like Haig, this was a lesson that the Armed Forces of Ukraine failed to learn during their counteroffensive. Rabotino was intended to be the first minor step during that offensive that would lead to Tokmak which would serve as the staging ground for an assault on Melitopol. But as armor assault after armor assault was destroyed, it became apparent that the Ukrainians would never reach their goal. But, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky needed something to show his Western benefactors, so Rabotino became the goal. It took 71 days to capture the tiny village with a pre-war population of about 500 people, largely using the same tactics they began with. Ukraine lost dozens of expensive tanks and thousands of men capturing and then holding the village.

The Ukrainian offensive never went any further and in May, Russia recaptured the village. Just as the invention of the tank helped break the stalemate of the First World War, new technologies are emerging to counteract the drone and there it seems Russia has a decided advantage on that front. According to Military Watch Magazine, Russian electronic defenses have rendered Ukraine’s best artillery weapons all but useless, including the Excalibur GPS-guided artillery shells, the vaunted HIMARS rocket artillery systems and the JDAM precision-guided bombs. “Everything ended [in 2023]: the Russian deployed electronic warfare, disabled satellite signals, and HIMARS became completely ineffective,” one senior Ukrainian military official was quoted as saying. But the innovations on the battlefield aren’t exclusive to high technology, often they come from the soldiers on the ground. As tanks were increasingly taken out by drones, soldiers started adding cope cages in an attempt to protect them. This eventually led to the deployment of what is affectionately called the “turtle tank.”

Typically beginning with a T-72 tank, so-called turtle tanks are outfitted with a metal shell that covers almost the entirety of the tank, leaving only the very front and its cannon exposed to drone attack. While limiting the driver in visibility and maneuverability, those drawbacks have proven worth it. The Ukrainians who initially laughed at the turtle tank’s awkward appearance and low-tech solution quickly stopped laughing as they retreated from turtle tank assaults across the Western front.

Read more …

“..the Russian response will not be nuclear. That is impossible. There are a thousand options between doing nothing and going nuclear, and we can be sure the General Staff are working on all of them..”

• The Popski Syndrome – Allied Defeat Turns Into Battlefield Fantasies (Helmer)

In war, exaggeration is a killer. In the media, exaggeration is a bestseller. In the current war there is a dearth of military and political analysts who for truth or money will tell the difference. Instead, when the mentality of the war fighters is a combination of racial superiority and spetsnaz derring-do, what you get is the conviction that with one more brilliant operation and one more super-weapon, victory can be snatched from every indicator of defeat because the adversary will be persuaded to accept negotiations as he loses his nerve. This is the meaning of the Anglo-American publicity which burst over the long Bank Holiday and Memorial Day weekend, as summer campaigning began in earnest for the July and November elections in the UK and US — with the incumbent in the former running 21 points behind, and the incumbent in the latter trailing on an approval margin of minus-16 points.

The Reuters propaganda agency, based in New York, is claiming to have found four Russians from “a senior level in the political and business worlds” to be talkative about what they say they know of the Kremlin’s end-of-war plans. “[President Vladimir] Putin can fight for as long as it takes, but Putin is also ready for a ceasefire – to freeze the war… Putin would, however, be ready to settle for what land he has now and freeze the conflict at the current front lines, four of the sources said. ‘Putin will say that we won, that NATO attacked us and we kept our sovereignty, that we have a land corridor to Crimea, which is true,’ one of them said, giving their own analysis.” With just one more successful push from the Ukrainian side, Reuters and its four Russians believe, Putin will agree to give up his war. This push, which the western media have been amplifying this week, is the drone attacks on Russian radar stations for early warning of nuclear missile attack at Armavir, Krasnodar, and Orsk, Orenburg.

