Canada Archives - The Automatic Earth

🚨BREAKING NEWS: U.S. Strikes on Tehran

The US military just took the fight straight to Tehran,
targeting the IRGC's core Sar-Allah Headquarters ⚡

The main command facility is reportedly burning down
right now. Game over for deniability 🔥 https://t.co/J18rXNsp6N
— Ivanka Trump Truth Post 📚🇺🇸 (@newsIvankaq) September 17, 2026

The attempted globalist takeover of Europe will only work if people sit on their hands.

This courageous woman is standing up for all of the sane citizens of Europe because the current insanity sweeping across Europe emanates from damn near every European Capitol.

Americans… https://t.co/RxW8zIVkow
— General Mike Flynn (@GenFlynn) September 16, 2026

Wow .. the real AI scare story?! https://t.co/2hSMyjkqA2
— Willem Middelkoop (@wmiddelkoop) September 17, 2026

The AI 'panic' is a coordinated political play. From a researcher's viral post to CEO warnings and legislative proposals, it's all happening incredibly fast. Is it about genuine threat, or control? #AI #Politics #Tech pic.twitter.com/j0uqAjYO2i
— Promethean Action (@PrometheanActn) September 16, 2026

“Trump tells Axios he’s approaching major crossroads in Iran war..”

• Trump Concedes He Must Soon Decide On Iran End Game: ‘Annihilate Them Or Not’ (ZH)

Some key lines of President Trump given to Axios on Thursday…He told the outlet he is at a “critical juncture” regarding the war in Iran, weighing whether to launch massive new attacks or pursue a different path to end the conflict. He has previously indicated his belief that war will continue through the November midterm elections. Trump has newly said: “I have a big decision coming up. Do I want to go in and annihilate them [the Iranian regime] or do I not? It’s a big decision. Anything could happen with me.”

The war is increasingly unpopular among Americans, and Trump’s rhetoric has appeared a bit more honest on this of late. What’s the end game? After six months of conflict, Epic Fury has looked like a bombing campaign in search of a strategy. According to more of Trump’s talk with Axios: Trump declined to say whether he’ll decide on the path forward before or after the midterms.
Trump and Hegseth have ordered the military to maintain its level of forces in the Middle East until the end of the year, to remain ready for a potential return to full-scale combat. The officials say Trump needs to decide soon on the way forward, partly because the US military can’t stay in its current holding pattern much longer. “At some point you have to decide what is the end game”
The situation of global energy transit has over the past week become much more complicated with the Houthis advance across Yemen’s Red Sea coastline, and drone damage to Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline. The US looks to be staying on the sidelines of Yemen fighting, for the time being. New via Al Jazeera:
A senior US official told Al Jazeera: We are focused on ensuring navigation in the Red Sea and allowing our partners to manage security challenges. And yet “partners” like the Saudis and its government in Sanaa are clearly not doing so well.
BREAKING: Yemen's Houthis have dug roughly 20 km of trenches in the mountains above the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, visible on Sentinel-2 imagery, with positions overlooking the strait's narrowest point near Dhubab and Perim.

The Houthi fighter filmed on the Murad coast last week said… pic.twitter.com/0kgmg3FiPE
— The Hormuz Letter (@HormuzLetter) September 17, 2026

I doubt Iran has much left to surprise us with.

• Iran Is Preparing an October Surprise Before the Midterms (Victor Davis Hanson)

We’re about 50 days out from the midterms, and everybody seems to have an October surprise. What’s the situation on the ground in Iran? One of the big surprises is we don’t know because this is the first really major engagement where there are no Western journalists allowed into Iran. There are no U.S. ground troops. There are no embedded reporters. The Mossad maybe has agents on the ground, but they’re not publicizing that fact. And Iranians who sporadically call people in the West on their cell phones are hunted down.

So, a lot of it is subjective conjecture. But I think it’s pretty clear that Iran is planning, as it is now sporadically, but planning an October surprise near the midterms. Their entire strategy has been to delay, negotiate, attack, delay, negotiate, attack. And the purpose was to, A, drive up the price of oil through that uncertainty, especially in hitting ships in the Strait of Hormuz, and B, get closer and closer and closer to the midterms.
They don’t really care about the details or statistics of American congressional operations. They don’t really understand that for the Democrats to cut off all aid to military forces that are fighting the regime, that means money that we give Israel, intelligence that we give the Gulf, but more importantly, our daily expenses from the Pentagon, they’re going to have to have a large veto-proof Congress. I don’t think they’ll get that even if they were to win the midterms. But that’s what Iran is worried about and concerned about, that they want the Democrats to win.
Why the Democrats? They remember in 2009, a million of them went out in the street to overthrow the regime. Barack Obama, newly inaugurated, didn’t do anything. He just kept mute for about 12 days. Why? Because he was going to negotiate with a theocracy about their nuclear program, and he wanted to reboot Iran as part of a rival to democratic Israel and the moderate Gulf regimes. He thought by empowering the Shia Crescent in Iran, in Syria, in Beirut, on the West Bank, and in Gaza, he could have creative tension, and he would be the adjudicator.
But the people don’t really trust the Democrats, and they know they’ve been very critical of this effort to hurt the theocracy. So, Iran and the Democrats have the same goal: create chaos. They have the same goal, and that’s to defeat Donald Trump. The Democrats want the Iranians to create chaos, drag out the war, and therefore drive down public opinion and raise the price of gas. That’s clear. They’ve all but said that. And in turn, the opposition has a what? What would we call it? An October surprise? It is gaming the midterms as well.
Now, what are they thinking? They are thinking that every time the Democrats come into power, they negotiate with this horrendous regime. They don’t trust that the Democrats want it gone. They fear, third, that the Democrats may be in power in the Congress. They fear that Donald Trump is at 40% popularity, and he might have to make concessions to them. So, in their interpretation of the calendar, the clock, the time remaining to the midterms, it might be they feel time is running out given two things.
One, they don’t have any fuel, gasoline, or diesel. We know that much. The gas lines are three to four miles long, and food is scarce, and air conditioning is probably nonexistent. Inflation is rampant, and things are deteriorating at a geometric rate in Iran. And two, they don’t think anybody will come to the rescue except Donald Trump, and Donald Trump right now has control of the Congress. So, in their way of thinking, they may think an October surprise would be to go out in the streets right before the midterms and show that they thank the United States, they support the United States.
There’s another October surprise. We haven’t heard much from the Kurds. The Turks have been very adamant that they did not want us to help the Iranian Kurds because that could spread into the Turkish Kurds, and the same thing is true of the Iraqi Kurds and the Syrian Kurds, etc.
But they have been more active than usual in the last week. If they sense the people of Iran are rising up or are about to go for broke, they may want to as well join them. So they may have an October surprise.

It’s been 5 months. With mostly hardly any fighting. Why do you say forever war? Because others do, too? Because it takes longer than you thought/wanted?

Those “four primary objectives in the Iran War” are just your fantasy. There is one primary objective: no nukes for Iran.

The rest are secondary. At best.

• How Trump’s Iran Operation Turned Into A Forever War (Harrison Berger)

As the United States has struggled to secure its four primary objectives in the Iran War – achieving regime change, dismantling long-range ballistic missiles, eliminating nuclear enrichment, and halting Tehran’s support for regional proxies – U.S. officials have rolled out a series of tried-and-failed theories for how to achieve those goals.

In the past four weeks, Americans have watched their government attempt to inflict an economic victory against Iran through Operation Economic Outcast, tightening a sanctions regime which for decades has strangled Iran’s economy without resolving the underlying dispute. Now, as that strategy flags, we have seen the Trump administration return to its older strategy of kinetic strikes against Iran. Those strikes, too, have failed to achieve their desired objectives. Facing the prospect of a self-inflicted defeat, the U.S. has now proposed two new paths forward.
The first, reported by the Wall Street Journal last Wednesday, is an option to extend and formalize the current series of on-and-off strikes U.S. officials call this “mowing the lawn,” or a strategy of using periodic bouts of disproportionate force, as Israel did in Gaza prior to launching its full-scale, seemingly endless campaign after the Oct. 7 attacks of 2023. To support that option, the Pentagon has extended troop deployments in the Middle East through 2027.
The second option reportedly considered by the White House is for the U.S. to declare victory and walk away, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that Trump favors the idea. Among the supporters of the second option is Joe Kent, the former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, who resigned in protest of the Iran War, and who has argued on X that the U.S. should “reset the terms of the deal” with Iran “by removing our troops & ships from the region.” The argument that the U.S should walk away and “declare victory” is growing increasingly popular even in establishment circles.
But given the historic limitations of sanctions to achieve political outcomes, coupled with Iran’s current demands, that strategy too appears unlikely to re-open the Strait of Hormuz and avert the economic consequences Iran’s leverage over the waterway will have on the global economy.
Political scientists have long doubted whether U.S. economic pressure and sanctions can shape political outcomes, particularly when the targeted state has little reason to believe these measures will be reversed in exchange for good behavior; researchers like David Siegel are quick to acknowledge that they “don’t work,” while U.S. officials like Janet Yellen have conceded the same point, noting that, while sanctions against Iran had caused a “real economic crisis,” they produced political outcomes “much less than we would ideally like.”
As Siegel – who most recently studied the failure of U.S. sanctions on Russia to redirect their state behavior toward U.S. and NATO interests – explains, “target states have strong incentives not to give in and sometimes even benefit from heightened levels of political support at home because they can now credibly blame their economic woes on a foreign imperial power.” Siegel argues that it’s “probably more true today than ever before due to the fact that sanctioned states can turn to China.”
The low likelihood of economic pressure opening up the Strait of Hormuz is depressed even further by the fact that one of Iran’s preconditions for opening the Strait of Hormuz is the removal of sanctions, which would require a vote from Congress, where the proposal would face an uphill battle. But perhaps the main reason walking away and declaring victory would fail to re-open the Strait and mitigate impending economic disaster is because Iran has tied freedom of navigation in the waterway to the U.S. reining in Israel, and the U.S. has long demonstrated it is unwilling to do so.
The June 17 agreement between the U.S. and Iran only required the U.S. force an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, and Washington failed to follow through. Now, subsequent provocations by the U.S. and Israel have led Iran to expand its ceasefire demands to other campaigns: in Iraq, in Yemen, and in Palestine.
Securing a deal to re-open the Strait and end the war is further complicated by the growing view around the world that the “Art of The Deal” author is simply incapable of making deals. Results of a 2025 Politico survey of diplomats from 15 countries show foreign officials describing Trump’s deal-making process as “reactive, with no clear direction,” while Trump has so far failed to resolve a proxy war in Ukraine that he promised to end “within 24 hours” of taking office. The White House has similarly failed to reach a peace deal in Gaza.

“A soaring global energy crunch collides with mid-term election season in the U.S., as the White House looks abroad to Venezuela and pressures Ukraine to ease supply pressures.”

• Trump Working To Spare US The Effects Of Global Oil Crunch (JTN)

President Donald Trump is working furiously to spare the United States from the fuel crisis sweeping the globe, seeking out new sources in Venezuela, ensuring that the U.S. continues to pump oil, and calling for Ukraine to halt its strikes on Russia’s energy infrastructure.

So far, the United States appears to be insulated from the worst of the crisis as unrest breaks out in countries that are feeling acute oil shortages stemming primarily from the Iran war. Rising prices in regions as diverse as South Asia and Europe have prompted protests. Governments have responded with price ceilings, rationing, and even scheduled power cuts in poorer countries.
This weekend, for example, in Syria, protesters blocked a highway, blocking traffic and setting fire to tires, just hours after the central government announced it would temporarily raise prices on fuel products by as much as 40%, both Al-Jazeera and The New York Times reported. Similar protests have occurred in the Philippines, Bangladesh, Guatemala, and Portugal.
A missile strike by Iran-backed militias damaged Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea oil pipeline this weekend
The White House and administration officials view high oil prices as temporary, an issue that will resolve itself when the Iran war is finished, as Trump has said. However, no end to the conflict between Washington and Tehran appears likely before the midterm elections. Instead, voters are being confronted with the prospect of rising gas prices as tit-for-tat fighting between the U.S. and Iran continues just as the election season truly kicks off.
A missile strike by Iran-backed militias that damaged Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea oil pipeline this weekend has contributed to the recent oil price uncertainty sweeping the markets. The strike temporarily knocked the East-West pipeline out of commission, preventing Saudi Arabia from using its only reliable way to bypass the Strait of Hormuz and forcing the kingdom to cut oil shipments to Europe.
The current crunch is particularly acute for diesel, which is more expensive than gasoline. The price of diesel, an oil-based fuel often used in commercial vehicles and industrial machinery, set a new record when it surpassed $6 a gallon this weekend. Because of its use in freight and delivery transportation, elevated diesel prices often translate into higher prices for goods.
The pattern prompted the president to call on Ukraine to halt its strikes against Russian oil refineries in a bid to calm global diesel prices, which he blamed on the Russia-Ukraine war, not the conflict in the Middle East.
“Mr. Zelenskyy has to do one thing. He has to stop knocking out diesel fuel in Russia,” Trump said during a visit to Ireland. “Let him go after targets, but not diesel fuel because he’s causing a shortage of diesel. This isn’t done by the Middle East; this is done by what’s happening with Russia and Ukraine.”
Recent polls show 49% of voters are most concerned by the cost of living
The pressure is on. Polling throughout the summer has shown that potential voters are primarily concerned with the cost of living and economic conditions ahead of the elections, which will take place in November. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll in June, for example, respondents said the cost of living was the most important factor in deciding whom to vote for in November – at 49%, followed by democratic norms at 22% and immigration at 13%. In that same poll, 14% of respondents overall and 20% of Republican respondents labeled gasoline prices as the issue they most want members of Congress to prioritize.
Americans are also growing weary of how the president is handling the economy. Trump’s net approval on the economy is 33 points underwater, and American approval for the Iran war has also declined to the lowest levels since the conflict began, with only 31% of Americans approving of the war.
To bolster supply, the administration has turned its focus to South America, working to ease sanctions on Caracas and facilitate higher oil exports. According to reports by The Wall Street Journal, easing restrictions on Venezuelan crude could direct hundreds of thousands of additional barrels per day to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries, helping offset supply disruptions from the Middle East.

Globalists vs nationalists. Soros vs Trump.

• Canada and Europe are Coordinating to Manipulate the US Midterm Election (CTH)

In this outline Promethean Action’s Susan Kokinda summarizes how energy prices are being weaponized to influence the 2026 midterm election. The multinationals, Canada, Europe, NATO and those opposed to America-First sovereignty are waging an economic war against President Trump’s geopolitical and economic reset.

This midweek update argues that the midterm elections are being shaped less by campaign ads than by coordinated economic and political pressure: rising diesel prices tied to Ukrainian strikes on Russian diesel infrastructure, energy pricing set by European exchange traders in London rather than producers, and continued Iran conflict framed as being prolonged to affect the vote.
Kokinda also cites Canada’s trade war and targeted tariffs as politically timed, alongside attacks on U.S. bonds and pressure to raise interest rates, describing “full spectrum economic warfare” against Trump’s agenda. A second front is an accelerated AI panic, beginning with viral warnings from an ex-Anthropic researcher and followed by Anthropic CEO calls for regulation, which Trump and allies call a control-driven “hoax.” The script traces AI-ban lobbying to London-based Control AI, highlights foreign funding networks, and links the push to international oversight and reduced national sovereignty.

“Mark Carney just pulled Canada out of the USMCA and there’s no one to blame but himself.”

“Together both Europe and Canada convey a mindset and worldview that organizes fabricated problems to keep control of their populations. It’s a corporatist structure of modern Fascism where instead of govt telling the corporations what to do, the World Economic Forum of multinationals tell the governments what to do.”

• Von der Leyen Announces Canada as 1st Associate Member of European Union (CTH)

Pouring effusive and slobbering praise over the Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, the anointed “middle power” leader of a shrinking -and increasingly irrelevant- new world order, with grand pontifications EU Commissioner Ursula von der Leyen announced today that Canada is the first “Associate Member” of the European Union.

It’s a major award! As noted by Reuters, “There is currently no such status as associate member set out in the European Union’s treaties, though various versions of an associate-type of membership have been floated in the bloc over the years. Germany suggested Ukraine be an associate member as an interim stage to full accession, though the proposal failed to gain traction as some EU capitals pushed back.
von der Leyen gushed: “Dear Mark, I said we must urgently reimagine our partnerships. So, I would like to work with you on opening the door for Canada to be the first associate member of the EU. We share one ocean, one set of values, one way of seeing the world. And we will now build our shared future as well – thank you for being here.” Mark Carney sat with a big smile, giddy with excitement and barely able to control his visible glee.

DAILY MAIL – […] But the attempt to flatter the former Governor of the Bank of England backfired, with diplomats saying they were never briefed about the proposal and that, in effect, ‘associate membership’ doesn’t even exist. EU diplomats accused Brussels of ‘over-reach’, an accusation often levelled against Eurocrats by UK Brexiteers before Britain left the bloc. One EU diplomat told the Mail: ‘This bombastic announcement is just not right.
‘There will be a summit at the end of October, so logically they will talk about deepening the relations. ‘But no one has ever seen an associate membership and no idea what it means in practice. Canada is a valuable partner for the EU, one of the few currently in the world where we share the values, so it is nothing against Canada. ‘But first and foremost the member states should be the ones to express what kind of relationship the EU wants to have with any third country.’
Another added: ‘She kept this bit of associate membership out of the text until the last moment. She also did not mention it up front to EU member states. ‘It seems like she is a bit too far out in floating this. Everyone is positive about Canada, and wants to strengthen the relationship. ‘But there is a lot of uncertainty about what von der Leyen envisages by coining this label.’
They added that, in reality, the most that can likely be hoped for is a deeper trading relationship rather than ‘associate membership’, which implies Canada taking part in EU programmes that it would be forced to pay into, becoming more politically integrated and potentially even having a say over the bloc’s rules.
But there would be huge barriers to overcome to establish closer ties, as swathes of Canada’s regulations are at present incompatible with EU single market rules, with high taxes on the bloc’s alcohol exports another thorny issue. Under EU law, any granting of membership would have to be approved by the 27 member states, which is another reason they were wrong-footed.” (read more)
We all know what this is. This is simply a joint Canada/Europe response to the geopolitical realignment currently underway by U.S. President Donald Trump. At the core of the CA/EU association is the insufferable leftist mindset. A pontificating pretense that elites and globalists should determine the outcomes and values for the rest of the world.
Together both Europe and Canada convey a mindset and worldview that organizes fabricated problems to keep control of their populations. It’s a corporatist structure of modern Fascism where instead of govt telling the corporations what to do, the World Economic Forum of multinationals tell the governments what to do. It’s a constructed social and economic model where Western bankers are in charge of the proles beneath them.
The pontificating snobbery within the collective outlook, the pretenses and bureaucracy have nothing to do with representative government, as outlined in the unilateral approach by Ursula von der Leyen to create a status that doesn’t even exist, without any consultation with the members she is supposed to represent.
This move today is the personification of elitism and globalism in its last, desperate dying state.For the little schoolboy inside Mark Carney, this is the culmination of a lifetime goal to be important. For the Canadian people, this should be embarrassing; but it’s not. Canada is part of a British Commonwealth, and they proclaim “sovereignty” as their cause celeb against the horrible Trump, while rushing to the arms of the European Commission.
Actually, on second thought, this is perfectly Canadian. Here’s the point that will be missed by 80% of Canadians. The EU trade rules do not align with the USMCA. I don’t mean that in a vague or disingenuous manner. The specific rules, regulations and policies of the European Union are not compatible with the trilateral North American trade agreement between the U.S, Mexico and Canada. It’s not even close.
What most Canadians don’t realize amid all this gleeful back-slapping and pretentious cheer, is that Mark Carney has officially sealed the position of Canada as it relates to the USMCA/CUSMA. nCanada just did exactly what President Trump and U.S. Trade Greer had been organizing and hoping for. Mark Carney just pulled Canada out of the USMCA and there’s no one to blame but himself. We have been waiting for this for a long time. Thank you, Mark Carney.

A coalition of the weak is still weak.

• Canada Welcomes EU Proposal To Become ‘Associate Member’ (BBC)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has welcomed the European Union’s ambition for Canada to become its first “associate member”, calling for closer cooperation on defence, critical minerals and energy security. Carney told the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Thursday that Canada and Europe were “stronger together” in the face of “geopolitical rupture”. His comments came a day after European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed “opening the door” to Canada’s associate membership, a status that does not currently exist.

US President Donald Trump earlier called the idea “laughable” and threatened “very serious tariffs” on Europe if he considered it a “hostile act”.Canada and the US are locked in an escalating trade dispute, with each side imposing tit-for-tat tariffs after bilateral talks collapsed last month. “Today our societies are being battered by new storms,” Carney said during his address, naming them as climate change, “the erosion of democratic norms” and the “weaponisation of trade”. “Economic integration is now being weaponised, tariffs being used to exert pressure,” he said.
“Financial mechanisms have been used for coercion. Supply chains constitute weak points to be exploited.” He said a Canada-EU alliance would create a “beacon for other democracies”, while stressing the two sides were not seeking to form a new power bloc. “I am not proposing a third bloc in order to become a great-power rival – only with better manners,” he told MEPs. “This is about sovereignty, our ability to live as we wish. We do not seek power to dominate others.” Asked about the proposal on Wednesday, Trump told reporters: “If I think it’s at all a hostile act, I will put very serious tariffs or stop trading with Europe, on many things.
“If it’s a good intention, that’s fine. If it’s a bad intention, we’ll put very heavy tariffs on Europe, which is a possibility.” Responding to Trump’s comments at a press conference following his address, Carney said: “This alliance is a positive process, that’s my response to the American president.””Canadians are united that nobody is going to tell us what language we speak, no-one is going to dictate our culture, or with whom we can strike agreements internationally,” he added.
Carney said Canada was “not in a position, nor seeking, to become a full member of the European Union”, describing the proposal as a “different framework”. Speaking at the European Parliament on Wednesday, von der Leyen said she wanted Canada to become the EU’s first associate member, with closer cooperation in areas such as manufacturing, technology, defence, energy critical minerals and economic security.
It is unclear exactly what that relationship would look like because the “associate member” status does not currently exist within the EU and could take years to implement. Any new arrangement would require the agreement of all 27 EU member states, with some governments having previously expressed reservations about creating a new form of membership. The EU and Canada already have a free-trade agreement, and cooperate in areas including trade, defence and research.
In his address, Carney said Canada and Europe could strengthen their “strategic autonomy” through “deep co-operation in the full range of strategic capabilities, including critical minerals”. He said Canada could supply liquefied natural gas and hydrogen to support European energy security, while benefiting from Europe’s expertise in clean-energy technologies. He also proposed pooling technological resources and deepening “people to people ties”, including allowing young people to “work, study and live where they want on either side of the Atlantic” through Canada joining the EU’s Erasmus+ programme.
Carney described the proposed relationship as “a unique, positive approach that we will define together”. He added that there would be a debate and a vote in the Canadian parliament on the proposals, but emphasised the two sides were still at the “start of a road”. A Canada-EU summit is due to take place in Montreal at the end of October, where Carney said they would “drill down the details”.

House prices are used to control people.

• Where Did Our Happiness Go? Into The Pockets Of Others (Paul Craig Roberts)

Remember how happy we would be according to Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum when we owned nothing? Well, that is where we are. Are you happy? They took away memory cards and sold us cloud storage. They took CDs and DVDs and sold us streaming. They took software you once bought as yours and turned it into a monthly subscription. Corporate America figured out the real money wasn’t in selling you something. It was making sure you NEVER actually own it.

According to AI Overview, for Existing Homes, the median sales price for existing single-family homes and condos is $429,100. For New Construction, the U.S. Census Bureau reports the median sales price for new houses sold is $410,700, with the broader average around $502,700. Prices vary depending on whether you look at averages (skewed higher by multi-million dollar homes) or medians (the midpoint where half cost more and half cost less).
To comfortably afford a $400,000 house, you generally need an annual household income between $90,000 and $130,000, depending on your down payment, interest rate, and monthly debts.mIf you pay for the house with a mortgage, the cost of the house with principle, interest, insurance and real estate tax by the time the house is paid for is about triple the purchase price. You will have paid more than $1.2 million for your middle class home.
So Americans cannot afford to buy and they cannot afford to rent. Dear Americans, are you happy? Would you like a real populist government that represented you. Good luck.

Paul Craig Roberts seems to feel it’s HIM who represents America.

• Who Represents America? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Mail-in voting, along with street corner drop boxes, has proved to be one of the most effective methods of election stealing. There are examples where at the last moment a large number of mail-in votes arrive that suffice to change the outcome.

The Covid lockdown was used to expand mail-in voting. Democrat states such as Connecticut and Delaware made special efforts t o expand mail-in voting. President Trump’s effort to limit mail-in voting to documented citizens is opposed by “voting rights groups,” which are mainly Democrats such as the League of Women Voters, by some election officials who claim mail-in voting increases election integrity, and by the US Supreme Court. The claim is made by Democrats that mail-in ballots are only sent to registered voters.
But we know that lists of registered voters are seldom brought up to date and that states and voting rights groups resist purging the rolls of dead people and people who have moved out of state. We have examples of people being voted in states that they no longer live in. James O’Keefe and others have presented evidence of vote and election fraud due to unverified mail-in ballots. It seems to be clear that whichever party that controls the elections in a state has a reserve of ballots that can be mailed in at the last minute to change the winner. There are examples where the last minute mail-ins are almost all for the Democrat candidate, although it does seem that the Zionist Republicans used this fraud against Israel critic US Rep. Thomas Massie in his recent primary.
Consider the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts’ case against Trump’s effort to ensure that the mail-in ballots actually come from US citizens residing in the states. Trump’s executive order requires the Department of Homeland Security to compile from various federal data bases, including Social Security, a list of US citizens for the US Postal Service with the requirement that the mail-in ballots can only be delivered to those on the voting list. The League of Women Voters argued that the federal data bases are out-of-date and unreliable. But so are the states lists of registered voters. The League of Women Voters does seem to be more concerned about preventing unqualified voting than with election integrity.
The League of Women Voters also argues that President Trump’s effort to restore integrity to US elections is an attempt to seize control of elections from Congress and the states. The League of Women Voters says no constitutional text allows actions by the President to protect election integrity. This is a curious way of putting it if the Constitution actually prohibits Trump from establishing election rules in the interest of election integrity. What exactly is the case that the President cannot act in the interest of election integrity, which requires that only citizens can vote?
The two justices on the Court who have the most integrity and who are the most principled, Thomas and Alito, saw the issue differently from the majority. Justice Alito pointed out that the issue on which the majority ruled against Trump’s executive order was that there was insufficient time to implement Trump’s order before the upcoming midterm federal elections and therefore the order would be disruptive of the election. In other words, the scheduling crunch was cleverly timed by those challenging Trump’s order.
Now, think about this for a moment. If Trump and the Republicans stood to gain from mail-in voting, why would they oppose it? Unless Democrats stand to gain from mail-in voting, why their enormous efforts to prevent President Trump from increasing the integrity of US elections?
Republicans claim that the Democrat political machine in Chicago elected John F. Kennedy president by stealing the election from Richard Nixon. I do not know if this is true. I do know that the Democrats stole the 2020 election from Trump with successful vote fraud in the swing states. The fraud is obvious despite its almost universal media denial. In the five swing states that flipped to Democrat, the states’ election procedures were controlled by Democrats. No Democrat state was flipped to Republican.
I do know that Republicans are more conservative and patriotic than Democrats. It is Republicans, not Democrats, who chant “USA, USA.” It is Democrats who favor voting by illegal aliens and who appoint them police officers and local government officials and act to prevent their deportation. It is obvious that Democrats favor multiculturalism over Americanism as evidenced by Minneapolis broadcasting over public loudspeakers the Muslim call to prayer six times a day. Anything a Democrat can do to stick her finger into America’s eye will be done.
Patriotic Americans, a body of people that I think excludes most Democrats, face a dilemma in the upcoming fall elections. Trump and the Republicans stand for Israel against America’s interest and at Americans’ cost. But the Democrats stand against America. The Democrats favor immigrant-invaders and have opposed all efforts to protect America’s borders and the meaning of US citizenship. The Democrats are the party of multiculturalism that is turning America into a Tower of Babel in which there is no longer a gender difference between male and female. All the weird stuff that infect our society has its home in the Democrat Party.

Really, a murderer is your hero?

• Gandhi is Out, Mangione is In: Political Violence is in Vogue in America (Turley)

Across the country, a chilling shift is occurring. Political violence has become a twisted form of virtue signaling. Mahatma Gandhi is out and Luigi Mangione is in. For an increasing number of young people, nothing signals your values like a willingness to kill others for them. For decades, being nonviolent has been the touchstone for many on the left. Something is changing. On my campus and others around the country, students are rationalizing violence and even idolizing assassins.

A recent Emerson College poll shows that 4 out of 10 voters between the ages of 18-29 (39%) view Mangione’s role in the fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson as “acceptable” or “somewhat acceptable.” Other polls show a troubling number of liberal voters consider political violence justified, including polls showing 40% of young people embracing political violence in some circumstances.
For college students, the rationalization of the killing of a Charlie Kirk or a Brian Thompson is now a litmus test of your movement bona fides. I have heard exchanges where students identify with accused assassin Tyler Robinson, who wrote, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I took it.”
This week, UC Irvine instructor Matt Goldman came under fire for a posting showing the picture of conservative Nick Shirley with the menacing observation “Someone can do the funniest thing just before the Kirkiversary.” There was a time when political assassination was viewed as anathema, particularly among academics.
To put it simply, violence is in vogue. Hollywood isn’t helping our political violence problem Hollywood is commoditizing political violence. Many conservatives were critical of the movie “One Battle After Another,” with Leonardo DiCaprio, as glorifying domestic terrorism and fueling liberal paranoia.
Other actors seem eager to make their films part of a political rage fest. “Spider-Man” actor Andrew Garfield actually said that he hoped that his new movie, “The Uprising,” would make billionaires scared, declaring that “I hope that if any billionaires watch it, they’re scared s—less.” Garfield wanted to take this film as his own bona fides with the mob, demonizing the rich. He apparently forgot Spider-Man’s motto, “With great power comes great responsibility.”
Others are more direct. Lexi Alexander, director of the 2008 Marvel film “Punisher: War Zone,” triggered a firestorm Sept. 1 with an X post featuring Mangione’s face superimposed on Batman’s bat signal. The posting featured a new article’s headline: “Bank of America vice president killed in Times Square stabbing.” The vice president, Erin Piacenti, 32, left a 5-month-old daughter who will now grow up without a mother.
When people noted the obvious that Alexander, who bills herself as a “Palestinian filmmaker,” was seemingly celebrating the death of bank officer Piacenti, who was just back from maternity leave, Alexander accused them of being Israeli propagandists, or “Hasbara bots.”
In a now-deleted post, Alexander dismissed criticism that she knew about the executive being a new mother and said it was enough at the time that she was an executive because “it sounded like another Luigi situation.”

Blood or soil.

• Sen. Paul Introduces Birthright Citizenship Amendment (Turley)

Yesterday, I had the pleasure of speaking at the Constitution Day event at James Madison University about “Rage and the Republic.” and various constitutional issues. During the event, organized by the James Madison Center on Civic Engagement, one student asked me what I would change about the U.S. Constitution. I said that I would amend the Constitution to eliminate birthright citizenship, as have other nations who once followed this ill-considered practice. Well, Sen. Rand Paul (R., Kentucky) has wasted no time. He just reintroduced his bill to ban birthright citizenship.

I have previously written about the possible need for such an amendment after the decision in Trump v. Barbara. With that decision, the matter now rests not with the court but with the country. We have never truly had a national debate over the practice. The basis and future of birthright citizenship have remained matters almost exclusively for the courts. Most countries in the world reject this controversial policy. Our closest allies in Europe reject birthright citizenship and follow the common practice of “jus sanguinis,” or right of blood. We are part of a smaller number of countries following “jus soli,” or right of soil.
Various countries that once followed the practice later amended their constitutions or laws to get rid of it. That is what would need to be done with a 28th amendment. It is time that we have a civil and substantive debate over birthright citizenship in the United States. Given that the states are Democratic-controlled, it is unlikely that an amendment would pass; as noted, we have never been given this decision at the national level. Even with the 14th Amendment’s ratification in 1868, there were differing views on the meaning of the critical line:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Both sides have good-faith arguments, but the time for that debate is long overdue.
Here is the language of the amendment:
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to protect United States citizenship.
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
“article —
“Section 1. For purposes of the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States, a person may be considered to be ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States’ only in accordance with section 2.
“Section 2. A person born in the United States may only be considered ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States’ if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is—
“(1) a citizen or national of the United States;
“(2) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States whose residence is in the United States; or
“(3) an alien with lawful status under the immigration laws performing active service in the Armed Forces.
“Section 3. Congress shall have the power to carry out this article through appropriate legislation.”

The ICC is a tool.

“Western countries have turned the Hague-based court against their “opponents,” Khonya Mathonsi has told RT “

• ICC Used As ‘Tool’ To Target Global South – Editor (RT)

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has served as a “tool” for Western countries to target leaders in the Global South who challenge them, political commentator and Behind the News Network editor Khonya Mathonsi has told RT.

Mathonsi was commenting on Wednesday’s ICC hearing for former Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte in The Hague, the 81-year-old’s first public appearance in more than a year. Duterte faces charges of crimes against humanity over killings linked to his anti-drug campaign.
He said the court disproportionately pursued figures from Africa and Asia while largely leaving Western countries untouched. “The ICC was mostly [formed] to silence their opponents,” he said, adding that “it was used as a tool” against people viewed as anti-Western, particularly in the Global South.
Duterte was arrested at Manila airport in March 2025 and transferred to ICC custody in the Netherlands. He has defended his anti-drug campaign, saying he only ordered police to kill in self-defense. His lawyers have challenged the ICC’s jurisdiction, citing the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute. The court maintains that it can prosecute alleged crimes committed while the country was still a member.
On Wednesday, the ICC said Duterte “shall continue to be detained,” citing an increased risk that he could flee or interfere with witnesses and court proceedings. Mathonsi said Duterte had criticized the US and other Western governments and sought to run the Philippines without following their wishes. “This is his punishment,” he said, accusing the West of using financial pressure and sanctions against those who challenge it.
“The real issue here is that the West don’t see themselves standing in front of the judges,” he said, adding that there is “zero accountability” for Western countries. He said Global South countries should consider establishing an alternative body to uphold international law, suggesting that such an institution could be developed within or alongside BRICS.

🚨 Morgan Stanley just raised its $TSLA bull case to $840, and the Tesla Semi is a big reason why@

Brian White @FutureAZA highlights the economics behind it: autonomous trucking could mean 2.3x better utilization, 20% lower cost per mile, and up to 6x more profit per truck.

The… pic.twitter.com/VII9tVk1us
— Herbert Ong (@herbertong) September 17, 2026

FIGURE IS STARTING TO OUTPACE TESLA’S OPTIMUS. 🤖🏃

Figure’s humanoid robot starts by standing still, then breaks into a light jog across a polished office floor.

It turns, passes the couches, looks at the camera for a moment — and keeps running without losing balance.

The… https://t.co/d5Kbrqd7i3 pic.twitter.com/7MzGsjQD1t
— DN_DEGEN (@DN_degen) September 17, 2026

BREAKING: Ron Baron says SpaceX could be worth $15 trillion in 10 years, and Starlink alone could generate $1 trillion in annual revenue.

“Starlink is the internet for the entire planet.”

He predicts Starlink could reach 300M customers and use 100,000 satellites. pic.twitter.com/EkIVObGH68
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) September 16, 2026

https://twitter.com/LunarOptimus/status/2100260473245429918?s=20

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

Debt Rattle September 17 2026

Sep 172026

September 17, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:35 am Finance Tagged with: Canada, Carney, Dario, EU, FBI, Greece, Saudi Arabia, Von der Leyen, Zuck 34 Responses »

Peter Paul Rubens Saturn devouring one of his sons 1636

• State of the Union: Five takeaways From Ursula Von Der Leyen’s Speech (Euronews)

• Von der Leyen To Call For ‘European Security Council’ (EurActiv)

• EU Opens Door For Canada To Become Bloc’s First-Ever “Associate Member” (ZH)

• Mark Carney Is Leading Canada ‘Right Over the Cliff’ (Victor Davis Hanson)

• Very Interesting – Saudi Arabia Cancels Oil Shipments to Europe (CTH)

• Zuck Torches Dario’s AI Nanny State, Wants ‘Trust Us Bro’ Instead (ZH)

• Zelenskyy Tells CBS Russia Drones Tried to Take Down His Airplane (CTH)

• Greece Wants To Become Europe’s Next Hedge Fund Hub (ZH)

• The Road to Armageddon (Paul Craig Roberts)

• Trump Slams Former FBI Director Chris Wray Over Butler Investigation

• FBI Agent Wanted To Criminally Investigate Elon Musk, Email Shows (ET)

The picture is getting clearer. We are now experiencing a massive ai powered fearporn psyop campaign. https://t.co/99btwIVI9i
— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) September 15, 2026

The FBI File on Trump's Assassin Just Leaked…Everything They Told You is A Lie

New evidence just blew up the Thomas Crooks narrative.

Two mystery men were with him at a gun store weeks before Butler. Another unidentified man trained with him the day before.

Even more… pic.twitter.com/51DVuUmd18
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) September 15, 2026

BREAKING: Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang says every car in the world will become autonomous. https://t.co/O5vMJDgHQz pic.twitter.com/W86zJjHdhv
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) September 14, 2026

https://twitter.com/DN_degen/status/2100146408900694283?s=20

Ursula von der Leyen is the product of indirect democracy. It’s as if Congress elected the US president.

There are good reasons why it doesn’t.

Biut von der Leyen does have a lot of power. Which is a really bad idea.

Europe, since 2019, when she first appeared, has lost a lot of terrain. And money.

The EU is a costly facade that doesn’t do anything countries’ governments couldn’t do better.

It’s sad to watch a globalist mob destroy an entire continent.

• State of the Union: Five takeaways From Ursula Von Der Leyen’s Speech (Euronews)

Canada, hybrid warfare, climate change, digital safety and migration were front and centre at Ursula von der Leyen’s State of the Union speech.

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” With this iconic Charles Dickens quote, Ursula von der Leyen began her one-hour-long State of the Union speech in Strasbourg, laying out solutions to cope with the “exceptional” challenges and the “incredible” change that Europe is undergoing.”In this world, Europe has chosen to forge its own path. And a stronger, independent Europe is now emerging,” she told lawmakers. “Europe is there for Europeans. And that in the cold fragility of today’s world, only Europe can provide true sovereignty to Europeans.”
Here are the five takeaways from the address.
‘Associate membership’ for Canada
This was the day’s jaw-dropping moment. The European Commission president offered to create a tailor-made status of “associate membership” to bring Canada ever closer to the bloc. “We share one ocean, one set of values, one way of seeing the world. And we will now build our shared future as well,” she told Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who flew from Ottawa to Strasbourg to attend the speech as guest of honour.
She hailed the dawn of an “alliance for the future” to deepen EU-Canada cooperation in areas such as economic security, intelligent manufacturing, cutting-edge technology, defence, energy, critical minerals and batteries, as well as the Arctic region. However, details of what “associate membership” would mean in practice were left unsaid. It remains unclear how it would fit in the current structures of the EU treaties. A previous attempt by the German chancellor to grant “associate membership” to Ukraine swiftly disappeared after backlash from capitals.
Von der Leyen simply said the newfound status would bring EU-Canada relations “to the highest level possible”, prompting loud applause inside the hemicycle. Ahead of the speech, a poll conducted by Abacus Data showed that 49% of Canadians supported EU membership, while 30% opposed it and 21% were unsure. These are exceptional numbers for a country that lies on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean and reflect the political damage inflicted by US President Donald Trump’s punitive tariffs and repeated attempts to annex Canada.
Climate action made a comeback for self-evident reasons.
Von der Leyen framed the summer of 2026 as the “summer of truth”, pointing to wildfires, retreating glaciers, water shortages, crop losses and extreme heat that have wreaked havoc across the continent. She cited 660,000 hectares burned, 12 million tonnes of crops lost and more than 35,000 additional deaths during heatwaves. “Science is clear. Europe is warming at double the global rate. Of course, the transition is complex. And we will need to adjust and learn along the way,” she said.
The immediate response will be a European Heatwave Plan, which von der Leyen said will address early-warning systems, health preparedness, urban adaptation, cooling and protection for vulnerable groups. Her Commission is set to present a new climate resilience framework next month, already expected, that will identify 100 of the bloc’s most vulnerable territories, assess their risks and determine the appropriate level of responsibility for managing them. Insurance was another major vulnerability flagged by von der Leyen.
Only around 25% of catastrophe losses in Europe are currently covered by private insurance, she said, leaving governments to act as the insurer of last resort. Her services will put forward a Climate Insurance Alliance to close that glaring gap. She also promised a European Water initiative to fix costly leaks and a European firefighting fleet to respond to wildfires.
As expected, defence featured high in the speech, which came amid a string of hybrid attacks, some of which were attributed to Russia, that have rattled Europe. “We should be under no illusions about what is happening here: hybrid threats facing Europe are less and less hybrid and less and less threats,” von der Leyen said. “Cyberattacks and sabotage, arson and drone incursions. They are ramping up every day. So, as the threat level climbs, so must Europe’s preparedness.”
She then proposed a brand-new mechanism fashioned on NATO’s Article 4 that member states would trigger in the event of a hybrid attack. This would launch political consultations to “coordinate” an EU response and “deter further escalation”. Article 4 in the NATO context means that any country of the 32-strong alliance can call for an urgent meeting to discuss a new threat. It is the precursor to collective defence under Article 5, which stipulates that an attack on one is an attack on all.
Von der Leyen also pitched creating a “European Security Council” to bring together the leaders of Ukraine, the UK, Norway, Canada and other democratic partners. “This is even more urgent now, given the nature and scale of the risks at play,” she said.= How this Council will go from idea to reality is anyone’s guess at the moment.

“..potential rival to NATO ..”

• Von der Leyen To Call For ‘European Security Council’ (EurActiv)

The potential rival to NATO will come with a call for an ‘Alliance for the future’ with Canada, according to a draft

– Ursula von der Leyen will propose a radical change to Europe’s security architecture and the NATO Western alliance when she takes the floor in the European Parliament on Wednesday. Leaders from the EU, plus Ukraine, Britain, Norway, Canada and others, should convene in a new format to coordinate responses to mounting security threats, she will say according to a draft of her annual State of the EU speech seen in advance by Euractiv.
“This is even more urgent now, given the nature and scale of the risks at play. This is why we will set out our ideas to make a European Security Council a reality,” the draft speech reads. The EU should also create a new “security protocol” – modelled on NATO’s Article 4 – which an EU member state could trigger in order to convene all others. The NATO article allows members of the alliance to request consultations when they believe their security or territorial integrity is under threat.
“We are strengthening our work with NATO. But our doctrine, our institutions and our decision making have not kept pace with the new reality,” she will say, according to the draft. The idea of creating a European Security Council, which has previously been floated as a Franco-German initiative, gained renewed momentum following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, with Defence Commissioner Andrius Kubilius repeatedly calling for its establishment.
It would emerge as a potential rival to NATO, and it’s unclear whether Mark Rutte, the NATO secretary-general, or Donald Trump, the US president, would welcome such a format. Von der Leyen’s plan is a major departure from her previous speech in 2025.
Alliance building
In the presence of Mark Carney, the Canadian prime minister, von der Leyen will pitch Canada as a key partner for Europe, proposing an “Alliance for the future” to deepen cooperation between the two sides. The new relationship is being touted as everything but full membership of the EU, which the Commission views as legally impossible due to the North American country’s geography.“We want to bring the relationship with Canada to the highest level possible,” she will say, according to the draft.
[…]
The Commission president’s speech will focus on three tipping points: climate, AI and industrial competitiveness. She is expected to invite tech heavyweights for a discussion on pacing AI development. Her speech will also formally announce that the EU will present a Kids Act on Thursday, and, according to previous reporting from Euractiv on the leaked text, it will limit access to online services for children under 15 years old.
“I am aware that many perceive the power of big tech as overwhelming,” von der Leyen is expected to say, adding that “Europe has the power to act. It is us who decide our rules, not big tech”. She is also expected to announce an EU-wide heatwave plan for early-warning detection and health planning.As previously reported by Euractiv, the Commission president will also put forward a new migration initiative following the Ceuta crisis in Spain.
Von der Leyen will propose a “European Emergency Response Framework” to guide the EU’s response to what she will define as “engineered and weaponised” mass movements. “It will only be triggered under a strictly defined set of criteria. And in those cases, it will allow for a time-limited and strictly defined flexibility of standard procedures,” the draft reads.

Trump may close the border.

• EU Opens Door For Canada To Become Bloc’s First-Ever “Associate Member” (ZH)

Thanks to how mean President Trump has been, Canada could become the first-ever “associate member” of the European Union under a proposal unveiled Wednesday by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, as Ottawa looks to reduce its economic dependence on the United States.