Although Russian military sources claim these attacks were pinpricks, and the second of them was shot out of the sky before detonation, western media are reporting that it is now the battle strategy of the US, the British, and the Ukrainians to provoke Putin into retaliation, crossing the red line of tactical nuclear warfare. That’s a red line, the allies are calculating, which Putin would rather negotiate end-of-war terms than cross. A retired Moscow military analyst warns against the exaggeration, not of the attacks themselves, but of Putin’s power to decide end-of-war terms over the opposition of the General Staff and the new Defense Ministry. “It is obvious the Ukrainians have had a string of successful breakthroughs,” the source acknowledges, “– against ships, airfields, refineries, and now this radar site. We also understand it is not the Ukrainians: all target selection, identification, guidance, and the hardware are American or European. Where the command control of these launch sites is, we do not know but it might well not be in Ukraine.”

“But the Russian response will not be nuclear. That is impossible. There are a thousand options between doing nothing and going nuclear, and we can be sure the General Staff are working on all of them. So when people say this is provocation for a nuclear strike and that [Ukrainian President Vladimir] Zelensky is provoking it, we understand that, first, NATO planners know Putin will not go nuclear because he and his generals are too rational and sane. And second, Zelensky is not the one making the provocations. So the real red line now is not the nuclear arms provocations from the NATO side. That’s a fantasy of theirs. Just so, in response, I think it’s time Putin stops making threats and strikes at the source of these operations.” When desperate weakness triggers battlefield fantasies, call this the Popski Syndrome.

Popski was the call sign and unit nickname assigned by the British Army headquarters in Cairo to a tiny unit of behind-the-lines special forces operating against the Italian and German armies in the Libyan deserts from late in 1941 until September 1943, when the war moved on to Italy, taking Popski with it. Popski’s unit numbered 24 men to start in Libya; in Italy, by the war’s end, it had reached 80. Vladimir Peniakoff was Popski, born to wealthy Jewish Russians who fled the Revolution to install their aluminium business and themselves in Belgium, then the UK. With London publisher Jonathan Cape, Peniakoff imagined he could turn his small guerrilla war in the Libyan and Tunisian deserts into something approaching the bestsellerdom of the Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E.Lawrence’s story of the war of the Arabian peninsula tribes against the Turks between 1916 and 1918; first published in 1926.

Read more …

A timeline.

• Presidents Who Gamble With Nuclear Armageddon (Jeffrey Sachs)

The Doomsday Clock was at 17 minutes to midnight when Clinton came to office, but just 9 minutes when he left it. Bush pushed the clock to just 5 minutes, Obama to 3 minutes, and Trump to a mere 100 seconds. Now Biden has taken the clock to 90 seconds. Most presidents, and most Americans, have little idea how close to the abyss we are. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which was founded in 1947 in part to help the world avoid nuclear annihilation, established the Doomsday Clock to help the public understand the gravity of the risks we face. National security experts adjust the clock depending how far or how close we are to “midnight,” meaning extinction. They put the clock today at just 90 seconds to midnight, the closest that it’s ever been in the nuclear age.

The clock is a useful measure of which presidents have “gotten it” and which have not. The sad fact is that most presidents have recklessly gambled with our survival in the name of national honor, or to prove their personal toughness, or to avoid political attacks from the warmongers, or as the result of sheer incompetence. By a simple and straightforward count, five presidents have gotten it right, moving the clock away from midnight, while nine have moved us closer to Armageddon, including the most recent five. Truman was president when the Doomsday Clock was unveiled in 1947, at 7 minutes to midnight. Truman stoked the nuclear arms race and left office with the clock at just 3 minutes to midnight. Eisenhower continued the nuclear arms race but also entered into the first-ever negotiations with the Soviet Union regarding nuclear disarmament. By the time he left office, the clock was put back to 7 minutes to midnight.