Speaking during her annual State of the Union address in Strasbourg, with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in the front row as the first foreign head of government ever to attend the speech, von der Leyen said Brussels wants to take its relationship with Canada to an unprecedented level. “We must urgently reimagine our partnerships,” von der Leyen said, before telling Carney she wanted to work with him on “opening the door for Canada to be the first associate member of the EU.” There is just one complication: no such status currently exists.
EU treaties allow European countries to apply for full membership, while Brussels maintains an assortment of trade, association and single-market agreements with countries outside the bloc. But “associate membership” would be something new, meaning its rights, obligations and legal structure would have to be negotiated essentially from scratch. Reuters notes that any serious move toward such a status would also face the politically difficult task of winning support from all 27 EU member states.
And Carney himself has stopped short of calling for full EU membership. On Sunday, after a Wall Street Journal report that Canada was exploring membership, he described what Ottawa is seeking as a “unique alliance” with Europe. He addresses the European Parliament on Thursday. The substance of what Brussels is proposing, however, goes considerably beyond another trade agreement.
Canada and the EU already have CETA, their comprehensive free-trade deal. Von der Leyen said Wednesday that the two sides now want to move “from CETA to an Alliance for the Future” encompassing manufacturing, technology, defense, energy, critical minerals, batteries, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, cybersecurity and Arctic security. “We will integrate defence industrial bases,” she said. That process has already begun.
Canada became the first non-European country allowed to participate in the EU’s €150 billion SAFE defense procurement program under an agreement signed in February and formally concluded by the EU Council in June. The arrangement allows eligible Canadian companies and Canadian-origin products to participate in procurement financed by the program. The EU-Canada defense relationship has also expanded into military mobility, interoperability, maritime and space security and defense-industrial cooperation.
Then there’s the economics of the idea. Roughly 70% of Canadian exports go to the United States, making any rapid decoupling unrealistic. At the same time, Trump’s tariffs and repeated talk of a 51st state have given Ottawa a powerful incentive to diversify. Europe, meanwhile, needs resources. Von der Leyen warned Wednesday that Europe remains more than 80% dependent on China for many critical raw materials, with dependence reaching 90% for some rare earths. “No country can do this alone,” she said.
Canada possesses significant reserves of nickel, uranium, potash, cobalt, lithium and rare earth elements, among other commodities increasingly regarded as strategic inputs for batteries, semiconductors, defense equipment and energy infrastructure. That makes a deeper Canada-EU relationship potentially complementary: Europe gets another source of strategic commodities and energy while Canada gets a large alternative market, industrial investment and greater access to European defense and technology programs.
There is nevertheless a potentially uncomfortable tradeoff for Ottawa. If “associate membership” eventually includes meaningful access to the EU’s roughly €18 trillion single market, Canada could be required to align portions of its regulatory regime with EU rules. Reuters notes that this could leave Ottawa accepting European regulations without receiving the voting rights enjoyed by actual EU members. Canada could gain market access while becoming, at least in some areas, a rule-taker rather than a rule-maker.

He’s a little man.

• Mark Carney Is Leading Canada ‘Right Over the Cliff’ (Victor Davis Hanson)

I know we’ve talked a lot about the current Canadian-American trade dispute, but it involves larger issues of globalism versus nationalism versus North American relations versus the United States paradigm versus the EU paradigm, etc., etc. And what’s happened is I would call it [Canadian Prime Minister] Mark Carney’s fantasy house, Mark Carney’s dream house, Mark Carney’s imaginarium. He has no … It doesn’t seem like he has any connection with reality. His economy has lost 41,000 jobs. It depends on exporting to the United States 72% to 76% of all of its products.
That is going to be very difficult. It is now difficult. It’s going to be almost impossible if he continues. He has to keep his oil wells going, and given the fact that other provinces have not been ready and willing to make pipelines to the rich tar sands of Alberta, he depends on a 4 million-barrel export a day to the United States. Some of it is thick tar sands, some of it has been diluted and is marketable elsewhere, but it’s a very good deal for Canada. When you talk about cutting that off, you’re talking about cutting your nose to spite your face.
This would be the most self-destructive thing. The fact that Canada even mentions it shows that they’re entering a period of delusional thinking. This new relationship with China, they’re bringing in 48,000 low-tariff, I think it’s only 6%, EVs. They’re going to ruin what little they had left of the Canadian auto industry. But more importantly, that trade agreement is ushering in a whole set of new agreements, some of them military.
Does Canada know, does Mark Carney know, that if Canada negotiates a special military relationship with China and it’s on our borders and we have NATO relations, that will endanger the alliance and it will permanently wreck the relationship between Canada and the United States?
The other thing that’s very disturbing is right now, as we speak, the European Union model is under assault, not by America, but by Europeans. They don’t believe the socialist model of open borders, illegal immigration, dismantling fossil fuels, not using fossil fuel resources, subsidized expensive green energy, de-arming, disarming, whatever term we use, low fertility, works. They used to have, about a quarter-century ago, the 470 million Europeans, they had about the same gross domestic product as the United States.
Now they’re $10 trillion at least smaller. So, why is Canada emulating the EU failed model? Forty-five percent of your population was not born in Canada or their parents weren’t born. Why are you subsidizing green energy and you’re not utilizing this rich resource in Alberta? Why are you disarmed? Why won’t you meet your 2% commitments? You may or may not have done it just one year, but why do you repeatedly not do that when you have such a vast nation and it is so exposed in a very dangerous world, in the Arctic, in the Northwest Passage, and the airspace over North America?
And the answer is your economic model does not allow you much margin. Your immigration model does not allow you much margin of error to compensate for these decisions that you’ve made for a weaker, poorer, more disunited Canada. You feel you can’t arm yourself because the United States will protect you. You feel that you need a $50 billion surplus because the United States is far wealthier and you’re in dire straits.
Next problem. You don’t express your disagreement or anger at the United States over trade policy by warming up to, and allying with China, which is the greatest trade violator in history with its patent theft, copyright theft, dumping product below the cost of production, currency manipulation, forced labor camps.
And you don’t win yourself national support when no other country except you and China have slapped counter-tariffs, not because they didn’t want to, not because they couldn’t do it, but because they realized they were running surpluses for years with the United States, and they could still make money with a more symmetrical trade agreement.
You apparently don’t think that. You think if you lose your special $50 billion surplus relationship, or you might have to rearm, the choices that you’ve made on energy and immigration and economic policy prevent you from being competitive, and you need to be thus indirectly subsidized.
But more importantly, you’re not going to win world sympathy, at least among the United States and other countries that are its allies.

Not directly. But both Putin and Trump see the advantages. Make Europe need Russian oil.

• Very Interesting – Saudi Arabia Cancels Oil Shipments to Europe (CTH)

The Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen reportedly hit Saudi Arabia’s east/west pipeline with drones. President Trump did not strike the Houthi’s. Despite knowing oil prices would jump, President Trump told Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salmon to approach the issue carefully. Reuters, citing an Axios report based on two US officials, said Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman called Trump twice on Thursday and pressed for military action. Trump rejected the request, according to the report.

Why would President Trump ‘not’ strike back against the Iran-backed Houthi rebels, knowing the drone attack on the Saudi pipeline would only worsen the oil issue? Well, you won’t read this anywhere else…. However, if Saudi Arabia shut down the east/west pipeline for a while (they just did), then the oil flowing to the Red Sea that ends up in Europe would be halted (it just was). Think about it. All of a sudden Europe cannot get oil from Mohammed bin Salmon. So, how does that change the dynamic of President Trump’s desired leverage toward Europe in his approach to bringing Russian oil back into the market.

I hope everyone can see the dynamic. All of a sudden that Russian oil Europe hates so much, turns into dependency leverage against EU antagonisms against solving the Ukraine-Russia conflict. This is not happening accidentally. Oil Price News – Saudi Aramco has canceled or delayed crude deliveries to European refiners after the shutdown of the kingdom’s East-West pipeline cut into one of its remaining routes around the Strait of Hormuz.
At least three European refiners have had late-September cargoes canceled or pushed as far out as November, according to market sources cited by Argus. Two more expect notices covering September supplies. The 7-million-bpd East-West pipeline has been offline since a September 10 attack. The pipeline carries crude from eastern Saudi oil fields to the Red Sea port of Yanbu, bypassing Hormuz. One market source told Argus that every Saudi cargo scheduled for the final 10 days of September could be at risk.
The same source estimated that Yanbu had roughly five days of crude inventories remaining. Argus could not independently confirm that estimate, and Aramco declined to comment.mIn August, Bloomberg had reported that Aramco would supply full contractual crude volumes to at least three European refiners for September. But no Saudi crude has departed Yanbu since September 11, according to Vortexa data cited by Argus. (read more) Essentially, the Houthi “attack” on the Saudi pipeline just shut down oil going to Europe.
Europe needs oil. This is not an optional dynamic.
Russia has the oil that Europe now desperately needs. Suddenly, the geopolitical dynamic has shifted, as an outcome of the economic/energy dynamic shifting, at a very opportune time for President Trump to hold optimal leverage to get Europe to reconsider their opposition to a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire.

“Mark Zuckerberg macrodoses mushrooms and fights Dario Amodei in his mindspace ..”

• Zuck Torches Dario’s AI Nanny State, Wants ‘Trust Us Bro’ Instead (ZH)

After Anthropic’s Dario Amodei set off a firestorm on Saturday calling for a ‘pause’ in AI development until hand-picked arbiters are installed inside the frontier labs (a gift to Beijing), Mark Zuckerberg sided with the testosterone wing of the tech-bro complex with a builder’s response: police yourselves. You don’t need anyone’s permission – or a cartel, to do it.

Mark Zuckerberg macrodoses mushrooms and fights Dario Amodei in his mindspace (probably)
Amodei published a 3,800-word essay, “We Must Pace the Frontier” – telling the industry to slow down before its own agents got loose, and the response was a group hug: Sam Altman fell in line within hours, Elon Musk said “Dario is right,” and by Monday Congress was drafting ways to put the genie back in the bottle. Zuck’s plan is different: Frontier Justice.
According to Investor Nic Carter;
Zuck pretty handily dismantles Dario’s talking points here:
– people want models that are *aligned with them* (subtly punches back at Anthropic’s normative constitutional approach)
– labs already face liability if they screw up, so incentives to release aligned models is already baked in
– Meta delayed Muse for alignment reasons but didn’t make a whole song and dance about it
– Subtly questions Anthropic trying to kingmake METR (implies METR is an Anthropic patsy)
– Meta doesn’t need to coordinate with anyone to work on alignment, it’s just something labs should naturally do

Dario’s Plan
Amodei’s essay says the newest models have begun improving themselves and a swarm of agents could take over significant parts of the internet within six to twelve months, so the labs should slow the rate at which they add capability. The fix comes in three steps: outside inspectors, with the nonprofit METR as the model, embedded in every lab with employee-level access and the right to publish; a narrow waiver from antitrust law so the frontier labs can agree among themselves on standards and speed; and, eventually, red lines negotiated with China (mmhmm).
Before that negotiation, Dario wants Washington to keep the chip ban, crack down on distillation (training a cheap model on an expensive one’s answers), lock up model weights, and widen America’s lead over the next three to five years. The Global Times counted twelve references to China in a document about safety, and Beijing’s Foreign Ministry answered in less than two days, calling it “fearmongering.”
To some, the whole thing seemed highly choreographed. Last week an OpenAI-turned-Anthropic researcher quit in protest – saying the industry was gambling with our lives. Two of the three researchers who resigned that week went to METR, as we noted Saturday. By Tuesday the House AI safety bill’s Republican co-sponsor, Rep. Jay Obernolte of California, was telling reporters he had met OpenAI’s top lobbyist the day before the company endorsed the bill’s 3rd party evaluator provision.
Meanwhile, a New York assemblyman whose campaign was backed by an Anthropic-funded PAC had launched a $30 million push to make AI safety the Democrats’ 2028 platform, and Anthropic’s IPO was reportedly in the works. The referee is family too: METR’s reported funders are the same donors who financed Anthropic’s early rounds and hold its equity, and under the essay’s own terms the inspectors sign a contract the lab writes. David Sacks, the former White House AI czar, needed one sentence: stop pretending METR is independent when it is intertwined with Anthropic’s investors and staff. None of this proves coordination. All of it explains the salt.
.@DavidSacks says if Dario Amodei truly believes frontier AI could end humanity, he has no business running Anthropic. Make it safe, shut the lab down, or step aside. pic.twitter.com/tec7eACwdG
— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) September 14, 2026

Dario Vs. Zuck What is the danger? Amodei says capability: systems that improve themselves faster than anyone can check. Zuckerberg says concentration. The argument he made in a July Wall Street Journal essay, The AI Future Is for Everyone, is that a world where a few companies hold the most capable systems is the dangerous one: one person with a superintelligent lawyer wins unfairly, everyone with one gets a fairer system.
Who checks? Amodei wants an embedded referee with a badge. Zuckerberg wants users and courts. An agent that ignores the people it works for gets abandoned, a lab that ships harm gets sued, and a few billion users correcting a product every day is a larger alignment dataset than any written constitution. Outside evaluators, he says, are “industry best practice” that Meta Superintelligence Labs already uses; they are a tool, not a license.
Who sets the pace? Amodei wants a shared speed limit the labs agree to, with government permission to agree. Zuckerberg’s answer is that Meta already paced itself: it sat on its Muse models for months to harden them, “didn’t call for everyone else to do this before we would,” and shipped. The cleanest speed limit, he argues, is putting most of your compute into serving people rather than into racing self-improvement, a choice visible in capital spending and product cadence rather than in an inspector’s report.
What about China? Amodei wants to widen the lead first and negotiate later, arguing the restrictions raise the leverage of democracies and make a deal more likely. Zuckerberg’s position, and Beijing’s, is that the open-weight world already exists and exclusion makes it less safe, not more. “The key to building a positive future for everyone is maintaining the right balance of power.”

World War Reddit. “This claim, originally attributed to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre was entirely fabricated and soon debunked. However, that didn’t stop Zelenskyy from making the claim to the American audience of CBS, yesterday. ”

• Zelenskyy Tells CBS Russia Drones Tried to Take Down His Airplane (CTH)

What would make Volodymyr Zelenskyy appear on CBS News to tell a debunked story about his airplane being targeted by Russian drones in Moldova? Answer the question honestly.

Appearing on CBS News, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy claimed that Russian drones tried to attack his airplane in Moldova. This claim, originally attributed to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre was entirely fabricated and soon debunked. However, that didn’t stop Zelenskyy from making the claim to the American audience of CBS, yesterday. WATCH:

The reality is the drone in question was detected inside Ukraine over 160km from where Zelenskyy was in Chisinau International Airport. Zelenskyy and/or Moldova itself was never under any threat.
“After 5:20 p.m. (local time, 4:20 p.m. Paris time), authorities confirmed that the drone had fallen and exploded about 160 km from Chisinau International Airport. Flight restrictions were then lifted and the Ukrainian president’s plane took off later than planned,” he added. A source in the Ukrainian presidency told AFP that Zelensky was at the slightest risk was “exaggerated”. {SOURCE}
In the BIG PICTURE, it is fake stories like this, false and fictitious narratives, that give us appropriate context for the latest leftist/political effort to control information via a new regulatory process under the guise of AI regulation. This latest AI panic is “digital covid.”
Frontier Labs = Wuhan Labs
Anthropic = NIH
Rogue AI = SARS-CoV-2
Regulation = Vaccination
COVID panic = Election/Control
AI panic = Election/Control
The only thing we are waiting now is patient zero, the AI ‘false flag’ (cyberattack).

Remember the air raid sirens when Biden walked across the square in Kiev?

The EU made it dirt poor.

• Greece Wants To Become Europe’s Next Hedge Fund Hub (ZH)

Athens is emerging as an unlikely contender in the competition for Europe’s hedge fund money, with Greece using favorable tax treatment, an improving economy and Mediterranean living to attract financiers looking beyond London and other established financial centers, according to Bloomberg.

That campaign has already produced some notable converts. Millennium Management has established an operation in Athens, while billionaire hedge fund manager Chris Rokos is heading to Greece after deciding to leave Britain. Greek officials are betting that attracting firms of that caliber will make it easier to persuade smaller funds and finance professionals to follow.
It is a striking development for a country that spent much of the previous decade synonymous with sovereign debt problems and economic instability. Greece has since repaired its public finances, regained investment-grade credit ratings and posted stronger economic growth than much of Europe. Its government can now borrow at lower yields than several much larger economies.
That turnaround is central to the sales pitch. “Greece is fiscally healthy, it constantly produces surpluses and, as a result, it provides tax predictability and macroeconomic stability,” said Vasilis Karatzas, an adviser to Finance Minister Kyriakos Pierrakakis.

Bloomberg writes that there is also plenty of financial incentive to make the move. Greece continues to offer qualifying wealthy newcomers a €100,000 annual flat tax on foreign income, a program that has remained unchanged since 2019. By comparison, Italy has repeatedly increased the cost of its competing program. Greece has now sweetened the deal for the investment industry specifically, allowing eligible fund managers who become Greek tax residents to pay 5% on carried interest and bonuses.
The government says it isn’t simply trying to become another European parking lot for wealthy foreigners. The larger ambition is to get investment firms to actually operate from Athens, bringing well-paid finance jobs, encouraging talented Greeks working abroad to return and creating the foundation for a domestic money-management industry.
Timing could be working in Greece’s favor. Higher taxes have made Britain less attractive to some wealthy financiers, while geopolitical instability has introduced another consideration for people who had been looking toward financial centers in the Middle East. Athens suddenly finds itself competing for people who might previously have considered London, Milan, Dubai or Abu Dhabi the obvious choices.
There are still practical obstacles. Athens will need more luxury housing, strong private schools and the broader infrastructure expected by highly paid international finance workers and their families. And a couple of prominent arrivals hardly make Greece the next Mayfair. “The country won’t become a wealth hub overnight. It will take years,” Karatzas said.
Still, Millennium and Rokos give the Greek experiment something more important than another tax incentive: validation. Once major funds demonstrate that Athens is a viable place to operate, Greece’s hope is that the next wave of managers becomes considerably easier to convince.

“.. 9/11, an inside orchestration by the American Zionist neoconservatives to produce the “new Pearl Harbor” needed for Washington’s 21st century attacks ..”

• The Road to Armageddon (Paul Craig Roberts)

The world is faced with two major war fronts, both of which are widening and could spin out of control.

Ukraine is Washington’s proxy in the West’s war against Russia, a war that has moved deep within Russia herself far from the Donbas front. Nato countries such as Germany and Great Britain are openly involved in the conflict against Russia as is the US. Germany and Great Britain make the long range drones that Ukraine uses with Washington’s targeting system to attack Russian oil production, oil refineries, and energy depots inside Russia, as well as airports, civilian housing, children’s schools, and vacationeers. The Russian president refuses to acknowledge these attacks as attacks of war and calls them “terrorist actions.” Putin pretends that the conflict is merely a “special military operation” confined to Ukraine in Donbas.
The “Special Military Operation” has continued for 4.5 years, during which two more countries have joined NATO and aligned against Russia. More NATO members have changed their policies and have announced their willingness to host Washington’s nuclear weapons on their territory on Russia’s border. NATO countries speak openly of preparing for a war against Russia in three years.
Every weapon system that Washington and NATO members said would not be sent were sent to Ukraine. Russia’s peace talks with Trump went nowhere, but Putin still believes in them. Zelensky now threatens with his German and British drones to close down Russia’s air space from commercial flights. Russia is fighting the West’s proxy–Ukraine–not Russia’s Western enemy. Ukraine is in the fight only because of the support and instigation from the West.
Obviously, Russia is in an existential conflict. There is a limit to how long Russia can deny reality, and when that limit is reached, Russia’s back is likely to be to the wall, in which case out come the Russian nukes. In the Middle East Iran is engaged not with Iran’s enemy, but with the proxy–Washington–of Iran’s enemy–Israel. So we have two wars in which the proxies, not the instigators, suffer the consequences. As this serves the instigators, as they bear no cost, the conflicts can continue until they become unmanageable.
We have before us the enormous self-delusion of Russia and Iran. Russia is fighting Ukraine, a former part of Russia, not Washington and NATO. Iran is fighting Washington, not Israel whose puppet Washington is. So we have two countries under attack, neither of which confront its actual enemy. It is a perfect scenario for matters to get out of hand.
With this point made, now ask yourself why the US is at war with Iran. We know why Washington is at war with Russia. Russia is a risen power that constrains Washington’s hegemony over the world and is, therefore, in the way of Washington’s hegemony. America’s foreign policy doctrine–the Wolfowitz Doctrine–says that it is the principle purpose of US policy to prevent the rise of any country that can serve as a constraint on Washington’s unilateralism.
Russia and China are obviously world powers, but why Washington’s hegemonic concern with Iran, which is not? The answer is that Iran is in the way of the Israeli Zionist Agenda of Greater Israel, which defines the territory of the Israeli state to be from the Nile to Pakistan.
For the entirety of the 21st century Washington has been fighting for Greater Israel. That was the purpose of 9/11, an inside orchestration by the American Zionist neoconservatives to produce the “new Pearl Harbor” needed for Washington’s 21st century attacks that have destroyed not the specified “seven countries in five years,” but three of the countries–Iraq, Libya, and Syria–in 25 years, with the current attack on Iran underway. That is a lot of fighting for Israel.
What I have presented is the truth. But no awareness or discussion of this truth results or is possible in America or Western Europe. The powerful Israel Lobby has defined all truth unfavorable to Israeli expansion to be antisemitic. Unless they are retired, no professor, no foreign policy analyst, no government official or student can survive being labeled an antisemite. The power of the Israeli’s self-justifications for wars and genocide is extraordinary. There are only 7.7 million Jews in Israel; yet they control the discussion of the violence of which they are themselves responsible.

He appointed the man?

• Trump Slams Former FBI Director Chris Wray Over Butler Investigation

The criticism comes after the FBI released new documents related to the investigation, which included revelations that shooter Thomas Crooks had been emotionless since birth and never had friends in middle or high school. President Donald Trump slammed former FBI Director Christopher Wray on Tuesday, claiming the man should pay a price for his handling of the investigation into the assassination attempt on Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania.

The criticism comes after the FBI released new documents related to the investigation, which included revelations that shooter Thomas Crooks had been emotionless since birth and never had friends in middle or high school. “Everybody knows the Crooked Joe Biden FBI didn’t do what they should have with respect to the lunatic who shot me in Butler, PA,” Trump said on Truth Social. “By the time I got into office, on January 20th, most of the information was missing, altered, corrupted, or gone.
“New info was just found! Why wasn’t it seen long ago? This was all a Democrat plot, to get me out of the election, that failed,” he continued. “Dirty Cop Christopher Wray should pay a price for the way he handled this assassination attempt, and certainly for the things he said.” Trump appointed Wray to replace former FBI Director James Comey in 2017. Wray was eventually replaced with current FBI Director Kash Patel in the second Trump administration.
The documents are part of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s ongoing inquiry into the Trump assassination attempt on July 13, 2024, in Butler. While Trump survived the assassination attempt, an innocent bystander was killed in the shooting. The documents showed that Crooks’ actions were a surprise to his family, and his motive remains a mystery.

FBI and politics, great combo.

• FBI Agent Wanted To Criminally Investigate Elon Musk, Email Shows (ET)

An FBI agent pitched investigating Elon Musk for his work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), according to an email released on Sept. 15. FBI agent Kevin Gounaud wrote in the Feb. 22, 2025, missive to a supervisor that he wanted to recommend opening a criminal investigation into the person or people at the Office of Personnel Management who approved transmitting an email to government workers about what they had done the previous week. That person was conspiring with Musk “to violate government-wide security policy and transmit sensitive government information outside of a strict need to know,” Gounaud said.

“Furthermore, Musk used a non-government system (Twitter) to relate information that allegedly was for official purposes,” he said. “In doing so, because he is monetized … he likely generated income for himself based on Twitter’s monetization and/or advertising revenues.” Gounaud compared Musk’s action to how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used a private email server to conduct government business. The FBI declined to take action against Clinton, determining she lacked criminal intent.
Gounaud said Musk also likely violated a federal law that bars executive branch employees from participating in government matters that impact their own interests. “Happy to write the case opening and find a prosecutor (or at least try),” the agent told the supervisor. He added later, “And no, I’m not kidding.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released the letter as senators questioned FBI Director Kash Patel during a hearing in Washington. Grassley said the email, along with other evidence from actions taken by additional agents, “undercut public statements by former FBI officials that agents don’t get to pick their cases.” [..] Patel told senators that the FBI has fired agents who were involved in certain probes, including collecting intelligence in a malfeasant manner. “And in terms of criminal investigations that sprout from that, I can only comment on what’s been public, but there are a number of ongoing investigations regarding this illegal conduct,” he said.
Gounaud is no longer with the FBI, as of February, according to his LinkedIn page. He had been with the bureau since 2004. Musk’s time as a special government employee concluded in the spring of 2025, while DOGE formally shut down in July. Musk has not been charged to date. It was not clear whether Grassley has obtained other emails involving Gounaud, including any responses the latter received to his pitch for a probe of Musk.

“AI doomers should be held accountable for their doomsday claims. It’s made up… It’s irresponsible. We ought to just keep track of all that and remind people when their claims don’t come true”—@JensenHuang NVIDIA

I agree and hold the CEOs and executives of the companies that…
— Brian Roemmele (@BrianRoemmele) September 16, 2026

Optimus will make the future much more productive

And also much more fun pic.twitter.com/xsNNrGGW88
— Optimus (@Optimus_RH) September 15, 2026

THIS ROBOT JUST LEARNED TO JUGGLE – AND IT CHANGES WHAT HUMANOIDS CAN DO!

In just 20 seconds, the humanoid robot goes from holding 2 tennis balls to tracking, catching, and throwing them while maintaining its balance. That means its cameras, motion planning, hands, and legs have… https://t.co/VtD6tvggjl pic.twitter.com/YghE1T5uIL
— Future Memo (@TheFutureMemo) September 16, 2026

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

Debt Rattle September 2 2026

Sep 022026

September 2, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:30 am Finance Tagged with: ballroom, BYD, Canada, Carney, ID, Le Pen, Russia, savings accounts, Ukraine, VIPS 37 Responses »

Henri Matisse Sorrow of the King 1952

• Dangerous Talk of Putin’s ‘Loss’ in Ukraine (VIPS)

• Russia Moving Towards Resolving Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)

• Ukraine Tried To Copy Russia’s Battlefield Tactics, Walked Into A Trap (RT)

• Le Pen Would Beat Every Rival In 2027, Major French Poll Finds (ZH)

• Supreme Court Rule 5-4 to Eliminate Lawsuit Against White House Ballroom (CTH)

• Eye of the Beholder: Aesthetic Injury and the White House Ballroom (Turley)

• Wolf Blitzer’s Trump Mail-In Voting Lie Blows Up in His Face (Margolis)

• 400,000 California Voters Didn’t Provide Any ID at Registration (Salgado)

• EU Can’t Raid Europeans’ Savings Accounts, and It Drives them Nuts (O’Brien)

• Carney Picked a Trade War With Trump—But Why? (Victor Davis Hanson)

• BYD Inquires to Purchase Stellantis Auto Plant in Canada (CTH)

.@SecScottBessent on Iran: "I will say it on worldwide TV, just so you know: we know where in the British Virgin Islands your accounts are at these trust companies. We know the $100 million houses you have around the world, and we are going to freeze those." pic.twitter.com/c0H0IFVwgU
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) September 1, 2026

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2094537377557688323?s=20 https://twitter.com/Q_TheStormRider/status/2094711609705087445?s=20

I think Trump already knows. The notion that Ukraine can win is idiotic.

• Dangerous Talk of Putin’s ‘Loss’ in Ukraine (VIPS)

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Dangerous Talk of Putin’s ‘Loss’ in Ukraine

VIPS tells President Trump that once apprised of the reality on the ground (and in the air) by his intelligence advisors, he might choose to do what is in his power to end the disaster in Ukraine.
Dear President Trump:
The New York Times is reporting that the outlook for Russia in Ukraine is “bleak.” C.I.A. Director John Ratcliffe is said to have explained that to the Russians while in Moscow Tuesday. He reportedly urged them “to cut a deal before their military and economic situation gets worse.”
We write you on the chance you may be taken in by this latest song and dance. We believe it is orchestrated by the same kind of geniuses who told President Joe Biden to announce on July 13, 2023, in a major speech in Helsinki, that the Russians had “already lost the war” in Ukraine.
We suggest that you “kick the tires,” if they try to sell you that same car. Nothing could be further from the truth. Your predecessor was ill-served by intelligence. We suspect you are getting the same tendentious treatment from your own advisers. Indeed, many of them seem unconscionably relaxed about risking wider war with Russia over Ukraine.

We offer you, as we offered Biden, the following jogs to memory:
— December 3, 2022: “Russia is using up ammunition quite quickly. It’s pretty extraordinary. Our sense is that Russia is not capable of indigenously producing what they are expending at this stage.” (National Intelligence Director Avril Haines)
— March 18, 2022: “Russia has lost in Ukraine. The West should recognize this Russian defeat.” (Anatol Lieven, Quincy Institute)
— July 1 & July 7, 2023: “Putin’s war has already been a strategic failure for Russia – its military weaknesses laid bare; its economy badly damaged for years to come.” (C.I.A. Director William Burns)
The Church of Latter-Day Pundits
Two NY Times journalists who specialize in intelligence matters report Thursday that this latest version of the Russia-has-already-lost story is “the current C.I.A. director’s assessment.” They warn somewhat quizzically that, despite this, President Putin might ignore it “and choose to keep fighting.” But why would Putin do that? Indeed, the Gray Lady and her intelligence sources seem quite baffled by why Putin would keep trying when, according to U.S. officials and pundits, he started losing three and a half years ago and continues to lose. Could it possibly be that it was they that were wrong – terribly wrong?
Dismissing that as a possibility, they perform a somersault, straighten up, and chose to blame Putin’s advisers who, the Times says, have not “given Putin honest assessments of the war’s trajectory and toll.” If Black Humor is at work here, we do not find it funny. The slaughter in Ukraine brings hundreds of victims daily.
Russia is methodically advancing in Donbass along a thousand-mile front, it is weathering drone attacks on its oil and civilian infrastructure with enhanced interception and has enforced a virtual blockade on Ukraine’s largest port, Odessa, with withering aerial attacks. Ukraine’s manpower and interceptor shortages make it impossible for it to ever recover its lost territory, as you acknowledged after your meeting with President Putin in Alaska.
Mr. President, if you were given access to reality-based, honest intelligence, you would be able to decide for yourself whose advisers have gotten it right over these past five years. And, once apprised of the reality on ground (and in the air), you might choose to do what is in your power to end the disaster in Ukraine.
Déjà Vu
This is not the first time we advised a president to seek unbiased advice with a view toward avoiding unnecessary, catastrophic war. We did that just a few hours after Colin Powell’s deceptive presentation to the U.N. Security Council on February 5, 2003. Today, we strongly suggest that you broaden your circle of advisers, as we urged President George W. Bush to do then, in our first VIPS Memorandum, which ended with this recommendation:
“After watching Secretary Powell today, we are convinced that you would be well served if you widened the discussion beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic.”
FOR THE STEERING GROUP, VETERAN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR SANITY (VIPS)
• Fulton Armstrong, former National Intelligence Officer (ret.)
• Marshall Carter-Tripp, Foreign Service Officer (ret.); Division Director, State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research
• Philip Giraldi, C.I.A., Operations Officer (ret.)
• Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq and Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
• Larry C. Johnson, former C.I.A. and State Department Counter Terrorism officer
• John Kiriakou, former C.I.A. Counterterrorism Officer and former senior investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
• Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., U.S. Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003
• Douglas MacGregor, Colonel, USA (ret.) (associate VIPS)
• Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army infantry/intelligence officer & C.I.A. analyst; C.I.A. Presidential briefer (ret.)
• Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer/NE, National Intelligence Council & C.I.A. political analyst (ret.)
• Scott Ritter, former MAJ, USMC; former U.N. Weapons Inspector, Iraq
• Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)
• Sarah G. Wilton, CDR, USNR, (ret.); Defense Intelligence Agency (ret.)
• Ann Wright, retired U.S. Army reserve colonel and former U.S. diplomat who resigned in 2003 in opposition to the Iraq War

“Moscow is making every effort to end the hostilities as soon as possible, the Russian president told Indian PM Narendra Modi..”

• Russia Moving Towards Resolving Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin holds a meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the SCO summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, on August 31, 2026. © Sputnik / Pyotr Kovalev Russia is actively seeking to end the Ukraine conflict, President Vladimir Putin told Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during a meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Kyrgyzstan on Monday.

The two leaders discussed the Ukraine conflict among other issues, with the Indian prime minister calling for a peaceful resolution to the ongoing hostilities and urging the sides to “move in this direction.”“Thank you, dear prime minister. That is the way we’re heading for,” the Russian president replied.Moscow has repeatedly said that it is ready to resume Ukraine peace talks at any time, provided that they are focused on addressing the “root causes” of the conflict, including Ukraine’s plans to join NATO. Russia insists that the conflict has its roots in the 2014 Western-backed coup in Kiev and subsequent attempts by the new Ukrainian government to suppress the rebellion in Donbass by force.
Ukraine later failed to implement the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements, which were intended to reintegrate the breakaway regions into Ukraine by granting them broad autonomy through comprehensive political reform.In a June article for Politico, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that Moscow had explored every diplomatic avenue to defuse the Ukraine and Europe security crisis, but the US and NATO rejected Russia’s proposal for legally binding mutual security guarantees in January 2022.
Kiev’s Western backers also sabotaged the Istanbul talks between Russia and Ukraine that were launched soon after the Ukraine conflict escalation in February 2022.Then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson infamously traveled to Kiev in April of that year to tell Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to drop any negotiations and “just fight,” thus slamming the door on any genuine diplomacy in the short term, according to Lavrov.
Moscow has consistently stated that it hopes to achieve a lasting settlement to the conflict and not simply a temporary ceasefire. Russia is demanding that Ukraine abandon its plans to join NATO and adopt a neutral status, accept restrictions on its armed forces, and formally recognize Crimea and four former Ukrainian regions as Russian territory.Russia also presented a roadmap towards the final settlement, which involved a ceasefire along the current front line linked to the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from parts of Russian territory they control, an end to mobilization, and an end to Western military aid to Ukraine.
Kiev has repeatedly rejected any proposals put forward by Moscow, while continuing to claim sovereignty over the four former Ukrainian territories as well as Crimea.

“Behind Kiev’s claims of ‘liberated’ territory lies a failed operation, abandoned assault teams and an increasingly unstable southern front..”

• Ukraine Tried To Copy Russia’s Battlefield Tactics, Walked Into A Trap (RT)

Last week, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, along with the new Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) Mikhail Drapaty, visited a section of the front line in Dnepropetrovsk region. Zelensky stated that this year, the AFU has almost completely regained control of Dnepropetrovsk Region, with only about 10 square kilometers of territory remaining under Russian control. What is the logic behind this PR campaign? Did the AFU really make progress in this direction? What were the real goals of the Ukrainian operation, and to what extent have they been achieved? We explore all this below.

The southern sector is the most strategically important part of the 1,500-kilometer-long front. On one end it borders the Dnieper River, while the other end stretches northeast to Pokrovsk, where, as it is generally considered, the central sector of the front begins.
In 2023, Ukraine’s only strategic offensive took place in this area. The AFU’s aim was to reach the sea and cut off the land corridor to the Crimea by means of two decisive blows. If successful, this operation would have radically worsened the situation for the Russian army and, according to Kiev’s plans, changed the course of the conflict. Even though the 2023 offensive failed, this section of the front did not become less important for the AFU. In the spring of 2026, with the aim of cutting off supply routes to the Crimea, the AFU launched a middle strike campaign, particularly targeting the highway located 50-70 km from the front line. These attempts have so far proven unsuccessful.
For Russia, the southern sector of the front is extremely important for three reasons. Firstly, as the front is pushed further north, Ukrainian middle strikes become less effective. Secondly, the capture of the city of Orekhov will pave the way for an advance toward Zaporozhye, a regional center with a pre-war population of over 700,000 and one of the largest industrial cities remaining under Kiev’s control.
Ukrainian soldiers from the 65th Separate Mechanized Brigade drive in the evacuation buggy near the road sign ‘Orikhiv’ damaged by Russian shelling. © Andriy Andriyenko / SOPA Images / Sipa USA Thirdly and most importantly, an advance north from Zaporozhye will allow the Russian army to approach the central sector of the front from the rear, either encircling it or at least significantly disrupting its supply lines.
Last year brought troubling news for the AFU in the southern sector of the front as the defense near the city of Gulaipole collapsed. At the time, all forces were pulled for the defense of Pokrovsk and Mirnograd, while several areas in the south were left with no one to defend them. As a result of the successful campaign of Russia’s East Group of Forces to identify and destroy drone crews, the AFU were forced to abandon approximately 300 square kilometers between the Yanchur and Gaichur rivers without fighting. To restore the front, then Commander-in-Chief Syrsky was forced to curtail the counteroffensive near Pokrovsk and essentially abandon the encircled garrison in neighboring Mirnograd.
This situation determined the priorities of the 2026 spring-summer campaign for the AFU: the aim was to restore the southern front at all costs, eliminate the threat to Zaporozhye, and push Russian forces as far east and south as possible to relieve strategic pressure on the central sector of the front.
We don’t have any information from the Ukrainian General Staff, so we can only assess the operation’s goals based on indirect evidence. Apparently, the AFU planned two auxiliary strikes in the Stepnogorsk and Uspenovka area to cut off the pincers of the Russian army, which threatened to close in around Orekhov. The main strike, however, was to be directed at Velikaya Novoselka. If it had been successful, the entire defense system of the East Group of Forces from Gulipole to the junction with the Center Group of Forces near Pokrovsk would have collapsed and the Russian army would have been pushed back 30-40 kilometers.
The AFU’s attacks began in the spring and were accompanied by an unprecedented media campaign. The operation was labeled a second counteroffensive, Ukrainian authorities claimed dozens of “liberated” settlements and hundreds of square kilometers of reclaimed territory, and once-respected Western publications churned out articles about a turning point on the front, a heroic Ukrainian offensive that would change the course of the war, and other such nonsense.
However, by mid-summer, news about the AFU’s success on the southern front became less frequent and after Syrsky’s removal, disappeared completely. Instead, news surfaced about the plight of Ukrainian storm troops which, advancing through the gray zone, got stuck there for weeks and even months. It was reported that due to disruptions in aerial deliveries, the soldiers hid in stashes, lacked food, and were forced to drink their own urine.

The future of Europe hangs in the balance. Last chance to beat the globalists.

• Le Pen Would Beat Every Rival In 2027, Major French Poll Finds (ZH)

Marine Le Pen would win France’s 2027 presidential election against every major rival now being measured, according to a major survey by Elabe published on August 29 for BFMTV and La Tribune Dimanche.

France elects its president in two rounds: a crowded first round on April 18 cuts the field to the top two – no one will win outright – and the survivors meet again on May 2. Elabe has Le Pen at 34% to 35.5% in round one depending on who else runs, far clear of the pack, then beating every potential runoff opponent it tested. The new poll comes on the heels of a Nomura report which showed Le Pen with a commanding first-round lead.
The rest of the field is fighting over second place. Édouard Philippe, the former prime minister and the most plausible face of the post-Macron center, leads that pack at about 17% when he stands alone. Jean-Luc Mélenchon is on 14% to 14.5%, having lost his summer lift. Raphaël Glucksmann, now in the race, is between 11.5% and 14%. Gabriel Attal’s presence mainly splits the moderate vote.
According to the poll, here’s Le Pen:
• versus Philippe: 52.5% to 47.5%
• versus Attal or Glucksmann: 57% to 43%
• versus Mélenchon: 69.5% to 30.5%

For a generation, French presidential politics assumed a front républicain: a cross-party second-round squeeze that would keep the National Rally out of the Élysée. It elected Chirac 82-18 over her father in 2002 and Macron twice over her; yet the margin has narrowed every time. According to the Elabe poll, that squeeze is no longer automatic. Le Pen is not only first in April. She is ahead in May against every opponent Elabe put up. Even against Philippe, the closest of them, she leads by five points.
Le Pen’s popularity has perhaps been boosted by her status as a martyr – created by what some might consider establishment efforts to throw her off track. On July 7 the Paris court of appeal upheld her embezzlement conviction in the European Parliament assistants case. It shortened the ban on holding office enough for her to stand and imposed a year of house arrest with an electronic tag. Her appeal to the Cour de Cassation freezes that sentence while she campaigns. The court has said it aims to rule before the first round. A confirmed tag would not take her off the April ballot. It would frame the May runoff. Le Pen herself has said she could not campaign tagged – though sentence remission could free her by early 2027 either way. Jordan Bardella remains the party’s designated stand-in.
At the summer gathering of MEDEF (France’s main employers’ federation) at Roland-Garros on August 27 she set out a €125 billion savings path and a plan to let long-tenure workers retire at 60 to 62, costed at about €9 billion and described as a “societal choice.” French banks are still wary of financing National Rally campaigns. On these numbers, voters are less so.
Bond markets are pricing the wider strain – as French 10-year yields have been near 4.1%, their highest since late 2008. The extra yield over German Bunds is about 80 basis points, the wide end of a 59-to-85 range over the past year. That premium reflects a hung Assembly, a government that has already stumbled on the budget, a 2027 finance bill due in October that may not pass in ordinary form, a deficit still near 5% of GDP, and IMF debt figures already around 118.5% this year and through 120% in 2027.
The working rule of French politics was that Le Pen could reach the steps of the Élysée and not the door – but rules were made to be broken.

“Supreme Court Rule 5-4 to Eliminate Lawsuit Against White House Ballroom and National Defense Complex – Chief Justice Roberts Joined the Minority..”

• Supreme Court Rule 5-4 to Eliminate Lawsuit Against White House Ballroom (CTH)

Somehow Chief Justice John Roberts found that a single person who walks past the White House every month and doesn’t like the proposed appearance of the ballroom has some standing to sue and block construction. Go figure. Roberts also decided that the Obamacare mandate wasn’t a tax. Roberts joined with the minority DEI judges in his position. However, the majority decision was against the woman having standing to sue. Therefore, the lawsuit was dispatched and the building can continue.

SCOTUS BLOG – […] On Monday, a divided court granted the government’s request for a stay, permitting construction to move forward while the litigation continues in the lower court. The majority’s opinion focused primarily on its conclusion that the National Trust likely does not have standing to challenge the project. The trust had submitted a declaration from Alison Hoagland, a member who lives in Washington, D.C., and said that she visits the area where the White House is located approximately once per month.
Hoagland, who has “expertise in historic architecture,” claimed that the project caused “‘injuries’ to her ‘aesthetic, cultural, and historical interests’ because she finds the ‘scale,’ ‘height,’ and ‘massing’ of the government’s design distasteful.” But those are not the kind of “concrete” and specific injuries required to bring a lawsuit, the majority explained.
The majority also concluded that the government would be permanently harmed if Leon’s order were allowed to go into effect – another key criterion in determining whether to grant emergency relief. Among other things, it noted, senior government officials “attest[] that constructing something approximating the height and mass of the intended above-ground ballroom is ‘crucial’ to the security of the below-ground military installation.”
In his six-page dissent, which Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined, Roberts countered that “[a] historic preservationist such as Hoagland can be aesthetically injured in a concrete, particularized way by the transformation of a historic building that she frequently enjoys, just as,” based on prior court precedent, “an environmentalist can sustain a concrete, particularized aesthetic injury from the extinction of a particular animal or the transformation of a particular forest or river that he regularly enjoys.” Roberts ended the opinion by quoting Winston Churchill, who said that “[w]e shape our buildings, and afterwards our buildings shape us.” “All the more reason,” according to Roberts, “to ensure that those responsible follow the rules in deciding what to tear down and what to build up at the People’s House.”

President Trump – “I am pleased to report that the United States Supreme Court has just ruled in favor of the Ballroom/Military Complex being built without any further contingency, doubt, or threat. We are living in the Golden Age of America, and this Building will be one of the Greatest ever constructed in Washington, D.C. When completed in the Summer of 2028, the magnificent Ballroom and Military Complex will be something that the entire Country is very proud of. The Project, despite the baseless lawsuit brought by the so-called National Trust for Historic Preservation of the United States, which is not in any way affiliated with the United States Government, is under budget and ahead of schedule. The Ballroom is totally funded by Great Patriots and Corporations and, therefore, is a Gift — At no cost to the American Taxpayer. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
President DONALD J. TRUMP

“She asserts that having to view the finished ballroom the government is constructing would cause her to suffer “injuries” to her “aesthetic, cultural, and historical interests” because she finds the “scale,” “height,” and “massing” of the government’s design distasteful.”

• Eye of the Beholder: Aesthetic Injury and the White House Ballroom (Turley)

The Administration won a major victory before the Supreme Court this week, securing a 5-4 decision allowing the resumption of construction of the new White House ballroom. Notably, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a dissent with his three liberal colleagues to oppose the move. The case turns on the standing of challengers to bring the case. However, as a torts professor, what intrigued me was what the case says about aesthetic injuries.

In torts, I teach aesthetic nuisance cases where courts tend to reject claims of injury due to eyesores and blight. Such claims are disfavored in both codes and cases: “Things merely disagreeable, however, which simply displease the eye or offend the taste, or shock an oversensitive or fastidious nature, no matter how irritating or unpleasant, are not nuisances.” 81 N.Y. Jur. 2d Nuisances § 17 (2014).
As one court ruled in Missouri in Ness v. Albert, 665 S.W.2d I (Mo. Ct. App. 1983):“Aesthetic considerations are fraught with subjectivity. One man’s pleasure may be another man’s perturbation…Judicial forage into such a nebulous area would be chaotic. Any imaginary good from doing so is far outweighed by the lurking danger of unduly circumscribing inherent rights of ownership of property and grossly intimidating their lawful exercise.” The decision in National Park Service, et al. v. National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States raises a parallel issue on standing. At issue is the right of a private group to stop a major construction project based on claims that the ballroom is oversized and obnoxious to some.
The Court has long maintained a demanding standing doctrine under Article III of the Constitution, requiring a showing of an “injury in fact” that is based on the “invasion of a legally protected interest.” Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U. S. 555, 560 (1992). That requires an injury that is “(a) concrete and particularized . . . and (b) actual or imminent.” The claim, upheld by the D.C. Circuit, is based primarily on the eyesore injury of one person who would have to walk by the structure:
“To establish its standing to bring this case, the Trust relies on a declaration from a single of its members, Alison K. Hoagland. Hoagland says she lives in Washington, D.C., and expects to visit the neighborhood around the White House “about once a month.” App. to Application 73a–74a. She asserts that having to view the finished ballroom the government is constructing would cause her to suffer “injuries” to her “aesthetic, cultural, and historical interests” because she finds the “scale,” “height,” and “massing” of the government’s design distasteful. Id., at 75a. On the strength of that declaration, the Trust contends, it has Article III standing to challenge the East Wing project.”
The per curiam opinion rejects the aesthetic injury at the base of the standing claim. The majority notes the importance of the project, including security elements such as the bunker below the ballroom. It then states: Meanwhile, on the other side of the ledger and against these harms, the only harm the Trust claims is the offense one of its members will suffer from having to view a structure of the “scale,” “height,” and “massing” the government intends…These harms and equities are not nearly in equipoise.
The size of the ballroom has drawn criticism from many, including many who agree with the President that a ballroom has long been needed. Architects associated with the project demurred as the President demanded a large structure. However, the question is whether that injury alone can sustain judicial review. The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that an eyesore is no injury when it comes to Article III standing.