Kennedy saved the world by coolly reasoning his way through the Cuban Missile Crisis, rather than following the advice of hothead advisors who called for war (for a detailed account, see Martin Sherwin’s magisterial Gambling with Armageddon, 2020). He then negotiated the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with Khrushchev in 1963. By the time of his death, which may well have been a government coup resulting from Kennedy’s peace initiative, JFK had pushed the clock back to 12 minutes to midnight, a magnificent and historic achievement. It was not to last. Lyndon Johnson soon escalated in Vietnam and pushed the clock back again to just 7 minutes to midnight. Richard Nixon eased tensions with both the Soviet Union and China, and concluded the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I), pushing the clock again to 12 minutes from midnight. Yet Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter failed to secure SALT II, and Carter fatefully and unwisely gave a green light to the CIA in 1979 to destabilize Afghanistan. By the time Ronald Reagan took office, the clock was at just 4 minutes to midnight.

The next 12 years marked the end of the Cold War. Much of the credit is due to Mikhail Gorbachev, who aimed to reform the Soviet Union politically and economically, and to end the confrontation with the West. Yet credit is also due to Reagan and his successor George Bush, Sr., who successfully worked with Gorbachev to end the Cold War, which in turn was followed by the end of the Soviet Union itself in December 1991. By the time Bush left office, the Doomsday clock was at 17 minutes to midnight, the safest since the start of the nuclear age.

Read more …

UKiev.

• Russia’s Victory Over Ukraine Is Drawing Near (Scott Ritter)

By the time the counteroffensive ground to a halt, in December 2023, Ukraine was a spent force militarily. Its armed forces had used up their reserves of manpower. NATO had depleted its stocks of available military materiel. And the West had become politically exhausted at the prospect of a never-ending conflict which seemed destined to result in an endless cycle of throwing good money after bad, all the while failing to bring about the strategic goal of defeating Russia. Moscow, on the other hand, emerged from the 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive in a good position. From a military perspective, the Russians had won the war of attrition with Ukraine and the collective West – basic military math had Ukraine consuming manpower and material resources at a far greater rate than they could be replenished, making Kiev grow physically weaker every day the conflict dragged on, while the Russians were able to accumulate manpower and material resources at a rate far greater than Ukraine was able to destroy, meaning Russia grew stronger every day te conflict continued.

Economically, Ukraine and its Western backers were exhausted. The blowback from the aggressive anti-Russian sanctions imposed by the West had severely curtailed the industrial capacity of the European members of the NATO alliance to sustain the scope and scale of its military support to Ukraine, while domestic political realities in the US, amplified by the fact that it was engaged in a hotly contested presidential election cycle, paralyzed the American ability to sustain Ukraine financially. The military and economic exhaustion of Ukraine and the collective West severely impacted the ability of this coalition to politically sustain support for a war that had no discernable prospect of ending well. While the conflict has not, by any stretch of the imagination, been without cost to Russia, the approach taken by the leadership, to create conditions on the battlefield designed to maximize enemy losses while minimizing their own, meant that Moscow entered 2024 in a much stronger position militarily, economically, and – perhaps most importantly – politically.

War, it has been said, is an extension of politics by other means, and this is no exception to the age-old adage. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s latest electoral victory has provided the leadership in Moscow with a political mandate that strengthens Russia’s hand considerably, especially contrasted with the weakened posture of Ukraine. It is within such a context that the Russian offensive north of Kharkov must be evaluated. From a military-political standpoint, the operation has a specific objective – to push Ukrainian forces back from the border with Russia so that Ukrainian artillery and rocket systems can no longer strike Russian territory. But there is a larger purpose for this offensive – to continue the process of grinding down the Ukrainian military, to complete the larger task of ”demilitarization” set by the Kremlin.

In this, Russia is succeeding. First and foremost, by attacking north of Kharkov, Moscow has compelled UKiev to commit not only the last of its mobile strategic reserves in response but, because these forces are inadequate in strength, to force Ukraine to strip away units on the eastern line of contact, in Kherson, Zaporozhye and Donbass, and to divert them to the Kharkov direction. The depletion of reserves is part and parcel of the overall Russian strategy of attrition. Moreover, as these forces displace to the Kharkov region, they are being interdicted by Russian air, missile, and drone strikes, further eroding their combat power. The result is that Ukraine is now defending a longer line of defense with even fewer forces than it started with.