Why do I think he must be 120 years old? He’s been there forever. And a day.

• Wolf Blitzer’s Trump Mail-In Voting Lie Blows Up in His Face (Margolis)

On Friday, Wolf Blitzer decided it was his job to help Democrats lie about President Donald Trump. At least this time, he was forced to issue a correction.Blitzer made a blatantly false claim during Friday’s episode of The Situation Room, when he sat down with Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) to discuss a multi-state Democrat lawsuit fighting President Donald Trump’s March executive order meant to ensure only eligible citizens can vote by mail.

It started when Spanberger, without any evidence, accused the Trump administration of trying to intimidate voters into staying home. “The continued attacks that we’re seeing from the Trump administration is really just an effort to get people fearful, to get people to stay home, and, in many cases, to eliminate what is a valid, safe, secure way for people to be able to have their voices heard and to vote,” she said.That’s when Blitzer decided to imply that Trump’s order would impact the military. “And in Virginia, you have a lot of military personnel who totally rely on mail-in ballots if they want to be able to express their opinions,” he told her.
“That’s true,” Spanberger said, even though it wasn’t. “It’s members of the military service, of our diplomatic service, intelligence services, people serving overseas in service to our country who get their ballots mailed to them at the various postings throughout the world.” Now, one of two things happened here. Either Spanberger and Blitzer were legitimately clueless about the facts, or they knew the facts and just decided to push falsehoods anyway. Dare to guess which it is? There’s no excuse for either. Spanberger is part of a lawsuit fighting the order, yet clearly doesn’t understand what the order does. Blitzer, as a member of the media, should have known better.
Trump signed the executive order Blitzer lied about on March 31, 2026, and it has been picked apart, litigated, and debated in public ever since. There was plenty of time to get the facts straight before going on television and telling however many viewers CNN still has that Trump was coming for military ballots. Blitzer didn’t bother. He repeated a scare story handed to him by a Democrat governor, let her validate it, and let it sit there unchallenged for three days until he finally walked it back.
On Monday, Blitzer had to issue a “quick note of clarification,” which is CNN-speak for “we got caught.” “We discussed legal challenges to the Trump administration’s directives for the Postal Service on mail-in voting,” Blitzer said. “A comment I made suggested that U.S. military and overseas voters’ ballots would be impacted by these directives. I want to be clear right now: Those ballots are exempt from the Postal Service’s new rules implementing the president’s March executive order.”
He added, “Those groups are covered under the Uniformed and Overseas Absentee Voting Act [UOCAVA], just to be specific on that point.”Blitzer’s correction came only after the false claim had already served its purpose: feeding viewers a panic narrative about Trump and mail-in voting. By the time the correction was made, it barely even mattered. Military and overseas voters remain protected under UOCAVA, and the new Postal Service rules expressly exempt their absentee ballots. CNN should explain how such a basic fact escaped a network that calls itself the “most trusted name in news.”

Now count the whole country.

• 400,000 California Voters Didn’t Provide Any ID at Registration (Salgado)

Because the state of California allows people to register online without providing any proof of identity, anyone could register to vote and under any name. Hundreds of thousands of people have done just that, and it once again raises the question of just how solid Democrat control in California would be without fraud.

Bill Essayli, first assistant U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, just arrested a Honduran national who illegally registered to vote in California. But it is incredibly easy to do; anyone, indeed, could do so as long as he or she has a fake address ready and checks the options for no ID and no Social Security. Apparently, almost half a million people have taken advantage of this scam.

California currently provides an option to register to vote while simply checking boxes that say you do not have an ID or Social Security number pic.twitter.com/s0Zvt5o5NF
— Catherine Salgado (@CatSalgado32) August 29, 2026

In the clip below, Fox News co-anchor Bill Hemmer talks with Essayli about Darwin Rivera Flores, a “noncitizen born in Honduras, and you at DOJ were able to get your hands on his voter registration forms.” Last year, Rivera “falsely claimed to be a U.S. citizen. He checked the box attesting he’s a U.S citizen born in the United States; he signed it under penalty of perjury,” Hemmer went on. “Bill, in California, there’s no one checking this, right? Entirely the honor system.”
Essayli confirmed that and continued, “This case really highlights the vulnerability in California’s voter rules. They basically allow anybody to register to vote on the honor system. There’s nobody in government that is checking to confirm you’re a citizen, and in fact, in this case, he, on the form, [put] down a California driver’s license and a Social Security [number], which he had, because he has a visa, [but] that does not prove you’re a citizen. And according to the Secretary of State, they say at least half a million people don’t even provide that information when they register to vote.” In his post, Essayli put the number more precisely at 400,000.

California does NOT check if you’re a citizen when you register to vote. It’s based on the honor system. This allows people like this defendant to easily register to vote and participate in our elections. According to @CASOSVote, approx. 400k registered to vote without providing…
— F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) August 31, 2026

California allows a crazy number of IDs as proof for registering to vote, including health club memberships, welfare checks, senior citizen cards, and drug prescriptions. But 400,000 voters didn’t even provide that much.
Registered Republican Spencer Pratt ought to have advanced to the general election for the Los Angeles mayoral race. Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton has rapidly closed the gap between him and Democrat Xavier Becerra in the polls. And there are still enclaves of Republicans throughout the state of California. But so long as Democrats can vote-harvest from homeless people, encourage illegal aliens to vote, and “count” for several weeks after Election Day, we can be sure no GOP candidate will ever win a major race in the state again. Of course Democrats don’t want to audit their voter rolls or require proof of ID to register and vote in the state of California. That could upset their whole insurance plan for staying in power.
After all, why worry about audits and reforms if you know your candidates could win honestly? The only reason for fighting federal reforms tooth and nail is if election officials and other politicians know perfectly well that their elections are compromised.

“… it will never be like the U.S. for one simple reason: it doesn’t have the guts or the will.”

• EU Can’t Raid Europeans’ Savings Accounts, and It Drives them Nuts (O’Brien)

When it comes to business and investment, the European Union (EU) thinks it can be like the U.S. It wants to be like the U.S., and it’s actively trying to be like the U.S. But it will never be like the U.S. for one simple reason: it doesn’t have the guts or the will.

The contrast between Europe’s risk-averse business culture and the American winner-take-all culture was on display last week when the president of the European Commission (EC), Ursula von der Leyen, delivered remarks at the annual French Entrepreneurs Conference. She’s not happy that, according to her, Europeans are keeping a collective 10 trillion euros in their bank accounts and not investing that money in European startups and other companies.
“In Europe, we have no shortage of technology or savings,” von der Leyen said. “But we still lack sufficient capacity to develop European companies on a large scale. Too many projects are stalled because the initial investment is too risky, demand is too uncertain or capital is too expensive. Our companies know how to start in Europe. But they also need to be able to grow here.” The EU president said that European startups tend to go outside of Europe for financing, and this is where she says, “They shift their center of gravity. Or they are bought out.”
I’m going to borrow a better description of von der Leyen from my colleague, Stephen Green, who calls her a “Euro-Scold,” which is so apt. So yeah, the Euro-Scold said the EU cannot finance the entrepreneurial growth with public funds alone. She said that Europeans have savings, quite a bit, actually, and she wants to get her hands on it. But regretfully for her and for her globalist allies, it’s not that easy. It seems that you can’t just raid people’s bank accounts in Europe if you want that money, at least not yet. That doesn’t prevent her, however, from lusting after that money, coveting it, and seeing it as just lying there unused in bank accounts.
The owners of those accounts may not see it that way. They may see those savings accounts as a safe haven from the likes of her and so many others whom they know could burn through 10 trillion euros pretty quickly and still have nothing to show for it. “Europe must now to put these savings to work for their companies,” she added. “This is the objective of the Economic and Investment Union. We have put forward proposals on securitization, investment by banks and insurance companies, and the integration and supervision of our markets. Together, these measures could unlock up to 470 billion euros in additional investment.”
https://twitter.com/coinbureau/status/2094655132747321387?s=20
I’m not sure about you, but ever since the COVID pandemic, any time I hear from this Euro-Scold and the globalists on the other side of the pond, I find myself immediately trying to read between the lines and looking for the secret word sequence where she introduces the Fourth Reich or some other. That’s not the case here. If her jargon sounds like jargon, it’s because that’s what it is. It’s neat-sounding terminology to mask the cultural impotence that is the European business climate, which can’t get its mind off of those 10 trillion euros it wants so badly.
Just in the way the EU is framing all of this, the culture is very top-down. The agenda is set by the government, not the marketplace, and that represents all the difference. In America, the entrepreneurial spirit is marked by a thriving private investment marketplace. In Europe, they like to talk about uses for the invested funds. In America, we talk about opportunity for investors to grow their money through the best possible return on investment (ROI).
These are two completely different mindsets, and the difference between the two says everything about why Europe is so terrible at fostering business and economic growth.What the Euro-Scold and her friends understand is that they’re not set up at the moment to give Europeans incentive to invest at scale in European ventures. They’ve come to realize that they simply don’t have the kind of investment infrastructure that incentivizes individual Europeans to invest.
Americans are different. It’s in this country’s DNA to try new things, to take risks, to innovate, to invent, to sometimes fail, to get back up, and to start over – all with as little government involvement as possible.
We love our stories of companies like Apple starting in Steve Jobs’ parents’ garage. We love it when we see Elon Musk make a ton of money and then gamble it all on multiple companies, including Tesla and SpaceX, to really blow expectations away and change the world. Americans don’t need a government to incentivize them into investing in these world-changing companies. The default impulse in America is for large swaths of potential investors to compete against each other to get in on some of that action.
Our markets are vibrant and exciting, sometimes too exciting, but still, they are nothing like the lukewarm European startup climate. Individual Americans, through their 401(k) plans at work, are collectively invested in mostly American companies to the tune of $10 trillion. IRA accounts represent another $18 trillion. Americans invested directly in mutual funds total close to $6 trillion. All U.S. retirement assets total more than $47 trillion, and that doesn’t even touch on the sheer level of individual investing that happens on a daily basis on Wall Street.
Metaphorically speaking, while American entrepreneurialism has been rockin’ and rollin’ for well over 100 years, the EU can’t decide whether it wants one lump of sugar or two in its afternoon tea, right before it takes its afternoon nap. And so, the Euro-Scold is seeking baby steps in trying to gently nudge Europeans to move chunks of their money from the safety of savings accounts to the risky world of startup funding. Good luck with that.
[..]

EU President Ursula von der Leyen believes that Europeans are not saving money correctly.

She wants to control how Europeans are allowed to save their money.

The European Commission head stated that about €10 trillion in household savings are currently sitting in bank… pic.twitter.com/A4q4sBtrtN
— Wall Street Mav (@WallStreetMav) August 31, 2026

It’s his identity. His Canadian followers demand he defeats Trump.

• Carney Picked a Trade War With Trump—But Why? (Victor Davis Hanson)

Canada, everybody likes Canada. Come on. We all have—I have a brother-in-law who’s Canadian and a very nice person. But there’s three things to remember about Canada, this dispute. Number one are the issues, and they’re real. Number two is the timing. Why now? And number three, why does Mark Carney seem so angry?

He’s not a Stephen Harper, that wonderful prime minister that I think all of us on the conservative side, but all Americans in general, really admired. And he’s not Brian Mulroney, whom I admired, who just passed away not too long ago. So there’s three issues. There’s Carney, there’s the timing, and there’s the problem. The problem is that Canada pretty much got into a habit the last few years of running up a $50 billion to $70 billion surplus with the United States. Not as bad as Mexico, but under Donald Trump’s vision of symmetry, he wanted to address it.
And what made it egregious is we had a North American Free Trade Association, which was supposed to eliminate the need for tariffs and taxes on imported and exported goods because there would be fair dealing and there would not be differences very much. What Ross Perot… Remember he said that, that huge sucking sound of jobs—the sucking sound … and money. Yeah. That wasn’t gonna happen, we were told by [Bill] Clinton and [Al] Gore. And it did, and Mexico had a $200 billion. And the weird thing is, we told Mexico, “You’re not going to get Chinese cheap dump parts and assemble them and be the gateway for China to evade tariffs, to get, undercut our jobs.”
And they said, “Okay, we won’t do it.” Then we said, “We’re going to tax, we’re gonna start your remittances at 1%, $65 billion …” And we said that because we had 30 million illegal immigrants, mostly from Latin America and Mexico, who were largely recipients in some fashion of American largesse: housing, education, food, health care subsidies. We’re not gonna pay that and free them free cash to become the largest source of foreign exchange in Mexico, which we are.
Jack Fowler: Money, that probably had not been taxed in the U.S. either.
Victor Davis Hanson: No. No. And never had. It was probably cash. Then we tried to tell them about the cartels, and the point is, we were making progress, but not so much with Canada. They kept running this surplus. And then we said there were other peripheral issues. You promised to meet your NATO goals, and you never did. Last year they may have done it, but they may have done it by bookkeeping that counted salaries and infrastructure rather than just militarily strict budgeting.
And if they did, it was like 1.98%, 2.01% of GDP. So they were reliant on America’s nuclear shield and protection, and nobody in their right mind in America ever thought that if the Russians or the Chinese or the North Koreans threatened Canada, they would not be protected by us, either through anti-ballistic missile systems or forward … And they have no military. I think they have 79 jets that are functional. Saudi Arabia and the UAE and Kuwait have 300. Israel has 400.
Jack Fowler: And their landmass just begs to have broader coverage.
Victor Davis Hanson: So the issue was Trump said, “Let’s reopen negotiation.” They were all set. They agreed on everything. And by the way, it only affected 5% of all of the total amount. And he said through his agents, Howard Lutnick and the others, “If you do what Mexico is doing and you import cheap aluminum and steel from China that does not have a market economy, then you’re breaking the understanding because you are assembling things in cars and autos and sending them here that are not solely Canadian-made.
“And you’re doing it at the bequest of China. And number two, you are telling all of our social media companies, Meta and sales companies that are online, Amazon, Google, Twitter,” the old Twitter, X, excuse me. “You’re telling them they have to pay 5% so that they don’t smother Canadian culture just off the top of all their revenues, hundreds of, I don’t know what it was, hundreds of millions of dollars. Why are you picking on these companies? And this is in addition to any other import fees or anything.
“We don’t do that with yours. When I read the National Post, the government doesn’t say to the National Post, ‘You are influencing American public opinion and you’re stifling our culture, so we need to tax you 5%.’” So that was the issue. And the other issue was that after a certain percent, tariffs went up 250% on dairy and farm products to Canada. And Canada said they were supporting independent entrepreneurial family farms. But like everything Carney says, it’s not accurate.
If you’re a Canadian farmer or you’re a Canadian egg producer, whatever, you get an allotment from the government. You can’t just go out and start something, just like you can’t set up an X-ray or a CT center. Everything is controlled. So the idea that the United States was gonna drive you out, maybe it could hurt you if we ever got up to the 250. They said, “It’s 250%” but we never really charge you.” And we said, “We never really charge you because all of our companies, when they meet your little quota, they can’t send anymore because it’ll be up to 250%, so they self-restrict it.” So that was the situation. Carney then blew up and said, “We’re not going to let the United States destroy our sovereignty and tell us who we have to trade with.”
Subtext: If we want to help communist China dump product in the United States by assembling it into our automobiles, trucks, etc., at cheap stuff, which even our steel and aluminum people don’t want, and our companies and unions want to agree with the Americans and restrict it, we’re gonna walk out. And more importantly, if you don’t wanna pay, then you’re stifling the French language. So it was all misdirection, number one, and it didn’t really make that much difference because, as I said, it was only a tariff. So why did he blow up?
[..]
Yeah. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Exactly. And there are key Senate races in where? Maine, right on the border, Michigan, right on the border, and Wisconsin. And so, what Carney was trying to do was to get people in the United States sympathetic to Canada, and here’s Donald Trump again. And Donald Trump helped fuel that when he said he was gonna rename Lake Ontario, Lake America. Lake Ontario’s 55% of its mass is in Canada. I think most Americans don’t care that it’s called Lake Ontario. This was the way he was trolling them. But the Left went crazy as if they never rename things, which they rename everything.
So my point is, he took two issues that were not really issues. He blew them up, he stormed out, and he did this to tell the Canadian electorate, “Don’t try to break away or flirt with America or flirt with yourself as an independence providence—whatever it is, ’cause I am standing up for Pan-Canadianism against the Americans.” And then he was telling the Americans in Michigan, in Maine, and in Wisconsin, “Your prices are higher? It’s because your stupid president has tariffs and went after us.” What he didn’t really tell them is that, when Alberta’s, I guess it was Mr. Ford, said we might cut off oil exports, the Americans shrugged their shoulders and said:
“Go ahead. We’re the largest producer of oil and gas in the world. The Persian Gulf is settling down. Price of oil is going down. But more importantly, you have a heavy crude sulfurous product. Your own provinces will not let you send it easily on pipelines to transport centers where you can send it to China. You send it right across the border to the United States. “We refine it, and guess what? Natural gas, in the case of natural gas, you can’t even send it to Montreal through your own territory because you have these provincial restrictions, environmental nuttiness. So we take your natural gas and we pass it along and plug it into our pipelines, and then it goes back up to Montreal.”
They didn’t even know that when they walked out.

I like Sundance, obviously. But he shouldn’t claim Musk is wrong for something he said 15 years ago. BVD was in a very different situation back then.

“China even goes so far as to fund alarmism research about climate change because they are making money selling carbon credit certificates..”

“BYD is, in essence, not a car per se’, but a mechanism to generate a carbon credit certificate that can be sold to other car companies.”

• BYD Inquires to Purchase Stellantis Auto Plant in Canada (CTH)

For about a year CTH has predicted Chinese auto manufacturers BYD and GEELY would take over shuttered auto plants in Canada. Specifically, six months ago, against the backdrop warning of Stellantis, Toyota and Honda telling the Canadian government that without the USMCA they would shift auto production to the USA, CTH predicted BYD and GEELY would make moves on those closed facilities. he move by China is easy to predict. Prime Minister Mark Carney has opened the door to Chinese EVs. It would be in Beijing’s best interest to retool and take control of closed plants to begin mass production in North America.

Chinese EV manufacturing in Canada serves two purposes. First, they would not be limited in production to the cars that remain in Canada as part of the agreement. Factually, China would use their Canadian footprint as an export hub into Europe and save money on current distribution. Remember, Europe is losing their auto manufacturing base to China and Germany is laying off 100,000+ auto workers. Second, the appearance of Chinese auto manufacturing in North America would put pressure on the United States to permit their cheap EVs to enter the market.
Today Bloomberg is reporting exactly what we predicted. Chinese automaker BYD (Build Your Dream) is asking local officials about the currently idled Stellantis auto plant. Things are following a very predictable timeline.
BLOOMBERG – Chinese carmaker BYD Co. inquired about taking over an idled Stellantis NV plant in the Toronto suburbs, according to a local politician, signaling possible global interest in Canadian auto hubs in the midst of a trade battle with the US. Patrick Brown, the mayor of Brampton, Ontario, said BYD approached him about six months ago to talk about making buses at the factory. Stellantis had been retooling the plant to manufacture the Jeep Compass, but the company halted that plan last year when the US adopted a policy of tariffs on foreign autos.
Brown said he also received inquiries from Leapmotor International, a joint venture between Zhejiang Leapmotor Technology Co. and Stellantis, as well as from an Italian automaker. Bloomberg News reported in April that Stellantis was discussing options for building electric vehicles in Canada with Leapmotor. Most of the vehicles Canada produces are exported to the US, but the trade war and the lack of a new product earmarked for the 40-year-old factory have clouded the future for thousands of people who work there. Unifor, the union representing those workers, said this month that Stellantis is considering selling the plant. (read more)

I went to Russia in 2024, because what I was hearing in western media about the sanctions did not align with what I was seeing from reports inside Russia. Before I went into Russia, I spent several weeks in Northern and Eastern Europe visiting various institutions, reading material and checking to see how systems in Europe were engaging with commerce given the Russian sanctions. It wasn’t very exciting work, and sometimes I literally just sat in the lobbies of banks listening to conversations.
When I went into Russia (April, May, June and July ’24) I noticed many of the “Uber cars” were BYD brand, Chinese electric vehicles. It made sense given two years of existing sanctions and few cars from Europe or America available except under costly brokerage fees for acquisition. The Russians like the Geely brand better, but BYDs are much cheaper. A brand new BYD costs around $5,000 to $10,000 USD, in some places even less. Then later I noticed even more of these BYD cars in Europe. I started to pay attention to them and saw them everywhere.
When I went back into Russia a year later in 2025, there was a very noticeable increase in BYD cars. It was crazy, they were everywhere. My travels also took me to southeast Asia and again those damned BYD’s were all over the place. In Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam, these BYD’s were everywhere, maybe even 30% of total vehicle traffic at times – most certainly well over 50% of all EVs – and there are digital billboards for “Build Your Dream” (BYD) all over the place throughout Asia.
Australia is stocked full of those things, and the middle east, yup, even there too. It became increasingly weird to notice. So many were visible I was wondering how the heck China can mass produce and ship this many cheap EVs so fast. Then as serendipity would have it, I ran into a Chinese guy, professionally an actuary, in a hotel restaurant. He explained to me that China produces the BYD not to make money from the automobile, but rather to sell the carbon credits the automobile generates within the auto industry.
The actual value to Beijing is in selling the carbon credit worthiness to various automakers who are fined or penalized by their government for producing gasoline powered vehicles. BYD is, in essence, not a car per se’, but a mechanism to generate a carbon credit certificate that can be sold to other car companies. It’s the carbon credit certificate that generates the revenue, not the sale of the vehicle. As my dinner guest explained, the auto insurance industry was having fits about this because the actuaries couldn’t accurately put a correct figure on the cost of the insurance warrantee within the industry (that’s another story).
The bottom line is that China is manufacturing a product to create a carbon credit certificate in response to the demand for carbon credits from all the world auto-makers. Any nation that has a penalty or fine attached to their climate goals is a customer. Those are nations with fines or quotas associated with the production of gasoline powered engines if the auto company doesn’t hit the legislated target for sales of electric vehicles.
In essence, EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car companies buy Chinese car company carbon credits, to avoid the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN fines. The Chinese then use the carbon credit revenue to subsidize even lower priced Chinese EVs to the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car markets, thereby undercutting the EU/AU/CA/RU/ASEAN car companies that also produce EVs.
Big Panda brilliantly exploits the ridiculous pontificating climate scam and has an interest in perpetuating -even emphasizing- the need for the EU/AU/RU/ASEAN countries to keep pushing their climate agenda. China even goes so far as to fund alarmism research about climate change because they are making money selling carbon credit certificates on the back end of the scam to the western fear mongers. This is friggin’ brilliant.
My dinner buddy was in the business of identifying the cost/benefit equation between the climate change fines and the prices Big Panda could charge for the carbon credit certificates. If, as an example, Brussels dropped the quotas for EVs, China would need to lower the price for the carbon credit certificates. So, Beijing wants Brussels to make sure they don’t drop the quotas. See how that works?
The climate change alarmists are helping China’s economy by pushing ever escalating fear of climate change. You just cannot make this stuff up. What does the outcome look like? Well, in this example we see thousands of unsold BYDs piling up in countries that emphasize climate regulations with no restrictions on the import of EVs (which most don’t even manufacture), which is almost every country. Big Panda doesn’t care about the car itself; they care about generating the carbon credit certificate to sell in the various carbon exchanges.
Put this context to the recent announcement by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney about his trade deal with China to accept 49,000 EVs this year. Prime Minister Carney bragged about getting the Chinese to agree to only super low prices for the Canadian market. Mark Carney was very proud of his accomplishment to get much lower priced vehicles for Canadian EV purchasers. No doubt Big Panda left the room laughing as soon as Carney made his grand announcement.
1. China sells EV’s in Canada, creating credits available on the carbon exchange scheme. Europe et al will purchase the carbon credits because Bussels has fines against EU car companies.
2. With a foothold already established in Europe, China will then take the money generated by the carbon credit purchases and lower the prices of the Chinese EV cars sold in Canada.
It’s gets funnier.
3. Carney bragged about forcing China to only sell low price EV’s as part of the trade agreement. The low price of the EV’s in Canada will be subsidized by Europe. China doesn’t pay or lose a dime.
But wait….
4. Carney can’t do anything about the scheme he has just enmeshed Canada into, because Canada has a Carbon Credit exchange in law.
Big Panda wins again.

[…] In a statement published Thursday, BYD said sales of its battery-powered cars rose nearly 28% to 2.26 million units.
Musk openly laughed at the mention of BYD while being interviewed on Bloomberg TV in October 2011. He said he did not see the company as a competitor to Tesla, adding: “I don’t think they have a great product.” Meanwhile, Tesla said Friday it delivered 1.64 million vehicles in 2025. [SOURCE]
Elon thinks BYD are building cars. They aren’t.

Elon Musk today at the G20 Summit:

“AI will increase the global economy by 20% to 30%, or about $20 trillion to $30 trillion per year. By the end of next year, AI could do anything digital, and humans may no longer be able to compete with it in writing software at all.” pic.twitter.com/LxxJmZ3ISe
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) September 1, 2026

Tesla’s FSD just officially hit 14 Billion cumulative miles driven on FSD (Supervised)

Tesla FSD (Supervised) improves road safety by ~7x vs the average U.S. driver

And the scale is even accelerating fast

13 billion miles → early August
14 billion miles → only ~24 days later… pic.twitter.com/18NF2NV7ma
— X Freeze (@XFreeze) August 31, 2026

Tesla has released new footage showing the Model S and Model X production lines being dismantled at Fremont to make room for Optimus.

Once fully operational, the new lines are expected to have capacity for 1 million Optimus robots per year. pic.twitter.com/Y91Lv0zoyV
— Humanoid Intelligence (@HumanoidsHQ) August 31, 2026

The floodgates have officially OPENED.

Tesla has added 45 Cybercabs to the Robotaxi fleet today alone. 314 Robotaxis are now registered in Texas.

• 45 Cybercabs
• 269 Model Ys

Elon wasn’t kidding when he said Tesla was about to flood Austin with Cybercabs. Get me to… pic.twitter.com/iyIFKFJFxB
— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) August 31, 2026

Today 45
Soon it will be 100
After a while we'll see 500
Later a first 1,000 a day.

At that point people will stop looking because the exponential curve is visible for the last one.

The Cybercab production capacity is 125,000 units per year as of now but will increase over time… pic.twitter.com/cpacjklC3N
— Alex (@alex_avoigt) August 31, 2026

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

Debt Rattle September 1 2026

Sep 012026

September 1, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 10:29 am Finance Tagged with: Canada, Clyburn, court packing, Holocaust, Iran, Jews, Muslim, WWII 28 Responses »

Henri Matisse Le Bonheur de Vivre 1906

• Trump Says Iran’s Regime Killed 100,000 Freedom Protesters (Salgado)

• The Left Would Hate for You to Know These Things About Trump (Margolis)

• Penn Professor Demands Politicians Commit to Packing the Supreme Court (Turley)

• Oh, Canada (James Howard Kunstler)

• Is the Muslim World Rising (Paul Craig Roberts)

• The True Story of World War II (Paul Craig Roberts)

• The Long Shadow of Judge Indira Talwani (Turley)

• Clyburn Calls for Packing the Court with “Baker’s Dozen” to Flip Cases (Turley)

We Knew They Were Snakes When We Let Them In pic.twitter.com/zFusPWjA49
— A Man Of Memes (@RickyDoggin) August 31, 2026

https://twitter.com/KirkLubimov/status/2094455512821879045?s=20 https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2094225618443682274?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2094139964439376307?s=20

Broken up work day today. Had to go to hospital for tests. The Matisse must make up for all that’s off.

• Trump Says Iran’s Regime Killed 100,000 Freedom Protesters (Salgado)

The Iranian regime’s massacre of its own people who want a freer and more democratic country has now climbed to 100,000, according to President Donald Trump. If the genocidal Iranian regime falls, which we all pray will happen in the near future, Trump seems to be contemplating Nuremberg-style trials, which is something we haven’t done for mass murderers in far too long. The president posted on TruthSocial on August 31 about the runaway inflation in Iran and how many freedom protesters have died in government crackdowns since the initial January slaughter that left 50,000 dead.

“Iran is officially a Failed Nation. IT IS DEAD!” Trump began in his usual exaggerative style. “They have no Navy, they have no Air Force, they have no currency, they are not paying their soldiers or police, Inflation is at 300%, and their leadership is in total disarray and incapable of properly representing the country. The only thing they have is FAKE NEWS from the USA, a willingness to kill their protesters (now over 100,000 people dead. They must be tried for war crimes against humanity!), and a good line of ‘BULLS**T.’ Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Over the weekend, the Trump administration ordered strikes on Larak Island, where the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had missile launchers. Unfortunately, the IRGC still seems to have enough missiles left to continue firing at American troops.

"U.S. forces in Jordan are under missile attack."

FOX News' @TreyYingst reports Iran is attacking U.S. bases in Jordan in response to American strikes on Iranian missile launchers on Larak Island.

"There are efforts underway to shoot down this incoming fire," Yingst reports, as… pic.twitter.com/mTh23RgmbK
— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 30, 2026

The people of Iran have shown their courage in the face of death all throughout this year in a way that history should immortalize. But tragically, until and unless the United States and Israel eliminate the rest of the top ayatollahs who indiscriminately kill Israelis, Americans, Persians, and Arabs alike, the slaughter will never end, and regime change will never happen. It is unfortunate that none of the weaponry the Biden administration abandoned to the Taliban in Afghanistan will be available for the Persians to take on their own terrorist government. I would much, much rather that the Persians who are pro-American have it and overthrow a regime that never stops screaming “death to America” than that Afghani terrorists who hate us should have and use it.
Unfortunately, for some reason, American weapons never do seem to end up in the hands of people who are willing to further our interests. Then again, perhaps there is an alternative to Americans and Israelis taking out the murderous mullahs directly.
Perhaps the U.S. government could stop sending so many weapons to Ukraine, where so many men have died in a stalemate war, and smuggle them to the Kurds or the Persians. Four more Americans died recently in Iranian strikes. It’s time to stop that Iranian terrorism once and for all. And there is a whole army of Persians and Kurds just waiting for the weapons and the opportunity to do the job for us.

Not the Left, it’s the MSM that has made Trump a caricature.

• The Left Would Hate for You to Know These Things About Trump (Margolis)

The mainstream media have spent pretty much every moment since Donald Trump announced his candidacy for president of the United States portraying him as an evil, cruel, empathy-free tyrant who couldn’t manage a kind word for anyone outside his own family. Joe Biden practically built his entire 2020 campaign on that same premise, insisting that the election came down to character, and that Trump simply didn’t have it.

This is the same Joe Biden who spent years refusing to acknowledge his own granddaughter, Navy Roberts, the daughter Hunter Biden had with a former stripper. It’s the same Joe Biden who checked his watch through the dignified transfer ceremony for the 13 American troops killed in the terrorist bombing outside Kabul’s airport. And it’s the same Joe Biden who let the country believe he was sharp as ever while his own team quietly managed a cognitive decline he denied for years. But I digress.
Character, as it turns out, was never really the point. But two stories from a Newsmax podcast are the kind Democrats would rather nobody hear because they don’t fit the narrative they’ve been trying to sell to the public. The first comes from Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who sat down with Greta Van Susteren and described what happened after Trump invited him to Mar-a-Lago back in January 2025. “He invited me to have dinner at Mar-a-Lago back in January of 25, and I took a lot of s**t for that,” Fetterman said. “Why? I don’t understand.” But the big reveal came next.
“He also even checked in on my dad. My dad’s having a real difficult situation, health, about his heart, and he absolutely checked in on that,” Fetterman said. He added that he disagrees with the president plenty on policy, but on a personal level, “it’s been more than happy. “The private and the personal, at least in my experience, is very different,” Fetterman said. Van Susteren backed Fetterman up with a story of her own, one that goes back years before Trump ever ran for office. She recalled reporting on a struggling veteran and getting an unexpected phone call.
“Years ago, before he even ran for president, I was covering the story of this down-and-out soldier who had PTSD,” Van Susteren said. “I got a call from Trump asking me what his address was. I said, ‘I don’t know his address. Why?’ He said, ‘Because I want to help the guy.'” “I said, ‘Well, I don’t know.’ He said, ‘Tell you what, I’ll send you a check and you find him,’ so he hangs up the phone,” Van Susteren continued. “The next day I get a FedEx from Donald Trump with a personal check to the guy for $25,000.”
There’s a reason why Van Susteren considered it a big deal. “It’s not something Trump could write off on his taxes. It’s not something that was reported,” Van Susteren said. “He’s pretty gruff, often he says some pretty rough things and tweets some pretty rough things, but he’s got that side of him.” None of this fits the character that Democrats have long insisted was true.

“Carney increasingly reminds me of Fauci. He has that exact same air of technocratic infallibility. . . .” — Hans Mahncke on X

“Mark Carney has made himself a pain-in-the-ass for President Donald Trump.”

No, Trump got rid of one Trudy. He can take out any number of them.

• Oh, Canada (James Howard Kunstler)

You go for decades without even thinking of the place. The Great White North. Very polite people, somewhat Scottish, seems like. There’s poutine! Une invention Québécoise — an indigestible mélange of French fries, gravy, and cheese curds, like something you’d cook up at 4am after a toga party in a frat house. Ice hockey (of course, but was it necessary?) Polar bears. Puffins on the Labrador cliffs. Tar Sands. Plaid upholstery . . . .

Years ago, we used to go up there from college in the farthest reaches of upstate western New York just to get a half-fake buzz of being in “a foreign country.” Niagara Falls was like Times Square without the charm. Bunch of squalid wax museums and ashtray shoppes. Toronto was Rochester on steroids, beyond forgettable.
I once took a choo-choo train from Seattle to Vancouver just to take in the scenery along the Pacific Coast. Bald eagles galore all the way up feeding on stuff out in the Pacific tidal mud-flats. Got to Vancouver. They yanked me out of the customs line and stuffed me in a back office. A female immigration officer swaggered in, said they found a nine-year-old DUI conviction for me on some computer (well. . .. okay. . . a night of fishing with rum). Said she could keep me out of the country if she was in a bad mood. I couldn’t help wising off: “Nice to know Canadian immigration policy depends on your mood.” Whoops. They detained me for an extra two hours just to make me feel the pain. But I was eventually released into that boring city. Thank God for the Chinese restaurants.
And now. . . Mark Carney! He’s a beauty. A refined ectoplasmic manifestation of all the Globalist huggermugger working tirelessly to upend Western Civ. He has a weird glow of semi-transparency — not in the sense of revealing any truths, but more like you can partly see through him . . . he’s only half there . . . a ghost in the geopolitical machine.
More to the point, Mark Carney has made himself a pain-in-the-ass for President Donald Trump. On the surface, this US / Canada rift appears to be all about trade relations. Naw. It’s about Mark Carney being a tool for merry old England attempting to capture the resource base of northern North America to collateralize what little remains of the UK’s once-sprawling, now sinking, empire. England is not so merry these days. It has somehow managed to issue a fatwa on itself and entered a gruesome process of assisted economic and cultural suicide. You can’t even raise a British flag there anymore without risking weeks in the slammer. The home folks get stabbed and beheaded. It’s all blight, rape, kebabs, and hijabs over there. Not a good look if you still want to be that country you dimly remember.
Plus, they want to kick off a big war with Russia. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Really? Lacking much of a military, Ukraine was Britain’s tool for that. Trouble was the huge expense of that project. Thought they could work-around it by turning Ukraine into a money-laundry, washing, rinsing, and disbursing US-sourced funds to Mr. Zelenskyy, with giant kickbacks to the Democratic Party’s money apparatus. Worked nicely when the phantom “Joe Biden” haunted the White House. He and his sicko son, Hunter, were already in so deep in Ukraine since JB’s felonious veepdom that Mark Carney — then chief of the Bank of England — could hang the Bidens out to dry anytime, if required.
Lo, these many years, then, Britain and NATO have sponsored all that drone-making and missile-launching action from Ukraine deep into Russia — in case you wonder how Zelenskyy carries on this stupid war, considering there are no young men left in Ukraine eligible to reinforce the battle lines in Donbas. Britain and NATO probably also furnish the satellite targeting of Russian assets. You must doubt that the USA is involved in that anymore. Luckily, Mr. Putin has the Christian patience of a true saint.
Our president is sick of Ukraine and the festering geopolitical disease it has been infected with by our increasingly-former allies in Europe. NATO’s aim with Russia is exactly the same as Britain’s push in Canada — a resource grab for the failing nations of Europe, who are getting choked to death by Ursula von der Leyen and her EU flying monkeys. Germany, France, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain. . . all whirling around the drain. Our president sees all that. (You don’t need magic glasses.)
Maybe it’s time to just send the 82nd Airborne into Ottawa. Flight time: under two hours from Fort Bragg, NC. Drop them on Parliament Hill. Let them hang around a few hours. Then, declare the whole thing a gag and fly them home. It’d be worth it. Or maybe go in and snatch Mark Carney like we did Maduro. Stuff Carney in an adjoining cell at the MDC in Brooklyn. I’m sure the two could amuse each other, swap satisfying gripes and sob stories.
Really, why stop at just re-naming Lake Ontario. Take the whole darn thing like a pie that has been left on the windowsill too long. The Canadian people would get over it five minutes. Everything is easier in the USA. Running a company, especially. They could keep their poutine and their hockey, learn to have a little fun once in a while. Quebec could become a theme park (what else have they got going there?). No more tariffs to get hung about. Honk if you like the idea.

“Such an opportunity for Muslims has not existed for centuries ..”

• Is the Muslim World Rising (Paul Craig Roberts)

Recently there have been striking new developments that imply major changes in the correlation of forces. These developments have largely gone unacknowledged and their implications unexamined. I made the effort in online interviews on Dialogue Works and On Target. I will now attempt to do so in writing.

One of the developments is Iran’s defeat of US President Trump’s attack on Iran. Trump has been desperate to find a way out of the conflict without admitting defeat. His exit strategy is to redefine the conflict from a military one to an economic one and impose new economic sanctions on Iran and those who trade with Iran, while claiming that the Strait of Hormuz is an American territory through which is moving massive amounts of oil shipments. The combination of a redefined conflict with propaganda comprises Trump’s exit strategy.
Another development is the announcement of a mutual security agreement between Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. This development combines conventional military force with oil reserves and nuclear weapons and unifies three separate Muslim ethnicities in a strategic location with a population of 355,390,000 people. These are largely Sunni Muslims.
Another development is the announcement on Iranian news media that Iran, predominantly Shia, has been invited to join the alliance. It true, this would indicate that the schism between Sunni and Shia is breaking down. It would also mean a pact of four countries with 448,700,000 people, larger than the United States, with conventional and nuclear power, a large chunk of the world’s oil reserves, and control over the strategic oil waterways. It would be a bloc of strategic importance to Russia and China as the Muslim four country pact is located such that it protects Russian and Chinese interests. Such a pact could become a de facto alliance of 6 countries.
These developments, if real and not just words, signal the end of any pretense of American hegemony and Israel’s agenda of Greater Israel. Israel’s population of 10 million of which only 7.8 million are Jews is dwarfed by 448,700,000 Muslims. Moreover, the protection offered by the alliance would likely result in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen joining and the end of warfare stirred up by Washington among Muslims. Syria itself could be reconstituted, and Israel could be forced to give back enough of Palestine for a two-state solution to be possible.
Such an opportunity for Muslims has not existed for centuries and the possibility is so extraordinary that it seems likely to pass by due to stupidity, incompetence, and petty bickering. But if the opportunity is seized, the world has changed.
The only news I have of the Iranian response to the invitation is that Iran asked to see the details of the security agreement. Certainly Iran would want to know if the pact had any teeth or was just words, a bluff or an attempt to get attention. I know little of the content of the agreement, and I wonder at the absence of an explanation of its consequences. As it is announced, it is not secret, and you would think it would be of great interests to the world’s foreign policy analysts.
The report that Iran was invited to join came from Mehdi Rahimi, who heads Iran’s parliamentary news agency. However, I have not seen confirmations from the members of the pact or the Iranian executive branch that such an invitation has been issued. If no invitation has been issued, it raises the question whether the pact is an Israeli-American operation directed at Iran. If so, it seems that Trump would be more comfortable with the Iranian situation than he shows himself to be.
We have seen centuries of Muslim impotence due to their inability to unite. In the 21st century we have witnessed Washington destroy three Muslim countries for Israel–Iraq, Libya, and Syria–and attempt to destroy Iran, while Israel has completed its absorption of Palestine into Israel. Just the other day Israeli Finance Minister Smotrich announced that with the “Judaizing” of the remnants of the West Bank, there would now be new Jewish settlements in the Negev and in Galilee.
Possibly the Netanyahu coalition will be turned out in the upcoming election. Such a possibility could be heightened considerably should Iran receive and accept an invitation to join the Mecca pact, as it would show Israelis that the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel had no further prospect and that an accommodation must be arranged with the Muslim Middle East. If peace were to arrive in the Middle East, it could possibly arrive elsewhere.

“..it doesn’t seem to be correct that there was an over-arching official policy from Hitler to exterminate the Jews.”

• The True Story of World War II (Paul Craig Roberts)

[..] The Nuremberg Trials were a travesty of justice. The “trials” served to put all war crimes, including the Soviet ones, on the Germans. I exposed the criminality of the Nuremberg Trials in a previous article on this website. Kristallnacht was a Brownshirts operation. David Irving reports that when Hitler heard of it he was furious. Irving provides the actual documentation. But when I ask AI, the false answer I get is that “it was explicitly orchestrated by top Nazi leadership and approved by Hitler.” I trust David Irving, not a polluted AI data base containing a vast number of lies written by court historians.

Hitler disapproved of the SA (Brownhirts) and destroyed them. As for the Holocaust, Europe has laws prohibiting any examination of the alleged Holocaust. The Zionist allegations must be accepted irrespective of any evidence. This is very curious, because if the narrative is true scholarly investigation would support the narrative. Generally speaking, matters that cannot be investigated are matters that truth does not support.
David Irving reported that after a half century of research, he had not found one word of a Holocaust in any official documents in German, Israeli, Soviet, British, American official archives or in any memoirs, diaries, letters. He even offered a monetary prize to anyone who can offer him some evidence. If memory serves, neither Churchill’s nor Eisenhower’s memoirs mention a Holocaust.
Think about this for a minute. An operation as large as the alleged Holocaust would have required an organization with its own administration, with its own stationary, headquarters, insignia and uniform, but no signs of such an organization exists. It would have required enormous budget expenditures, but no signs of such a budget entry exist. In the last days of the war it would have required special fuel permission overriding the needs of the German Army, but no such orders exist.
Evidence is conclusive that the so-called “death camps” were in fact work camps where synthetic fuel and rubber were made for the German Army. In Germany all labor was valuable, including Jews, as the German work force had been severely reduced to provide the Eastern Front with troops attempting to stop the Soviet advance on Germany. The notion that six million highly valuable workers would be deprived the hard pressed German labor force is difficult to accept.
There is no doubt that Jews in National Socialist Germany suffered discrimination and harsh treatment, both official and ad hoc. Rightly or wrongly, Jews were associated with the internal revolution and Germany’s WW I defeat. Many members of the National Socialist Party advocated and acted against them. But it doesn’t seem to be correct that there was an over-arching official policy from Hitler to exterminate the Jews. David Irving documents occasions when Hitler orders that Jews are not to be harmed, and states that “the Jewish question” will be settled after the war. Hitler’s original plan was to deport them to Madagascar.
With the initial success of Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union, Hitler decided that he would send the Jews to the rump of Russia behind the Urals that he would leave for Stalin. This announcement resulted in Nazi organizations sending Jews into the occupied Russian territories in advance of the expected victory, for which the administrators of the territories had no provision. David Irving says he can document 200,000-300,000 Jews being executed despite Hitler’s orders to the contrary by administrators who had no place to put them. Irving condemns these executions.
The Waffen SS was a large military force of tank and infantry divisions fighting in German front lines. They were often used to open or close breaches in the lines of combat. They were not an organization for the extermination of Jews. As David Irving and others have reported, some 150,000 Germans of Jewish descent, some being full-blooded Jews, served in the Wehrmacht, many as officers including officers in the SS. The last commander of the Luftwaffe was Helmuth Wilberg, a German officer of Jewish descent.

“Talwani is viewed by many as a one-stop-shop judge for forum-shopping.”

• The Long Shadow of Judge Indira Talwani (Turley)

This week, the Trump administration found itself in a familiar position: facing an injunction from Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Indeed, it had just secured an order from the Supreme Court on its emergency docket lifting her earlier injunction on the U.S. Postal Service requiring voting lists to confirm U.S. citizenship.

The case against the executive order on mail-in ballots has reasonable arguments on both sides, although (as I have said previously) the challengers are likely to prevail in defeating the rule or at least delaying the policy until after the midterm elections. The Constitution gives states the primary responsibility over “the times, places, and manner of holding elections.”
However, the U.S. Postal Service is a federal agency, and the federal government does have a role in the funding and regulation of federal elections. More importantly, the Trump administration is arguing that it is not barring mail-in voting but merely imposing “modest informational requirements.” Non-citizens cannot vote in federal elections, and the new rule “does not displace a single state election law. And it need not and should not prevent a single voter from voting by mail.”
The controversy over Talwani is not necessarily the merits of her decision that the rule convenes the constitutional framework. Indeed, the Supreme Court did not rule on the merits and could well rule in favor of her interpretation. The controversy is the pattern of sweeping injunctions by Talwani and a few other judges.
Litigants have been accused of forum-shopping by going to liberal, Democratically appointed judges to prevent Trump policies from being implemented in a wide array of areas, including immigration, elections, reduction in government bureaucracies, and foreign aid.
Like her colleague in Boston, U.S. District Court Judge Brian Murphy, Talwani is viewed by many as a one-stop-shop judge for forum-shopping. Both have issued hair-trigger injunctions, and both have been repeatedly reversed.
Talwani was reversed on Aug. 24 for imposing an injunction against the mail-in balloting policy. Her injunction was taken to be premature and without a legal injury, since the administration had not issued a formal rule. The truth is, the challengers had her at hello. She did not wait for a showing of a cognizable injury before issuing another injunction, because the decision appeared made before the case hit her own docket.
Previously, Talwani showed the same inclination in other cases. For example, she issued an injunction against revoking the humanitarian parole program for hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Her order was lifted on appeal. She also issued an injunction to stop the Trump Administration from defunding Planned Parenthood. That order was also set aside on appeal.
Regardless of the outcome of this latest injunction, Talwani has offered the strongest case in favor of the expanded use of the emergency docket, also known as the “shadow docket.” Liberal law professors and litigants have bewailed the expanded use of this docket at the Supreme Court to resolve cases without the need for a long briefing and oral argument. However, judges like Talwani have created legitimate concerns over the use of the appellate system to slow or freeze new policies. This is why the “shadow docket” has become more prominent.
This year, confidential memoranda were leaked from the court on the use of the emergency docket and published by the New York Times. It was only the latest such strategic leak from a court that was once the paragon of confidentiality and civility.
The internal exchanges of the justices were illuminating as to the majority’s underlying reason for allowing this fast-track review. The immediate issue was a move by the Environmental Protection Agency to impose unlawful regulatory burdens on electric utilities despite a countervailing earlier ruling in Michigan v. EPA. Chief Justice Roberts believed (as did many) that the EPA was using the ongoing litigation to force utilities to spend billions of dollars to comply with new regulations that the Supreme Court had already rejected.
“In other words,” Roberts wrote, “the absence of stay allowed the agency to effectively implement an important program we held to be contrary to law.”
As with the national injunctions that plagued the Trump administration in its first year, this tactic was all too familiar. Litigants would go to liberal judges in Washington, Boston, and other blue cities to secure injunctions that would take years to fully litigate. That approach effectively allowed individual judges to pursue their own preferred policies or to prevent a president from carrying out promises made during an election. At most, the president might have a year left after these cases slogged through the conventional appellate process. It is an administrative version of the old adage that “justice delayed is justice denied.”
What concerned the justices was that many of these injunctions directly contravened earlier precedent, exposing the cynical purpose of these orders. For a president to be able to carry out major changes, he had to run a gauntlet of hundreds of judges, any one of whom could effectively negate reforms. In response, the Supreme Court ramped up the use of the emergency docket and cracked down on national injunctions, quickly reversing the rapidly increasing number of injunctions against the Trump administration.
With the midterm elections rapidly approaching, the odds favor challengers in either running out the clock or prevailing on the merits on the mail-in ballots. But Talwani and some other judges have reinforced suspicions of the Roberts court that some courts are willing allies of partisan groups in seeking to gum up the system.
Ironically, Roberts is one of the most likely conservative justices to be concerned with the Trump administration’s effort to force election integrity reforms on the states. Either way, it is the shadow of these judges, not the docket, that is casting the most ominous concern for many of the Supreme Court justices.

The only way they can win. Change the playing field.

• Penn Professor Demands Politicians Commit to Packing the Supreme Court (Turley)

University of Pennsylvania Professor Michael Mann is the Vice Provost for Climate Science, Policy, and Action and has pushed candidates to commit to major environmental reforms. Notably, he seemed to pivot in an interview with Peter Dominick on a podcast last week, calling for all Democratic candidates to face a litmus test on committing to pack the Supreme Court: promise to pack or get the sack. It is only the latest example of how the hostile takeover of the Court is now the priority for many Democrats in removing a barrier to a radical agenda.

Mann declared: “When it comes to Senate races, there should be a litmus test,” Mann said. “It isn’t just good enough to be a Democrat. You’ve got to be a Democrat who would be willing to expand the Supreme Court…There’s no way not to be partisan. There’s no way not to be political here. If you care about the environment, you’ve got to vote for the Democrats now.” Establishment candidates are offering the mob the Supreme Court to show their bona fides as the far left turns on “institutionists” who support our constitutional system. As I previously wrote, even law professors and deans joined this movement in calling for the rejection of our Constitution on the 250th anniversary of our Revolution.
Once packed, the Court could greenlight a variety of unconstitutional measures. Years ago, Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election.” However, he warned that “the Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described.” Therefore, the court must be packed in advance to make these changes possible. That includes an agenda for extreme measures ranging from wealth taxes to reparations to climate control regulations.
Mann raised the need to reverse doctrines limiting agency authority—a barrier to some climate control measures. In so doing, he got the underlying law fundamentally wrong: “It was in a conservative Supreme Court decision within the last few years that introduced the so-called Chevron standard. Basically, what they said was that the EPA no longer had the authority to make rules based on the science and its own determination.”
In 2024, the Supreme Court actually overturned the Chevron Doctrine in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. It also did not rule that “the EPA no longer had the authority to make rules based on the science and its own determination.” Rather, it said that courts would review such decisions without the prior presumptions in favor of agency decision-making. The restored, traditional judicial review is precisely to determine whether agency decisions are based on credible interpretations of the law and science.
Mann has had his own conflicts with the courts. He was sanctioned last year after winning a defamation case against bloggers Rand Simberg and Mark Steyn for attacking his climate control research.
At the time, some of us questioned the award, which awarded just $1 in actual damages but $1 million in punitive damages. In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case, BMW of North America v. Gore, striking down a punitive damages award. The case involved the company’s practice of repairing and repainting cars damaged in transit without telling the customers. The jury in the original trial awarded $4,000 in compensatory damages for the car’s lost value due to the lack of a factory paint job and other damage; it then imposed $4 million in punitive damages for the company’s dishonesty.
D.C. Superior Court Judge Alfred S. Irving Jr. reduced the award against Steyn to just $5000 after finding the original award to be “grossly excessive.” The court later learned that Mann’s defense team had allegedly presented false accounts of his losses after the criticism. Mann’s legal team was accused of presenting a chart that listed a grant that Mann allegedly lost due to the defamatory remarks as $9.7 million when it was later found to be worth $112,000. Irving also found a disparity in the grant income figures given to the jury.
The court found the alleged misrepresentations to be “an affront to the Court’s authority” and sanctioned Mann and his legal team “for bad-faith trial misconduct.” After reversing the jury verdict, the court ordered Mann to pay $1.1 million of his critics’ legal expenses.Now, Mann is calling for all Democratic candidates to pledge to pack the Supreme Court as a condition for running. So any Democrat who believes in our institutions and resists this mob will be a persona non grata in the party as an “institutionalist” captured by “nostalgia.”
Mann joins a growing list of figures demanding the hostile takeover of the Court from Kamala Harris to Pete Buttigieg. The priority is telling. Much of what is planned by the far-left will be difficult to accomplish due to constitutional limits. You can remove those limits by eliminating an independent Supreme Court and turning this essential institution into a federal version of state courts packed with partisan jurists.
At its base is a fundamental misunderstanding of the Court’s role. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) not only renewed her previous call to pack the court but said the court was illegitimate for rendering decisions against “widely held public opinion.” However, the court was meant to be counter-majoritarian to protect minority groups and viewpoints from the majority will.
Mann’s advice is different from that of James Carville, who wants Democrats to hide this intended move from the public (which continues to oppose court packing). Carville told Democratic candidates: “If the Democrats win the presidency and both houses of Congress, I think on day one, they should expand the Supreme Court to 13. F—k it. Eat our dust. Don’t run on it. Don’t talk about it. Just do it.”
Mann and others (including former Attorney General Eric Holder) are done with any pretense: “There’s no way not to be partisan. There’s no way not to be political here.” In other words, it is time to make the Supreme Court itself partisan and political. It will then be reduced to just another partisan institution in an age of rage.

It’s their only way to power.

• Clyburn Calls for Packing the Court with “Baker’s Dozen” to Flip Cases (Turley)

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) added his voice to expand the Supreme Court to a “baker’s dozen,” or thirteen members to allow Democrats to add justices who agree with him and Democratic members on how the law must be interpreted. In the meantime, as discussed earlier, court pack ing is being pushed as the new litmus test for any Democratic candidates. Clyburn’s “baker’s dozen” is a telling description of an effort to bake in partisan views on a Court expanded to create an instant liberal majority. In defending this hostile takeover of the Court, Clyburn bizarrely insisted that the failure to do so might lead to a return to antebellum conditions when blacks were being given fewer rights than whites.

When asked by host Kristen Welker whether he supports the call of former Vice President Kamala Harris to pack the Court, Clyburn responded: “Yes, I do. I think that we are in a position now that calls for some significant actions taken by the Congress and we ought to expand. Thirteen is a pretty good number. A baker’s dozen would be a good number to have on the court. And I would hope we would get people on the Court who will follow the constitutional underpinnings of this great nation of ours.”
Clyburn then made the sensational claim that, without taking over the Court, blacks could be returned to virtual slave conditions. He added: “The 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments have been interpreted different ways over the years. And we had in the Warren Court an interpretation of those amendments that I thought would be set for the future of the country. We have now a Supreme Court that has decided to reverse course and take this country back, I say, to those rulings of Justice Taney that said that no black man has any rights that a white man must respect.”
So, while recognizing that interpretations have evolved, Clyburn now demands a takeover of the Court because he disagrees with the current interpretations. It was fine when interpretations aligned with his views, but opposing viewpoints are intolerable and warrant packing the Court with reliable liberal votes. Other Democrats have demanded packing the Court to reverse immigration rulings.
The unhinged rhetoric reflects the importance of taking over the Court by Democrats who view the institution as a barrier to carrying out a radical agenda, including proposals that are considered unconstitutional. Liberal professors and pundits have identified a court takeover as essential to, as one law professor put it, guaranteeing that the Democrats never lose another national election. As former Eric Holder and James Carville have made clear, it is about power and guaranteeing its retention.
Of course, these figures know that it will take a great deal to get Americans to trash core institutions and values. Polls have long shown that a majority of citizens oppose efforts to pack the Court. FDR’s infamous court-packing plan in the 1930s has been widely panned in history, but is now being used as a model by many Democrats to achieve short-term political goals.
In order to overcome this fealty to our constitutional system, citizens must be very angry or very afraid. That is why the rage rhetoric is increasing as we approach the midterm elections. In the last election, the prediction was the imminent end of democracy. Now it is the return to slavery conditions in the United States.
One can disagree with the Court without suggesting that these justices are effective racists or want to return the nation to pre-Civil War slavery conditions. The suggestion that the Court would return this country to the Dred Scott period from before the Civil War is deeply offensive to the conservative justices, including Justice Clarence Thomas, who is African American. It is an absurd suggestion and shows contempt not just for the Court but for Black voters.

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2094437257021186067?s=20

Trump Says He Will Take No Days Off to Help Republicans WIN the Midterms.

“I'm going to go campaign like I did… when we had the presidential election. I took off 120 days, four months. Every single day I was on the trail.”

We can’t let Democrats take back power. pic.twitter.com/cCnBow2S9Z
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) August 31, 2026

I’ve got this feeling in my chest.

People are not ready for Thursday.

I’ve owned Tesla through all the years people said, “It’s just a car company.”

10+ years…

And this is the moment I’ve been waiting for.

The FIRST mass-produced Tesla with no steering wheel.

No pedals.

A… pic.twitter.com/Y7TpzluUpq
— Teslaconomics (@Teslaconomics) August 30, 2026

Many people are still unaware of this fact

The Super Heavy booster that SpaceX successfully caught after Starship Flight 7 was actually used again for Flight 9

SpaceX literally caught a skyscraper-sized rocket with the tower… then sent it back to space pic.twitter.com/aKi81Q3dNX
— X Freeze (@XFreeze) August 31, 2026

Elon predicted that China is going to win the AI race.

And every day makes it look more right.

"There's a good chance that they are the leaders at some point."

Elon is building the biggest AI cluster in America. He has more money than any human alive, first access to Nvidia's… pic.twitter.com/2pBa8E9BFq
— Ricardo (@Ric_RTP) August 30, 2026

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

Debt Rattle August 28 2026

Aug 282026

August 28, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:01 am Finance Tagged with: Canada, Carney, globalism, Hormuz, Marco Rubio, Meta, Nvidia, Oman, Trump, visa 30 Responses »

Rembrandt van Rijn Old Man Sitting 1631

• Kuwait, Qatar Ramp Up Hormuz Oil, Oman-Iran Talks Ease Supply Fears (ZH)

• Iran and Oman Agree to Share Strait of Hormuz Revenue, Defying Trump (Jung)

• Iran’s Most Dangerous Enemy: Administrative Collapse (Monty Donohew)

• Secretary Marco Rubio Suspends all Visa Reviews and Interviews (CTH)

• AfD Now Polls At 43% Across Eastern Germany (ZH)

• The Disappearing Western World (Paul Craig Roberts)

• Canadian PM Mark Carney’s Role in EU and Ukraine Friction (CTH)

• It’s Always Cute When Canada Thinks It Matters (Kurt Schlichter)

• Moscow Warns It Could Target British Military Facilities (ZH)

• Monopoly Money: Why Meta “Likes” the $16 Billion Settlement (Turley)

• Chipmaker Nvidia Arranges Funding For Its Own Clients (NOS)

• Why August 1991 Failed To Bring Peace Between Russia And The West (Bordachev)

https://twitter.com/RealBaronTrump_/status/2092648747834523756?s=20

Not me. https://t.co/W2hLBd8gOU
— General Mike Flynn (@GenFlynn) August 28, 2026

https://twitter.com/MAGAStorm47/status/2092998667808464972?s=20 https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2092789283023466550?s=20

Is Oman a US ally?

• Kuwait, Qatar Ramp Up Hormuz Oil, Oman-Iran Talks Ease Supply Fears (ZH)

Brent crude futures fell to an intraday low of $86.22 a barrel early Thursday before recovering above $88 by 0630 ET. The benchmark is down 6.3% this week as traders unwind part of the war-risk premium amid growing optimism that renewed diplomatic efforts involving Iran, Oman and Qatar could reduce the threat of drone attacks on tankers in the critical waterway. Bloomberg reported earlier that Kuwait and Qatar are restoring crude exports through the highly contested maritime chokepoint. Sources familiar with energy flows in the Gulf region say that both producers are shipping about 70% of the combined 2 million barrels a day they exported before the Iran war.

Total oil shipments via tankers have climbed to between 7 million and 8 million barrels a day, up from roughly 4 million barrels a day in mid-July and equal to about 75% of prewar levels, according to the outlet. London-based energy and freight analytics firm Vortexa told clients in a separate report that the estimated seven-day average for oil transiting the Strait of Hormuz has approached 10 million barrels a day. The recovery in the critical waterway helps explain why Brent crude retreated to $86 earlier this morning after surging above $120 in late April.
The Trump administration and Tehran remain deadlocked over finding another resolution, but Gulf exporters are increasingly finding ways around the disruption. The outlet noted that the United Arab Emirates was the first to transit crude through the strait before transferring it to other vessels in the Gulf of Oman. Maritime research firm TankerTrackers was the first to report the increase in ship-to-ship transfers on Tuesday.

A busy day in the Gulf of Oman, where there are at least fifteen sets of STS transfer sessions taking place. We count 25 million barrels of crude oil; plus some refined products. The oil originates from almost every country in the region, minus Iran.#OOTT #IranWar #Tankers pic.twitter.com/TAba26mJiW
— TankerTrackers.com, Inc. (@TankerTrackers) August 25, 2026

“An Iran-Oman framework for a ‘temporary joint maritime corridor’ is pulling oil lower. It remains difficult to envision how the US would sign off on this given the concurrent ratcheting up of economic pressure,” UBS analyst Justinus Steinhorst wrote in a note. Dennis Kissler, senior vice president for trading at BOK Financial Securities, said on Wednesday, “It seems crude is now beginning to price in a sooner-rather-than-later peace deal.”
Beyond Iran and Oman’s diplomatic push to reopen the strait, Reuters reported that both countries are working to clear all naval mines from the waterway. President Trump said earlier this week that all mines had been removed. However, with disruptions to Middle Eastern refineries and Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries, the energy crisis has morphed into a crude-products crisis, with diesel crack spreads in the US still trading above $90 a barrel. Last week, the spread hit an unprecedented $100-a-barrel level as global diesel supplies dwindled.

Oman makes a deal with the IRGC and bypasses the US?!!

• Iran and Oman Agree to Share Strait of Hormuz Revenue, Defying Trump (Jung)

Iran and Oman have reached a joint agreement on sharing revenues associated with shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, according to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). However, the strategically vital waterway, one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints, will remain closed until Tehran resolves its conflict with Washington.

The IRGC announced on August 26 that the two countries had finalized terms after a month of negotiations over the future management of the strait. IRGC spokesman Hossein Mohebbi said the talks produced results acceptable to both sides, including agreements on each country’s share of the waterway and its revenues.
The announcement followed weeks of negotiations over an interim system for restoring commercial navigation. Under the proposed framework, vessels entering the Persian Gulf would use a route through Iranian waters, while outbound traffic would use Omani waters. The arrangement would allow the two countries to collect fees for maritime services and transit, although officials have not publicly disclosed the precise revenue split. Earlier proposals had contemplated voluntary fees, but the Trump administration has opposed any attempt to impose tolls on international shipping in the strait.
Despite the IRGC’s announcement, the terms of the agreement are not final. A senior Iranian source told Reuters that Tehran and Muscat were still working through technical details, including the permanent arrangement for shipping routes. The two governments had previously described their discussions as an “interim framework” for resuming navigation rather than a completed final settlement.
The IRGC also made clear that the agreement with Oman alone would not reopen the waterway. Mohebbi accused the United States of obstructing the negotiations and said that Tehran would restore passage only if Washington accepted the previously negotiated terms. He stated that if the White House rejected Iran’s conditions, the strait would remain closed.
The dispute comes as energy shipments through the Strait of Hormuz remain disrupted following the beginning of the conflict in February. Before the crisis in the Gulf, the waterway carried roughly one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments. Commercial traffic has fallen sharply since the conflict began, contributing to higher energy prices and forcing energy producers and shipping companies to seek alternative routes and workarounds despite major efforts by the U.S. military to clear passage for shipping.
Shipping also remains hazardous. Iran recently blacklisted 45 vessels in an apparent effort to disrupt ship-to-ship transfers that Gulf energy producers have used to circumvent its blockade. Several oil companies have subsequently considered avoiding vessels on the blacklist, further complicating efforts to restore normal commercial traffic. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. will increase economic pressure to tank Iran’s already sinking economy and bring the ayatollah’s regime to heel.
The proposed Iranian-Omani framework may represent a significant change in how traffic through Hormuz is administered if it takes effect. Iran and Oman would coordinate commercial navigation and potentially collect substantial revenues from maritime services, while a temporary system could eventually give way to a permanent division of responsibilities.
For now, however, the agreement remains conditional. Iran says it has reached an acceptable understanding with Oman, while senior Iranian officials indicate that technical issues remain unresolved and the Trump administration continues to oppose Tehran’s proposals. The next stage of negotiations will determine whether the framework can translate into the reopening of one of the world’s most consequential shipping routes.

“Can Iran’s mullah dictatorship govern the country while losing the war?”

• Iran’s Most Dangerous Enemy: Administrative Collapse (Monty Donohew)

Nearly every dispatch from this Iran military action measures Iran in the currency of destroyed hardware: ballistic missiles, drone production lines, naval combatants. That accounting matters, but it may be measuring the wrong thing. The more consequential damage may not be to Iran’s arsenal at all. It may be to the regime’s capacity to function as a coherent government. This week supplied two pieces of evidence, in two entirely different domains, pointing at Iran’s underlying administrative fracture.

The first is political, and it is remarkable on its own terms. Kayhan, the hardline newspaper closely aligned with the regime’s most conservative faction, published a piece this week accusing President Masoud Pezeshkian, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, and Iran’s own negotiating team of “completing a puzzle” whose intended effect was to manufacture an image of surrender and make retreat seem necessary.
That’s not commentary on an external enemy, but a state-aligned publication publicly accusing a sitting president and the speaker of parliament of engineering their own government’s capitulation, in the middle of a war, in terms ordinarily reserved for traitors. The second is fiscal, and the numbers are not subtle. Iran’s rial hit a record low of roughly 2.02 million to the dollar this week as trading opened. The IMF projects Iran’s average annual inflation will reach 68.9 percent in 2026. The World Bank estimates the Iranian economy contracted 2.7 percent in the year ending in March.
None of this means Tehran is defenseless against its own currency.
Iran has spent years building buffers precisely for moments like this: a shadow fleet of more than 350 tankers moving 1.6 to 1.8 million barrels of crude daily to Chinese refiners via ship-to-ship transfers, a barter system that covered roughly a third of oil exports last fiscal year and is projected to cover more this year, a state-administered exchange rate that lets favored importers buy dollars far below the open-market price, and a central bank willing to finance deficits by simply creating money rather than borrowing it.
These are not improvised responses. They are an institutionalized sanctions-evasion architecture, built up over successive rounds of pressure since 2018, and they have kept Iran’s oil exports above nuclear-deal-era levels even through the current war’s opening months. What is changing is how well that architecture still performs. The discount Iranian crude must offer buyers has widened from roughly eight dollars a barrel in 2023 to fourteen or seventeen dollars now, as Washington’s secondary sanctions reach further into the Chinese “teapot” refineries and shell-company networks that make the evasion possible.
Tehran’s fiscal break-even price sits near $124 a barrel; the price it is actually realizing on exported crude is closer to $56. That gap is precisely why the government leans harder on money creation, and money creation is precisely what is driving the inflation and currency collapse visible in the rial’s exchange rate. The buffers have not failed. They have simply stopped being sufficient to close the widening distance between what the state needs and what it can extract from a shrinking, more heavily discounted revenue base.
There is a further complication worth stating plainly rather than glossing over, because it cuts against any simple “sanctions are working” reading. The same evasion architecture that keeps the state solvent is also concentrating economic power in the hands of the actors best positioned to run it, chiefly the IRGC, which has expanded its role in the shadow fleet, the barter arrangements, and the currency-exchange houses that move sanctioned banks’ money.
Sanctions pressure that squeezes ordinary importers and consumers, who pay the open-market rate, while leaving IRGC-linked networks to capture the rents from smuggling and preferential exchange access, does not necessarily weaken the regime’s core coercive apparatus. It may instead redistribute economic power inside the state toward the faction least interested in a negotiated settlement, which would cut directly against the administration’s stated goal.
This is also why the Soviet Union is a useful comparison only if handled carefully, and it is worth being precise about what the analogy does and does not claim. The Soviet collapse involved national independence movements, deliberate political liberalization under Gorbachev, elite defections, and a wholesale transformation of the state’s institutions, a far longer and more complicated sequence than currency instability alone. Iran shows no equivalent liberalization and no comparable elite defections yet.
What Iran may be experiencing is not a repeat of that sequence but a similar underlying mechanism: an authoritarian state whose administrative machinery for translating central authority into local control begins to fail once fiscal and currency instability outpaces the state’s capacity to paper over the gap through patronage. That mechanism can operate on very different political timelines and produce very different outcomes than it did in Moscow. It is the mechanism, not the history, that is being invoked here.

“The move comes on the heels of U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas, a Biden appointee in Manhattan, striking down a prior State Dept ban on visas from 75 countries.”

• Secretary Marco Rubio Suspends all Visa Reviews and Interviews (CTH)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has suspended all international visa reviews and interviews with applicants until all of the consulate staff undergo training on the appropriate review process. The intent is to proactively identify visa applicants who are seeking temporary visas with the intent of claiming asylum status or similar permanent migration. Each consular staff agent and officer is being tasked with scrutinizing applications to ensure the applicant does not become a “public charge” after entry.

WASHINGTON – The Trump administration has directed U.S. embassies and consulates around the world to postpone immigrant visa interviews while consular officers complete training on new public-charge guidance, temporarily stalling applications that have reached the interview stage. The State Department told diplomatic posts to reschedule immigrant visa interviews until consular officers complete the training on how to evaluate whether an applicant is likely to become a public charge.
A public-charge determination can make an immigrant visa applicant inadmissible under federal immigration law if officials determine the person is likely to become dependent on certain forms of public assistance after arriving in the U.S. “In early August, we launched a global training initiative at all of our embassies and consulates worldwide. To accommodate this in-depth training, appointments for visa services will be adjusted,” a State Department official said in a statement.
[…] The administration said Monday that it was preparing to revoke the business and tourism visas of up to 200,000 foreigners who have applied for or are seeking asylum in the U.S., a move that would represent the largest mass visa revocation in U.S. history. (read more)
The move comes on the heels of U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas, a Biden appointee in Manhattan, striking down a prior State Dept ban on visas from 75 countries. However, the judge’s decision does not invalidate visa denials overall, based on independent grounds of ineligibility. As a consequence, Secretary Rubio is ordering worldwide embassy and consulate retraining to enhance scrutiny of all visa applications carefully.

France AND Germany looking good. Still efforts to ban Weidel and Le Pen?

• AfD Now Polls At 43% Across Eastern Germany (ZH)

Building on Nomura analyst Andrzej Szczepaniak’s note from earlier this week, which forecasts that right-wing parties are positioned to make electoral gains across Germany, France, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK over the next 18 months, new polling data from Germany further suggest that Alternative for Germany (AfD) is performing exceptionally well as citizens demand political change after years of failed progressive experiments that encouraged a Third World migrant invasion and nation-killing deindustrialization trends.

Einer aktuellen Forsa-Umfrage nach liegt die AfD im gesamten Osten bei 43%, während die CDU auf nur noch 13% kommt. Die Bürger wollen die politische Wende!https://t.co/c94bESp3Qu pic.twitter.com/lrKvllJCAa
— Alice Weidel (@Alice_Weidel) August 26, 2026

Weidel said, “According to a recent Forsa survey, the AfD is at 43% across the entire East, while the CDU is down to just 13%. The citizens want the political turnaround!” The key takeaway from the new survey is that the AfD is polling at more than three times the level of the center-right CDU/CSU and exceeds the combined support of the CDU/CSU, SPD, and Greens. German weekly newspaper Junge Freiheit commented on the new survey, saying, “The numbers are particularly interesting ahead of the upcoming state elections in Saxony-Anhalt on September 6th and in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania two weeks later.”
The outlet continued, “The assessment of Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s (CDU) performance remains abysmal across Germany. As in the previous week, only 13 percent of those surveyed expressed satisfaction, while 85 percent were dissatisfied.” Elon Musk has previously stated, “AfD is the only hope for Germany.”

AfD is the only hope for Germany https://t.co/6ONn1LOipE
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 19, 2026

One reason German citizens are particularly frustrated is that Europe’s economic engine is collapsing, with Volkswagen Group labor representatives warning earlier this week that as many as 140,000 jobs could be cut at the struggling automaker.Circling back to Szczepaniak, the Nomura analyst wrote, “Five years ago, financial markets would not have seemed so at ease with such a prospect. But then again, these populist right-wing political parties were previously not so fiscally prudent as they are perceived to be today.”
He added, “Now, if anything, financial markets are much more concerned about populist left-wing parties being elected due to their desire to increase spending, often paid for through higher borrowing or higher taxes, which are likely to shut the engine off of already stuttering economies.”.

“.. is New York City, a city whose white ethnic population is only 16% of the population still an American city?”

• The Disappearing Western World (Paul Craig Roberts)

It was 53 years ago that Jean Raspail wrote The Camp of the Saints in an attempt to wake up the French nation to the future challenge they would face. The French response was to dismiss Raspail’s effort as a dystopian novel and do nothing. Today five decades later Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s only French nationalist party, is the most popular political leader in France. A recent poll showed her and her party, National Rally, favored by 38% of those polled. Her nearest rival has 17%.

One of France’s many problems is that it has too many political parties, which indicates that France is more disunited than united. In the previous French election, Le Pen won in the sense of having the most votes. But to keep a French nationalist from power, other parties formed a coalition that represented a higher number of votes. The French Establishment then tried to imprison Le Pen and prevent her from again running for office. This scenario is likely to be repeated in the next French election.
So, after more than a half century of being overrun by immigrant-invaders, as Jean Raspail said they would be, the French still cannot rise to the defense of an ethnic French nation. Only Marine Le Pen’s political party represents a French nation instead of a multicultural tower of babel.
Today in Europe and in the US a political party that represents the essence of a nation–its historical ethnicity–is regarded as racist. To be clear, it means that any country that does not consist of a collection of races, cultures, languages, and disparate interests, thereby constituting a multicultural tower of babel, is racist. This indoctrination of the Western peoples is so successful that even today only 38% of the French people support an ethnic French nation. 62% of the French population are content to exist in a tower of babel.
Having observed the increasing takeover of the states of Michigan, Minnesota, California, and New York City by third world immigrant-invaders and Massachusetts’ new law requiring the state to recruit more Muslim immigrant-invaders into the state’s government, the rising Muslim communities in Texas demanding Sharia law, and the emergence of Hispanic Spanish as America’s second official language, the Unites States itself, once a melting pot of European and British ethnicities, has sold its soul to multiculturalism, an arrangement in which there are only disparate interests, a disparity inconsistent with the name of the country–United States.
According to university and community estimates, NY City alone has more than 350 Mosques. Several decades ago I noticed that NY city cab drivers were third world immigrants. Population studies have found that NY City’s population contains 750,000 to 1 million Muslims. 2.5 million Hispanics, 1.5 million Asians, and 2.2 million Africans, some American born and some recent immigrants. According to the latest US Census, 8.58 million people live in NY City of which 7.2 million or 84% are nonwhite.
In view of these numbers, is New York City, a city whose white ethnic population is only 16% of the population still an American city? Compare this Tower of Babel to NY City’s population in, say, 1950. Already a fifth of the US work force consists of foreign born people of color. Many are H-1B work visa holders, few of whom ever return to their countries. The Western World is disappearing. The peoples of the West have inhaled so much guilt from their indoctrination and brainwashing by white liberals that they are impotent to defend and to regain their immigrant-invader threatened nations.
How long before the only white ethnicities will be in zoos as specimens of white racist colonialists?

All the little people.

• Canadian PM Mark Carney’s Role in EU and Ukraine Friction (CTH)

Barbara Boyd does a solid job connecting the recent U.S-Canada trade friction to the globalist plans of Mark Carney in alignment with the European Union. The goal is to create and maintain broad opposition to the geopolitical reset underway as an outcome of President Trump s larger and nationalistic economic agenda.

This is worth the watch as many of the background happenings are interconnected, yet few people are putting it all together. Barbara Boyd argues that the most dangerous escalation is the proxy war with Russia, highlighting Russia’s warning that direct British involvement in strikes on Russian territory could make Britain a combatant.
She says the UK has long driven the πUkraine conflict and that Trump has sought peace while Britain and Europe resist, relying on war production amid failing economies. The episode focuses on Canada’s Mark Carney as a key spokesman for a permanent-warfare economic strategy, detailing his global financial roles and Canada’s creation of a Defense Security and Resilience Bank to fund defense mobilization without citizen involvement.
Boyd also describes Carney’s actions against the U.S., including trade disputes, deeper EU alignment, and Arctic defense plans. She claims a coordinated chaos and psychological warfare campaign targets U.S. voters ahead of the midterms.

There is little doubt European NATO countries, led by the U.K, France and Germany, are stimulating and supporting increased direct military conflict against Russia. We are beginning to see not-so-covert events happening in/around border nations with Russia -carried out by Ukraine- that continue to raise the stakes.
Moldova, Romania and now Finland are starting to become increasingly visible as launch regions for Ukraine drone attacks into Russia. Meanwhile the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad (between Lithuania and Poland) is surrounded by provocative NATO military activity. Keep watching.

Only Trump stands up to globalism.

• It’s Always Cute When Canada Thinks It Matters (Kurt Schlichter)

Just what the hell are the Canadians thinking? Do they think that if they cry enough, America’s going to roll over? We’re now in another trade war with them, and the Canadians are whining, and the Democrats — who never side with America — are whining right along with them. It’s about time to be done with the country that is touted as America’s best buddy but is actually tied for its most annoying next-door neighbor. They cry that America is being mean because it’s looking out for its own interests. How dare America expect Canada to pull its weight on its own defense?

How dare America not want to perpetuate unfair and unbalanced tariff and trade rules in perpetuity? And how dare America not recognize the moral superiority of a country that, if it were a stereotype, would be a fugly, sexually dysfunctional wine woman with a “Hate Has No Home Here” sign on the front lawn of the condo it shares with five cats, all named after characters in “Twilight.”
Americans don’t think much of Canada — literally. We didn’t have to, because for a long time Canadians were just pleasant, sturdy, and trustworthy neighbors who were different from us but shared enough in common that we managed to share the longest demilitarized border in the world. Canadians don’t want to be Americans, and that’s OK. It’s silly, because everybody should want to be Americans, but it’s all right. We didn’t take offense. We’d have to be thinking about them to take offense, and we weren’t. It’s nice to have a neighbor you don’t really have to think about, except when you need to borrow sugar.
But when we did think about them, they used to be kind of amusing. Now they’re actively annoying. And their obsessive loathing of the United States has morphed from a vaguely tiresome affectation into something genuinely grating. They are ripping us off on defense and trade, they are failing to back us up around the world, and they have become a petty dictatorship. They are still funny, but the Ralph Wiggum of nations is longer ha-ha funny.
They thought about us a lot, and you can’t really blame them. We’re economically successful, stubbornly free, and masculine — all the things that Canada either never was or no longer is. Canada has been taken over by the faculty-lounge left. It’s less a country than a giant, freezing college campus where the government will literally destroy your life if you do something like point out obvious truths about how a man is not a woman or that there was a giant scam involving allegedly dead Indian children — oh wait, we’re supposed to call them “First Peoples.” Of course, they have enshrined collective guilt over taming their vast lands as their national ideology. They despise us, but they also despise themselves. We have a glorious Constitution, and they have an endless land acknowledgment.
The Canadians harken back to their European roots in other ways too, such as a hatred of free speech and dissent. After all, they were never man enough to throw out the Brits or the French, and now they have fully embraced the same kind of supine and feminine national identity that focuses on crushing actual Canadians and importing the entire Third World to replace them. And like the Europeans, they won’t ever shut up about their free healthcare, bragging about it endlessly to us and complaining endlessly to each other about having to wait six months for a blood transfusion. Pro tip: When you’re in one of their clinics, if you can ever get in, just remember to keep smiling and appearing happy; otherwise, they’re going to recommend you for medical termination.
One of Donald Trump’s great qualities is that he refuses to obey the dictates of America’s foreign-policy elite consensus. That consensus was to let the Canadians keep drafting off us on defense, trade, and the Chinese communist infiltration that has corrupted their entire government. We’re supposed to ignore all that because Canadians are nice, but Trump’s not nice. Trump actually cares about America’s national interest, and it’s not in our interest to carry Canada’s rucksack any longer or to open our markets to it. At the same time, it closes its doors to ours and allows our great enemy a foothold on the frozen tundra above us. That’s why he has been hard on Canada, and that’s why Canada is whining like a little girl.
Canada has not been marching beside us, its allegedly closest ally, for a long time. It’s been half-stepping. Now, the argument you hear back is that Canada came to our aid after 9/11 and lost 158 soldiers in Afghanistan, so we should shut up and take whatever they give us, or not give us, as the case may be. Baloney. No one minimizes or belittles the death of those heroes. Their forces were studs, and you can’t say that about all the Allied forces by a long shot. Every American who’s worked with Canadians, including yours truly, respected them as tough and dauntless warriors. You talk bad about the Canadians who served with Americans overseas, and an American soldier will deck you.
But what happened yesterday doesn’t give a free pass for what needs to happen today. The last Canadian killed in Afghanistan died 15 years ago, when they pulled out of combat operations. That’s a decade and a half. That’s a long time. We appreciate that they came, but let’s be real. That was their obligation as a NATO ally when we, a NATO ally, were attacked. They didn’t do us a favor; they did their duty under the treaty. Moreover, those semi-human Islamist scumbags murdered 24 Canadian citizens — they were avenging their own as well as ours.
They deliberately chose to stop having a military and let us do it for them. Today, Canada has no real army, no real navy, and no real air force. The once-mighty Canadian military is now a micro-military more focused on DEI than making the enemy DOA. It shamelessly lets the United States defend North America, Europe, and the rest of the world alone. It has no capacity to project power. It’s not in the Red Sea, it’s not in the Persian Gulf, it’s not anywhere helping us do the heavy lifting of keeping the world free.
And that’s just the way Canada wants it, because it doesn’t want to spend the money and it doesn’t want to dirty its soft, girlish hands helping big, mean America. Moreover, its communist Chinese masters love having a disarmed and vulnerable pseudo-ally right next to the CCP’s main adversary. Canada has long failed to pay its share of NATO, and Trump isn’t going to tolerate that. No American should tolerate that. But the Democrats do, because if Trump wants it, they have to oppose it, even if it means opposing America.
Democrats call that a “win-win.”
Canada’s military free-riding is only surpassed by its fake free-trade free-riding. Not only do they restrict American imports to their own advantage, but they demand America open its markets to them. Worse, they allow Chinese commodities and products in and let them be transshipped into the United States to circumvent tariffs on China. Again, Trump doesn’t understand the idea that we are somehow morally obligated to allow lesser nations to take advantage of us. This is a right and proper attitude, but because it’s Trump, it has to be bad. That’s one reason Democrats are so eager to take the side of a foreign country screwing over the United States on trade. The other reason is Democrats despise America.
And let’s face it: Canada isn’t anything like a real democracy. It holds no moral high ground. It persecutes people for speaking. It murders those it deems a burden on society. It embraces every disgusting aspect of DEI, including having a justice system that treats different races differently. You can be destroyed for saying things in Canada — financially and maybe even placed in prison. You are also unable to enjoy the God-given right to keep and bear arms; the government keeps a monopoly on lethal force, meaning it keeps a monopoly on power, and those who should be citizens are merely subjects. It’s frankly disgusting, and a country like that is unworthy of our friendship.

It’ll warn first.

• Moscow Warns It Could Target British Military Facilities (ZH)

From the very start of the Ukraine war, the United Kingdom has consistently been among Kiev’s most open and ardent military supporters, time and again transferring heavy weaponry, including cutting edge long-range missiles like the Storm Shadow. At the start of this week, Britain announced it plans to provide Ukraine with classified technology to allow for the country’s own manufacturing of the British/French-designed SCALP air-launched cruise missile (which in the UK is known as the Storm Shadow). The allies expect to set up a production line in Ukraine as soon as year’s end.

Already, Ukraine has used its domestic-made and designed Neptune cruise missile to strike oil refineries and military sites deep inside Russian territory. A domestic-made SCALP would present the likelihood of Ukraine then using this Western-designed missile to directly attack Russia, which only increases the chances of an eventual Moscow-NATO clash. Ukrainian forces already appeared to have used the missile on Donetsk and other locations closer to front lines in the Donbass.
On Thursday the Kremlin has issued one of its strongest warnings and threats aimed at London to date, accusing the UK of “fully taking part in the war on Kiev’s side” – and thus thwarting any chance of peace talks while adding fuel to the fire. Moscow is now saying that the UK’s own military facilities could become fair game for direct attacks.
Kremlin spokesperson Maria Zakharova said in a Thursday press briefing, “We have repeatedly warned that the response to Ukrainian strikes using British weapons against Russian territory could be directed against any British military facilities and equipment in Ukraine and beyond.” Zakharova urged “all residents of the United Kingdom to think about the inevitable, catastrophic consequences of the hostile steps taken by their own authorities.” She also laid out:
“We propose that the British leadership once again carefully analyze the situation and immediately, in the most resolute and unequivocal manner, abandon the hostile, aggressive line, which can only… create the risk of the conflict escalating to an entirely new level.” Ironically this comes just on the heels of a rare visit of the CIA Director to Moscow. US officials claim the Tuesday meeting between John Ratcliffe and top Kremlin intelligence officials was to convey a warning to President Putin to not attack any NATO member. However, many analysts are skeptical that this was the official reason.

A demand of over $1.4 trillion bought off for 11.2 billion. What’s not to like?

• Monopoly Money: Why Meta “Likes” the $16 Billion Settlement (Turley)

It is not every day that a company can settle a case for over $16 billion and celebrate. However, Meta’s settlement with 29 states is a remarkably good deal for a company facing a demand of over $1.4 trillion and years of litigation. In the end, it may not even take a loss from the litigation. The settlement ends the latest mass liability case, following similar settlements in tobacco, opiates, and other products. It will require Meta to make changes to its platform, though the company already appeared to be moving to make such changes.

The maximum payment of closer to $17 billion is tied to whether competing platforms (like TikTok and YouTube) adopt parallel protections for children. Otherwise, the company is on the hook for at least $12.1 billion over 10 years under the agreement. The company agreed to impose daily time limits for underage users as well as “nighttime blocks” from midnight to 6 am (as well as notifications linked to school hours).
It is doubtful that these “fixes” will actually fix the problem. Social media is enormously popular with adults and children alike. It is also ubiquitous and accessible, particularly for tech-savvy kids. The burden will remain with parents regarding access to and use of social media, not the company.
Meta was looking at a long slog in the courts. Some of us were skeptical of the legal basis for some of these claims. The line between a popular and an “addictive” product is fairly subjective. It was hard to see where the line would have been drawn in this litigation. However, Meta likely would have faced similar demands for changes to its platforms through legislation even if it prevailed in litigation.
Those legal questions will now have to wait for another test case. The settlement leaves other companies in a more exposed position. This massive settlement is like a dinner gong for plaintiff’s lawyers who will now fan out in packs in pursuit of companies like dusk on the Serengeti. Companies are already facing thousands of such lawsuits. Meta has already lost cases in California and New Mexico over consumer safety and negligence claims. The priority was to limit the potential damages rather than to make new law.
The actual damages are not as daunting as it may seem. The tobacco multistate settlement was over $206 billion, not counting separate state settlements worth tens of millions more. The opiate settlements resulted in damages of roughly $60 billion.
Even at $16 billion, for a company the size of Meta, this is like monopoly money (literally so, if you ask some critics). The value of settling the case alone can wipe out that loss through stock-market gains and other pricing changes. After the tobacco settlement, companies like Philip Morris enjoyed market gains that effectively washed out the loss. Moreover, these companies enjoyed a very inelastic market, so they internalized costs with price hikes that left smokers holding the bag.
Ironically, if social media is as addictive as claimed by litigants, the market is equally inelastic. Big media will be able to easily recoup these damages as did Big Tobacco. Much of these damages will ultimately be passed on to and borne by social media users, operating like a tax for states receiving the funds.
The platform will clearly make positive changes that will assist parents. These are straightforward changes that have long been needed. Hopefully, these states will not just take this money and run as many did with the tobacco windfall. Instead, it would be a great help if the money went to enhancing programs for child mental illness.
Social media remains one of the most transformative inventions in history, including a powerful tool for free speech and political discourse. That popularity comes at a price. It will remain part of our social fabric, as are alcohol and tobacco products despite their abuse.
Meta did not create these social costs alone. We all did. We found ourselves overwhelmed by a technology with endless applications and potential for expression. This settlement will not erase those social costs any more than the tobacco settlement erased cancer or the opiate settlement erased addiction. The ultimate child-protection regulation will remain parents monitoring and educating their own children.
Meta’s corporate slogan, “Meta, Metamates, and Me,” may capture the problem. It is often hard for people to separate themselves from their virtual selves. This is a technology that is both liberating and captivating. Ultimately, despite the progress under this agreement, no settlement will protect us from ourselves.

From Dutch news. Crude machine translation.

• Chipmaker Nvidia Arranges Funding For Its Own Clients (NOS)

The American chipmaker Nvidia, the most valuable company in the world, is engaged in something remarkable: ensuring that its customers have enough money so that they can buy (even more) Nvidia chips. Nvidia’s computer chips have made the company enormous, because they are necessary for developments in the field of artificial intelligence (AI). The AI chips that Nvidia designs are purchased by large tech companies. They use the computing power to develop AI programs themselves, or rent out the computing power to smaller companies that cannot or do not want to buy the chips themselves.

Nvidia is very dependent on those large customers, says Dennis Vink, professor of corporate finance at Nyenrode Business University and holder of Nvidia shares. “If one of those major customers drops out, Nvidia immediately loses a large part of its revenue. That is why they want to ensure that more customers can buy their chips.” To achieve this, Nvidia is having investment firms raise 500 billion dollars (429 billion euros), as it recently announced. That money is intended for Nvidia customers: companies that also want to use AI chips, but have less money than the big tech companies.
Tens of thousands of euros per chip
“Nvidia wants the market for AI chips to grow,” says Arnout Boot, Professor of Corporate Finance at the University of Amsterdam. “So they ensure that their customers have the money to invest in Nvidia chips. These are not the Googles and Amazons of this world, but the companies that use computing capacity. That amounts to thousands of companies.”
Reson8 is one such company. “We build AI applications that convert speech to text, for example between a doctor and a patient,” says founder Thomas Kluiters. The Nvidia chips are needed to develop this type of program: the AI industry calls this ‘training’ the program.
[..] “At the moment, those chips cost between 20,000 and 60,000 dollars each,” he says. “You need many dozens of these types of chips, plus other equipment. That means we are quite dependent on Nvidia. They simply make the best chips. We cannot find an alternative for that anytime soon.”
Due to this role in the AI industry, Nvidia has grown very strongly in recent years and is earning enormous amounts of money. Last night, the company announced that it made a profit of 59.7 billion dollars (over 51 billion euros) over the past three months. Since 2024, it has recorded a total profit of more than 300 billion dollars.
Competition is a risk for NVIDIA
Nevertheless, Nvidia is not going to front that 500 billion dollar pot to its customers itself, if it materializes. It is the investment firms that raise the money and then lend it to companies that want to buy the AI chips.
A smart way to do it, according to Vink of Nyenrode University. “In the short term, the risks for Nvidia itself are limited,” he says. “That lies with the investment firms. They aren’t stupid either: they will take a close look at the financial standing of such a company. A bank doesn’t just lend you money without looking at your situation either.”
Nvidia can, however, play a role in the agreements an investment firm makes with such a company by acting as guarantor for part of the loan. That means Nvidia takes on part of the risk, giving investors a little more certainty that they will at least get part of their money back if something goes wrong, says UvA professor Boot. “Nvidia can do this because they have an exceptionally strong position.”
Despite the billions it earns, there is still a risk, says Boot. “Developments in the field of AI are very uncertain. Nvidia chips are still very important right now, but what exactly does the future hold? What is the competition doing? In this risky world, nothing is ruled out.”
“It is a serious risk for Nvidia if competitors develop AI chips that are just as good,” Vink also says. That is another reason why the company is securing funding to acquire new customers, he says. “They are trying to make them dependent on Nvidia chips, because they want to remain the absolute biggest in this market.”