Read more …

“They’re already selling off lands in Ukraine to foreign investors, and they will flood Ukraine with third-world immigrants and Ukraine will not exist in 50 years..”

• Ukraine Won’t Exist In 50 Years – Tucker Carlson (RT)

The US has “betrayed” Ukraine and will destroy the country by selling off its land and “flooding” it with third-world immigrants, American journalist Tucker Carlson predicted in an interview with former President Donald Trump’s son, Donald Jr. In a video interview published on Friday, Carlson and Trump Jr. both agreed that US President Joe Biden had brought the world to the brink of World War III, and that the US is essentially “at war with Russia.” “No-one’s articulated what victory in Ukraine looks like,” Trump Jr. said. “I don’t know what it means. Is it just like perpetual death of Ukrainians and Russians until they’re all wiped out and Blackrock comes in there and takes over all the farmland? That’s what it feels like to me.” Blackrock is the world’s biggest investment company, and controls an estimated $10 trillion in assets. The firm is one of Ukraine’s largest foreign bondholders, and in 2022 signed a memorandum of understanding with Kiev stating that it would manage Ukraine’s post-conflict reconstruction.

Several BlackRock alumni serve in the Biden administration, including Brian Deese, the head of the National Economic Council. After Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky signed a controversial package of land reforms into law in 2020, foreign investment firms like NCH Capital, BNP, and the Vanguard Group now control around 28% of Ukraine’s arable land, according to research by the Oakland Institute, an American think tank. Zelensky’s reforms were backed by the International Monetary Fund and US Agency for International Development. “They’re already selling off lands in Ukraine to foreign investors, and they will flood Ukraine with third-world immigrants and Ukraine will not exist in 50 years,” Carlson stated. “There’ll be no Ukrainian nation. We betrayed them like no other country ever.”

Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly promised that he would end the Ukraine conflict “in 24 hours” if re-elected this November, telling a Libertarian Party conference last weekend that he intends to “quit spending hundreds of billions of dollars to fight other people’s wars.” Trump has never fully elaborated on how he would do this, save for forcing Zelensky to negotiate with Russian President Vladimir Putin, but recent reports by Bloomberg and the Washington Post suggest that he would leverage the US’ massive military assistance to Kiev to pressure Zelensky into accepting the loss of some of Ukraine’s pre-conflict territory. However, Trump’s rhetoric on Russia has toughened in recent months, with the former president telling donors last week that he “would have bombed” Moscow when Russia’s military operation began in 2022. Trump did not lobby his Congressional allies to block a $61 billion aid package for Kiev in April, and said at the time that he would support lending, rather than gifting, money to Zelensky in future.

Read more …

“..you ate up every piece of propaganda, repeated all of it without any thought to whether it was true or not..”

• Dave Smith Burns Chris Cuomo To The Ground In Epic Covid Debate (ZH)

For the legions of us who still carry righteous rage about the tyrannical and destructive Covid-19 regime, the planets aligned on Friday and gave us the enormous, vicarious pleasure of watching one of libertarianism’s most articulate voices repeatedly pummel one of the most visible villains of that dark era. In a debate hosted by Patrick Bet-David of PBD Podcast fame, “Part of the Problem” podcaster and comedian Dave Smith took on former CNN anchor and Covid regime propagandist Chris Cuomo. From lockdowns to masks, vaccines, Ivermectin and the vilification of resisters, the debate covered a lot of ground, with Smith dropping one laser-guided bomb after another on Cuomo.

Let’s dive right into the highlights…First, Smith opened the debate with a gentlemanly gesture, giving Cuomo a copy of the Tom Woods book, “Diary of a Psychosis: How Public Health Disgraced Itself During Covid Mania.” Tongue in cheek, he said, “I know you like following the science, and there’s a whole lot of science in that book.” Before the next clip, recall that, in an infamous segment on CNN, Cuomo and Don Lemon smugly battered Joe Rogan and others who used Ivermectin to battle Covid. Despite the fact that Ivermectin has been used since 1975 with great success against a wide variety of human maladies, Cuomo and Lemon ran hard with the regime narrative that referred to the wonder drug solely as a veterinary de-wormer.