The West sees itself as the winner of the cold war. Russia does not see itself as the loser.

• Why August 1991 Failed To Bring Peace Between Russia And The West (Bordachev)

Thirty-five years have passed since the dramatic events of August 1991 in Moscow which marked, more clearly than any later declaration or diplomatic ceremony, the end of the era we call the Cold War. The failed ‘August Coup’ attempt to preserve the Soviet Union made continuation of the old confrontation impossible given one of its principal participants had effectively left the battlefield. Everything that followed, including the formal dissolution of the USSR in December 1991, merely recorded a change that had already taken place.

The essential fact was that the Soviet Union, and subsequently Russia, could no longer sustain the material and political foundations required to continue the struggle. There were many reasons for this, but foremost among them was the exhaustion of the Soviet model of state governance. Moscow therefore chose to end the confrontation. This was historically unusual because Russia hadn’t been defeated on the battlefield or forced to surrender, and the Cold War ended because of internal political change and a voluntary decision by the Soviet leadership.
Paradoxically, this peaceful ending helped make a future confrontation more likely. The principal reason was simple: the Western powers, led by the United States, regarded the end of the Cold War as a victory, but Russia didn’t regard itself as a defeated country. That contradiction became one of the central problems of the post-Cold War order. Great nuclear powers such as Russia, the United States, and China cannot realistically be defeated militarily without risking mutual destruction, thus the greatest threats to such states therefore tend to come from within through political dysfunction, economic weakness, poor governance, and social instability.
We can see something similar today in the United States. It remains the strongest individual power in the international system, but domestic conflict increasingly limits the effectiveness of its foreign policy. Meanwhile, China places internal stability and development at the center of its strategic thinking precisely because its leaders understand that domestic cohesion ultimately determines external strength. The same logic shaped the Cold War because once Washington and Moscow accumulated enormous nuclear arsenals, direct military conflict became irrational.
The confrontation instead developed according to what George Kennan described as containment in restricting Soviet influence and applying pressure across numerous fronts while avoiding a direct war between the superpowers.But we shouldn’t romanticize this arrangement because the Cold War was still a war in the political sense and the objective of the Soviet Union’s adversaries wasn’t simply peaceful coexistence, rather it was the containment and ultimately neutralization of their opponent.
From Moscow’s perspective, this amounted to a struggle against Russia itself, which at that particular historical moment existed politically and economically in the form of the Soviet state. The relative stability created by nuclear deterrence certainly encouraged a degree of mutual respect as it forced both sides to search for peaceful solutions even during serious crises. However, none of this removed the fundamental Western strategic objective which was victory over the Soviet adversary.
When the Soviet Union disappeared, therefore, Western capitals naturally interpreted the event as the achievement of that objective, but the victory was incomplete. Russia had lost the geopolitical struggle but had not been defeated in the traditional sense. Its territory hadn’t been occupied and its armed forces hadn’t surrendered, so Russians could therefore reasonably believe that the changes of 1989-91 were the result of decisions taken in Moscow rather than terms imposed by a victorious enemy and that distinction proved enormously important.
It also explains why comparisons with France after 1815 or Germany after 1945 are misleading as both countries were militarily defeated before being incorporated into new international systems established by the victors. France was reintegrated into the European order after Napoleon because Russia, Britain, Austria, and Prussia quickly developed disagreements of their own so Paris could therefore play a useful balancing role within the Concert of Europe.
Nothing comparable existed after 1991 when the Western coalition was unusually united and organized around NATO under American leadership and there was no internal balance of power in which Russia could become an indispensable partner. The comparison with West Germany after 1945 is even less convincing. West Germany entered NATO and the emerging European institutions while foreign troops remained on its territory and its sovereignty was sharply constrained by the consequences of military defeat. No comparable arrangement could conceivably have been imposed upon Russia.
After 1991, the central problem was never resolved given that the West saw itself as the victor of the Cold War and wanted to construct a political order reflecting that victory. Russia, on the other hand, saw itself as a sovereign great power that had voluntarily abandoned the previous confrontation and expected to participate in the new order on that basis and these expectations were fundamentally incompatible.

SpaceX wants 30+ Starships going up every day.

Not every month. Every day.

That’s around 10,000 launches a year by 2030, while the U.S. target for the entire country is 1,000 launches and reentries.

Elon’s point? The world already handles more than 100,000 commercial flights a… https://t.co/wfNfiyAzQ6 pic.twitter.com/WfvJELPvGY
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) August 27, 2026

https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/2092661241315512654?s=20

Starbase, Louisiana is going to be absolutely enormous

~125,000 acres
~195 square miles

For scale:

• ~148× Central Park
• ~123× Golden Gate Park
• ~3.7× Denver International Airport….the largest airport site in North America
• ~2.6× Acadia National Park
• ~84% the size… pic.twitter.com/X3GEZk1sDC
— X Freeze (@XFreeze) August 26, 2026

Tesla just brought one of the most expensive parts of a battery in-house.

Giga Texas is now running North America’s first large-scale cathode factory, producing the critical material used inside Tesla’s 4680 cells.

That means less dependence on overseas suppliers, tighter… https://t.co/JGf0OxhK43 pic.twitter.com/S007SMBC2F
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) August 27, 2026

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

Debt Rattle August 27 2026

Aug 272026

August 27, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:00 am Finance Tagged with: Canada, data center, Dolly Parton, Groundhog Day, Meta, Ratcliffe, Ukraine, Zelensky 46 Responses »

Pablo Picasso Self portrait with palette 1906

• Hormuz And The Law Of Diminishing Returns: When Leverage Burns (ET)

• Talk of Ukrainian Victory Like ‘Groundhog Day’ – ex-US Official (RT)

• Ukraine Is Definitely Losing In Conflict — Kremlin (TASS)

• EU Buries Plan To Steal Russian Assets For Ukraine – EurActiv (RT)

• Ukraine a Western-Backed ‘Zelensky Concentration Camp’ – Moscow (RT)

• Zelensky Continues To Oppose Wartime Democracy (Weeks)

• CIA Director John Ratcliffe Visited Moscow (CTH)

• White House Press Release: “Ending Canada’s Free Ride” (CTH)

• Canada Trade Minister LeBlanc Makes Mark Carney Look Like an Idiot (CTH)

• China’s Data Center Psyop and the 100,000% Rounding Error (Stephen Green)

• Remembering Dolly Through the Song I Loved First (Chris Queen)

• Meta’s $18bn Reckoning For Social Media On Child Safety (BBC)

• James Carville Releases His Signature Uncut Product (Turley)

https://twitter.com/AdamMoczar/status/2092357395536359572?s=20 https://twitter.com/BasilTheGreat/status/2092526537526374759?s=20 https://twitter.com/NaomiSeibt/status/2092292533137101071?s=20

'Europeans now pay 8.6 (!) times more for natural gas than Americans' https://t.co/8l0k7OWh6i
— Willem Middelkoop (@wmiddelkoop) August 26, 2026

President Trump Says He would Sign an Act to BAN Sharia Law in America.

"I would absolutely prohibit the Sharia law thing and it is happening in this country a little bit and when we see it, we take it out and you have to take it out."

Sharia law is not compatible with… pic.twitter.com/VG4b7TEyc8
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) August 26, 2026

“The story of Iranian success and American failure fit expectations many already held. Contradictory evidence produced cognitive dissonance.”

• Hormuz And The Law Of Diminishing Returns: When Leverage Burns (ET)

For months, the assumption that the Strait of Hormuz was Tehran’s ultimate card dominated commentary on the war.

As a narrow waterway through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and a substantial share of liquefied natural gas had historically passed, it appeared to be a chokepoint Iran could close or severely disrupt at will. It did not need to destroy every tanker. Hitting a small percentage with drones, cruise missiles, speedboats, or mines would spike insurance rates, deter crews and companies, and effectively shut the strait without continuous physical control.
This idea was not new for 2026. It had long been a feature of the Iranian strategic posture, treated as both a military instrument and a political myth-proof that even under pressure Tehran retained a decisive lever over the global energy system. Parts of the Western media and independent analysts amplified the same narrative.Relying on incomplete open-source shipping data, especially once vessels began sailing dark, many concluded that the United States had been caught unprepared and lacked a realistic path to reopen the waterway. Hormuz, they argued, was effectively closed or closable at Iran’s discretion. That framing was powerful, but also incomplete.
How the Threat Has Been Eroded
The assumption that Iran’s detection and targeting system could not be dismantled without dramatic escalation proved wrong. Under the U.S. Central Command, also known as CENTCOM, and with significant involvement from the Fifth Fleet and Air Force components, the United States ran a sustained effort to degrade the sensors Iran needed to find and hit ships. Iran relied on mobile truck-mounted radars, drones, cruise missiles, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) speedboats, and naval mines. Inside the narrow strait, ships move in relatively predictable lanes. Iran combined active radars with passive electro-optical and infrared cameras on elevated terrain and islands such as Qeshm, Larak, and Abu Musa.
Mobile radars would radiate briefly to locate shipping, then shut down and move before anti-radiation missiles could arrive. Once a ship’s approximate position was known, strike systems could be sent to search. The vulnerability was that every radar emission could be detected. American aircraft responded systematically with anti-radiation missiles while visual and intelligence efforts located the passive sensors. This was the core of what some involved called “draining the swamp.” Iran had redundancy, but the number of sensors was finite. Hundreds of precision strikes gradually reduced Iran’s ability to see traffic in the strait. As the detection layer thinned, the effectiveness of the strike systems declined with it.
Parallel efforts neutralized mines with unmanned vessels and declared the southern lane near Oman largely clear. Convoys moved under escort, often at night with the automated information system (AIS) off. Arleigh Burke-class destroyers with Aegis radars and standard missile (SM)-family interceptors formed the backbone; drones and Apache helicopters armed with laser-guided rockets provided additional cover. American ships also engaged IRGC speedboats that closed on the convoys.
On the commercial side, the United States addressed insurance barriers. In early March, President Donald Trump directed the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to provide political risk insurance and guarantees for maritime trade. The DFC, working with the Treasury and CENTCOM, established a revolving reinsurance facility of roughly $20 billion-later expanded with private partners including Chubb-focused on hull, machinery, and cargo cover. Early uptake was limited. As Iranian success rates fell, more vessels joined.
Results have been significant. CENTCOM has reported assisting well over a thousand commercial vessels and moving hundreds of millions of barrels since the spring. Independent trackers often showed lower numbers because much of the traffic sailed dark. Pre-war throughput was 20 million to 21 million barrels per day. Flows through Hormuz remain below that, but combined with the Abu Dhabi-Fujairah pipeline and Saudi Arabia’s pipeline to Yanbu in the Red Sea, volumes recovered enough to keep oil prices in the $85 to $95 range-elevated, but far from the predicted catastrophe.
Not Seeing the True Picture
Public data lagged for both technical and psychological reasons. Ships that went dark during transit normally turned their AIS trackers back on afterward, so theoretically they could have been tracked and counted, yet matching was imperfect amid overlapping night movements, incomplete satellite reception, intermittent signals, and ship-to-ship transfers. Commercial trackers attempt corrections using imagery and other data, but confidence thresholds still produce undercounts relative to what escorting forces could see.
There was also a narrative reason. The story of Iranian success and American failure fit expectations many already held. Contradictory evidence produced cognitive dissonance. The common response was to protect the original frame-by applying greater skepticism to inconvenient details and treating quieter progress as temporary. In a contested information environment, narratives that confirm prior expectations often outlast those that require revision.

“..Fyodorov stated in particular, “it seems that we are gradually, slowly, losing [in the conflict].”

• Ukraine Is Definitely Losing In Conflict — Kremlin (TASS)

Dmitry Peskov

The dynamics at the frontline clearly show that Ukraine is losing the conflict, Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday. “The fact that Ukraine is losing the conflict is unequivocal and the dynamics in all frontline areas clearly demonstrate this,” Peskov said at a press briefing. His statement comes after Ukrainian ex-Defense Minister Mikhail Fyodorov’s interview with Reuters on Tuesday. Fyodorov stated in particular, “it seems that we are gradually, slowly, losing [in the conflict].”.

“.. it is the same cycle of promise and despair, promise and failure that, again, has done nothing but cost the lives of both Russian and Ukrainian men and increasingly women,”

• Talk of Ukrainian Victory Like ‘Groundhog Day’ – ex-US Official (RT)

Steve Gill

Repeated claims that Ukraine is about to turn the tide against Russia and achieve a military victory are like being trapped in a time loop, a former White House official has told RT. The latest wave of media reports predicting a breakthrough in Kiev’s military campaign came on the heels of an escalation in Ukrainian long-range drone strikes on Russian oil refineries, retail warehouses, and cargo ships. Ukrainian officials claimed the attacks would pressure Moscow into accepting Kiev’s terms for a peace settlement.

Russia instead intensified its own strikes, virtually paralyzing crucial Ukrainian trade through Black Sea ports and inflicting other damage. On Sunday, President Vladimir Putin said Kiev was the one that “opened Pandora’s box.” “I feel like the old American movie ‘Groundhog Day’,” conservative media host Steve Gill, who served in the office of the US Trade Representative under Presidents George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton, told RT.
“How many times do we have to hear, ‘oh, it’s the spring offensive, the fall offensive, the summer offensive, the winter offensive that is going to win things for Ukraine? And it is the same cycle of promise and despair, promise and failure that, again, has done nothing but cost the lives of both Russian and Ukrainian men and increasingly women,” he added. Gill also suggested that Ukrainians who want to end the hostilities are in no position to do so because the country does not determine its own foreign policy.
“The ones who are making the decisions in Western Europe – and some in the United States, some who have the ear of President [Donald] Trump – are feeding misinformation and disinformation both through media and through the policymakers that is continuing the violence, continuing the death, and continuing this folly of Ukraine thinking that they’re somehow winning on the battlefield when nothing could be further from the truth,” he explained.

“Obstacles to Brussels’ plan – including Belgium’s fierce opposition – remain the same ..”

• EU Buries Plan To Steal Russian Assets For Ukraine – EurActiv (RT)

The EU is highly reluctant to revive plans to steal more than $200 billion in frozen Russian sovereign reserves and hand them over to cash-strapped Ukraine, EurActiv reported on Tuesday, citing sources.

On Monday, European leaders flocked to Kiev in a show of solidarity for Ukraine, which marked its 35th Independence Day, but the talks quickly turned to the country’s numerous issues, including a substantial budgetary deficit. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky told European officials that his government still faces a €23.5 billion ($27.4 billion) shortfall on top of EU funding already promised and urged Brussels to accelerate the next instalment of its €90 billion support loan.
According to EurActiv, while the EU’s attention once again pivoted to the idea of confiscating around €210 billion of Russian funds immobilized in EU institutions, mostly in the Belgian-based Euroclear, “there is little sign the issue is about to return to the table in Brussels.” “The obstacles and the reservations by a number of member states haven’t changed,” a senior EU official told the outlet.
Last year, EU officials proposed a scheme to leverage the frozen Russian assets as collateral to issue a loan to Kiev, which it would repay only after receiving reparations from Moscow. Separately, the EU had already agreed to redirect net windfall profits generated by the immobilized assets to Ukraine.Russia has condemned the asset freeze as “theft,” ruled out paying any reparations to Ukraine, and has warned the EU of harsh retaliation if it confiscates the funds one way or another.
However, the scheme – which was championed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen – met fierce opposition from a number of EU members, most notably Belgium. Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever argued that the plan would leave it uniquely exposed to legal and financial pushback from Russia. “
Taking [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s money and leaving the risks with [Belgium]. That’s not going to happen,” he said last year. Euroclear also vehemently opposed the seizure plot, at one point warning that it could sue the EU if the bloc tries to confiscate the assets. Several other EU leaders also raised concerns that confiscating Russian assets would erode international law and tarnish the bloc’s reputation and standing among investors.

Kiev has descended into complete repression at home and “outright terror” against Russian civilians, the UN envoy has said ..

• Ukraine a Western-Backed ‘Zelensky Concentration Camp’ – Moscow (RT)

Ukraine has been transformed into a “Zelensky concentration camp” with Western assistance, Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has said, accusing Kiev of suppressing dissent at home and increasingly resorting to attacks on civilians in Russia.

Nebenzia made the remarks at a UN Security Council meeting on Monday marking the 35th anniversary of Ukraine’s declaration of independence. The session was requested by the council’s five European members – Denmark, France, Greece, Latvia, and the UK – which reiterated their full support for Kiev. The Russian diplomat questioned whether Ukraine has anything to celebrate, arguing that successive governments have run the country “into the ground” and that Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky accelerated the process.
“With the most active involvement of the countries of the collective West, which claim to be ‘civilized’ and ‘democratic,’ Ukraine has morphed into a ‘Zelensky concentration camp,’ where any dissent or opposition is completely prohibited and those who find the courage to voice an alternative point of view are thrown behind bars without trial or due process, or physically eliminated,” he said.
Nebenzia described the persecution of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the glorification of Nazi collaborators, and the suppression of shared history and the Russian language – including a ban on a popular Russian cartoon – as a “vivid illustration of the sheer wretchedness of Kiev’s rulers.”Amid a growing crackdown on dissent and a deteriorating battlefield situation, Kiev has now slipped into “outright terror against Russia’s civilian population,” Nebenzia said.
“Terror has become the last resort for Kiev in its attempt to reverse the situation that is not currently in its favor,” he added. “At the same time, Zelensky continues to beg his Western patrons for new shipments of weapons and ammunition, which are then used to hit Russian cities, residential areas, and civilian infrastructure.”The envoy said at least 475 Russian civilians were killed or injured in Ukrainian attacks from August 10 to 16 alone, with 69 fatalities, including children. He highlighted a strike on Nizhnekamsk that killed 13 people and wounded 78, as well as attacks in Novorossiysk, Rostov Region, and a number of towns in Donbass, which Kiev claims as its territory.
“It appears that Ukraine’s Western patrons, not to mention Zelensky himself, still harbor the dangerous illusion that further escalation, strikes deep inside our territory and terror against civilians will somehow force us to accept an ultimatum that is being pushed under the guise of peace.” Nebenzia said Russia retains the battlefield initiative and rejected calls for a temporary ceasefire that would give Kiev time to regroup and its Western sponsors time to rearm it. He warned that there would be no meaningful diplomatic process as long as Russia is confronted with ultimatums and threats while the reality on the ground is ignored.

The nazis have total control now, including financially. they won’t give that up voluntarily.

• Zelensky Continues To Oppose Wartime Democracy (Weeks)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is facing mounting pressure to hold elections. The Ukrainian leader was elected to a five-year term in 2019, which expired in May 2024. Last week, Ukraine’s former defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov publicly called for elections, breaking what has been characterized as a “wartime taboo” within the nation’s elite. He continued to demand elections over the weekend and also directly accused the Defense Ministry of corruption.

Fedorov is not the first high-profile Ukrainian figure to call for elections. Back in 2024, Kiev Mayor Vitali Klitschko denounced Zelensky and called him an “autocrat” for refusing to hold elections. But Fedorov is the first figure to have served within the upper echelons of the national government to publicly endorse the restoration of democracy. On Sunday, Zelensky released comments slamming Fedorov’s recommendation as a threat to Ukrainian national security. “I believe that if we want to destroy the country, then during such a war we can move in the selection of elections,” Zelensky said.
While Zelensky has portrayed wartime elections as an existential threat to all of Ukraine, he also said he would be open to elections if the nation’s allies secured “specific conditions” that would allow all military personnel and displaced civilians, millions of people, to participate. This pledge undid the myth that Ukraine is forbidden to hold wartime elections by its own constitution under material law. It is also such an unlikely scenario; Zelensky appears open to democracy while safely shielded from it. If elections were held, he would lose.
The challenge from Fedorov is significant because the 35-year-old was the youngest minister of defense in Ukraine’s history, and his firing last month triggered protests throughout the country. Despite having no military experience, the former tech entrepreneur was viewed as revolutionizing Ukraine’s drone warfare. He only served for a few months before a rift with Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi, commander of Ukraine’s armed forces at the time, prompted Zelensky to fire him.
After protests broke out following Fedorov’s sacking, Zelensky tried to placate the people by firing Syrskyi as well. This has not turned down the temperature, as protestors want Fedorov reinstated. The anger is understandable. Zelensky and his administration are keeping the nation at war, and there is no end in sight. The war has been the justification for martial law, and the martial law has been the justification for the temporary, indefinite suspension of democracy.

“.. the direction points to intelligence sharing or notification.”

• CIA Director John Ratcliffe Visited Moscow (CTH)

CIA Director John Ratcliffe made an unexpected visit to Moscow, Russia, today. According to flight data and new media reporting Director Ratcliffe flew into Latvia and from Latvia into Russia on a C-17 military transport plane.

VIA CBS – CIA Director John Ratcliffe is in Moscow, Russia, for meetings, sources familiar with the situation told CBS News on Tuesday. News of his trip comes after a U.S. Air Force Boeing C-17A Globemaster III transport plane was spotted at a Moscow airport, along with a U.S. diplomatic motorcade. Neither the U.S. nor Russian governments has commented on the identity of the U.S. official in Russia or the purpose of the visit. The CIA did not immediately comment. It appears to be Ratcliffe’s first known trip to Russia as CIA director, though he has maintained contact with Russian intelligence counterparts. (more)
VIA AXIOS – CIA director John Ratcliffe is visiting Moscow on Tuesday for talks with Russian officials, two U.S. officials said. Why it matters: This is Ratcliffe’s first trip to Moscow since he took office and the highest-level visit by a Trump administration official to Russia since January. Ahead of Ratcliffe’s trip, the U.S. told Ukraine that a senior delegation was traveling to Moscow and asked it to suspend strikes until it leaves, according to a source with knowledge of the matter. (link) We shall not speculate too much on the purpose and intent of the visit; however, overall, the direction points to intelligence sharing or notification.
Recently the British announced they would be sharing “storm shadow missile” technology with Ukraine in order for Ukraine to build them for themselves. The Storm Shadow (also known as SCALP-EG in France) is a Franco-British, long-range, air-launched cruise missile used for precision deep-strike attacks against high-value targets. Essentially, the Storm Shadow missile is the U.K version of the Tomahawk cruise missile.
Ukraine would be building those missiles with money provided by the EU from the confiscated Russian sovereign wealth fund. Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin likely doesn’t appreciate that very much. According to Visegrad, “President Putin had a major event scheduled for today, with hundreds of people preparing for it. The event was canceled due to the visit of the CIA director, according to Kremlin pool journalists.” CIA Director John Ratcliffe is now returning home from Moscow.

Trudeau and Carney are girls dressed as guys. Trump has no time for that. If they were just normal people, he’d be very nice to them.

• White House Press Release: “Ending Canada’s Free Ride” (CTH)

Hopefully CTH readers have followed this story close enough to be able to predict where it ends. The White House has released an official and scathing press release outlining the lengthy and long-term issues with Canada and trade disputes.

WHITE HOUSE – Canada has been ripping off the United States for decades — and President Donald J. Trump is done letting them get away with it. Last week, the U.S. offered Canada the most preferential market access of any country on Earth, with deep cuts on steel, aluminum, autos, lumber, and more. Instead of partnership, Canada chose unreasonable demands, walk-backs, and flat-out rejection.
The record of Canadian abuse is clear and deliberate:
• FACT: Canada is joined only by the People’s Republic of China in choosing retaliation over negotiation. Their continued discriminatory treatment of U.S. commerce has burdened American workers, farmers, and businesses.
• FACT: Canada alone imposed discriminatory 25% tariffs and company-specific quotas on U.S. motor vehicles — measures applied to no other country. As a result, U.S. vehicle exports to Canada crashed 22% over the last year.
• FACT: Canada banned American wine, beer, and spirits in nearly every province and territory — while other countries have faced no such restrictions. As a result, U.S. alcohol exports to Canada collapsed 81% in a single year.
• FACT: Canada locks out U.S. dairy with tariff-rate quotas far more restrictive than those given to Europe, plus over-quota tariffs of nearly 300% — rates so extreme they function as a near-total ban and rank among the highest agricultural tariffs in the developed world.
• FACT: Canada has extracted a persistent average annual goods trade deficit of roughly $50 billion from the U.S. over the last decade — while refusing reciprocal access. FACT: Canada targeted American aerospace manufacturer Gulfstream for years. They effectively prohibited the sale of its G500, G600, G700, and G800 models while shielding its own competitor — until President Trump intervened.
• FACT: Canada’s protectionist barriers — discriminatory auto quotas, alcohol bans, and dairy lockouts — have hammered American companies. This has cost U.S. producers billions in lost sales, forced layoffs, and driven market share to foreign competitors who face none of the same restrictions.
• FACT: Without the United States, Canada could not survive. Canada sends roughly three-quarters of all its goods exports to America — and the U.S. market is where Canada gets the overwhelming majority of its money and economic oxygen.
• FACT: Canada’s failed trade policies are driving its own manufacturers south. A recent survey found 42% of Canadian manufacturers have already moved or are planning to move production to the U.S.
• FACT: Canada is doubling down on tariffs targeting American workers. Canada just announced an additional $27.6 billion in tariffs on American businesses — including a 50% tariff on American steel and aluminum, a 25% tariff on American fish, and a 25% tariff on American tools.
• FACT: The U.S. economy is approximately 13 times larger than the Canadian economy and home to over eight times as many people. The United States has the clear leverage. President Trump said it best: “Canada is easily the most difficult and unreasonable. They feel entitled, but they are not a State and will be entitled no longer!” Canadian leadership chose retaliation over partnership — and America is no longer willing to carry them.

D’oh Canada

“..,Outlines the Fracture Points and ..”:

• Canada Trade Minister LeBlanc Makes Mark Carney Look Like an Idiot (CTH)

–There are many people in Canada demanding to see the rough draft proposals of the U.S-Canada trade agreement so they can judge for themselves the issues that Carney claimed were irreconcilable. For those people this interview today by Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc will only embolden those requests.
Trade Emissary LeBlanc outlined the major fracture points that drove Prime Minister Mark to reject the deal. I’ll put the full interview below which everyone should watch because what LeBlanc outlined is rather funny. Carney was obviously looking for a reason to walk away, because the fracture points were ridiculously small.
Essentially, it boils down to four issues. !1) Removal of tariffs on Canadian assembled Semi-Trucks. (2) U.S. streaming services writing code for “search engines” in the French language. (3) Canada demanding 5% of gross revenues from U.S. tech platforms, and the last one is silly because it already exists: (4) the U.S. having a right to reject a trade deal made by Canada with a non-market economy, ie. CHINA.

Taking the issues one by one we start with
• U.S. tariffs on Canadian Semi Trucks. Canada wanted tariffs on Big Rigs removed. The U.S. said no. The reason is simple. Big Rigs assembled/built in Canada are falling apart in the USA. Why? Because they are full of cheap Chinese component goods and parts that wear out quickly. The U.S. wants two things on this issue. Either: (1) Make them in the USA, or (2) stop using cheap Chinese component parts. The parts that Canada are using are not even available in the USA because we tariff and reject them, so why should we accept them when Canada installs them? Either quit using Chinese parts (hence, the trade alignment against Chinese imports), or accept a tariff equal to the rate we would apply if the product was coming directly from China.
• U.S. tariffs on Canadian Semi Trucks. Canada wanted tariffs on Big Rigs removed. The U.S. said no. The reason is simple. Big Rigs assembled/built in Canada are falling apart in the USA. Why? Because they are full of cheap Chinese component goods and parts that wear out quickly. The U.S. wants two things on this issue. Either: (1) Make them in the USA, or (2) stop using cheap Chinese component parts. The parts that Canada are using are not even available in the USA because we tariff and reject them, so why should we accept them when Canada installs them? Either quit using Chinese parts (hence, the trade alignment against Chinese imports), or accept a tariff equal to the rate we would apply if the product was coming directly from China.

• Intellectual Property. Canada was demanding 5% of U.S. tech platform gross revenue (not profit, gross), they call it a tax. Canada then uses the “tax revenue” to subsidize Canadian media and information platforms that promote the approved government message. In essence, Canada demands that information providers pay them 5% of their revenue so that Canada can subsidize information providers they approve of. This is what the Canadian government calls “cultural protection.” In reality it is state-run media using a financial system that would make Vladimir Putin blush.
• U.S. Right to Limit Canadian Trade Deals. This point is exponentially ridiculous for Canada to be upset about because the current USMCA/CUSMA already has that clause. The U.S (or Mexico) can exit the USMCA if Canada enters into a trade agreement with a “non-market” economy, ie China. [USMCA Sec 32:10]

Canada was already in violation of the USMCA/CUSMA when they entered into a trade agreement with China and agreed to import Chinese EVs. This action triggered the U.S. to become more focused on the stuff Canada was going to import; hence, the renewed emphasis on the clause.
That’s it. Prime Minister Mark Carney blew up the trade discussion based on his demand that: Canada should be allowed to make any deal they want with China; that Chinese component parts be allowed in Canadian assembled Semi Trucks; that streaming services install a French language search engine; and that tech platforms pay him to censor information and subsidize official narratives.
In other words, Mark Carney was looking for an excuse/justification not to make a trade deal, and make a political statement that would appeal to the uber leftist French Québécois and his partners in Beijing.
Clear enough?
Here’s Dominic LeBlanc:

“.. a teensy little 100,000% rounding error, about how much water data centers require ”

• China’s Data Center Psyop and the 100,000% Rounding Error (Stephen Green)

When I take a particularly cute photo of my 14-week-old puppy, I click the little heart button right there in my camera app. Without me doing anything else, the next time a screensaver comes up — on my laptop, my desktop, or even on the massive living room TV — the new pic joins the older photos scrolling by. Thank you, data centers.

Earlier this year, my wife was delayed by weather bringing our sons home from the airport after their first No Parents! trip together, so she hit the Share ETA button on the CarPlay screen in her Jeep. Virtually instantaneously, I got an alert on my phone letting me know they’d be late and not to worry. Thank you very much for that one, data centers. Sure, the internet is a “series of tubes,” as everyone must be aware by now, but the data doesn’t flow through them on its own.
Yes, AI requires bigger and more energy-hungry data centers — and we can’t seem to get enough AI. AI is either going to evolve itself into Skynet to kill us all, or deliver enough productivity growth to eliminate the deficit and make our accumulated debt look puny. I’m somewhere in the middle. I fully expect someday that my domestic help robot will somehow manage to kneecap me, but will then prove invaluable in nursing me back to health while still keeping the house tidy.
But none of it — not our messaging apps, not our GPS apps, not the website you’re reading right now — none of it works without data centers. To a surprising degree, data centers are the internet. And this country’s embrace of the internet is perhaps the most important among several reasons we left Europe in the economic dust. I’d also add that the reputable messaging apps are generally encrypted end-to-end, so for the first time in history, the general public’s default way of talking to one another, sharing photos, locations, and the like, is secure from prying eyes.
So why all the data center hate? While nearly all of it is ginned up, in my opinion, much of it rests on a “mistake,” a teensy little 100,000% rounding error, about how much water data centers require in Karen Hao’s purportedly nonfiction book, Empire of AI. Here you go:

Author @_KarenHao really messed up the discourse by publishing misinformation that over-reported data center water by 100,000% in her book, blaming the government (she misread the file), and then doing a book tour and selling the book anyways. https://t.co/zBF1OzsUYk pic.twitter.com/23D85kcKKC
— Kane 謝凱堯 (@kane) August 26, 2026

As it turns out, data centers — all data centers; not just the ones dedicated to AI — use less water than golf courses do. In fact, they use a fraction of 1% so small compared to golf courses that it actually could be a rounding error. And yet I can’t log into X without seeing everyone from Bernie Sanders (CPUSA-Vt. Oblast) to low-follower randos calling for a moratorium on data center construction. Remember when 5G radio waves were going to melt our brains and sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids? This is that, but even more important to combat.
But here’s where it really gets weird. I follow this stuff professionally, yet even I had to have a colleague share a link on X — no mainstream media source, naturally — to learn about Hao and her little tiny error. Even though she “discovered” her mistake in November of 2025, the whole data center controversy didn’t gain steam until the summer of 2026. Something stinks — and here is Blume Industries to explain: “Just gonna remind you the journo who produced the bogus water data for data centers now lives in Hong Kong. I’m sure you’re smart enough to figure it out from there.”
So yeah, I’m completely comfortable calling the sprang-up-outta-nowhere data center “debate” a Communist Chinese psyop to kneecap our high-tech edge over the People’s Republic.

“That’s part of the God-given talent you’re born with. It’s not something you can teach.”

• Remembering Dolly Through the Song I Loved First (Chris Queen)

I’ve written extensively here and on my Substack about the musical influences on my life. My mom and aunts were the primary agents of my musical exposure. My mom was a massive fan of The Carpenters and early Beatles, and she had the radio on all the time in the car. My aunts opened my ears to what we now call “classic rock.”

My dad was a different story. His musical tastes were much narrower in the ‘70s. I remember that he had a sticker advertising WPLO, a country station, on his Jeep, but I remember him listening to WBIE (I can still hear the jingle: “WBIE! Georgia’s! Country! Giant!”). He also had two 8-tracks: One was a greatest-hits compilation from Porter Wagoner and Dolly Parton, and the other was what was then Dolly’s current album, Here You Come Again.
The title track connected my parents’ distinct musical worlds. Since it was Dolly’s first hit to crossover to the pop music marketplace, I heard it on the radio in our apartment or in the car with my mom, and I also heard it on the 8-track when I was riding with my dad. I might be wrong, but I think “Here You Come Again” was the first radio song that I learned all the lyrics to. My mom also had the sheet music, and I remember her playing it as I sang along. It was one of my favorite songs on the radio at the time, and it remains my favorite Dolly track.
The album was part of a calculated move on the part of Dolly and her management team to expand her horizons beyond country radio. Her previous album, 1977’s self-produced New Harvest … First Gathering, deliberately incorporated pop and R&B elements but made no splash outside the country marketplace.
For Here You Come Again, Parton turned to Los Angeles-based producer Gary Klein, who enlisted top-notch studio musicians, including keyboardist (and later ultra-pop producer) David Foster and drummer Jim Keltner, to play on the album. The title track, which was also to serve as the first single, wasn’t one of Dolly’s compositions. Instead, “Here You Come Again” came from the pens of Brill Building stalwarts Barry Mann and Cynthia Weil.
Side note: I was precocious enough at age five to be able to read the lyrics and credits on the sheet music. I saw those names, and I couldn’t believe that people would sing songs that other people wrote unless they were in a movie! Even though the album — and especially its title cut — was part of a specific strategy to launch Dolly to pop stardom, Dolly wasn’t about to leave country behind. She talked Klein into adding subtle steel guitar to “Here You Come Again,” and that small detail helped ground the song in both stylistic camps.
Listeners could tell that this song was something different from the intro. Mix Online explains: The rhythm section on the track included Dean Parks (guitar), David Foster (keyboards), David Hungate (bass) and Jim Keltner (drums). The track opens with Foster’s Fender Rhodes. He recalls the session as fairly groundbreaking:
“I played the Fender Rhodes on the basic track,” Foster says. “Then I came up with the idea of duplicating exactly the same part on the acoustic piano, something I—or to my knowledge, no one—had ever done before. It became an interesting sound that years later became a stock ‘push of a button’ sound on many synthesizers, which some even called ‘Fosterized.’ “Also, I remember that while waiting to overdub the acoustic piano, no music was playing in my headphones and the tape op [second engineer] suddenly realized that he still had every track In Record and he ended up erasing about the first 20 seconds of the master,” Foster continues. “They had to go to an earlier take, splice them together and then I did my overdub acoustic piano part.”
Keltner and engineer Armin Steiner said that Dolly’s scratch vocals, which she recorded live with the band, were so good that some of them made the finished record. The arrangement proved that even though “Here You Come Again” was tailor-made for both country and pop radio, it wasn’t a simple track. The song crosses five keys throughout its journey, which made the song even more effective. If you’re not musically inclined, you may think I’m geeking out a bit; if so, skip a paragraph or two. ChatGPT helped me chart out those key changes.
“Here You Come Again” key changes
The key changes get Mann and Weil’s point across: Whenever Dolly (as the protagonist) thinks she’s gotten it all together, here comes that old flame back into her life to knock her off her equilibrium. Each time she thinks she has regained her footing, the song returns in a new key, familiar but no longer quite where she left it. Even before I was better versed in music, I knew that there was something about the sound of the song that was interesting and different.
The crossover gamble paid off. “Here You Come Again” hit number three on the Billboard Hot 100 and number two on the easy listening charts, but it also spent five weeks atop the country charts and won her a Grammy for Best Country Vocal Performance, Female — her first. Better still, it launched her career into the stratosphere. The band and crew recognized something special in Dolly. Her talent and personality dovetailed to make her more than just an ordinary entertainer.
“As a human being—forget about her great gifts as an entertainer— this is the one of the most delightful people we’ve ever had in the entertainment industry,” Steiner told Mix Online. “As a human being, she’s extraordinary. And she has such a beautiful voice, an incredibly identifiable sound, identifiable diction; she’s a fine writer and a great interpreter of lyrics. You believed what she sang. It’s all part of the talent and part of the human being. That’s part of the God-given talent you’re born with. It’s not something you can teach.”

Nearly half a century later, I can appreciate the craftsmanship that I couldn’t have understood at five: Foster’s layered keyboards, the subtle steel guitar, the improbable sequence of key changes, and Dolly’s effortless vocal holding it all together. But when I hear “Here You Come Again,” I still hear my mom playing it on the piano, the radio in her car, and that 8-track in my dad’s Jeep.
Dolly made a record that she intended to cross musical boundaries without leaving its country identity behind, and in our family, it did exactly that. It brought my parents’ different musical worlds together and gave me a song that has followed me for most of my life. Now, whenever those opening notes begin, here she comes again — and for three minutes, I’m five years old all over again.

Too big to fail.

“The worst-case scenario [..] was $1.4tn [..] up to $18bn (over a period of 10 years) is significantly smaller. Meta is not admitting to any wrongdoing…

“Instagram and Facebook’s billions of users provide the company with a goldmine of data, and the data of adults can be used to sell ads.”

• Meta’s $18bn Reckoning For Social Media On Child Safety (BBC)

Meta’s decision to agree to an $18bn (£13.3bn) settlement on Wednesday, to resolve claims that Facebook and Instagram harmed children, came as a surprise. I was expecting weeks of courtroom drama as 29 states – almost two-thirds of North America – took on one US tech giant.Technically, the trial was about children’s online privacy. It was based on a US law called the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), which is nearly 30 years old and predates all of today’s biggest social platforms. It centred around Meta’s historic gathering and use of data belonging to children under the age of 13 over a period of several years.

In reality, it was a co-ordinated attack on the firm’s online safety credentials.Meta, alongside other social media apps, is under fire around the world as 2026 is shaping up to be a year of reckoning for the entire industry – perhaps our days of doomscrolling are numbered. Meta has fought hard, over multiple lawsuits spanning many months and at great expense, to defend its commitment to protecting children on its platforms. More than once, I’ve been invited to detailed presentations at Meta’s London HQ, where senior executives have walked journalists like me through the many safety tools the company has launched over the years designed to give children better protection on its apps.
I have also met the parents of young people who have come to harm on those same platforms, and others who admit to being totally overwhelmed by the sheer number of safety tools that require their oversight – at the last count Meta had more than 60 of them, and that was just on Instagram. The trial went on for just five days, and came to an end before CEO Mark Zuckerberg took to the stand. But it was rough for Meta. Whistleblower Arturo Bejar, who once worked at Instagram, claimed that in the past he had told bosses that harmful stuff was happening to children on the platform, and no action was taken.
Another executive said he didn’t remember writing on a slide deck that sometimes Meta chose to pay fines for violating regulations rather than make changes. Internal memos suggested that the firm knew opt-in tools tended to have low adoption rates, and yet it still launched safety features that were not switched on by default. There had been intense speculation that Meta would have faced hundreds of billions of dollars in fines if it had lost. The worst-case scenario, which would have been the maximum penalty imposed for every single child who used one of its platforms for more than half an hour a day during a 12-year window, was $1.4tn (£1tn) – roughly the same as the company’s entire value.
That of course was never going to happen, but a more realistic figure was still in the hundreds of billions. By comparison, up to $18bn (over a period of 10 years) is significantly smaller. Meta is not admitting to any wrongdoing. You could argue that settling protects its core business – social networks are still the way in which it makes most of its money. Instagram and Facebook’s billions of users provide the company with a goldmine of data, and the data of adults can be used to sell ads. Meta may say it is now laser-focused on AI, but it still needs the vast revenue generated by its social apps.
What is Meta changing?
As part of the settlement, the social media giant has agreed to make a number of changes to the way Instagram and Facebook operate for its youngest users. Some experts say it is long overdue. The new safety barriers include a two-hour time limit across both platforms, which will be a default setting for known teen users. But direct messaging on the platforms will not count towards the daily use limit.Notifications will be muted between midnight and 06:00 and on school days between 08:00 and 15:00.Likes on posts and content will also be entirely hidden on the platforms for teens.
Most of these new features will be made either default or an option for teens within six months. However, new efforts by Meta to better identify which users on its platforms are children will take up to a year to be rolled out. I would be surprised if these measures remain within the confines of the US for very long, as other countries will almost certainly be keen to adopt them too. Meta also says the new features will only truly help children if all of its rivals adopt them as well. It’s a highly competitive industry, but given the global backlash against social media and its impact on children, perhaps others like TikTok and Snapchat may have to follow suit.
The question then is whether children will still bother with them, once they are deliberately toned down into a much blander offering. And perhaps that would bring the social media era to a natural end, as existing adults gradually aged out of it. Arturo Bejar, the ex-Instagram engineer turned whistleblower, says the proof of the pudding will be in whether the new teen safety features are effective. “At the end of the day, Meta needs to be held accountable for results, not efforts,” he told me.

“Do you really wanna live in a world without Coca-Cola?”

• James Carville Releases His Signature Uncut Product (Turley)

In Breaking Bad, the character Walter White explains to a major drug dealer why cheaper knockoffs of his signature Blue Sky methamphetamine are just not enough: “So… it’s grade-school tee-ball vs. the New York Yankees. Yours is just some tepid… off-brand, generic cola. What I’m making is classic Coke.”

This week, James Carville released his own uncut, undiluted classic product to a nation of rage addicts. Blue Sky rage. What set off Carville was telling. He and others were outraged that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries met with Trump’s son-in-law and close adviser Jared Kushner to discuss areas of common ground. Such dialogue “with the enemy” is unthinkable in an “age of rage,” particularly for someone like Carville who previously threatened that, once Democrats are back in power, Trump supporters would be treated the same way as Nazi collaborators after World War II.
Carville went into his signature berserker trance on his podcast appropriately called the “Politics War Room”: “These people are a pack of felons and traitors, and you do not meet with them! You do not meet with them. There’s only one thing you can do with people that you genuinely believe deep inside of every fabric of your body are a pack of thieves and a pack of traitors.” As usual, Carville delivers the line with the intensity of a man seconds away from a self-induced stroke. The message, however, is clear. Anyone seeking a middle ground or compromise is a traitor and will be dealt with the same way as collaborators once Democrats regain power.
What is really on display is rage politics. When you feed this addiction, you have to keep your product pure to avoid the pain of rage withdrawal. Carville is asking Democrats the same question as Walter White: “Do you really wanna live in a world without Coca-Cola?” Go with the classic. Go with the rage. Over on the social media safe space for liberals, BlueSky, Carville is being heralded as a prophet of furor. It was a perfect combination. BlueSky was created for liberals to remove themselves, particularly from X, because of conservatives returning to social media after years of censorship.
The media billed BlueSky as the future, as many predicted the rapid death of X. It did not exactly work out that way. Many liberal influencers proclaiming their abandonment of X never actually left and many others have returned. BlueSky is now little more than a progressive boutique in comparison to X. It has an estimated 43 million users as opposed to as many as 600 million for X. (Monthly active users drop to around 27 million versus more than 300 million). Yet, the business model of BlueSky is to offer a protected zone for liberals to rave amongst themselves without the distraction of as many opposing views or voices.
It is a social platform that is premised on the same “you do not meet with them” screed of Carville.Recently, Carville has lashed out at the far left of his party, such as Democratic Socialists, over their radical agenda. However, he and other establishment figures are primarily objecting to the fact that these radical policies will not succeed in the election and return them to power.
Carville has no problem trashing the system to secure and maintain power. He previously called for packing the Supreme Court, but notably told Democrats not to actually talk about it: “If the Democrats win the presidency and both houses of Congress, I think on day one, they should expand the Supreme Court to 13. F—k it. Eat our dust. Don’t run on it. Don’t talk about it. Just do it.”
Other Democratic leaders continue to try to co-opt the mob for their own uses. Senate Minority Leader dismissed questions about the DSA platform in eliminating the presidency, the Supreme Court, and the Senate. These are small differences, according to Schumer, compared with the need to win elections: “Not everyone has the same exact view on every single issue.”
One of those small disagreements is the very existence of the institution that Schumer so desperately wants to lead.Carville and Schumer, however, appear to agree on the key element of the political strategy in keeping the rage alive. The greatest threat to that strategy is any dialogue of Democrats with their Republican neighbors. If reason were to break out before the elections, all could be lost.
The effort reflects the fact that the rage in an age of rage eventually burns off. People look into a mirror on both sides and realize that we have become grotesque like Carville by yielding (indeed enjoying) the anger and hate. Once people start to talk again, it is harder to hate so completely and blindly that hate traffickers need.So Blue Sky rage is hitting the streets. The Classic coke of hate to be injected directly into the veins of a nation of rage addicts. After all, as Walter White asked his fellow traffickers, “Do you really wanna live in a world without Coca-Cola?”

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2092344675533561922?s=20

SpaceX has announced two mega-projects representing at least $116.8 billion in combined investment, all within less than three weeks:

• Terafab in Texas, the world’s largest chip manufacturing facility.

• Starbase, Louisiana, the world’s largest spaceport.

Together, they are… pic.twitter.com/o64tI8kTo8
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) August 25, 2026

Starbase Louisiana will ultimately have over a dozen launch towers, enabling more than 30 Starship flights per day and making it the biggest launch site on Earth!

SpaceX makes sci-fi real. https://t.co/C7Ht0U12ba
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 25, 2026

https://twitter.com/AmericaPartyX/status/2092345401512718753?s=20

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

Debt Rattle August 26 2026

Aug 262026

August 26, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:01 am Finance Tagged with: Barron Trump, Canada, DNC, Dolly Parton, midterm polls, Mojtaba Khamenei, SpaceX 27 Responses »

Fra Filippo Lippi The Virgin Mary 1450-65

• Mojtaba Khamenei Is (Still) Dead (Rick Moran)

• Iran Airs Video of Barron Trump, Offers $10 Million Bounty On His Head (ZH)

• Top Zelensky Staffer Led Out Of Corruption Court In Handcuffs (ZH)

• State Department Moving Toward Mass Visa Cancellation (CTH)

• The Background of Mark Carney Working with DNC Officials and Operatives (CTH)

• The Illusion of Leverage in Canada-US Trade Negotiations (Christian Vezilj)

• Don’t Trust the Midterm Polls (Victor Davis Hanson)

• Cookery for All (James Howard Kunstler)

• “What are You Gonna Even Do with More Money?” Abdul El-Sayed (Turley)

• Hasan Piker: American Jews are Asking for Attacks on Them (Turley)

• Get Ready for the Democrats’ Season of Bloodthirst (Tim O’Brien)

• Why Is SpaceX Buying All That Marshland in Louisiana? (Stephen Green)

• Dolly Parton Passes Away at 80 (Chris Queen)

https://twitter.com/BasilTheGreat/status/2091850006453973104?s=20 https://twitter.com/AdamMoczar/status/2092004747993809195?s=20

This is amazing to see

Alice Weidel of the AfD NOT BACKING DOWN

The Syrians will go home
The Afghans will go home

Remigration is coming

Europe will be savedpic.twitter.com/ejMCCf1ruS
— Basil the Great (@BasilTheGreat) August 24, 2026

Big things are happening in Europe.

New polls show that the right-wing Marine Le Pen is continuing her lead to become the next President of France.

In Germany the AfD party are leading big in the latest polls.

In Austria, the right-wing Freedom Party is at nearly 40%, having a…
— PeterSweden (@PeterSweden7) August 25, 2026

https://twitter.com/warDaniel47/status/2091919445195186344?s=20

The power of a dead man.

• Mojtaba Khamenei Is (Still) Dead (Rick Moran)

In 1975, a brash new TV show premiered. Viewers had never seen anything like Saturday Night Live (SNL). It aired in the 11:30 p.m. time slot on NBC and featured a group of (then) unknown actors doing skits and gags geared toward a younger audience. At the same time, network news coverage had been reporting for weeks about the imminent death of “The Last Fascist,” Generalissimo Francisco Franco. The death watch was interminable. For weeks, network news reported on every minor change in Franco’s condition. If there was no news, some broadcasts concluded with “Franco is still alive.”

Franco finally died on Nov. 20, 1975. The next Saturday night during SNL, anchor Chevy Chase started saying “Franco is still dead” on the “Weekend Update” segment to mock the endless news coverage. It became one of the decade’s most popular catchphrases. I think it’s time to resurrect the gag and apply it to news about fanatical Islamist Mojtaba Khamenei and the endless speculation about whether he’s alive or dead.
Uncounted times since the Feb. 28 bombing that took out his father Ali’s fortified bunker, killing dozens of top-ranking Iranian government officials, it’s been reported that Khamenei the Younger succumbed to his injuries. The regime has admitted that Mojtaba was badly injured, but said he was well enough to speak with the new leaders of the Iranian government. His election as Supreme Leader by the Assembly of Experts has been questioned; he has yet to appear in public, and even top leaders in the government have not laid eyes on him since the death of his father.
An article in The Atlantic by Arash Azizi has started tongues wagging again. Azizi claims that Khamenei the Younger not only merely dead. He’s really, most sincerely dead.Funny thing: Only five individuals have seen the new Supreme Leader. And yet, there’s been a blizzard of pronouncements, edicts, and bombastic statements from him, suggesting an energetic and dynamic leader.
The Atlantic: “Almost six months since his anointment, Iran’s supreme leader has been entirely obscured from the public eye. Not a single contemporaneous picture, video, or audio recording of him has been released. Many of the country’s top political leaders admit that they haven’t seen him—among them Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister and a member of the National Security Council. IranWire, a London-based opposition outlet, reports that not a single cabinet member has met with Mojtaba since he became supreme leader.
Not even Mojtaba’s close friends and relatives have seen him. Fewer than five people have met with Mojtaba since his ascent to power, Mohammad Hossein Khoshvaght, a former official and a relative of Mojataba’s told me, “due to security precautions.”
The rationale is not implausible. Mojtaba would be a likely target for an Israeli or U.S. air strike, such as the one that killed his father. Direct communication from him could supply Iran’s enemies with clues to his whereabouts. He is also said to have sustained injuries in the February strike on his family that have made public speeches and appearances difficult. “I believe Mojtaba has either passed away or is brain-dead,” a staffer at a government institution in Tehran told Azizi. One solid reason why this might not be scuttlebutt is that the amount of communications coming from the Supreme Leader’s office has all but ceased in recent days.
“At least two other government officials told me the same,” Aziz wrote. “One said that he believed Mojtaba died or became brain-dead earlier this month.”mThe Islamic tradition of holding a “wake” 40 days after the death of a loved one was telling. A veritable who’s who of Iranian power brokers showed up at the event commemorating the death of Ali Khamenei, including several of the elder Khamenei’s sons. Missing was the host himself: Mojtaba Khamenei.
Whether Mojtaba is dead or alive is more than idle speculation. Whether Mojtaba is dead or alive, his public absence creates problems for the Iranian regime. The supreme leader holds most of the constitutional power in the Islamic Republic and has in the past served as the final arbiter among the system’s warring factions and institutions. Mojtaba appears to be sitting these conflicts out, at a moment when their outcome could be particularly consequential.
The country’s 13-person National Security Council is effectively running the country as a collective. It is chaired by Pezeshkian, a reformist who favors an end to the war with America, and includes Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the powerful parliamentary speaker who led the talks with the United States. But it also includes General Ahmad Vahidi, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and other military leaders.
General Vahidi is the real power in Iran, while President Pezeshkian concerns himself with domestic matters. Vahidi has the guns, and in Iran’s precarious state, that counts the most. It really doesn’t matter if Khamenei is alive or dead. The Iranian regime has been reborn as a military dictatorship, with the clerics cowering in their mosques. Vahidi is using Mojtaba Khamenei as a frontman, so whether the ayatollah is alive or not is immaterial until the general consolidates power.

His security detail just doubled.

• Iran Airs Video of Barron Trump, Offers $10 Million Bounty On His Head (ZH)

While it was largely Israeli media’s Ch.14 which first called attention to the “Where to kill Barron Trump” clip, the short video does appear to be a creation of Iranian state media. It is indeed authentic.It is currently featured at the Tehran-based Tebyan Cultural Institute’s official Persian-language homepage. The institute is highly visible in Iran (more here), and is affiliated with the Islamic Development Organization, which is under the Supreme Leader and is also linked to the IRGC and its media channels. The video is hosted at the official state institute here.

A MEMRI TV (Middle East Media Research Institute) translation of the video closes by featuring reference to a $10 million dollar bounty placed on the US president’s son Barron, disturbingly…

Iran’s next target: Barron Trump, President Trump’s son, with a $10 million bounty on his head.

Iran’s state television and radio network published classified information revealing the precise locations of Donald Trump’s son and the places he had visited.

Translated by MEMRI TV… pic.twitter.com/RxviWJ1atr
— ilana israelov (@izrailov94) August 24, 2026

The official Tebyan website also features English subtitles for the video. Hawks in the US are already trying to seize on this admittedly somewhat absurd AI-looking video to argue the case for renewed military action. They will try to get Trump’s ear and attention with this.

* * *
As the U.S.-Iran confrontation barrels into a new phase, Tehran’s propaganda machine has gone from Legos to death threats. A newly surfaced Iranian state media video openly fantasizes about the assassination of Barron Trump. The clip, titled “Where to kill Barron Trump,” claims without evidence to have dug up the 20-year-old’s Xbox and Discord accounts.
https://twitter.com/c14english/status/2091482886369067332?s=20
The disturbing video also claims to track the Barron’s movements and displayed depictions of dorms at New York University. The clip also claims a $10 million bounty has been placed on Barron. The video circulated through media tied to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Middle East outlet Al Bawaba reported, according to The New York Post. The clip was first translated by Euronews. The chilling report comes as the Trump administration is preparing to roll out a sweeping campaign to economically strangle Iran and anyone still doing business with it.
As we reported this morning, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that he will hold a Monday press conference to talk about exactly what we’re going to do” about an economic war against Tehran. “We are now entering the endgame. At dawn begins an economic D-Day, the single greatest financial offensive ever marshaled against an adversary,” Bessent warned in an X post on Sunday. “President Trump has dismantled Iran’s military capabilities, destroyed nearly 100 percent of its military factories, and buried its nuclear program.”

“The Islamic Republic has subsisted by dressing extortion as security guarantees. It has drawn strength from a calculus that regards Iranian retaliation as certain and American enforcement as negotiable,” the top Trump official added. “Under President Trump, that era is over. And those who fear the danger of defying Tehran ought not to discount the cost of testing Washington.”
As Bessent’s economic measures loom, the purchasing power of ordinary Iranians continues to plummet. The rial has cratered to a record low, trading around 2.02 million to the dollar on the open market, a staggering gap from the central bank’s official rate of roughly 1.5 million. Rice is up 60% in a matter of months, while beef has exploded 150%. The International Monetary Fund now projects Iran’s economy will contract by 5%.

The corrupt getting rid of the corrupt.

• Top Zelensky Staffer Led Out Of Corruption Court In Handcuffs (ZH)

This is not a sight you see everyday, but it’s one that’s becoming increasingly common in the halls of power in Kiev. Footage of the detention of (now former) deputy head of Zelensky’s office Irina Mudra, seen being led out in handcuffs after a court ordered her pretrial imprisonment on corruption charges, has emerged and is being widely shared. She was Zelensky’s number two chief of staff running the presidential office, essentially…
https://twitter.com/Panchenko_X/status/2092155359578263942?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2092155359578263942%7Ctwgr%5E4f43ae9eedb0893c223f81579842d051055f43f3%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fwatch-top-zelensky-staffer-led-out-corruption-court-handcuffs

The country’s Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office has argued for her detention pending trail at the High Anti-Corruption Court, amid proceedings which began on August 21. Starting on Aug.19, a presidential office statement had confirmed: “Iryna Mudra shall be dismissed from the post of deputy head of the Office of the President of Ukraine.”
National media says that not only did she receive regular monthly income, but the prosecutor has alleged there is at least $4 million among other undeclared assets: During the court hearing, the prosecutor separately mentioned a conversation between Iryna Mudra and Mykytas. According to the prosecution, it concerned the transfer of nearly $4 million, expenses for Mudra’s daughter’s living costs and education in the United States, as well as assets that were not listed in her declaration.
Based on the records of the covert investigative actions, it can be concluded that Mr. Mykytas left her (Mudra – ed.) $4 million; Ms. Mudra systematically receives $20,000–$30,000 every month; she owns a Range Rover that is not included in her declaration, worth approximately 4 million hryvnias. In addition, Ms. Mudra discusses jewelry she owns from Bulgari and discusses with Mykytas her daughter’s education in the United States, for which the annual budget for living expenses and tuition is expected to amount to $250,000. – Vitalii Hrechyshkin

Iryna Mudra

Ukrainian and regional media says her properties were searched last weekend: According to information from Ukrainian parliament member Oleksiy Honcharenko, investigators searched the premises of Iryna Mudra, deputy head of the President’s Office. He gave no further details about the case. The outlet Zerkalo Nedeli reports that the NABU and SAPO operation also involves Vadym Stolar, a lawmaker from the former Opposition Platform — For Life party, and Maksym Mykytas, a former member of the Ukrainian parliament, in addition to Mudra. Officials from the Justice Ministry and representatives of Sense Bank (formerly Alfa-Bank Ukraine) also appear in the case.
The operation was code-named “Forrest Gump.” NABU released a fragment of an audio recording capturing conversations among people named in the case, in which they mention “four sacks” and the President’s Office. “Only a moron would register stolen money and tuition payments in his own children’s names,” a voice on the recording also says. The bail set by the judge this week was reportedly immense…

Irina Mudraya, ex-deputy head of Zelensky's office, says she'll pay the $450,000 bail to stay out of detention.

Prosecutors originally wanted $3.35 million.

I'm sure she can pay much more. Half a million dollars is just pocket change for her. pic.twitter.com/Hg9tA4wUhH
— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) August 25, 2026

All of this follows on a series of prior investigations by NABU and SAPO into corruption at the highest levels of government, which has taken down many officials and been an ongoing source of embarrassment for Ukraine.
These investigations tended to get spun as if ‘heroic’ Zelensky is on a mission to root out corruption and destroy the rot from within. Journalist, Mark Ames has pointed out the following trend: Every shocking Zelensky corruption scandal – and they keep getting worse – is PR’d away as “proof that Ukraine is a functioning western democracy fighting corruption”, as if it’s always one corruption scandal away from turning the corner & becoming Denmark.

“.. preparing to revoke the business and tourism visas of up to 200,000 foreigners..”

• State Department Moving Toward Mass Visa Cancellation (CTH)

Two significant media reports on the topic of immigration today. The first is an AP report showing the State Dept is planning to revoke 200,000 visas that were given after illegal entrants claimed asylum status. The second is DHS requiring $100,000 payment for each H1B visa sought by companies to bring in foreign workers.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is preparing to revoke the business and tourism visas of up to 200,000 foreigners who have applied for or are currently seeking asylum status in the United States. If it happens, the move would be the largest single mass revocation of visas in U.S. history and would likely face legal challenges. Unless challenged or revised, the State Department is expected to announce in the coming weeks the revocation of so-called B1 and B2 visas issued between 2016 and 2026 whose holders have sought asylum or are now seeking asylum, according to State Department documents obtained by The Associated Press and two U.S. officials.
The action will be taken in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security. “We are coordinating with DHS to identify and revoke the nonimmigrant visas of foreigners who have come to the United States claiming to be short-term visitors, but then file for asylum to stay here permanently,” said State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott.

WASHINGTON – The Trump administration has proposed a more than $100,000 fee for H-1B visa applications for skilled foreign workers, a policy that the president introduced last year but had been blocked by a federal judge.= […] In June, a federal judge blocked Trump’s bid to impose the six-figure fee, concluding that it was an unlawful “tax” that required congressional approval. But the Department of Homeland Security revived the proposal on Monday, submitting it online in the Federal Register to be officially published on Tuesday, when a 30-day public-comment period will commence. And the administration is now proposing $103,265 for all new H-1B visa petitions.
The White House declined to comment and referred POLITICO to a statement by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a DHS department, that said the payments would support “immigration programs that otherwise must be funded by taxpayers,” according to USCIS spokesperson Zach Kahler. The White House has also said the fee would help curb misuse of the H-1B program, accusing U.S. employers of undercutting American workers with lower-paid foreign labor.
According to Monday’s proposal, the fee would help generate revenue to fund immigration activities carried out by federal agencies including Customs and Border Protection and ICE. DHS said there may be “a reduction in the number of H-1B cap registrations and some employers, including small entities, may file fewer petitions as a result of this proposed rule.” But it concluded that the fee was “appropriate.” H-1B approvals are capped at 85,000 per year, with 20,000 spots for people with advanced degrees. Nearly 400,000 petitions, most of which were for renewal, were approved in fiscal year 2024. The majority of H-1B workers come from India, with the second-most common birthplace being China.
Deport all illegal aliens. The deportation goal should be 1 million/month.
Cancel all H1B visas. No renewals. They are being abused.
Cancel all J1 (temp work) Visas. They too are being abused.
Eliminate all domestic U.S. businesses that are modeled and incorporated to facilitate foreign visa assistance. Cancel the govt contracts and non-tax status for all 501(c) groups who structurally support illegal migrants.

Weaklings connect with weaklings because they think it makes them strong.

• The Background of Mark Carney Working with DNC Officials and Operatives (CTH)

This is a pretty good encapsulation of the relationship between Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and the DNC officials within the United States. Although Kokinda missed mentioning the meeting between Barack Obama and Mark Carney shortly before the G7 summit in France.

After Prime Minister Mark Carney abruptly pulled Canada out of U.S. trade talks and framed the dispute as a “war,” this episode argues the rupture isn’t really about tariffs but about political and financial strategy aimed at the U.S. midterm elections. Citing U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer’s account of negotiations and Canada’s unique retaliation, the script claims Carney is pursuing “geo-industrialization” and a “donut strategy” to go around the White House and influence American public opinion, aided by U.S.-connected advisers and outreach to mostly Democrats.
Kokinda also highlights comments from Iran’s foreign minister about U.S. debt and links the broader conflict to competing economic systems. The episode concludes that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is fighting a parallel battle to manage risks from the yen carry trade using tools like FIMA to prevent destabilizing Treasury selloffs.

“Mark Carney chases Canada’s businesses to the U.S., and Trump welcomes them with open arms.”

• The Illusion of Leverage in Canada-US Trade Negotiations (Christian Vezilj)

The latest failure in the trade talks between Canada and the United States has revealed a basic mismatch between political rhetoric and economic reality. Although Canadian officials, such as Prime Minister Mark Carney and the country’s trade negotiators, are still expressing confidence and maintaining that Canada has real leverage in arriving at a future agreement, the basic economic situation paints a completely different picture—one which Canadian businesses understand far better than the political leadership responsible for representing them.

The imbalance starts with a simple and inevitable fact: around 75% of Canada’s exports go directly to the United States, whereas only a small part of American exports go north. This imbalance is a fundamental characteristic of the Canadian economy. Since one country relies so heavily on access to the other’s market, the position of leverage becomes inherently unequal. Although Canada may be a worthwhile partner, it is not on an equal footing when it comes to bargaining power. The United States can endure trade tensions much more easily than Canada can, and Canadian companies know it.
Yet the Canadian government acts as if that imbalance does not exist. Political figures talk about staying firm, resisting pressure, and negotiating from a position of strength. While this approach might be acceptable within the country, it fails to account for businesses’ incentives, since they produce Canada’s economic output. The gap exists because politicians have no personal stake in the outcome. Whether trade improves or worsens, elected officials and bureaucratic negotiators do not see their income, investments, or market access suffer. The risk they face is political, not financial. At most, a wrong move could cost them the election several years in the future. For Canadian manufacturers, on the other hand, the effects are immediate, tangible, and possibly disastrous.
The gap between political posturing and economic reality is evident in the way companies are behaving. A recent report by The Globe and Mail on a survey carried out by KPMG found that almost 20% of Canadian manufacturers have already moved some of their production to the United States, and over 30% intend to do so in the coming years. Their reasons are clear: they want to avoid tariffs, gain access to a bigger and more stable consumer market, take advantage of favorable U.S. tax and regulatory conditions, and ensure their long-term competitiveness. These firms are not making ideological declarations; rather, they are reacting to incentives. They are acting rationally in a situation where the United States offers greater profits, more stability, and more opportunities than Canada does at present.
All companies that shift production south of the border decrease Canada’s manufacturing capacity, job opportunities, tax income, and its future ability to negotiate. At the same time, the United States gains jobs, investment, and control over its supply chains. The Canadian government’s continued emphasis on appearing tough has no effect on this trend; in fact, it accelerates it. If businesses think political leaders are disregarding economic realities, they will take action and move to places where incentives align with long-term survival.
Behavior, not political statements, determines leverage. Even though Canadian negotiators assert that they can set the terms, their companies are responding by moving production, limiting capital spending, and altering investment plans in ways that reveal the real balance of power. These actions prove what the market has always known: the United States has the stronger economic position, and Canada’s negotiating stance is becoming more dangerous.
It doesn’t mean Canada has no influence at all; rather, it means Canada should bargain from a basis of reality instead of relying on empty words. A mutually beneficial agreement is still possible and worthwhile, but only if Canadian leadership admits the structural dependence that shapes the relationship. Trying to impose terms on a partner that is ten times larger in size is not a sign of strength; it is damage to Canada itself. The companies moving from Canada to the United States are not disloyal to their country; they are reacting to incentives set up by a government unwilling to acknowledge the limits of its own influence.
In the end, the difference is clear: politicians can afford to have illusions, but businesses cannot. And as long as Canada’s leadership does not adjust its strategy to match the economic realities its companies already know, the country will continue to lose investment, jobs, and negotiating power—step by step, with each factory that is moved.

“.. he ended a 50-year problem that seven presidents said was existential. “

• Don’t Trust the Midterm Polls (Victor Davis Hanson)

Let’s have a periodic check on the status of the midterms that we’re now less than 80 days away from. The Democrats are riding high. They feel that historical trends, i.e., 39 out of the last 41 midterms, the in party in the White House loses seats, and there’s not very many seats Republicans can afford to lose, and they may lose the House and Senate. = They’re already, I guess you’d call it, measuring their drapes, but in the sense that they’re already explaining how they’re going to go after the Trump family, the Trump family associates, cryptocurrency concerns, any hangers-on, people going to the Middle East and investing. They’re gonna open it wide open.

These are the people, of course, who never investigated the Biden family or Hunter Biden. That’s no excuse if there’s culpability, but nonetheless, you can count on a two-year investigation of Donald Trump and a never-ending impeachment inquiry, and the end of the MAGA agenda should he lose the House and the Senate. Donald Trump is strangely confident. He now has finally hit on a strategy that he feels will work. Earlier, I called it the “Anaconda Strategy,” the idea that he is squeezing a debilitated Iran. In other words, the kinetic 40 days of bombing have left the nuclear military-industrial complex in shambles.
And this time, he’s not just blockading, he’s not just having an embargo on goods. He is not just freezing the bank accounts of Iranian grandees. He’s not just debanking the entire country. He’s going to third parties and saying, “You and China and Russia and Europe have been trading with this country even while we were bearing the burden of defanging a potential nuclear renegade nation, and we’re going to isolate you. We’re not gonna do business with you if you do business with Iran.”
And the Iranians now are crying foul. They’re saying we’re colonialists. But what I’m getting at, after all that military damage from Feb. 28 for the next 40 days, and after all the blockades, they’re not able to withstand a renewed squeezing. And so, time is actually on our side. The second part of this strategy is Donald Trump has now put the war on the back burner. He is saying that we don’t need to have ground troops. We might not even go in and bomb them again unless they egregiously attack an ally of ours or one of our carriers or ships.
We have managed it now. The strait is mostly open, and whatever the status of the nuclear stockpile or enriched uranium of the theocracy, it’s pretty clear they can’t get at it. Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah don’t seem to be getting money. They don’t seem to have enough rockets to threaten the Gulf States or Israel, at least to get through their missile defenses. And so, we’re just going to concentrate, Trump thinks, on the economy.

So, what he is doing now is he and JD Vance are barnstorming the country, and they’re starting to make headway. They’re not worried about the polls that show a generic 7% Democratic advantage and betting odds and polls that say they’re gonna lose the House because they looked at the recent primaries. El-Sayed, the candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic candidate for the Democratic senatorial seat in Michigan, was polling ahead 10 points, and he scarcely won by a point and a half. Francesca Hong, the Wisconsin Democratic candidate for governor, was polling ahead 10 or 15 or 20 points. She lost and lost handily.
Mr. [Alexander] Vindman, who was running for Senate in Florida, was polling ahead. He lost to a crazy, wacky Ms. [Angie] Nixon, a democratic socialist. So, what I’m getting at is the polls are worthless. And what we need to look at is what the status is right now. The war is starting to wane. If it should end or if the Iranians crack in the next 60 to 70 days, that would be a spectacular achievement that Donald Trump—you know, we’ve tragically lost 17 Americans—but at a tolerable cost in blood and treasure, he ended a 50-year problem that seven presidents said was existential.
You could not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon, and the pressure that he’s put on them and the damage he’s inflicted would probably, in the next year or two, prompt a renewal of internal opposition against a theocracy that is bleeding. The second thing to remember very carefully is, as I said earlier, the redistricting, the red state redistricting and the Supreme Court prohibition on racial gerrymandering might give him an additional four or five seats. But the most important developments are money and the agenda of the new Democratic Party.
Very quickly, Donald Trump has got a war chest of about $400 million, and he’s now going to use it. He says he’s going to use it all in his political action committees to help save the Republicans in the midterms. Elon Musk said that he is going to match dollar for dollar the Democratic oligarchic class that if they start to donate in great amounts to Democratic candidates. So, the money issue probably favors also, like, the redistricting and maybe the course of the Iran war that could wane and be not an issue.
But the most important thing to conclude is the Democratic Party. No one thought that the Democratic socialists would ever try to absorb and even seem to succeed in absorbing the Democratic Party. I mean, Nancy Pelosi, Hakeem Jeffries, Chuck Schumer, they’ve all said they have no problem with the Democratic socialists, that they …
It’s a big tent party, and they’re going to help them win their seats. But the problem is, once you have the money and the effort and the attention, and you show what the democratic socialists are, like, defunding the Pentagon, defunding the police, opening the border, mass amnesties, warring on fossil fuels, isolationist foreign policy, the transgender issue reopened with biological men now by statute free to compete in women’s sports. I could go on and on.
They even want to destroy the Senate and the Electoral College, not to mention packing the Supreme Court, ending the filibuster, and bringing in new seats in the Senate by admitting new blue states such as Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. And so, what I’m getting at is, the more we learn about the democratic socialists, and the more that the Democratic Party feels they’ve already taken over the apparatus of the party and they’re going to join them, or at least they’re not going to oppose them, they’re gonna be culpable or responsible for what these people say.
And they’re saying all sorts of stuff, not just antisemitic venom, not just anti-Israel venom, but questioning the very legitimacy of the United States government, the way that our Founders created a legislative, judicial, and executive branch, the Declaration of Independence. Our entire traditions, they’re saying, are flawed at their origins. They got worse during our maturity, and now they’re god-awful right now. That’s not a winning message. So, the midterms are very much up in the air. Contrary to historical precedent, there’s still a chance that the Republicans can save both the Senate and the House.

“We’re only cooked if we accept it.” —Blaine Holt on “X”

• Cookery for All (James Howard Kunstler)

A Gift from Us for You Credulous Human Twits

They don’t call economics the dismal science for nothing. It has been noted — since Thomas Carlyle minted the term in 1849 (objecting to the emancipation of black slaves on Britain’s colonial sugar plantations as a harm to productivity) — that attempts to manage the billion-footed transactions of human beings always find a way to bite back. But how can this creature we call society not try to regulate its affairs, with evils and hazards lurking in all we do, everywhere and always?

And so, you get politics, the quarrels that arise out of those efforts to manage a polity. And then you get war, which, the Prussian Carl von Clausewitz observed, is a continuation of politics by other means. But then, long before him, and on the other side of the world, came Sun Tzu’s treatise The Art of War, which counseled that winning was best achieved with the least actual fighting.
All these ways of seeing our world converge dynamically in the current historical moment: this Fourth Turning, or Long Emergency — however you label it — in the arc of our techno-industrial order of things. A lot of these things are coming apart now, and in astounding ways, and it remains to be seen what we will do with these broken and discarded parts, and whether any of it can be put back together in a satisfactory way. Here in the USA, we act all this out these days with Trump and Trumpism and the Left with its Leftism.
Mr. Trump recognizes the brokenness and, being primarily a builder, seeks to rebuild according to first principles of the USA (Make America Great Again) — meaning, back to the Hamiltonian doctrine of an economy based on the production of things (of real value). The catch there is that it comes with baggage of Hamiltonian finance, which is the creation and use of debt with government assistance.
Now it happens that a primary feature of this Fourth Turning crisis in our techno-industrial order is excessive complexity that produces diminishing returns — that is, makes things worse rather than better. And a lot of this excessive complexity lodges itself in finance, because using operations that few people can understand serves beautifully in the engineering of frauds and swindles. Financial frauds and swindles, in turn, muddle the verity of money — in which finance is enacted — and things denominated in money — securities and so forth, all based fundamentally in debt. So, the net effect of such debauched finance leads to a great deal of insecurity and anxiety over money.
Which is where the Trumpian rebuild is dangerously vulnerable, especially as we enter the fall season, when the leaves flutter down and markets like to crash. Everybody and his uncle watching things financial predict an imminent crackup in these markets as the rackets and hallucinations that magically levitate them dissolve in foul mists of reveal. For instance, the acid trip of artificial intelligence (AI).
Never have more lavish fantasies been proffered on a new technology. Elon Musk, the demigod prophet of the latest-and-greatest new tech, promises a coming economy of super-abundance and universal leisure (good for the sale of vacation packages on Mars). Musk is a fine fellow and there’s much to admire in his intelligence and positivity. But there’s plenty of reason to suspect that AI might disappoint and become a menace to mankind.
We’ve already noticed that it’s messing up all the procedures of schooling, leaving young people shockingly stupid, devoid of real skills, stripped of creativity. Anyway, the economy AI is supposed to integrate with and enhance would quickly become one devoid of human endeavor per se, and all the transactions that come out of it. If you think it through just a little ways, you can’t help seeing a system that’s based on getting something-for-nothing — which is to say a childish fantasy that precludes human transacting based on work. . . people who do nothing, make nothing, and enact nothing around doing-and-making. . . a society without anything social in it. In short, this imagined AI economy beats a path straight to entropy, the force in this universe that you don’t want to mess with.
All that is apart from the probability that we have already crossed the line into the “singularity” territory where AI takes on a mind of its own and becomes an outright menace to the human race — who will then seek to destroy the AI monster it made (which AI will keenly apprehend and then look for ways to defend its existence). The storyline crudely harks back on the old Twilight Zone episode titled “To Serve Man” in which a posse of big-brained space aliens comes to earth acting all chummy and gifts us a handbook supposedly of its good intentions. Eventually, one savvy human gal manages to decode the aliens’ language and declares to the dopes boarding the UFO: “Don’t get on that ship. . . it’s a cookbook!”
On the other side of our national political psychodrama, the Lefty-leftists can’t even conceive of building or rebuilding anything, least of all a USA of first principles. They are simply agents of disorder and destruction, and their activities are predicated on the age-old demented idea that utopias surely grow out of smoldering ruins — so the faster everything gets ruined, the better.
Personally, I’d prefer it if the Trumpians prevail because I’m in favor of making-and-doing and the social enactments around all that. But we better beware that overgrowth of financial hazard baked into Alexander Hamilton’s old recipe book. If a correcting crash of financial markets coincides with the midterm election and sweeps away all the swindles and frauds currently operating, the lefty-leftists, so eager to serve man, will step up and sell the American people their one-way Marxist tickets to a utopia in the sky called Palookaville.

“..the excess of money held by some tragically wealthy citizens..”

• “What are You Gonna Even Do with More Money?” Abdul El-Sayed (Turley)

Abdul El-Sayed is tackling a new national crisis: the excess of money held by some tragically wealthy citizens. In his interview this week with Fox host Jesse Watters, the Michigan Democratic Senatorial candidate not only reaffirmed his call for a wealth tax, but suggested that wealthy people really do not have much use for money that is best left to the public.

El-Sayed needs money. A lot of money. He has called for massive new programs to fund Medicare-for-All, reparations, roads, and other programs promised to Michigan voters. He is only the latest Democratic leader to support a wealth tax, which would (in my opinion) be unconstitutional on the federal level and disastrous on a state level. Earlier in the week, El-Sayed expressed full support for a wealth tax, including non-billionaires. He declared on a podcast: “I also think we got to start taxing wealth for people who now have over $100 million. I mean at that point like what are gonna even do with more money?”
Figures such as Rep. Ro Khanna have also called for a wealth tax on millionaires, not just billionaires. As some of us predicted, the use of billionaires was simply a strategic and political framing. Once politicians succeed in opening up this untapped wealth to taxation, they will gradually work down the tax rolls as they acquire a windfall in new revenue.
I discuss the tax in my book “Rage and the Republic” as an example of the “eat-the-rich” politics used by demagogues from ancient Athens to the French Revolution. Politicians seek to divide a population into “haves” and “have-nots” with the promise that citizens could have it all. Much of what El-Sayed said is ripped from the pages of such figures like Huey Long and his “share our wealth” campaigns in the 1930s.
In his Fox interview, El-Sayed reaffirmed his call for a wealth tax, adding: “The question ultimately is, ‘Do you want to drive on good roads, or would you rather have a billionaire make a second billion?’ That’s what Mike Rogers wants. That’s why Donald Trump wants. Apparently, that’s what you want. I think the people in Michigan want something different.” While El-Sayed has reported $686,069 in income with his wife in 2025, they would not be subject to the wealth tax. It would currently apply to those with $100 million or more in property and other forms of wealth.
El-Sayed appears to conflate or confuse wealth taxes and income taxes in the interview. He told Hannity, “If we tax you at 7%, you’re still going to make what? A cool $30 million off your billion dollars? I think that’s okay, they’re going to be okay, Jesse.” It’s unclear what he is referencing. Even if you are talking about a billion dollars in income taxes, 7% would be $70,000,000, with $930,000,000 left after taxes. If he is talking about $100,000,000 made from a billion in wealth, that sounds like an income tax but it would not result in $30 million in remaining income.
There is a great difference between a wealth tax and an income tax. The wealthy have already paid taxes on their wealth. Indeed, they pay income taxes when the money is earned and pay taxes on any profits from that money when it is invested in stock or property. A wealth tax is an additional tax on all that you own from homes to boats to art.
At a seven percent tax on wealth for those worth $100,000,000, the wealthy would pay an additional $7,000,000 every year in Michigan beyond their income taxes. In Michigan, the state tax of 4.25% (and the corporate tax on their businesses at 6%). If the wealth tax is added to an income tax, that would be in addition to the 37% top tax rate in the federal system. Again, the wealth tax would continue to apply to what an individual owns in the form of cars, homes, and other property every year, regardless of whether income declines.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) drove this point home when she ran for president, taunting the wealthy that she was coming for “your Rembrandts, your stock portfolio, your diamonds and your yachts.” While some states allow a wealth tax, many of us view it as unconstitutional under the federal system. The federal government secured the right to tax individuals in 1913, but the 16th Amendment only approved income taxes.
This is why many of these same politicians are promising a hostile takeover of the Supreme Court by either eliminating the Court or packing it with an instant liberal majority. Once packed, the Court could greenlight a variety of unconstitutional measures. Years ago, Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election.” However, he warned that “the Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described.” Therefore, the court must be packed in advance to allow these changes to occur.

Jews or Muslims is a major theme in America today. It never was before.

• Hasan Piker: American Jews are Asking for Attacks on Them (Turley)

I recently wrote about Hasan Piker leading a hatefest in San Francisco with thousands mocking the death of Charlie Kirk. He is now being condemned for a livestream statement suggesting that American Jews are asking to be attacked if they continue to support Israel. On the Aug. 20 livestream, Mr. Piker declared: “If Jews in America keep putting this idea out there that they are singularly invested in Israel, eventually someone’s going to come around and take action, not against the state of Israel — mind you — but against American Jews.”

The veiled threat was just the latest shocking statement from Piker, who has said that America deserved 9-11 and displays a picture of the attack on his wall during podcasts. As I previously noted, Piker and other hate traffickers like Jennifer Welch (who even justified Kirk‘s assassination) have commodified rage to make fortunes from their program. They inject hate directly into the veins of rage addicts. The result is predictable. In feeding a rage addiction, figures like Piker give a license to those who want to engage in violence. A certain percentage of the population is waiting for such triggers, seeking to assassinate figures like Kirk or Supreme Court justices.
This same conditioning toward violence has appeared on other sites. Members of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) were on another site suggesting that the country was now ripe for a violent takeover. DSA activist and streamer Michael Beyer is shown during a panel discussion declaring: “The Democratic Party establishment that we have has to be ripped out…We can actually start to grab hold of the ship of state and steer it our direction, but it’s going to be a violent process.”
As with calls to trash the Constitution or abandon core institutions, these figures are normalizing radical actions. In the meantime, establishment figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer are desperately trying to marshal the power of this mob in the hope that they will return him to power. When confronted with the calls of the DSA to get rid of our constitutional institutions, Schumer recently shrugged and said, “Not everyone has the same view on every single issue.” Those small disagreements not only include antisemitic rhetoric but also calls to eliminate the very institution Schumer hopes to lead again.
The DSA is not being subtle. The DSA Steering Committee member Cliff Connolly declared on one podcast that they are “famous for” “Our hatred of the United States Constitution.” From Piker to the DSA, establishment figures continue to delude themselves that they can control the mob, which will turn on their enemies while sparing themselves. History does not work that way.

“In the coming weeks, you’re going to be treated to unapologetic displays from the left ..”

• Get Ready for the Democrats’ Season of Bloodthirst (Tim O’Brien)

In order for the Democrats to take control of the culture and ultimately the government, people have to die. It’s just a fact. As much as the left likes to blame conservatives for killing people for not wearing masks, not getting vaccinated, and for ignoring the lies of climate change and transgenderism, the movement that is fully reliant on violence and death is the left, and more specifically the 2026 version of the Democrat Party.

In the coming weeks, you’re going to be treated to unapologetic displays from the left, celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk, and the radical Islamic attacks on America from 25 years ago on 9/11. For every sober and respectful commemoration event, it will feel like there are two or more disgusting displays from the left that can only appeal to the savage instincts of its base.] This has already started. My colleague David Manney wrote about a recent Hasan Piker event, where he sang a song in celebration of the murder of Kirk, sparking the leftist crowd in attendance to cheer.
“During a live performance of his Fear& podcast, Piker led a packed theater in a mocking rendition of ‘We Are Charlie Kirk,’ a tribute song that appeared after Charlie Kirk was assassinated at Utah Valley University last Sept. 10. His co-hosts laughed, the audience cheered and sang along, and Piker later posted a photo from the show with the caption, ‘Carried the flame in.’”

Here is Hasan Piker now mocking the murder of Charlie Kirk as we approach the 1 year anniversary of his assassination

The Bolsheviks will kill us all and they will laugh about it pic.twitter.com/6ic8nKdSyT
— Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) August 22, 2026

Abdul El-Sayed, the Democrat nominee for the Michigan Senate race, is trying to create some separation from one of his best political friends, allies, and operatives, Hasan Piker, on the issue of 9/11. He’s not doing it because he had a change of heart. He’s doing it because his political advisors are telling him that Americans still aren’t all that receptive to Piker’s and the left’s views on 9/11. Piker has famously said that “America deserved 9/11.” Still, in trying to distance himself from Piker’s comments, El-Sayed sent a neat and tidy dog whistle to his own base, which loves it some bloodlust.
Politico reported what El-Sayed had to say about those 9/11 comments: “’Of course it was a dumb statement and of course I think Hasan himself would say that was a dumb statement,’ El-Sayed said. ‘He disavowed it. So yes, America didn’t deserve 9/11, but you know, to sit here and play gotcha politics with a dumb thing somebody said out of context that they disavowed themselves — to say, ‘oh well, what does that mean about what you think?’”
El-Sayed’s comments are a stark difference from his interview with POLITICO earlier this year in which he declined to denounce Piker’s views in what he called a ‘gotcha game.’ ‘I’m not here to disavow people’s views,’ El-Sayed said at the time. For those of you in the back row checking your phones, the dog whistle in this case is where El-Sayed has gone on record saying, “I’m not here to disavow people’s views.”
Of course, the left is not limiting its enjoyment of bloodletting to the Kirk assassination and the 25th anniversary of 9/11. It has other more recent murderous events to celebrate, like its sickening displays of joy and satisfaction at the trial of Lindsay Clancy. You may know her as the woman who strangled all three of her children, killing them in her home’s basement. She then, apparently, tried to kill herself by cutting her wrists and jumping from the window of an upstairs bedroom. This is Charles Manson stuff. As bad as the crime is, culturally what’s worse is that a significant segment of the left and others have come out in support of Clancy, the admitted killer.

Lindsay Clancy brutally strangled her 3 kids to death

Feminists in court today: pic.twitter.com/WfFRJaRNX9
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) August 25, 2026

Sorry for repeated use of this word, but there is no other. You can see the bloodlust in their eyes, can’t you? These people are far more than political actors, but in the context of this political time of the year, you have to know that these are people of the left. This is the left. Then there is the case of Luigi Mangione, who has pleaded guilty to the cold-blooded assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. In committing the premeditated murder, the privileged rich kid established himself as an almost mythical hero to leftists everywhere.
CNN reported on June 5, 2025, “In the months since the fatal shooting of Thompson, Mangione has become a cult-like figure. There has been a massive outpouring of support on social media and at his court appearances from people with deep frustration and anger at the American for-profit health care system. They see the American health insurance industry as broken, overly expensive and quick to deny coverage.”The one thing the woke cable network’s article left out was that Mangione only became a “cult-like figure” to Democrats and leftists, not simply “people with deep frustration.”
If you’re wondering whether those of us on the right are working too hard to connect the dots, Hasan Piker will put those wonders to rest. As Piker goes, so goes the left, and in the process so goes the Democrat Party. This is Piker providing some continuity to the left’s now predictable support for murder as a political tactic, along with some New York Times operatives nodding in approval. In the Democrats’ world, the killer is the victim.

In a new NYT interview, Hasan Piker says that many “understand” Luigi Mangione killing United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson because Thompson himself was guilty of “social murder” pic.twitter.com/4f9bPdsxU5
— Pirate Wires (@PirateWires) April 22, 2026

“..the site and that much land do make sense for “[a] launch site, natural gas production, and solar power for air separators and condensers. Preferably all three.”

“.. Neither Starbase in Texas nor Cape Canaveral in Florida is ideally suited to polar orbit launches. But the Louisiana coast is. Launching nearly due south from there keeps the rocket over open water and away from population centers for long distances, unlike trying to do the same from Starbase or the Cape.

• Why Is SpaceX Buying All That Marshland in Louisiana? (Stephen Green)

I have not one but two wild — and interconnected — SpaceX items for you today. The first is that CEO and founder Elon Musk just announced an exclusive partnership with AI chip giant Nvidia for the company’s planned orbital data centers — and that SpaceX won’t waste any time getting them into orbit. “SpaceX, in partnership with Nvidia, has designed a space-optimized Vera Rubin NVL72 rack-scale system/platform for launch to orbit in Q4 next year, with significant scale in 2028,” Musk posted to X on Monday. If you just have to know, Vera Rubin NVL72 is Nvidia’s latest and greatest AI server, and now it’s optimized to bring that performance to space.

Musk described the servers as “significantly simpler, lower cost, denser, and lighter than a traditional rack.” And that brings us to today’s second item: the 130,000 or so acres of marshland the company reportedly bought from ExxonMobil on the Louisiana coast. Rumors began swirling last spring that SpaceX was buying up land near Pecan Island on Louisiana’s Gulf Coast, and today Gov. Jeff Landry is expected to hold an event in Abbeville for a “major economic development announcement.” Some of the locals aren’t happy with whatever is going on, as detailed in this Fox8 Live local news report. But why?
Space analyst Ozan Bellik theorized back in May, when the rumors got going, that “You don’t need a logistics hub in Louisiana to transport Starships between Texas and Florida. Especially not one that’s 136,000 acres.” He added that the site and that much land do make sense for “[a] launch site, natural gas production, and solar power for air separators and condensers. Preferably all three.” A really big launch site, for reasons I’ll show you now.
According to a MarketWatch report on Monday, research firm Wood Mackenzie estimates that “a one-gigawatt orbital data center would cost $170 billion, more than triple the cost of a traditional data center. But costs are expected to come down over time as rocket launches also become cheaper.” That’s just the construction and launch costs, but there is more to it than just those two items. Being in orbit means being out of local regulatory reach, which streamlines — well, everything. Bernie Sanders (CPUSA-Vt. Oblast) can shake his fist at the sky all he wants, but that won’t stop any data center construction in Low Earth Orbit.
More importantly, data centers, as you well know, consume massive amounts of electricity, but in space, electrical power costs nothing more than the price of the solar panels. But what if there was a way to drive power costs even lower? If SpaceX were to launch its Starmind — good name, right? — into a dawn-dusk sun-synchronous orbit (day-night boundary), each satellite would receive direct sunlight almost continuously. That greatly reduces the need for expensive (and heavy!) battery capacity, while also reducing stressful thermal cycling on the satellites.
Since Wood Mackenzie’s report didn’t mention polar orbits, the firm might have overestimated Starmind’s production and launch costs. Here’s the problem: Neither Starbase in Texas nor Cape Canaveral in Florida is ideally suited to polar orbit launches. But the Louisiana coast is. Launching nearly due south from there keeps the rocket over open water and away from population centers for long distances, unlike trying to do the same from Starbase or the Cape.
If SpaceX is serious about putting 100 gigawatts of AI compute into LEO annually — and it is — the company needs a huge launch center ideally located for polar launches. The Louisiana coast fits the bill.