Earlier this month, Cuomo revealed to Bet-David that he’s now himself taking a “regular dose of Ivermectin” for purported long Covid. However, In this jaw-dropping sequence, Cuomo stunned anyone with a memory of his exchange with Lemon by saying, “I don’t like what people did to Joe Rogan about Ivermectin.” A stunned Smith replied, “YOU did it!” Cuomo denied it and challenged Smith to “find the clips.” The PBD crew obliged, promptly rolling the damning video: Smith condemned Cuomo for failing to do his job, which was to “be skeptical of power and to shine a light against the propaganda…you ate up every piece of propaganda, repeated all of it without any thought to whether it was true or not, and then smeared millions of Americans like myself who were opposed to this stuff.” Cuomo said Smith was guilty of using “hyperbole” in referring to the Covid regime as “totalitarian.” An unwavering Smith had a pointed and compelling response: Smith elaborated, explaining why “it was completely criminal for all of these governments to lock down”…

Asked whether lockdowns were a net benefit — or instead erred on the side of catastrophe — Cuomo drew audience laughter when he said, “The people I talked to — who made these decisions — stand by them.” Smith quipped, “I’m sure Dick Cheney stands by the war in Iraq too!” Smith grew indignant when Cuomo suggested that Smith’s focus was on drawing attention to himself — to the detriment of society. Smith countered: “You’re attacking my motives…meanwhile, when those CNN checks were coming in, you said nothing that would have put them in jeopardy, but now that you’re here, you’re starting to tell a little bit of the truth.”

[..] Alas, amid the joy of Smith’s outstanding performance, there was a wistful element too, as many who’d hoped Smith would carry the flag of liberty as the 2024 Libertarian Party presidential candidate were reminded of what a remarkable champion he would have been — in stark contrast to the leftist, open-borders, drag-queen-promoting, kid-transing doozie the party ended up with. That said, far be it from us to end a feel-good story on a down note. Our highlight reel just scratched the surface: If you’re looking for weekend entertainment, here’s the entire debate, which also covers much more Covid ground, Trump’s trumped-up conviction and a lot more:

Dave Smith CNN
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796766419709022460

Read more …

“We certainly can’t support the election of a person to the position of NATO’s secretary general, who previously wanted to force Hungary on its knees..”

• Mark Rutte, The Dutch Invader, Is Sinking In The Hungarian Goulash (Helmer)

The Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte was the first leader of a NATO state to try to send his soldiers on to the Ukrainian battlefield to fight Russian forces directly. That was in July 2014, in the aftermath of the Ukrainian shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. That Rutte scheme failed after it was vetoed by the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel; she insisted on more time to prepare the NATO forces in the Ukraine to fight Russia. Now that they are, Rutte is the US candidate to become the new secretary-general of NATO. For the first time, however, his appointment is being vetoed by a NATO member, Hungary, which has proposed an alternative candidate – the ethnic German Klaus Iohannis, who is President of Romania. Because NATO rules require unanimity on the secretary-general, the Hungarian objection puts the Rutte nomination in the soup — make that goulash.

Rutte’s plan to deploy up to 9,000 troops in the Donbass had been devised in the summer of 2014 with two other Dutchmen – David Petraeus, who is also a US national, a US Army general, and former CIA director; and Sandra Roelofs, a Dutch national who held Georgian citizenship because she was married to Mikheil Saakashvili, onetime President of Georgia. Their cover story was that the NATO military intervention force was required to recover the black boxes of the downed MH17 aircraft and the bodies of the passengers, most of them Dutch. Every one of Rutte’s attempts to go to war with Russia has ended in exposure of his personal lying; the collapse of the Dutch-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW); and the loss of almost €30 billion in bilateral trade – oil and petroleum products from Russia; Dutch pharmaceuticals, medical technology, financial services, cut flowers, seeds and plants.