SpaceX has just officially announced Starbase, Louisiana, a new $100+ billion spaceport in South Louisiana near Pecan Island.

Construction starts in 2027, with the first Starship launch from the new site planned for 2029.

Starbase, Louisiana will be built to support thousands… pic.twitter.com/uacCLKg7CG
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 25, 2026

A Queen. For sure.

“I used to joke that I was the Queen of the Tabloids, but now I guess I can say I’m the Queen of Social Media AI!”

• Dolly Parton Passes Away at 80 (Chris Queen)

One of the truest legends, who was also one of the most incredible human beings of our time, has died. Dolly Parton has passed away at the age of 80. Her nephew, who also served as her head of security, announced his aunt’s passing on social media. People Magazine reports that Parton had mentioned as recently as Friday that she was still recovering from health issues:Parton shared an update on her health on Friday, Aug. 21, acknowledging her recent decline after the March 2025 death of her husband, Carl Dean.

“As I’ve shared in video messages throughout the past year, I am dealing with some health issues that I just didn’t pay attention to when I was watching over Carl. You know, this isn’t the first time I’ve had to manage something like this. Back in the early ’80s, I was down for several months with female issues, and I was struggling with my weight at the time too, so it’s not like I haven’t been through hard times with my health,” Parton told PEOPLE.
She added: “But I think because we live in a 24/7 world with social media, everything gets magnified in ways it wasn’t years ago. I used to joke that I was the Queen of the Tabloids, but now I guess I can say I’m the Queen of Social Media AI! Seriously, though, even though I’m still healin’, I’m still workin’! You know me — as I’ve often said — I’ve dreamed myself into a corner and I still have so many things I want to achieve, so I’m gonna keep on working as long as I can to see everything come to life.” Parton’s career spanned seven decades, from her work with Porter Wagoner in the ‘60s to her subsequent solo career. She had dozens of hits on the country and pop charts and starred in several movies.
Her life was a literal rags-to-riches tale. She was born into a poor family in the mountains of Tennessee as one of a dozen children. She discovered her musical talent early on and began writing songs at age seven. It didn’t take her too many years to turn her talent into a lucrative career. With hits to her credit like “9 to 5,” “I Will Always Love You,” “Jolene,” and “Here You Come Again,” Parton left a tremendous legacy across the landscape of country and pop music, and she even recorded a rock album in 2023. Parton was also an entertainment magnate with the successful Dollywood theme park in Sevierville, Tenn., and theaters in tourist-trap towns across the country.
Because of her rags-to-riches life and her Appalachian upbringing, Parton cultivated a campy image: enormous blond hair, rhinestones, bright colors, high heels, and a figure she cheerfully made the punchline of her own jokes. It was flamboyant and exaggerated, yet completely authentic to the persona she created. The image barely belied her warmth, humility, wit, and considerable business savvy.
Parton was also an incredible philanthropist, donating millions to various causes, especially in the South. Her Imagination Library put books in the hands of countless kids, and she most recently donated to help Southeasterners recover from hurricanes in 2024. She was such a positive force for simply treating people well that she was a beloved figure on the right and the left.

Pack it in, folks. A year of mourning for one of the only people we all agreed on. So sad. What a lady and what a life. https://t.co/1dz5PGzsut
— Mary Katharine Ham (@mkhammer) August 25, 2026

President Donald Trump issued a statement on Truth Social: Very sad to report that Dolly Parton, one of the greatest Country singers, and far beyond, EVER, has just passed away. This is a true loss for millions of people. There has never been anyone like her, and never will. In her honor, I am lowering the American flag throughout the United States for a one week period beginning tonight at 6:00PM. Rest in Peace, Dolly! The World loves you. President DONALD J. TRUMP
Sen Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) also released a statement: Chuck and I are absolutely heartbroken and saddened to hear of the passing of our friend, Dolly Parton.mDolly’s life and career are forever woven into Tennessee’s music, culture, and history. Her extraordinary talent, generosity, and love for the Volunteer State touched hearts around the world and will continue to inspire generations to come. Tennessee will forever be grateful for Dolly. nOur prayers are with her family and the millions around the globe mourning this tremendous loss.
She was also a woman of deep, sincere Christian faith, so I have no doubt that the chorus around the throne of heaven has gotten louder and more fun. As her nephew said, Dolly Parton is “in the arms of Jesus.” We Southerners will miss her deeply, and we were privileged to share her with the rest of the world. See you in eternity, Dolly!

It doesn't look like much, but this building will produce 27,000 Optimus humanoid robots per day at full capacity. https://t.co/gB6cHumL2J pic.twitter.com/JUIbgPoV3u
— Smoke-away (@SmokeAwayyy) August 24, 2026

https://twitter.com/iam_smx/status/2091962853792133171?s=20

“The American colonies would never have been pioneered if the ships that crossed the ocean hadn’t been reusable”

Starship is going to do the same for space… give humanity the capability to cross worlds, return, go again, and eventually build entire civilizations on other… pic.twitter.com/EH9VUrfaaq
— X Freeze (@XFreeze) August 25, 2026

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

Debt Rattle August 25 2026

Aug 252026

August 25, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:49 am Finance Tagged with: Bessent, Canada, Economic Outcast, Ilhan Omar, Iran, Le Pen, mail-in voting 54 Responses »

René Magritte Invisible world 1954

• “Operation Economic Outcast” Begins (ZH)

• Treasury Sec to Unveil ‘Economic D-Day’ Against Iran (ETM)

• Iran’s Civilian Leaders Call For Peace Amid Crippling U.S. Blockade (ZH)

• Le Pen Poised To Win French Elections? New Poll Shows Commanding Lead (ZH)

• The Democrats Are in a Trap of Their Own Making (Eric Florack)

• SCOTUS Gives Trump HUGE Win on Mail-In Voting (Matt Margolis)

• West Will Never Get Its ‘Loans’ Back From Kiev – ex-Ukrainian PM (RT)

• Zelensky Says Wartime Elections Would ‘Destroy’ Ukraine (ZH)

• Canada Chooses Climate Change, Censorship, and China (J.B. Shurk)

• Loonie Limps Lower As Trump Unleashes (More) Tariffs (ZH)

• Trump Gave Mark Carney an Ultimatum, USA or China? Carney Chose China (CTH)

• Trump Confirms ICE Investigating Ilhan Omar, ‘Enforcement’ Possible (Salgado)

• “This is My Place of Business” (Turley)

https://twitter.com/BasilTheGreat/status/2091833704331010055?s=20 https://twitter.com/CaseyKrol/status/2091526969951183212?s=20

Precisely articulated https://t.co/xAVg4WN7DH
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 23, 2026

Still can’t believe that The New York Times ADMITTED & PRINTED that the "conspiracy theorists" were right about COVID and that Fauci and the "experts" LIED to the public.

What’s even more disturbing is how many people I know in Hollywood who are completely ignoring all this &…
— Jimmy Dore (@jimmy_dore) August 23, 2026

“Bessent Warns Countries Helping Iran Face Expulsion From Dollar System..”

• “Operation Economic Outcast” Begins (ZH)

• Bessent Unveils “Operation Economic Outcast” Against Iran
• Pakistan enters diplomatic push: Pakistan’s army chief reportedly traveled to Tehran after Trump urged him to help reopen Iran talks.

Summary: US Treasury Sanctions Nearly 60 Iran-Linked Entities, Individuals And Vessels Across Nuclear, Missile, Cyber And Oil Networks:
• Five sectors face potential secondary sanctions: digital assets, technology, gold, aviation and shipping.
• Measures target brokerage networks and shadow-fleet vessels operating across the UAE, Hong Kong, China, Singapore, Switzerland and Europe.
• Bessent warns that countries failing to take action “will be removed from the US dollar system.”
• Bessent launched the Trump administration’s long-awaited “Operation Economic Outcast,” unveiling sweeping sanctions designed to sever Iran from the global financial dollar system and punish any foreign government or entity that continues facilitating Tehran’s trade.

The first wave of sanctions targets nearly 60 Iran-linked entities, individuals and vessels connected to the regime’s nuclear, missile, cyber and oil networks. The measures span a global web of brokerage companies, financial intermediaries and shadow-fleet vessels operating across China, Hong Kong, the United Arab Emirates, Singapore, Switzerland and Europe. “No one is above the reach of US sanctions,” Bessent warned during the press conference. Bessent made clear that Trump’s campaign extends well beyond Iran. Foreign companies dealing with Tehran now face an explicit choice: sever those ties or risk losing access to the US financial system.
Bessent stopped just short of naming countries such as China… “If others don’t act, Treasury will unilaterally act,” he said, adding that Washington “expects action” from other nations. Bessent added, “To those who enable Iran, don’t test US resolve.” The obvious pressure point here is China, which remains the largest buyer of Iranian crude. Washington has previously sanctioned independent Chinese refiners and trading companies.

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell

• Treasury Sec to Unveil ‘Economic D-Day’ Against Iran (ETM)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will announce massive new sanctions against Iran on Monday, a move he likened to “economic D-Day.” In an op-ed published in the Financial Times, Bessent said he is launching the “single greatest financial offensive ever marshalled against an adversary.” He said any nation that associates with Iran will face isolation. “Iran’s enablers purchase and transport its petroleum,” Bessent wrote. “They facilitate the flow of its finances through exchange houses and free trade zones. They welcome Iran’s flights and maintain registries on its behalf. They turn a blind eye to seaborne fuel transfers and the illicit use of their banks, all while concealing the extent of their complicity.”

Those enablers should “consider the consequences” of continuing their relationships, Bessent said. “Those who sever Iran’s remaining financial and commercial connectivity will reinvigorate their own,” he wrote. “They will deepen their access to global capital, reinforce confidence in their markets and attain the standing they seek in the world economy.” But, Bessent continued, “the alternative for those who tether themselves to Tehran is the foreclosure of any path to lasting prosperity.” “To become a sanctuary for terror is to become, in the eyes of the United States, a global pariah,” he said.
Iran’s head of national security, however, said the country will “retaliate in a seismic manner” to any sanctions and will consider any country supporting sanctions to be committing an act of war. Bessent compared the sanction strategy to the 1943 Tehran Conference, where Allied leaders planned the defeat of Nazi Germany. “As Roosevelt and Churchill weighed a campaign that would culminate in the Normandy landings, they asked themselves what could be done ‘to bring the greatest pressure to bear on the enemy,’” he wrote.

Split the country. Without killing another 40,000.

• Iran’s Civilian Leaders Call For Peace Amid Crippling U.S. Blockade (ZH)

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian speaks during a visit to the shrine of the leader of Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution

Iran’s top civilian officials are publicly urging an end to the ongoing conflict with the United States, exposing a deepening internal rift as they attempt to rein in hardliners who champion continued resistance. The financial and social toll of the U.S. blockade is proving too severe to ignore – as Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian recently declared that the country cannot endure a state of perpetual limbo, though he cautioned against making concessions that would appear humiliating on the global stage.

“The war must come to an end at some point,” Pezeshkian stated in a Friday address, according to state media. “It is better that we demonstrate our strength and dignity today and tell the world that we have won and that we are ending the war.” President Donald Trump has maintained a relentless blockade on the Islamic Republic after a previous memorandum of understanding imploded – effectively severing the regime’s ability to export oil – its primary source of income. This has plunged Iran into a domestic crisis characterized by skyrocketing inflation and an increasingly desperate cost-of-living crisis.
The pressure is expected to intensify further this week, as U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent prepares to unveil what President Trump has characterized as an “economic D-Day.” While the exact nature of these punitive measures remains classified, Bessent has strongly signaled the implementation of sweeping secondary sanctions targeting any nation that continues to do business with Tehran.
A Regime Divided
The push for diplomacy from Iran’s civilian government stands in stark contrast to the shifting power dynamics among its clerics and military elite. Pezeshkian claims his diplomatic push aligns with the broader goals of the regime, referencing past speeches by Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei – who has conspicuously vanished from the public eye since the conflict escalated.”I was in the presence of the Supreme Leader, and in his speeches as well, he openly stated that we must move beyond this state of ‘neither war nor peace,'” Pezeshkian noted. “We are not going to humiliatingly back down before the enemy or bow our heads. We can sit down with strength, but also with logic, and resolve our problems.”
Prior to his public absence, Khamenei had elevated hardline factions who favor military confrontation over the moderates seeking a renewed deal with Washington. Despite this, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf echoed the President’s warnings, underscoring the severe national security risks of a collapsing economy. “No matter how much military power we have, if our people are struggling and the country lacks financial circulation and economic growth, we will not achieve progress,” Ghalibaf stated. “As someone who has experienced war, I understand the true value of peace.”
Washington’s Stance: The “Right Deal”
The Trump administration’s distrust stems from the fraught history of recent negotiations, during which U.S. officials reported receiving deeply conflicting signals from Tehran. The previous agreement shattered after Iran launched a series of strikes on maritime vessels navigating the Strait of Hormuz. For the United States, the objectives remain twofold and uncompromising: Nuclear Prevention: Ensuring Iran permanently loses the capacity to develop or acquire a nuclear weapon. Maritime Security: The full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to global trade.
Currently, the Trump administration claims it’s securing the safe passage of 8 to 9 million barrels of oil through the strait daily – a steep decline from the roughly 20 million barrels that traversed the waterway before the conflict erupted. Washington is signaling that it will dictate the terms. Addressing reporters on Friday, President Trump summarized the diplomatic standoff: “They would love to make a deal, but they’re not ready to make the right deal.”

No Macron.

• Le Pen Poised To Win French Elections? New Poll Shows Commanding Lead (ZH)

France’s Le Pen Leads French Presidential Race Early Monday, we previewed a Nomura report that expects an 18-month election cycle across Europe, shifting the continent toward populism, with elections scheduled this year in Germany and Sweden, followed by France, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and Poland in 2027. Shortly after we released the note, new polling data from France showed, as The Guardian put it:

France loves a battle-scarred survivor. Charles de Gaulle, François Mitterrand and Jacques Chirac clawed their way back from political failure to become presidents of the republic. There is a significant chance that Marine Le Pen will be next. The latest Toluna-Harris poll shows Marine Le Pen winning every tested 2027 French presidential runoff:
• Le Pen 68%, Jean-Luc Mélenchon 32%
• Le Pen 55%, Édouard Philippe 45%
• Le Pen 57%, Gabriel Attal 43%
• Le Pen’s advantage extends beyond a matchup with the far left. She also holds double-digit leads over two leading establishment candidates, indicating that her National Rally party would enter the election as the clear favorite under these scenarios.

France, Toluna-Harris poll:

Presidential run-off election

Le Pen (RN-PfE): 68% (+1)
Mélenchon (LFI-LEFT): 32% (-1)

Le Pen (RN-PfE): 55% (+3)
Philippe (HOR-RE): 45% (-3)

Le Pen (RN-PfE): 57% (+3)
Attal (RE-RE): 43% (-3)

+/- vs. 25-27 May 2026

Fieldwork: 18-19 August 2026… pic.twitter.com/vvUtpkIyiR
— Europe Elects (@EuropeElects) August 24, 2026

Polymarket odds of Le Pen winning the French presidential election currently stand at 32%. Here’s more:
https://twitter.com/Cap2027_/status/2091775772906168809?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2091775772906168809%7Ctwgr%5E4665f81154ac257c311cf658bf28696f75baed80%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fseeds-political-change-nomura-sees-europe-lurching-right-and-markets-are-fine-it
Circling back to Nomura analyst Andrzej Szczepaniak’s note, he expects that right-wing parties are positioned to make significant gains across Germany, France, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK over the next 18 months. Szczepaniak noted, “Five years ago, financial markets would not have seemed so at ease with such a prospect. But then again, these populist right-wing political parties were previously not so fiscally prudent as they are perceived to be today.
He added, “Now, if anything, financial markets are much more concerned about populist left-wing parties being elected due to their desire to increase spending, often paid for through higher borrowing or higher taxes, which are likely to shut the engine off of already stuttering economies.” Europe is entering an 18-month election cycle that could accelerate the continent’s shift toward populism, with high-profile elections scheduled this year in Germany and Sweden, followed by France, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and Poland in 2027.
The much-needed political realignment reflects mounting public backlash against progressives in Brussels after years of uncontrolled mass migration from the Third World, deteriorating social cohesion, elevated violent crime, and nation-killing domestic policies that have accelerated deindustrialization. At the same time, European manufacturers face intensifying pressure from China (the demise of VW Group), which is exploiting its cost advantages and state-supported industrial capacity to flood the struggling continent with cheap electric vehicles.
Andrzej Szczepaniak, a senior European economist and executive director at Nomura International in London, describes this combination of pressures as “the seeds of political change,” warning that “politics in Europe is lurching towards more populism.” Szczepaniak says right-wing parties are positioned to make significant gains across Germany, France, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK over the next 18 months.

“Establishment Democrats. They’re the ones who’ve either been holding the reins or doing everything in their power to obstruct the repair process for the better part of the last six decades.”

• The Democrats Are in a Trap of Their Own Making (Eric Florack)

Tim Hains at Real Clear Politics, this morning:”Massachusetts Democrat Rep. Jake Auchincloss told “FOX News” that the Democratic Party will lose if the moderate party establishment picks a direct fight with the new Democratic Socialists. “What my faction of the party needs to do is to demonstrate to Americans what our positive, proactive agenda is to strengthen the middle class, how we are going to base that in freedom, not socialism, free enterprise, free minds, freedom from fear, and free elections,” he said. (Sound of muffled laughter. Shuffling in the seat while I smooth my professional commentator demeanor back into place.)

The comments are from an interview on Fox with Shannon Bream, which we’ll get back to in a second. Free enterprise. Free minds. Freedom from fear. Free elections. Gotta tell ya, Congressman, that’s a genuinely lovely word salad, and I mean that with the sincerest possible sarcasm — because you’re delivering it roughly 48 hours after your own party’s biggest streaming ally got caught with a framed newspaper commemorating 9/11 hanging on his studio wall like a hunting trophy. But we’ll get there.
BREAM: So, there is a video of somebody who’s been campaigning a lot with Democratic candidates or Democratic Socialist candidates who say they belong in your party, Hasan Piker, he’s not disavowed this video that’s out there circulating this weekend where he’s singing a song that appears to be mocking the death of Charlie Kirk, of people who would, you know, be worshipped as Christians, worshipping Jesus. What’s your message to those within your party who are campaigning, fundraising, and appearing with Hasan Piker?
AUCHINCLOSS: I reject Hasan Piker’s ideology, whether it was seeming to celebrate or at least excuse 9/11, whether it is seeming to excuse the assassination of Charlie Kirk, which I condemned immediately. The Democratic Party does not stand for what Hasan Piker stands for. The Democratic Party also needs to be able to reach young voters from all walks of life who are angry at a status quo in which they cannot afford to buy a home, in which they do not believe Social Security will be there for them in their retirement, and in which they see corruption run rampant in Washington, D.C. Well, it seems to me that they’ve already identified who’s responsible for the status quo. Establishment Democrats.
They’re the ones who’ve either been holding the reins or doing everything in their power to obstruct the repair process for the better part of the last six decades. Young people can’t afford a home in large part because of Democrat-controlled cities and states stacking regulations, zoning restrictions, and tax burdens on top of housing supply until the whole market seizes up like an engine that’s never seen a drop of oil. Here’s the part Auchincloss conveniently glides past, though, and it’s worth dragging back into the light: While he’s on national television lecturing about “rejecting” Piker’s ideology, plenty of his own colleagues have been busy actively embracing it.
Fox News’s own reporting from just this month confirms Piker has framed, and proudly displayed on camera behind him during livestreams, the front page of the New York Times’ Sept. 12, 2001, edition — the “U.S. Attacked” issue — describing it to his audience as “the cutie Cinderella newspaper from 9/11.” A man decorating his broadcasting studio with a memorial to the deadliest terror attack in American history, treated as a cute keepsake. And he’s told CNN there’s “0% chance” the 2028 Democrat nominee will be pro-Israel, expressing total confidence his own party is drifting exactly where he wants it.
Meanwhile, Rep. Ro Khanna has publicly refused to apologize for appearing on Piker’s show, warning that distancing from him would signal “weakness.” House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar went on MS NOW’s Morning Joe and insisted, with a straight face, that “the party isn’t lurching too far left.” Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed told Meet the Press he cares about “reaching Piker’s audience,” not his actual comments — which is a genuinely remarkable sentence for a candidate to say out loud about a man who’s excused a terror attack that killed nearly 3,000 Americans.

“..after months of Democrat officials trying to bury the policy in court, the administration finally has room to breathe.”

• SCOTUS Gives Trump HUGE Win on Mail-In Voting (Matt Margolis)

The Supreme Court just handed President Trump a massive victory in the fight to secure America’s elections. The justices cleared the way for his executive order restricting mail-in voting to move forward, and after months of Democrat officials trying to bury the policy in court, the administration finally has room to breathe. This is a big deal.

The SAVE America Act is still stalled in the Senate, blocked by Democrats who aren’t even hiding the fact they have zero interest in verifying that voters are who they say they are. Trump’s executive order just got a green light from the nation’s highest court anyway. Election integrity doesn’t have to die in the legislative graveyard to make progress.
Trump signed the executive order, called “Ensuring Citizenship Verification And Integrity In Federal Elections,” in March 2026. It directs his administration to build lists of eligible voters and orders the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on those lists. The Postal Service laid out its implementation plan last week, but the clock is ticking. Some states start sending mail ballots in just a few weeks, leaving the administration little time to get this right before the midterms. More court challenges remain possible.The victory is real, but it’s not the finish line.
Mail balloting has been a target of Trump’s for years, and for good reason. The Heritage Foundation has long argued that mail-in ballots are more susceptible to fraud, coercion, and chain-of-custody problems than in-person voting. Anyone who lived through the 2020 presidential election, one of the most disputed elections in history, watched that vulnerability play out in real time. In fact, a 2023 survey from Rasmussen Reports, conducted with the Heartland Institute, found that among the 30% of likely U.S. voters who cast an absentee or mail-in ballot in 2020, 19% admitted that a friend or family member filled out part or all of their ballot on their behalf. Another 17% admitted they voted in a state where they were no longer a permanent resident. Every one of those practices is illegal.
Think about that for a second: nearly a fifth of mail voters copped to letting someone else fill out their ballot. Democratic officials in 23 states and the District of Columbia sued to block the order, arguing that the Constitution gives states and Congress the power to run elections and that Trump’s changes could cause chaos and partisan abuse. Attorneys for the states wrote that “the consequences of allowing such transformative changes to take effect so close to this fall’s elections would be extreme.”
A judge in Massachusetts blocked the plan for the midterm elections in those states. An appeals court upheld her decision. She later granted a second order blocking it nationwide. The Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court on procedural grounds in late July, arguing that the states sued too soon. They also pointed to another ruling out of Washington, where a judge allowed Trump’s order to proceed. An appeals court backed that decision, while still leaving room for future court action if the changes are implemented.
Federal attorneys argued that the Massachusetts order “blocks the government’s ability to finalize and implement the President’s proposed policies to promote election integrity for the upcoming federal elections in November.”A dozen Republican-leaning states supported the federal government in their own appeal before the high court, saying states would have input on the final voter lists.
Trump has been to the Supreme Court on mail ballots before this year. In June 2026, the justices ruled against a Trump-backed argument, finding that states can count ballots arriving after Election Day. That case went through full briefing rather than the emergency docket. This time, Trump came out on top. This is a huge win, but now comes the hard part: building the lists, getting our Postal Service ready, and, of course, surviving whatever legal challenges come next, all before voters start filling out ballots. Election integrity advocates should be celebrating today, but also watching the calendar.

“Assumptions that Moscow will lose the conflict and pay reparations are “just fairy tales,” Nikolay Azarov has told RT.”

• West Will Never Get Its ‘Loans’ Back From Kiev – ex-Ukrainian PM (RT)

The EU keeps providing “loans” to Ukraine despite knowing that its government will never repay them, the country’s former prime minister, Nikolay Azarov, has said. In a post on X on Sunday, Vladimir Zelensky called funding the Ukrainian military one of the “major challenges” his government is currently facing. “A lot of money is needed,” he wrote. Making sure that the second tranche of a €90 billion ($105 billion) transfer approved by the EU earlier this year arrives in Ukraine is “an extremely difficult task,” but he is working on it with Germany and France, Zelensky stressed.

In an interview with RT on Saturday, Azarov said that “loans and Western assistance that amounts to about three-fourths of the state budget of Ukraine are covering the budget deficit, funding arms purchases and sponsoring the Nazi terrorist and corrupt regime.” When the European Commission and major EU countries, who have been the main supporters of Ukraine after US President Donald significantly reduced American aid to Kiev, “grant these loans, they know that they won’t get this money back,” he said.
“And this causes some irritation among EU bureaucrats because they understand that the money of the American and European taxpayers is being embezzled in a very outrageous manner,” the former prime minister said. Inside the Ukrainian government, there is “an organized criminal group that embezzled the funds that Ukraine received as part of these loans,” he said. According to Azarov, that is the reason why EU ambassadors held a meeting in Kiev with the investigators of the Western-backed National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and “supported actions to expose corruption in the country,” particularly in Zelensky’s office.
Earlier this week, the Ukrainian leader sacked the deputy head of his office, Irina Mudraya, after her home was searched as part of a probe into efforts to raise and legalize $3.3 million in bail money for former Energy Minister Herman Galushchenko. Galushchenko is a key figure in a $100 million corruption case involving state nuclear operator Energoatom and linked to Zelensky’s longtime business associate Timur Mindich. The scandal led to the downfall of his highly influential chief of staff Andrey Yermak last November. Other recent corruption investigations have targeted former Ukrainian ministers, diplomats, and senior officials.
The claims that Kiev will reimburse the US and EU because “Russia will pay some kind of reparations someday… are just fairy tales. You have to be really short-sighted to believe these fairy tales,” Azarov stressed. “No one will give this money back to the West. There’s $275 billion of Ukrainian debt, you cannot pay it back,” he added. Azarov was the Ukrainian prime minister from 2010 to 2014, resigning during the Western-backed Euromaidan protests in Kiev and fleeing to Russia after the overthrow of democratically-elected President Viktor Yanukovich in February 2014.

“That Purported Bastion Of Democracy..”

• Zelensky Says Wartime Elections Would ‘Destroy’ Ukraine (ZH)

Ever since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 with a goal of excising the Russian-speaking Donbas region, American and Western European officials have repeatedly said they and their countries are duty-bound to support Ukraine because, as Nancy Pelosi put it, “The battle for Ukraine is a battle for democracy itself.” That notion has been growing ever more farcical over time, as President Volodymyr Zelensky refuses to hold elections that were supposed to happen back in the spring of 2024. Over the weekend, Zelensky doubled down on his preference for martial law, telling journalists it would “destroy the country.”

Zelensky’s former defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov turned up the heat on his former boss by calling for wartime elections

Zelensky is now in the eighth year of his five-year term. His new remarks defending his overstay came after former defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov recently called for elections, after his controversial firing by Zelensky in July. “Democracy cannot be held hostage by Russia,” said Fedorov. “We are fighting precisely because we want to remain a free European state.” In his nine-minute speech, he also took a shot at Zelensky’s way of governing. “It is particularly dangerous when society develops the feeling that the main criterion for an appointment is not professionalism, results or the ability to transform the country, but personal loyalty to the system,” he said.
Speaking to a group of journalists over the weekend, Zelensky firmly rejected calls for elections in his supposed bastion of democracy: “I believe that if we want to destroy the country, then during such a war we can move in the selection of elections… I believe that during such a war, elections in general are big risks. Elections right now are a tsunami for the state that will split Ukraine.” Zelensky pointed to the logistical and security challenges of balloting during wartime, noting that it would require “the participation of the military, in frontline territories, abroad, where millions of our citizens have gone, fleeing the war” and the risk of “strikes and shelling.”
He argued it could only begin to be conceivable if Russia were to agree to a ceasefire, which he preemptively ruled an impossibility. In December, President Trump said he was inclined to see Ukraine hold elections soon. “It’s been a long time. Hasn’t been doing particularly well. Yeah, I think it’s an important time to hold an election. They’re using war not to hold an election, but I would think the Ukrainian people should have that choice,” he told Politico. “You know, they talk about democracy, but it gets to a point where it’s not a democracy anymore.”
Skeptics of Zelensky’s reasoning might point to elections held in other war-torn countries. For example, Afghanistan held elections in 2004 and 2009, and Iraq held one in 2005. To be fair, violence affected turnout and the legitimacy of the results was questioned. Meanwhile, the UK was supposed to have an election in 1940 but put it off all the way until 1945. The Atlantic Council, which is a de facto NATO think tank, has pointed to the UK example in urging Zelensky to refuse elections during a war — a war that is happening because of NATO expansionism.

Time is marching on, however. Russia has thus far been content to pursue a slow-burn approach to the war, ever so gradually taking over more and more territory. If that pace continues and if Russia’s territorial ambitions widen — say, to include taking Odessa and creating a landlocked Ukrainian rump state — we could see Zelensky in charge for years more to come.

Don’t miss Mr. Shurk’s brilliant analysis.

• Canada Chooses Climate Change, Censorship, and China (J.B. Shurk)

Central banker Mark Carney is doing that peculiar Canadian thing again — acting tough while exuding weakness. Just before midnight on Friday, the former governor of the Bank of England and King Charles III’s current prime minister in North America announced that trade talks with the United States had collapsed. This was expected, even though the Canadian and American trade delegations had publicly expressed optimism on Wednesday that a mutually beneficial framework for future trade relations was within reach.

The British Empire’s “climate change”-obsessed central banker announced the official start of the U.S.-Canada Trade War on his X account. That’s ironic because the Canadian government considers Elon Musk an enemy, restricts what information Canadian citizens can see on social media platforms, and seeks to tax and regulate all online communication. Because of the Canadian government’s censorship/propaganda machine, most Canadian citizens have no idea how economically vulnerable their British vassal state really is. Carney’s public memorandum makes it sound as if Canada’s economy is the envy of the world, when it is nothing more than a plaything for Chinese smugglers and European bankers who use the country as an entry point into U.S. markets. The average Canadian is about to learn how dependent Canada has always been upon the unreciprocated generosity of the United States.
Canada is a weigh station for moving products into the United States. Its value for other nations lies in its uniquely favorable trade agreements with the U.S. Canadian banks and manufacturers act as middlemen for foreign nations skirting American trade laws. For its trade- and money-laundering services, Canada receives a cut of the profits. China takes advantage of this arrangement by “snow-washing” their goods through Canadian shell corporations and hiding their commercial transactions within Canadian financial institutions. Over the decades, this “Trojan horse” operation — in which American adversaries use Canada as an economic workaround for hollowing out vital American industries — has greatly profited our neighbors up North.
In fact, the leftist-globalists running Canada have been able to generate enough revenue by stamping Chinese products, “Made in Canada,” that they have become emboldened to get on their “global warming” high horse and lecture the United States about the imaginary “climate apocalypse.” Even though the U.S. has actually reduced its so-called “climate emissions” by a larger percentage than Canada over the last twenty-five years (a feat accomplished through industrial innovation), the Canadian government pretends that the country’s poorly managed forest fires are the outcome of U.S. capitalism. (This is akin to blaming Thor for thunder.)
While sitting on some of the largest energy reserves on the entire planet, Canada has insisted upon throttling its own hydrocarbon output in the name of “fighting global warming.” By waging war against its own energy industry, Canada makes itself economically and militarily vulnerable. It cannot build things anymore. It is not self-sufficient. It depends upon kickbacks from communist China and military protection from the United States. These dual dependencies are mutually exclusive in a world in which China and the U.S. are already engaged in various forms of hybrid warfare.
Britain’s man in Canada, Mark Carney, is globalism personified. As the former governor of the Bank of England, he spoke regularly about a future in which central bankers managed the planet’s resources and economic activity. He has been a lifetime proponent of using the “global warming” bogeyman as a justification for controlling all human behavior. Carney is afflicted with the same narcissistic disease that grips all of Europe’s political and economic “elites”: He does not believe in the value of free markets, free speech, or human liberty. He is, at heart, a totalitarian committed to the proposition that a small cabal of central bank oligarchs and political aristocrats should exercise complete power over everyone else.

“We Don’t Need Canada”.

• Loonie Limps Lower As Trump Unleashes (More) Tariffs (ZH)

“Canada has been ripping off the United States of America for years,” wrote President Trump in his latest social media outburst, laying out his tariff torrent against Canada. “Their ridiculously high tariffs on our Farmers and farm products has made life impossible for these great American Patriots, and has long created a 60 Billion Dollar Deficit between our two Countries.nNot sustainable, and NOT ANYMORE!”= The US implemented a new 50% tax on imports of hundreds of Canadian items including furniture, plastics, plywood and electrical equipment on Saturday.

It’s such a high rate that it may cut off the world’s biggest market for some Canadian enterprises. And now this morning, Trump unveiled more products will face dramatic tariff increases come the start of next year… “On January First, 2027, Tariffs on all Cars, Trucks, both large and small. Automotive Parts, and Steel, will be increased to 50%.Build in the U.S. and there are ZERO TARIFFS. Canada will be treated like a State no longer!
On Trade, and in other ways, also, they are among the worst Nations in the World to deal with. They feel entitled, and yet, WE DON’T NEED CANADA, THEY NEED US! They do 95% of their business with the U.S., with us, the exact opposite!” The Loonie was weaker ahead of Trump’s tweet…

Carney’s government has pledged financial help for businesses caught in the crossfire. That may prove more complicated than previous aid packages for industries like steel that have been facing US tariffs for more than a year. The new tariffs are “very diffuse, and they hit, in particular, small and many medium enterprises in various parts of the country and in radically different supply chains,” said Matthew Holmes, chief of public policy at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce.
Very difficult for the federal government especially to create a package of supports for them.” Canadians may have wanted their prime minister to stand tough and not sign a bad trade deal with the US; but the collapse of talks, and the escalation of the tariff war, will come at a price.

So says the Council on Foreign Relations President.

• Trump Gave Mark Carney an Ultimatum, USA or China? Carney Chose China (CTH)

Council on Foreign Relations President Says Trump Gave Mark Carney an Ultimatum, USA or China? Carney Chose China

An interesting soundbin gave Canada an ultimatum within the deal proposed, us or them.
If Mike Froman is correct, Mark Carney chose China. [X LINK] Video Below:te from Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) President Mike Froman who distills down the main point of contention. Essentially, the U.S. position is to demand a common trade approach toward China and the U.S. delegationn.
Mike Froman, former US Trade Rep on CNN yesterday afternoon "I think the new issue is that the Trump administration is pressing Canada, as well as other countries, to adopt a common approach vis a vis China, whether it's a common external tariff or export controls, or ensuring… pic.twitter.com/RoTIXMZs3k
— cbcwatcher (@cbcwatcher) August 23, 2026

“.. the immigration fraud investigation against a Democrat representative is ongoing and could lead to an arrest.”

• Trump Confirms ICE Investigating Ilhan Omar, ‘Enforcement’ Possible (Salgado)

President Donald Trump indirectly confirmed that the immigration fraud investigation against a Democrat representative is ongoing and could lead to an arrest.

Trump did not comment in any detailed way on the investigation, but on Sunday afternoon, he shared an article from Just the News titled “ICE refuses to disclose records on Ilhan Omar fraud probe, cites ongoing ‘enforcement proceedings.’” By sharing this article on TruthSocial, the president verified its accuracy and immediately started a firestorm of speculation and controversy from other individuals and media outlets. The Trump administration had previously stated that they do have evidence that Minnesota’s Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Somalia) committed immigration fraud, but voters had begun to wonder if that would lead to any actual penalties.
Just the News is especially interested in the investigation because it filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the Omar immigration records in January, for all the details about her legally marrying her brother. ICE returned the following statement instead of the documents: “ICE has determined that the information you requested is being withheld in full pursuant to Title 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A). Disclosure of any responsive records at this time could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.”
No court admissible proof definitively proves that Omar’s legal ex-husband Ahmed Nur Said Elmi is her brother, Just the News said, although the government of the Republic of Somaliland, among others, has confirmed it. Somaliland, which is a breakaway nation from Somalia and hates Omar for her and her family’s connection to genocide, provided paperwork, apparently showing that Omar‘s name, like other members of her family, was originally Elmi before she altered it for the fraudulent marriage that helped her brother stay here.
Receipts: Ilhan Omar’s original last name was Elmi before it was changed. nThis evidence was available, but the Obama Justice Department refused to investigate. Her brother, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, and their father, Nur Said Elmi (also known as Nur Omar), used multiple names… https://t.co/9sz3ZXVN3X pic.twitter.com/d16tAMCKrn — REPUBLIC OF SOMALILAND (@RepOfSomaliland) March 19, 2026
Omar has bragged about prioritizing Somalia‘s interests while serving as a congresswoman. In 2024, while furiously rejecting Somaliland’s longtime independence and maritime deals, she declared, “While I am in Congress, no one will take Somalia’s sea.” Somaliland continued to write about Omar:
Her true name? Ilhan Nur Said Elmi. Father? Nur Said Elmi (aka Nur Omar), Colonel in Siad Barre’s army. Soviet-trained. Part of the command that turned Hargeisa into rubble. Tens of thousands—up to 200,000 Isaaq civilians—bombed, executed, raped, starved in the late ’80s. We call it the Isaaq Genocide. The world still looks away.The mastermind? Major General Mohammed Said Hersi “Morgan”—”The Butcher of Hargeisa.” Barre’s son-in-law. And when Omar visited Somalia to a hero’s welcome in 2022, she attended an event where she sat only a few feet away from “the Butcher,” who has reportedly posed for photos with her relatives.

Can we choose who we serve?

• “This is My Place of Business” (Turley)

“This is my place of business.”

Those words from Jim Sheehan, owner of the Wydaho Roasters coffee shop in Driggs, Idaho, have sparked the latest controversy over the right of businesses to refuse service on the basis of religious or political views. Sheehan has drawn national attention after throwing out a group of pro-life teenagers, calling them the equivalent of a Ku Klux Klan meeting in his shop. Sheehan clearly caters to those who want their lattes with an added shot of rage.
However, this and a number of other cases have exposed the hypocrisy of many regarding the service businesses must provide customers with opposing views. From cakes to coffee, shops remain ground zero for an age of rage. Years ago, politicians and pundits rallied around the effort to force Jack Phillips, a cakeshop owner, to create cakes celebrating same-sex marriages. Phillips objected that it violated his religious beliefs. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court in what many of us hoped would be a final resolution of this conflict.
I had long criticized the framing of the case (and other similar cases) under the religious clauses rather than treating it as a simple matter of free speech. In the end, the Supreme Court punted in a frustrating 2018 decision. In 2023, however, the Supreme Court delivered a major victory for free speech in 303 Creative v. Elenis. It ruled that Lorie Smith, a Christian website designer, could refuse to provide services for a same-sex marriage. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that “the framers designed the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to protect the ‘freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think.’ … They did so because they saw the freedom of speech ‘both as an end and as a means.’”
But notably, in cases like Masterpiece Cakeshop, Phillips insisted that he would always sell cakes to any couple, including same-sex couples. He only refused to make cakes specifically celebrating same-sex marriages, due to his religious views. The case of Wydaho is different. Sheehan refused the same general accommodation offered to all customers because he opposes pro-life causes. In the confrontation, Sheehan declared that “in my world” pro-lifers are no different from the Ku Klux Klan.
“This is my place of business,” he declared. “I did a lot of work to get people on the ballot so women would have the right to choose in the state of Idaho, and this is something I do not support, nor does my wife, and it’s our business. So we have that choice.” In my view, they do have that choice. Yet it must also be acknowledged what Sheehan is doing is far more extreme than what Phillips did in Masterpiece Cakeshop. He is not being asked to create a coffee concoction opposing abortion, like a Cafe Au Life specialty drink. He acknowledges that other groups might use the shop — he just does not want these teenagers to use it to support pro-life causes.
The same controversy arose the same week across the country in Virginia. In Alexandria, Fatana Karimi, owner of the Karimi Salon, threw out a woman after she revealed that she was Israeli. Jessica Walton posted an account of the encounter, and a video was later posted on social media.In the video, the person identified as Karimi says that she declared on Instagram that she would not serve those who support Israel. (She also adds that she got Walton to sign a release for the video.)
The Virginia Human Rights Act states that businesses cannot engage in “unlawful discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or military status.” Karimi will likely argue she refused service not due to Walton’s religion or national origin, but due to her support for Israel — a political position.
The case is reminiscent of the abusive treatment afforded to Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz at Martha’s Vineyard by a pierogi stand. He was also refused service over his political views.The line between national origin and religious discrimination versus political discrimination can be tenuous and unclear. However, in the video, the owner states that it is her national identity that is causing the action: “Get out of my shop. I can’t provide service to an Israeli. It’s against my political beliefs. You need to leave immediately.”
Back in Idaho, Sheehan’s bizarre analogy to the KKK outraged many, to the point that he later apologized for it. However, it is fascinating that liberals are now celebrating the right to exclude others for political or religious reasons, even when they are not asked to engage in any expressive act or make any creative product that contravenes their beliefs. If that is now the case, many owe individuals such as Phillips an apology for years of costly lawsuits, even after the Supreme Court gave him his first nominal victory.
Sheehan could be prosecuted if he were refusing general service or accommodations to the teenagers due to their race or religion. But he is refusing service on the basis of his own political views. Wydaho Roasters does not appear to want business from people who are pro-life, of whom there might be quite a few in Idaho. Karimi appears not to want either Israeli or possibly Jewish customers. It is a curious business plan to exclude such a large segment of the market, but some owners are sure to put their political views before their profits.
However, those on the left cannot have it both ways. They cannot reject the free speech rights of some owners to decline service while celebrating others’ refusal to do the same thing. None of this is likely to make society any more civil. No one wants a black eye to go with the red-eye espresso. Of course, recognizing the free speech rights of an unhinged coffee shop owner does not require patronizing his establishment. Sheehan clearly does not want to serve pro-life citizens, and I expect the feeling is mutual.

THE DEEP STATE

AND yet little executive branch reform has been taken to rip the guts of the deep state apart.

We cannot miss this fleeting opportunity. Otherwise, America will pay an even heavier price. @realDonaldTrump https://t.co/pevavt6Ho0
— General Mike Flynn (@GenFlynn) August 23, 2026

As foretold in the prophecy https://t.co/Y6fgfRZOta
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 23, 2026

ELON MUSK telling you to load up $TSLA before it 2x-5x from here: pic.twitter.com/KqyZQtc7vb
— Esther & Michael (@SuperLuckeee) August 24, 2026

BREAKING: Elon Musk refused to let Ukraine use Starlink for attacks inside Russia. He prioritizes ending the war, not expanding it.

Zelensky himself confirmed the refusal, saying Trump informed him that Musk had rejected the request. pic.twitter.com/7Us47VUzIk
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) August 23, 2026

Cybercab with no steering wheel or pedals driving around Austin

TESLA HAS ACCOMPLISHED THE IMPOSSIBLE!!!$TSLA pic.twitter.com/UEF1PAbx9t
— Dalton Brewer (@daltonbrewer) August 23, 2026

https://twitter.com/cb_doge/status/2091894100937347455?s=20

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

Debt Rattle August 24 2026

Aug 242026

August 24, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 8:00 am Finance Tagged with: 51st state, Bill Maher, Canada, Carney, Charlie Kirk, Fedorov, Hasan Piker, Hormuz, ICC, Iran 46 Responses »

Andrei Rublev Trinity 1411

• “Iran Is Losing Its Grip On Hormuz”: Strait Traffic Explodes Nearly 400% (ZH)

• Trump Eyes ‘Crushing’ Economic Blockade To Bring Iran To Its Knees (JTN)

• Carney Talking A Lot, President Trump Remains Quiet (CTH)

• Trump Loses Trade War With Canada — The Atlantic (TASS)

• Trump: Canada Wants ‘Benefits’ of Being US State (BBC)

• Zelensky Has ‘Questions To Answer’ – Fedorov (BBC)

• Putin Hints At ‘Catastrophic Scenario’ For Ukraine (RT)

• Gutfeld Delivers an Epic Takedown of the Democrats’ Big Tent Myth (Margolis)

• Bill Maher Admits Democrat Party Is Antisemitic (Matt Margolis)

• Hasan Piker Mocks the Murdered Charlie Kirk to Cheering Crowd (Turley)

• The New World Won’t Be Ruled By The ICC’s Bias (von Hoffmeister)

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2091310119309242825?s=20 https://twitter.com/ConstitustionX/status/2091321196436705568?s=20

FYI: AMERICA CONTROLS THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ.

Not Iran.

Marc Thiessen just dropped the numbers:

We’ve escorted over 1,000 ships through the Strait of Hormuz.

Quietly. Effectively. Night after night.

While the media pretended oil was completely cut off and prices would… pic.twitter.com/VgudcH46UT
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) August 23, 2026

https://twitter.com/RippleXrpie/status/2091183404649795886?s=20

“Nearly 200 ships navigated the strait last week, up from about 150 the previous week and just 40 two weeks earlier..”

• “Iran Is Losing Its Grip On Hormuz”: Strait Traffic Explodes Nearly 400% (ZH)

Shortly after President Trump declared the Strait of Hormuz “an American territory” on Friday evening, the New York Post published a new report citing UK Maritime Trade Operations data showing that commercial traffic through the critical waterway has rebounded sharply as more vessels use a US-backed route along Oman’s coast. This suggests that the US military presence and offensive operations in the region have degraded Tehran’s ability to fully control the waterway.