None of these losses has had material or political impact on the domestic Dutch constituencies or the Dutch media, which have accepted the state propaganda line, and in the case of the Dutch media owner, Derk Sauer, the money to keep repeating it. The book documenting the collaboration of Rutte and his officials in fabricating the narrative of Russian culpability in the MH17 crash, concealing the role of Kiev president Petro Poroshenko, and manipulating the evidence at The Hague District Court show trial, can be read here. Defeated at the Dutch parliamentary election last November, Rutte has been replaced as prime minister by a coalition of parties led by Geert Wilders, who agreed this week to Hendrikus (“Dick”) Schoof as prime minister. Schoof is a Dutch deep-stater and career liar who was promoted by the MH17 affair into the Dutch equivalent of the FBI, and then into the top job of the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security.

According to a veteran Dutch political analyst, “the nomination of Dick Schoof is a terrible fact. He is the head of the secret services responsible for NATO agitprop on MH17, on OPCW, on the so-called Covid protective measures. Also, he was responsible for the protection of Geert Wilders [from Islamic attacks]. In a way Wilders has been his prisoner – Schoof has been the jailer who has held the keys to Wilders’s physical survival. Schoof has also been protecting Rutte from personal scandal. He’s the J.Edgar Hoover type of secret policeman.” The Russian reaction to Rutte’s nomination for the NATO post was muted until the Hungarian government announced that it is opting out of NATO operations, financial support and arms supplies to the Ukraine war; and that it will not accept Rutte at NATO. “We certainly can’t support the election of a person to the position of NATO’s secretary general, who previously wanted to force Hungary on its knees,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó said several weeks ago.

Read more …

“I’m saying this slowly so that Brussels would understand: we will not go to war. We will not go to the East for a third time, we will not go to the Russian front again.”

• Huge Anti-War Rally In Budapest, Hungary (RT)

Hundreds of thousands participated in a peace march in Hungary’s capital, Budapest on Saturday, denouncing the EU’s policy of escalating tensions with Russia. The event culminated with a speech by Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who accused Brussels of bringing Europe closer to a global conflict. The demonstrators marched from the iconic Chain Bridge to Margaret Island on the Danube River. Many carried flags, chanted pacifist slogans, and held signs reading “No war” and “Give us peace, Lord.” “Never before have so many people lined up for peace. We are the biggest peace corps, the largest peacekeeping force in Europe,” the prime minister said, as quoted by Reuters. “Europe must be prevented from rushing into war, into its own destruction.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1796910522383704217

Orban said his country must draw lessons from the devastation it went through the darkest times of the 20th century. “In the two world wars, the Hungarians lost 1.5 million lives, and with them – their future children and grandchildren,” he told the crowd. “I’m saying this slowly so that Brussels would understand: we will not go to war. We will not go to the East for a third time, we will not go to the Russian front again.” Orban urged everyone to support the “pro-peace and pro-sovereignty” agenda of the ruling Fidesz party in the European Parliament election next week. “Do we want to shed Hungarian blood for Ukraine? No, we don’t,” he said. The pro-war [forces] have gone beyond common sense by wanting to defeat Russia as they tried to do during the First World War and the Second World war.

Since the start of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine in February 2022, Orban has repeatedly accused the EU leadership in Brussels of dangerous brinkmanship with Moscow and warned that the bloc must not allow itself to be dragged into a full-blown war. Budapest has refused to provide any military aid to Ukraine and threatened to veto financial assistance to Kiev. Orban heavily criticized the economic sanctions imposed on Moscow by the EU, arguing that the bloc had “shot itself in the lungs” by undermining trade and its own energy supply.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Moore Peterson

 

 

Oxdog
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796805027706621955

 

 

Giraffes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796194713969537066

 

 

Thank you
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796891909656310164

 

 

Happiness
https://twitter.com/i/status/1797011583891116440

 

 

Fishing net

 

 

Emmanuel
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796791908389323179

 

 

 

 

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