Nearly 200 ships navigated the strait last week, up from about 150 the previous week and just 40 two weeks earlier, according to UKMTO data. Traffic has recovered to roughly 20% of prewar levels, when the waterway carried about one-fifth of the world’s seaborne oil. “It increasingly looks like Iran has at least partially lost control of the strait,” Homayoun Falakshahi, head of crude oil analysis at Kpler, told CNN. “The Oman route absolutely makes the most sense,” added Dan Pickering, founder of Pickering Energy Partners, noting that it allows vessels to avoid the possibility of paying a toll to Tehran. President Trump told a crowd in South Carolina late Friday, “We don’t even know if we won, because I view the Strait of Hormuz as an American territory right now.”

BREAKING: Trump says he view Strait of Hormuz as an American territory pic.twitter.com/NBKGGBgvWu
— Insider Paper (@TheInsiderPaper) August 21, 2026

Let’s revisit a mid-March note from Ex Uno Plures’ Zoltan Pozsar, who explained at the time that Trump was “methodically building a portfolio of assets” to pressure China, centered on strategic energy-supply nodes and maritime chokepoints that have historically supported Beijing’s access to cheap crude imports. His note highlighted the Panama Canal, Venezuelan oil flows, and the broader significance of Iran and the Strait of Hormuz.
Axios: 40 Tankers Transited Hormuz Friday Night, But Real Crisis Is Diesel
Axios political reporter and Middle East correspondent Barak Ravid reported early Saturday that 40 tankers transited the Strait of Hormuz on Friday night, citing three unnamed US officials. “Around 16 million barrels of oil moved out of the strait through the southern channel on Friday night,” Ravid wrote on X.
https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/2091159212587917391?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2091159212587917391%7Ctwgr%5E00e4da20ec21f610f45b22fbc487bac4b37b007f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fenergy%2Faxios-40-tankers-transited-hormuz-friday-night-real-crisis-diesel
The latest Bloomberg vessel-tracking data show that 13 ships transited the critical waterway on Saturday, with seven traveling east to west and six moving west to east. Traffic remains well below the levels recorded during the brief memorandum-of-understanding period from June 15 through mid-July. On Friday, President Trump called the Hormuz chokepoint “an American territory”… “We don’t even know if we won, because I view the Strait of Hormuz as an American territory right now,” Trump said, addressing a crowd in South Carolina.
Trump joked about bombing Iran during the speech, saying, “It’s a Friday night. We have plenty of time… and what the hell do I have to do? Go back and bomb Iran a little bit more?” Axios reported Wednesday that the US military had established a shipping corridor in the critical waterway, which carries millions of barrels of oil each day. There was no word from Ravid on whether the 40 tankers sailed through the new shipping corridor. Even with these transits, the emerging energy crisis is not centered on crude availability, as SPRs around the world are being tapped to offset lost production in the Gulf region. Instead, the real crisis is materializing in the refined-products market.
The focus emerged at the start of the week when Bloomberg’s front-month US diesel crack spread (HOCL1 Index) topped $100 a barrel, as we warned: “Industrial economy either grinds to a halt or consumers about to be hit with the biggest energy pass-through in history.”

Diesel crack hits record $102. This is absolutely unprecedented.

Industrial economy either grinds to a halt or consumers about to be hit with the biggest energy pass through in history pic.twitter.com/OtAdgrCvb3
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 17, 2026

Then, by Wednesday, Jeff Currie, the former Goldman Sachs commodities chief and now co-chair of Abaxx Markets, appeared on CNBC to explain that the real crisis is not in crude but in diesel markets. “Nobody on the planet Earth consumes crude oil,” Currie told CNBC. “Refineries do. Everyone else consumes gasoline, diesel and jet fuel, and those markets look considerably uglier.” By Thursday, Currie explained that the convergence of tight physical markets, currency debasement and policy intervention represents the hallmark of a structural commodity bull cycle.
“Stop looking at crude. Nobody consumes it but refineries. The economy runs on gasoline and diesel, and that consumption-weighted basket costs $165 against $85 WTI,” Currie wrote on X. Read the report. The US diesel crack spread closed below $100 on Friday, but the Hormuz disruption, compounded by Ukraine’s decimation of Russia’s refining capabilities, is creating a perfect storm for global diesel markets ahead of the Northern Hemisphere winter.

“The issue of Beijing’s support for Iran during the war remains sensitive ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s planned visit to the United States in September.”

• Trump Eyes ‘Crushing’ Economic Blockade To Bring Iran To Its Knees (JTN)

The Trump administration plans to escalate its strategy to economically isolate the Islamic Republic by targeting its international enablers and financial networks, and sends a warning shot to Beijing. As the conflict with Iran nears its six-month anniversary, President Donald Trump has traded bombs for a comprehensive economic blockade of the Islamic Republic, hoping to strangle the regime by cutting off its economic lifelines. This week, the president — frustrated with the Iranian leaders’ failure to agree to a deal to settle the conflict that includes ending the country’s illicit nuclear program — vowed to significantly ramp up the United States’ campaign to crush the Iranian economy.

Trump: “Tremendous economic circumstances”
On Wednesday, Trump announced the “most crushing economic operation ever taken” against the Iranian regime that would target Iranian enablers, or any country “that allows its financial institutions, businesses, airports, or government entities to provide any type of lifeline to Iran.” “Those countries will face TREMENDOUS Economic Consequences,” the president said in a post to Truth Social. “Oil smuggling, swap lines, cash transfers, exchange houses, ship registries, front companies — It all needs to stop NOW. You know who you are,” Trump warned. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent elaborated further on the president’s goal. “[W]e are going to collapse this regime,” he said on Thursday in an interview with CNBC.
Victoria Coates, Vice President of Heritage’s Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at the Heritage Foundation, told Just the News that the president’s self-described “Economic D-Day” strategy began to take shape in April, when he first imposed a naval blockade on Iran’s ports and in the Strait of Hormuz, seeking to strip Iran of smuggled oil revenues it was using to fund its fight against the U.S. military.
“There was a major shift in April when the president decided, you know what, we’re going to blockade them. We’re not going to let them hold us hostage over the Strait of Hormuz. We’re going to hold the Strait of Hormuz hostage. We’re going to see who comes in and out,” Victoria Coates told the Just the News, No Noise TV show. “And Iran wasn’t prepared for that. So, they were expecting they could still get out about 750,000 barrels [of oil] a day, they could still get in their critical imports, and that’s really important. Most people don’t appreciate this because Iran hasn’t invested anything in their own economy. They’re heavily dependent on imports. We cut all that off, and so slowly over the summer, … we’re just strangling them,” Coates said.
UAE cuts trade with Iran
The president’s latest announcement outlines a plan to go even further by targeting the countries that are supplying so-called lifelines to Iran. Just a day before the president’s announcement, the United Arab Emirates announced that it would suspend all trade and financial transactions with Iran after the regime allegedly fired a missile at the UAE. The United States has for weeks been encouraging the UAE, which is a close ally, to crack down on the Iranian finance networks in the country. Tehran has long used the UAE as a conduit for financial and trading networks designed to circumvent international sanctions.
“The big move […] by the UAE to cut them off from Dubai, from any kind of commerce with the international financial markets, is huge, and I think that’s just going to continue on, and nature will take its course,” Coates said.
Aside from being a major trade partner of Iran before the war, the UAE has served as an intermediary for Iranian exports and financial exchanges in the global market, to which Iran’s access has been heavily restricted under sanctions regimes. U.S. government sanctions on Iranian regime-linked targets frequently include individuals based in Dubai, the UAE’s largest city. For example, the U.S. sanctioned companies and individuals in the UAE for their roles in a petroleum smuggling network linked to the Yemen-based Iranian proxy group, the Houthis.
Widespread effects of “Economic D-Day”
In June, the U.S. Treasury Department unveiled sanctions on the personal banker of Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, targeting his network of assets abroad that benefit the country’s most senior leadership, Just the News previously reported. The banker, Ali Ansari, is an Iranian national who lives abroad in Dubai, where he has used his ties to the Iranian regime to embezzle government funds and amass “a global network of investment properties and financial holdings,” according to the U.S. government.
China, Iran’s largest trading partner, would also face actions from the United States if President Trump imposes his “Economic D-Day.” China has purchased the vast majority of Iranian oil for years, even while its exports are under international sanctions. Chinese banks and front companies help Iran with oil transactions to avoid the sanctions and operate ships in a shadow fleet to transport the sanctioned oil, according to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. China has also sold Iran the technology and inputs required to construct its fleet of attack drones and missiles.
[US] Treasury Secretary Bessent on Thursday urged Beijing to “get with the program” and support the United States’ planned economic blockade. He cited China’s dependence on Middle East oil imports as a reason to get behind ending the conflict, indicating that the Chinese could face consequences if they continue to back Tehran. The issue of Beijing’s support for Iran during the war remains sensitive ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s planned visit to the United States in September.

” .. the Canadian position is based on lies, fraud and political denial. Canada is playing politics hoping to retain their one-sided benefits..”

• Carney Talking A Lot, President Trump Remains Quiet (CTH)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is delivering speeches, holding press conferences and trying to justify his position following the collapse of negotiations between the USA and Canada. Meanwhile, President Trump and his trade team are intentionally quiet. In all high-stakes negotiations, deals and financial issues, the apex predators always know you make your point clearly and without reservation, you establish your terms and then you don’t say anything. Total silence. The first person to break the silence is the losing hand. Once your terms are established you stay quiet and then let the other party talk, talk, and talk themselves to yes. Silence is the power.

Mark Carney is telling everyone his position and trying to justify what has taken place. Mark Carney is in a very weak position on both structure and substance of the issues. [I wrote a lengthy explanation HERE] Within this segment Carney tries to explain what the USA requests were that Canada would not agree to. He notes the U.S. wanted strict control over Canada’s free trade agreements (FTAs) with other countries. What Carney fails to note is that this exists already, right now in the USMCA [Article 32:10 of the USMCA]. The U.S. has termination rights to both Canada and Mexico FTAs with other countries. This is an example of Carney gaslighting Canadians.
In reality, Canada wants unlimited and unrestricted access to the U.S. market as if they were a 51st state. However, Canada will not permit unlimited and unrestricted access to their market for U.S. companies. This, Carney says, compromises the sovereignty of Canada. WATCH:

I was confident the discussions would collapse because the Canadian position is based on lies, fraud and political denial. Canada is playing politics hoping to retain their one-sided benefits and outlast President Trump into the midterm election. Trump, however, has already executed the tariffs and the only thing remaining for him and Greer to do is trigger the six-month USMCA withdrawal.

“According to the article, the pressure directed at Ottawa has not proven effective..”

The Atlantic doesn’t like Trump.

• Trump Loses Trade War With Canada — The Atlantic (TASS)

US President Donald Trump is failing in the trade conflict with Canada as the threats and pressure directed at Ottawa have not proven effective, according to The Atlantic magazine. It said that although Canada’s economy is significantly smaller than that of the United States, its government is more rational and can protect national interests during the trade conflict. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is more popular than Trump, and the Canadians have united around their distrust of Washington.

At the same time, the American public is facing a growing national debt, high interest rates, and an energy crisis. As The Atlantic points out, Trump’s inability to accept the fact that in wars not only strength but also endurance plays a role led to his defeat in the war with Iran and is the main reason for his loss in trade conflicts.
Trade Representative Jamieson Greer previously said that the Canadian government had rejected what Washington considered to be a beneficial deal with the US, and the US 50-percent customs duties on some Canadian goods came into effect on Saturday. Carney, in a widely circulated statement, confirmed that he had suspended the trade negotiations with the US. He said that Ottawa would impose retaliatory tariffs to protect workers and businesses from September 8.

If they insist on being all wokey, Trump doesn’t want to give it to them. In that regard, Carney is just like Trudeau. A bunch of wokeys.

• Trump: Canada Wants ‘Benefits’ of Being US State (BBC)

US President Donald Trump has said Canada wants “the benefits of being a State, without being one” after trade talks between the two countries collapsed late on Friday. In his first comments since negotiations broke down, triggering new 50% US tariffs on a range of Canadian goods, Trump also said American farmers had been charged “massive amounts of Tariffs” for years. It comes after Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney called the fresh tariffs a “miscalculation” designed to “hurt and divide us”.

Carney confirmed he would match Trump’s tariffs “dollar-for-dollar” from 8 September, including levies on steel, dairy, appliances and electronics. The US and Canada are now in a trade “war”, he said. “They asked too much and they offered too little,” Carney said on Saturday. “You’re at war when you get attacked. We got attacked,” he added. Trump’s latest comments echo his repeated references to making Canada the “51st state” of America since returning to office, sparking frustration among its leaders and residents. The collapse of the trade talks upended a deeply integrated trading relationship, with no clear path to resolution.
“We cannot accept what they’ve offered, and we will not give what they’ve asked,” Carney said. Both countries were optimistic of a deal earlier in the week, but talks fell apart after both sides accused the other of making last-minute changes. The new 50% US tariffs will apply to a range of Canadian goods, in addition to existing US tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminium, automobiles and lumber. They are limited in scope, covering about $20bn (£15bn; C$28bn) of Canadian imports, or about 5% in total, including wine, dairy, cement, clothing and hockey equipment.

Carney faces crucial test after walking away from Trump’s deal
The prime minister said Canada was retaliating “reluctantly” to protect its interests. Details of the counter-measures will be released in the coming days, he said. Leaders of other federal parties in Canada, including the Conservative opposition, voiced support for the prime minister, as have the leaders of some Canadian provinces. Tariffs – a tax placed on imports from other countries – have been a key component of Trump’s trade policy, with the US president arguing they will boost American manufacturing and create jobs at home. Critics, however, say tariffs have raised prices for American consumers and have disrupted and damaged the global economy.
Carney’s speech on Saturday was his first address to Canadians after he announced late on Friday night that a deal would not be reached, accusing the Americans of making “last-minute changes” that were “unfair” and “uneconomic”. US negotiators, meanwhile, accused Canada of making “new demands and walk backs” on terms which had been previously agreed. On Saturday, US trade representative Jamieson Greer told Fox News there were no plans to resume talks. He added that the US had been prepared to cut some of its tariffs on Canada as part of the ill-fated deal.
Carney, however, said the US presented “unacceptable” terms that were too restrictive, including curbing Canada’s ability to strike new trade deals with other countries. He also rejected the assertion that Canada had made last-minute requests: “We clarified what was on offer and were continually disappointed by the answers.” Doug Ford, the leader of Canada’s most populous province Ontario, backed Carney and said Trump “can’t be trusted”. British Columbia Premier David Eby said the US demand for restrictions on Canada’s ability to have other trade deals “would reduce us to the economic equivalent of the 51st state”.
“It was never acceptable to Canadians,” Eby said. The Conservative opposition leader Pierre Poilievre also appeared to support Carney, calling the latest US levies “unjustified”. Quebec’s premier, Christine Fréchette, warned jobs would likely be lost as a result of the new US tariffs. “Behind these numbers are real people,” she said, vowing to introduce measures to support impacted sectors. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, whose oil-rich province has worked to make inroads with the Trump administration, urged both sides to resume talks. The collapse comes after more than a year of on-again, off-again trade talks, which intensified in recent weeks after a US-imposed deadline to strike a deal or face further tariffs.
The two countries were also engaged in a mandatory review of an existing North American free trade agreement, known as USMCA, with Mexico. The pact was signed by Trump during his first term to replace the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement. It underpins $1.6tn (£1.2tn) in annual trilateral trade across Canada, the US and Mexico. Earlier this summer, Canada and Mexico had formally requested for USMCA to be renewed for another 16 years. The US, however, declined to renew it in its current form. Asked how Friday’s trade talk collapse would impact the North American free trade pact, Carney said it was “certainly not good news”.

Musk chose the side of the nazis. That does not feel good.

• Zelensky Has ‘Questions To Answer’ – Fedorov (BBC)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has “questions to answer” about corruption in his government, his sacked defence minister Mykhailo Fedorov has told the BBC. Fedorov, a popular minister who modernised the armed forces and pioneered drone warfare, was fired last month after reportedly falling out with the head of Ukraine’s armed forces. He told the BBC a money laundering investigation announced last week raised questions about Zelensky’s awareness of potential corruption in his inner circle.

Fedorov also reiterated that “democracy should not be the hostage of Putin” – but stopped short of declaring his own political ambitions days after he posted a video calling for elections in Ukraine. There were angry protests over his sacking but his support dwindled and demonstrations ended on Wednesday, after Fedorov’s replacement was confirmed. His call for a wartime vote has been largely rejected. Asked whether he missed his old job, the 35-year-old replied “No”, citing the relentless stress of managing Ukraine’s war with Russia while transforming its defence ministry.
Ukraine has been under martial law since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, meaning elections are suspended. But Fedorov said it was his “moral right” to start the conversation about elections. “We should not be afraid of discussing it. That’s what democracy is all about. If I cannot share my ideas and be open about them with my own society, then what are we fighting for?” If elections were never held, he said, “then we are no longer a democracy”. In his earlier video statement Fedorov had argued that “people cannot endlessly live in a state where they do not understand why certain decisions are made”.
He shied away from criticising the president directly and declined to answer whether he backs Zelensky to win any election. Zelensky said he believed wartime elections would currently be too dangerous for Ukraine in remarks released on Sunday. “I believe that in a war like this, elections as such are a huge risk,” he said. “Elections right now are a tsunami for the country that will split Ukraine.” Experts have cited a number of obstacles to holding such a vote, including how soldiers, millions of Ukrainian refugees and people from occupied territories would vote, as well as disinformation threats from Russia.
Fedorov’s video highlighting political corruption last week came the day before a money laundering investigation was announced into lawmakers and bankers. Ukraine’s anti-corruption bureau said it had uncovered a scheme to misappropriate more than $3m (£2.2m) in Ukrainian currency to pay bail for a former energy minister accused of money laundering. A senior official in Zelensky’s office, alleged to be involved, was sacked. Fedorov said the case raised questions about the president’s awareness of potential corruption in his inner circle.
“Let him answer this question… I believe that he’s ready for such questions. It’s his responsibility to tell us all whether he was aware of all that or not… I don’t want to make any assumptions.” A spokesperson for the president had earlier told BBC News: “Since the former minister was part of every government since 2019, it’s strange that he phrases it as though these were somehow different governments without him. As everyone remembers, we didn’t hear any strong statements from him back then.”
Fedorov claimed he had rooted out elements of corruption from defence procurement but warned it was still affecting Ukraine’s frontline capacity. The former minister said he’d had no contact with the president for “a couple of weeks”, and had no evidence the president was personally corrupt. “In all the time that I worked with him, not a single time have I received from him any task or assignment that would go against law or my sense of integrity. So that’s my personal experience with him.”
As defence minister and previously digital transformation minister, Fedorov is credited with innovating to replace soldiers with an “army of drones”, saving lives on the battlefield and enabling long-range Ukrainian strikes on Russian military targets, oil refineries and distribution warehouses – thousands of kilometres over the border. He said he would continue to promote new ways to fight the war and confirmed a visit to the United States in the coming weeks, where he hopes to meet Elon Musk.
The billionaire businessman’s Starlink satellite communications system has been key in Ukraine’s success. Fedorov aims to convince Musk to extend the technology into Russian airspace to assist Ukrainian strikes, without the Kremlin benefiting from access. “The best tech companies in the world are supporting us and they will be investing in our victory, in ending this war. And we need to stay in touch with them regardless of my position. I have a previous successful track record of working with them and I need to stay in touch with them for my country,” he said.
Fedorov criticised bureaucracy in the UK and other countries supporting Ukraine for delays in supplying weapons. The UK is a longstanding supporter of Ukraine, spending £16bn supplying weapons since the war began. It was confirmed last week that British-made drones have been used to attack Russian targets. Fedorov said he was grateful for British support but blamed “bureaucracy and red tape” for delays in receiving promised equipment. “Governments are lagging behind the realities on the ground. It’s not only the issue for UK, but for other countries as well that announce some assistance and we are not getting it until the end of the year.”

“Kiev “let the genie out of the bottle” by striking economic infrastructure, and is now reaping the retaliation, the Russian president has said..”

• Putin Hints At ‘Catastrophic Scenario’ For Ukraine (RT)

Ukraine is facing a “catastrophic scenario” from Russian retaliatory strikes after it “opened Pandora’s box” with its attacks on economic and civilian infrastructure, President Vladimir Putin said on Saturday. In spring, Kiev sharply escalated its long-range drone attacks on Russia’s oil and gas infrastructure, thereafter extending the strikes to e-commerce warehouses and civilian logistics facilities. Russia retaliated by targeting Black Sea shipping and key port facilities it said were handling Ukraine’s military-related imports, effectively severing the country’s main export route.

Kiev is now reaching out through intermediaries to try to “prevent this situation from developing into a catastrophic scenario,” Putin said in an interview with Russia 1. However, their trajectory is apparent, he added. Ukraine initiated this with its “massive missile and drone strikes on our civilian targets and logistics,” the president stated. It has opened Pandora’s box itself. Russia’s retaliation struck Ukraine’s “most sensitive economic sectors,” including agricultural exports, which are its main source of revenue, Putin said.
He added that the diplomatic proposals Moscow is now receiving are sometimes “exotic and unacceptable.” We are always ready for dialogue on peace, but only on the basis of the realities unfolding on the ground. Moscow has long stressed that it prefers a diplomatic settlement to the Ukraine conflict, but will only accept a long-term and stable peace that removes its underlying causes. Russia will continue to push toward its goals via military means as long as Kiev refuses to compromise, the Kremlin has said.

“Run that equation long enough, and you don’t get a bigger tent. You get an empty one.”

• Gutfeld Delivers an Epic Takedown of the Democrats’ Big Tent Myth (Margolis)

Greg Gutfeld laid out a simple equation on Friday’s The Five that the Democrat Party is turning a blind eye to: welcoming radicals in gains you a handful of true believers, but it costs you a much larger group of people who just wanted a normal party to vote for. Run that equation long enough, and you don’t get a bigger tent. You get an empty one.

Gutfeld built the case by looking back at what actually worked for Donald Trump. “He had a lot of weird and odd people who backed him, and we called it a pirate ship,” Gutfeld said. “Because even though everybody was different, they all rode in the same direction.” Democrats, he argued, have the opposite problem. “They aren’t rowing in the same direction at all because they don’t have ideas. They just have identities.” That distinction is the whole ballgame. A coalition built around ideas can absorb a lot of different personalities and still move forward together. A coalition built around identity groups eventually runs out of room, because every new identity welcomed in has to be balanced against the people who feel replaced by it.
Gutfeld walked through the actual arithmetic. “You got a small group of super far-left fanatics who want to tear down everything, but there’s a much bigger group of regular Democrats who don’t,” he said. “So if you welcome the radicals into your tent, some will join, but then some normies, they’re going to leave.” The net change, as he put it, is the radicals who join minus the normies who leave, and normies vastly outnumber radicals. “Even a small percentage who leave, the party’s going to end up smaller,” he said. “And it will end up smaller. Trust me.”
“It’s like somebody deciding to add Ex-Lax to the office candy bowl,” he said. “Pretty soon, everybody’s going to start bringing their own snacks from home.” A key example, of course, is women’s sports, where fair competition based on biological sex gave way to policies that pushed female athletes out. He also mentioned churches that traded tradition for far-left positions and watched membership dwindle as a result, all while traditional congregations grew. The pattern holds because mainstream institutions survive on boundaries. Erase the boundaries to please the fringe, and the mainstream stops showing up.
Nobody has proven that point better than the Democrat Party’s own leadership. Party leaders have spent the past few months dismissing concerns about the rise of socialists inside their coalition, arguing that it is evidence the party is big enough for everybody. At the same time, plenty of the same leaders have spent those months working to sideline Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), a man who votes with his own party 95% of the time. His real offense was refusing to fall in line on Israel, Iran, the border, and socialism, the handful of issues on which the activist wing has decided disagreement is disqualifying.
“The Big Tent pretends to be this enrichment when it’s actually an erosion,” Gutfeld added. “The inclusion benefits only the outliers, but in the end, it destroys the institutions.”
The Democrats' "big tent" is actually pushing out the normies.pic.twitter.com/oSsVcCSP4R
— Matt Margolis (@mattmargolis) August 23, 2026

The worst part is that the signs that this a problem for their party have been there, but Democrat leaders just refuse to acknowledge them.

Pro-Muslim is anti-semitic.

• Bill Maher Admits Democrat Party Is Antisemitic (Matt Margolis)

On Saturday’s episode of HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, the host said the quiet part out loud about his own party’s relationship with Judaism. The exchange came after CNN anchor Dana Bash raised the case of Texas Democrat James Talarico, whose outspoken “Christianity,” she noted, means he “wears his faith on his sleeve” in a way Talarico believes could help him politically. Maher wasn’t buying the idea that all faith gets an equally warm welcome in the Democrat Party.

“Well, in the Democratic Party, as long as that faith isn’t Jewish, you’re good,” Maher said. Bash, clearly caught off guard, replied, “Well, you said it.” Maher wasn’t backing down. “Yeah, I said it because it’s true!” he shot back.

Bill Maher admits the Democrat Party isn't fond of Jews.
pic.twitter.com/IrTvUmEgpV
— Matt Margolis (@mattmargolis) August 23, 2026

He’s right. As far as I’m concerned, when a lifelong liberal like Maher admits that the Democrat Party’s tolerance for public faith excludes Jews, that tells you how big the problem really is. What Maher admitted here is something Republicans have been calling out for years.And we got the receipts.According to Pew Research Center polling, 80% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents now hold an unfavorable view of Israel, up sharply from 53% in 2022. Compare that to Republicans, of whom only 41% hold a negative view of Israel and 58% hold a positive one.
That gap didn’t exist a few years ago, and it opened up almost entirely on one side of the aisle. The Democrat Party didn’t get here by accident. And the fallout is impossible to ignore. It gave an audience to antisemitic influencers like Hasan Piker, and voted for Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, both of whom built political careers on anti-Israel rhetoric. This isn’t a fringe problem. This is the base.
Sam Markstein, national political director and spokesman for the Republican Jewish Coalition, told Fox News Digital on Saturday that Maher got it right. “It’s a rare occasion when we agree with Bill Maher, but he’s right: there is only one party where American Jews can be proudly Jewish and loudly pro-Israel, and it’s the Republican Party,” Markstein said. “Democrats prove it again and again — from Kamala Harris passing over Josh Shapiro in 2024 to the rise of communist elected officials who traffic in antisemitism in halls of power across the country.” He didn’t stop there. “The Democratic Party is being remade by its radicalized base, and party leadership continues to fecklessly whistle past the political graveyard as American Jews flee,” Markstein said.
As far as I’m concerned, there’s a clear period when this shift began. Barack Obama’s eight years in office normalized antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment inside his own party, and that shouldn’t surprise anyone who remembers his background. Before he ever ran for president, Obama spent 20 years in the pews of Jeremiah Wright’s congregation, absorbing anti-American and antisemitic rhetoric that became a real liability in 2008. He only quit the church once the cameras got too close. He never actually changed course, and his antisemitic record speaks for itself. This problem continued under Joe Biden. Essentially, Obama built the road, and Biden paved over it.
The results speak for themselves. A 2025 Gallup poll found American sympathy for Israel has collapsed to a 25-year low of 46%, while support for the Palestinians has climbed to 33%. Democrats now favor Palestinians over Israelis by a 59%-21% margin. They hold that position even though Hamas terrorists killed 1,200 Israelis on Oct. 7, including babies and Holocaust survivors, raped and tortured civilians, and took roughly 250 hostages.
The Democrat Party can keep pretending it’s still the party of religious tolerance and Jewish support. Even Bill Maher isn’t buying it anymore.

Not exactly the best of America.

• Hasan Piker Mocks the Murdered Charlie Kirk to Cheering Crowd (Turley)

We have seen protesters on the left around the country mocking the assassination of Charlie Kirk, even reenacting his murder. Hate traffickers like Jennifer Welch have even justified his assassination. It is all shocking and depressing, but none reached the level of Hasan Piker leading a huge crowd in mocking Kirk and his faith. Before he was murdered, Kirk debated Piker and called him a “socialist hypocrite.” What is shocking is not the utter depravity and cruelty of Piker, but the ecstasy of the crowd in relishing the death of someone with opposing views. It is part of the conditioning in what I have previously called an “age of rage.”

In the video, Piker leads the crowd in the meme song “We Are Charlie Kirk” at a stop of his “Fear& LIVE” tour, including such lines as “We are Charlie Kirk, we carry the flame. We’ll fight for the Gospel, we’ll honor his name.” His co-hosts and the crowd seem to be laughing with joy. Joining him at this hatefest at the Golden Gate Theatre in San Francisco on August 21 were reportedly Will Neff, QTCinderella, and AustinShow. Hasan is wearing his now-signature Mao jacket as the young crowd and his co-hosts laugh hysterically. It is the very essence of this movement to desensitize people, particularly young people, to violence and hate.
In Rage and the Republic, I wrote about this national ragefest. It allows people to hate completely and without thought to the humanity of those being hurt. What people will not admit is that they like it. Rage is addictive, and it is contagious. Just look at the crowd in San Francisco, and you will see the addictive quality of uncut, undiluted hate:

Piker, Will Neff, QTCinderella, AustinShow, and these fans have every right to spread hate. It is protected speech just as KKK and neo-Nazi groups are allowed to promulgate their own hateful values.
What is exasperating is how hatemongers on the left want to enjoy hate speech while accusing others of hate and intolerance. They do so by excusing their actions or views by demonizing those who disagree. Democratic leaders continue the false claim that democracy is dying in America and that this may be our last free election. While made over multiple elections, the claim of the imminent death of democracy (unless they are elected) does not appear to register with their supporters.
Recently the rhetoric has reached hysterical levels. Florida Democratic Senate candidate Angie Nixon has compared Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to “modern-day slave catchers” and the government is “literally trying to kill us.” It is a narrative that allows you to speak like a Nazi while claiming to be fighting Nazis. Piker thrilled the crowd by mocking a murdered man over his faith and his death. It is more than being simply classless. It is commodifying rage. Piker is reportedly raking in a fortune as are other hatemongers like Jennifer Welch. They traffic in rage to a nation of rage addicts.
It is a scene that only reaffirms the work of Kirk who sought to expose the hate and intolerance of the left, particularly on our campuses. Kirk infuriated many by challenging them to debate. There is no room for reason in an age of rage. Those who try to introduce opposing views on campuses are cancelled or attacked. Recently, a group of pro-life teenagers were kicked out of the Wydaho Roasters coffee shop in Idaho by an owner who found their presence intolerable. At universities, faculty members have attacked displays and even students in righteous rage.
One professor who pleaded guilty to assaulting pro-life students was not only attained on the faculty but even honored by another school.Civility, and even humanity, become signs of weakness in these times. They gravitate to figures like Abdul El-Sayed who has campaigned with Piker and promises to “choke out” Republicans and refers to moderates like Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman (D) as ogres to have their heads cut off and put on pikes.
The American left has found their berserkers, the old Norse warriors who were known to fight in a virtual violent trance. The new berserkers offer the chance to hate completely and without remorse or reflection. Over time, supporters are conditioned to disregard even the murder of those with opposing views. As shown in San Francisco, assassination becomes nothing more than a sing-a-long in an age of rage.

“The clash over sanctions on judges reveals a fading order in which neither moral monopoly nor financial coercion can claim legitimacy ..”

Constantin von Hoffmeister, a political and cultural commentator from Germany, author of the book The Fate of White America and director of Multipolar Press

• The New World Won’t Be Ruled By The ICC’s Bias (von Hoffmeister)

Washington’s clash with the International Criminal Court exposes the contradictions between supranational legal claims, American exceptionalism, and the rise of multipolar sovereignty.

The latest clash between Washington and the International Criminal Court says more about the structure of the present world order than about Tomoko Akane or Abdoulaye Seye. On August 18, 2026, the United States imposed sanctions on Akane, the Japanese president of the ICC, and Seye, a Senegalese senior trial lawyer in the Office of the Prosecutor. The measures freeze assets subject to American jurisdiction and restrict access to the American financial system. The ICC answered by calling the sanctions a “flagrant attack” on the independence of the court. Nine of its 18 judges, both deputy prosecutors, a former prosecutor, and another staff member now face American sanctions.
Washington says the court has exceeded its mandate by pursuing officials from states that never accepted its authority, above all the US and Israel. This dispute raises the oldest political question in a new form: who has the right to judge whom? The liberal international order promised an answer based on universal law. The American response supplies another answer based on sovereign power. A multipolar view has reason to distrust both claims when either seeks authority over civilizations and states that never freely granted it.
The American position contains a genuine question of sovereignty, even when Washington applies that principle selectively. The US never became a party to the Rome Statute. Israel also remains outside the court. From the American perspective, an international tribunal created by a treaty cannot simply acquire authority over American soldiers, officials, or allied leaders without American consent. The ICC answers that its jurisdiction can arise through the territory on which alleged crimes occurred, including territory belonging to states that accepted the Rome Statute. This is the legal basis behind some proceedings involving nationals of countries outside the court.
Lawyers can argue over jurisdiction, territorial consent, complementarity, admissibility, and treaty interpretation, but that us beside the point of the political issue in question here. A multipolar order begins from the existence of several sovereign centers of power, each possessing its own history, institutions, political traditions, and conception of justice. Any institution claiming authority above these centers carries an immense burden of legitimacy.
A tribunal with universal ambitions must either possess genuine universal consent or depend upon political power to enforce its judgments. The ICC possesses neither a world state behind it nor universal membership. The US, China, Russia, India, Israel, and several other important powers stand outside its system. Such a court can aspire to universality, yet aspiration alone cannot create a universal political community.
Yet Washington weakens its own argument whenever it converts sovereignty into a privilege reserved for itself and its allies. Sovereign equality means that American sovereignty deserves respect because every sovereign state deserves respect. American exceptionalism follows another principle: Washington claims freedoms that it frequently refuses to extend to others. The US objects when an institution beyond its control threatens American officials, while successive American governments have used sanctions, financial restrictions, diplomatic pressure, military power, and extraterritorial legislation to pressure individuals and companies far beyond American territory into complying with American policy.
Washington rejects the ICC because the court supposedly projects authority beyond the consent of sovereign states; Washington then answers that alleged violation by using the global reach of the dollar and the American financial system against foreign judges and prosecutors. Sovereignty becomes both the defense and the weapon. An international institution may pursue justice until its work touches the protected sphere of American power. At that point, financial coercion begins. For advocates of multipolarity, this episode illustrates why the concentration of global finance, sanctions power, communications infrastructure, and legal influence inside one geopolitical center creates political dependence even for institutions that describe themselves as independent.
The ICC itself deserves scrutiny from the same multipolar standpoint. The answer to American domination cannot consist of transferring ultimate authority from Washington to The Hague. The court arose during the high tide of the post-Cold War order, when Western political ideas increasingly appeared under universal names. Liberal democracy became “democracy.” Western doctrines of rights became “human rights.” Western political assumptions became “international norms.” Institutions created within that historical climate often inherited the same universal language. The moral appeal is easy to understand. Genocide, mass killing, torture, and deliberate attacks upon civilians are terrible acts, and societies naturally seek ways to punish those responsible.
The difficulty begins when moral judgment becomes a permanent supranational machinery claiming jurisdiction across radically different political worlds. International criminal law then enters the sphere of geopolitics. Prosecutors depend upon evidence supplied by states. Courts depend upon governments to arrest suspects. International bodies depend upon funding, diplomatic backing, banking systems, travel access, and political cooperation. Enforcement follows the distribution of power. A defendant from a weak state may find himself in The Hague. A leader protected by a great power may remain beyond its reach. The language remains universal while the ability to enforce it remains unequal. That gap between universal principle and political reality has haunted international justice from its beginning.

https://twitter.com/17QStorm/status/2091133294159303085?s=20 https://twitter.com/dave_aldrine/status/2091202610808103090?s=20 https://twitter.com/DOGEQEEN/status/2091303969649775013?s=20 https://twitter.com/joehansen/status/2091204488853954683?s=20 https://twitter.com/JeebsTX/status/2091045886847586589?s=20

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

Debt Rattle August 22 2026

Aug 222026

August 22, 2026 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:12 am Finance Tagged with: AOC, Canada, China, Eric Swalwell, Iran, Marco Rubio, Michael Cohen, Natalie Harp, trade war 28 Responses »

René Magritte Personal values 1952

• China Rejects US Demand To Back Its Economic Operation Against Iran (ZH)

• The Strait of Hormuz Is Repricing the Entire World Economy (Martin Armstrong)

• Deaths of ‘Iranian Leaders’ Hindering Deal With US — Trump (TASS)

• U.S-Canada Trade War is Now a Reality (CTH)

• Cocaine Networks and Communists — Marco’s Been Busy Today (Sarah Anderson)

• AOC for President? It’s Time We Take That Proposition Seriously (Rick Moran)

• Remember the Names (James Howard Kunstler)

• ‘My Guardian and Protector’: Natalie Harp’s Devotion to Trump (CNN)

• FBI Seizes Devices Belonging to Eric Swalwell (CTH)

• Mirror, Mirror on The Wall: Who Is the Prettiest Politician of Them All? (SA)

• Wait, What? Trump Was on Michael Cohen’s Radio Show? (Matt Margolis)

https://twitter.com/ConstitustionX/status/2090504429208494479?s=20 https://twitter.com/John_F_kJr/status/2090543513674961159?s=20 https://twitter.com/ivan_8848/status/2090481005987545449?s=20

Egyptian Coptic Christian who fled Islamic persecution explains:

“There are no moderate Muslims. Either they are following the command of Allah to wage Jihad, or they are not Muslim.

It’s written in the Quran that Muslims have to force everyone else to become Muslim, and if… pic.twitter.com/49DcO8MXyd
— Dr. Maalouf ‏ (@realMaalouf) August 20, 2026

But will China understand?

• China Rejects US Demand To Back Its Economic Operation Against Iran (ZH)

China has firmly rejected Washington’s call to join in implementing US sanctions to “squash” Iran’s economy, pushing back against Trump administration pressure to be part of the “toughest sanctions in history” which has marked a new phase of conflict focused on extended economic warfare, as a military solution is seen as increasingly unrealistic and unlikely.”Regarding the Iran issue, sanctions and pressure do not help resolve the problem,” Reuters quoted a representative of the Chinese Embassy in Washington as saying. The White House’s new plan is to include heavy reliance on international pressure on external countries to impose extreme isolation on the Islamic Republic.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lin Jian said the same to reporters Friday in a regular briefing. “China calls on all relevant parties to take responsible measures and resolve the problem through political and diplomatic means,” he said. Asked specifically about the latest comments of US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Lin emphasized the need for all parties to take “responsible measures” in resolving the war. “China opposes illegal unilateral sanctions that have no basis in international law and are not authorized by the UN Security Council,” Lin said.
Bessent had on Thursday told CNBC: “It is a one-two punch. We have the blockade (on Iran), and we are going to have the toughest sanctions in history.” He then vowed, “It is going to work in Iran and we are going to collapse this regime.” He further invoked some (infamous) words of President George W. Bush issued to allies in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. “You are either with us, or against us,” Bessent said in the interview. “This is going to be the greatest coordinated economic isolation in the history of the world.”
Such back-and-white rhetoric is very unlikely to sway the Chinese, given also that of course they know what happened next after that original proclamation by Bush – American forces got stuck in no less than two quagmires in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Iraq, in what came to be viewed cynically as ‘forever wars’. What’s more as the blowback in Baghdad was pretty immediate, as a key unintended consequence of the US regime change war was the ascendancy of pro-Iran Shia politicians ruling Iraq. Beijing is all too aware of the US score card in the region, even as Washington decision-makers continue ignoring the glaring lessons of recent history.
Bessent seemed perplexed at the reaction in oil prices on Thursday, while he also said that discussions with Beijing would be best done in private: “I think oil markets are misinterpreting what this economic pressure means,” Bessent said on Thursday. Oil prices climbed to more than three-week highs on Thursday. “We have asymmetric information, and I’m not sure why oil has popped up on this,” Bessent said. “If we are doing the maximum economic pressure, then that means that likely there will not be a large-scale kinetic restart.”
When asked if the U.S. could target China for doing business with Iran, Bessent said many conversations were best to have in private. “We are confident that everyone wants the Strait (of Hormuz) reopened, and for energy prices to come back down,” ` he continued. “Keep in mind that the Chinese get 50% (of their) energy from inside the Gulf. So it would do them a big service to get with the program.”Still, Bessent has been busy doubling-down on Trump’s message shift this week (opting for an economic siege warfare ‘solution’ as after military strategy hasn’t gone so well)…

Any remaining tie to Tehran will hasten a nation's economic oblivion, whether that tie be purposefully constructed or willfully ignored. pic.twitter.com/T3vticluAg
— Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) August 20, 2026

Tehran has been consistently saying that is is ready for a long war, whether that come in the form of more US-Israeli bombs, or else an economic siege. Even Reuters has acknowledged the obvious in its own coverage, saying “Iran has weathered punishing economic sanctions for nearly 50 years, since the Islamic Revolution of 1979.” “Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi called Trump’s comments an attempt to divert American public opinion from domestic financial problems, including record debt and rising interest rates,” the report added.
There’s an additional important factor. At this point there’s no way that the two key UN Security Council permanent members Russia and China will sign off on any big new anti-Iran sanctions regimen brought before the United Nations. Closer to home, the White House risks more China blowback, especially with President Xi Jinping slated to visit the US next month. Bloomberg poses the following in Friday analysis:“Is the White House willing to prioritize this new economic warfare campaign above its China relationship? And if it chooses to, there are serious ramifications,” said Chris Kennedy, an economic statecraft analyst at Bloomberg Economics. Kennedy said the new threats are also an “admission that the US is running out of options.”
Any decision to hit China would risk worsening tensions just weeks before Trump hosts Xi for the Chinese leader’s first visit to Washington in a decade. It also raises the threat of Chinese countermeasures that could inflict pain on the US economy ahead of November midterm elections that will hinge on pocketbook issues. Beijing has already demonstrated a willingness to push back against Trump, most notably by announcing export restrictions on rare earths that forced the White House into a climbdown from their tariff fight. Meanwhile, more pushback against this week’s Axios report saying that large quantities of oil are moving through the Strait of Hormuz via a US Navy established ‘stealth’ corridor:
https://twitter.com/borzou/status/2090576229900423280?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2090576229900423280%7Ctwgr%5E0a80588e3499234b9a74d868adceed0299b51c1e%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fchina-firmly-rejects-us-demand-back-its-most-crushing-economic-operation-against-iran
On Friday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said that Iran will “under no circumstances bow to bullying.” But he also struck somewhat of a conciliatory tone, perhaps signaling Iran is still open to dialogue so long as Washington is willing to compromise. “It would be better to end the war today, now that we are strong and have dignity, with the whole world acknowledging our victory,” the semi-official Iranian Students’ News Agency quoted him as saying.

If it were so bad, oil would be $200.

• The Strait of Hormuz Is Repricing the Entire World Economy (Martin Armstrong)

The politicians continue to speak about the Strait of Hormuz as though this were merely a regional dispute between Iran and its neighbors. That is complete nonsense. The strait is one of the most important arteries in the global economy, carrying roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas shipments. Brent crude has moved above $91, but the headline price of oil is only the beginning. The real economic damage appears in shipping rates, insurance premiums, refinery margins, diesel prices, electricity costs, and ultimately government borrowing. War does not remain confined to the battlefield. It enters every household through inflation.

Washington claims the strait is open while Iran insists it remains closed. Both statements are political propaganda because it is the shipowners, insurers, and commodity traders who determine whether a waterway is commercially open. A tanker can theoretically pass through Hormuz, but that means nothing if the insurance premium becomes prohibitive or the crew refuses to accept the risk. Most politicians have never operated a business and do not understand that commerce depends upon confidence—not government declarations. Once confidence collapses, trade will retreat regardless of how many officials stand before cameras insisting that everything remains under control.
This is why the cost of the conflict cannot be measured solely by the number of barrels temporarily removed from the market. Every vessel delayed or redirected reduces available shipping capacity and increases freight rates elsewhere. Insurers must reprice the probability of a tanker being damaged, captured, or destroyed. Refineries must compete for alternative supplies, while countries dependent upon Gulf energy begin building precautionary inventories. Traders add a geopolitical premium because nobody knows whether the next missile will strike a ship, a refinery, a pipeline, or an export terminal. These costs compound through the entire system long before the average person notices the increase at the gasoline station.

The more serious warning is coming from refined products, particularly diesel. Politicians obsess over crude because that is the price quoted every evening on television. Yet modern civilization runs on diesel. Trucks transport food and consumer goods, farmers operate machinery, construction companies run heavy equipment, and emergency generators protect hospitals and critical infrastructure. When diesel rises, the cost of virtually everything rises with it.
Governments will pretend that this inflation is temporary or caused by greedy corporations. They said the same thing after the monetary expansion of 2020. Inflation is never politically convenient because it exposes the true cost of government policy. A war financed through borrowing does not require politicians to present taxpayers with an immediate bill. The expense is transferred into sovereign debt, currency depreciation, and higher prices. The public pays through the destruction of purchasing power, while officials continue claiming that military operations can be conducted without domestic sacrifice.
Europe is particularly vulnerable. It has spent years undermining its own energy security while increasing sanctions, regulations, and military commitments. European governments are already struggling with weak growth, aging populations, expanding welfare obligations, and enormous debt. A sustained rise in energy prices will reduce industrial competitiveness and force governments to subsidize households once again. Those subsidies will require still more borrowing at precisely the moment bond yields are rising. This is the trap: war raises energy costs, energy raises inflation, inflation prevents central banks from reducing interest rates, and higher rates increase the cost of servicing government debt.
The bond market understands what politicians refuse to see. Long-term government yields are rising across Europe, the United States, and Japan because investors are beginning to question whether governments can continue borrowing without limit. The Middle East conflict is accelerating a sovereign-debt problem that already existed. Governments accumulated debt during the pandemic, borrowed again to subsidize energy after the war in Ukraine, and are now expected to finance another expanding conflict surrounding Iran. Each crisis is treated as temporary, but the debt is permanent.
This is how confidence collapses. The decline of an empire does not begin when it loses one battle. It begins when the cost of maintaining its military commitments exceeds the productive capacity of its economy. Rome debased its currency to pay the army and preserve the frontiers. Spain consumed the wealth of the New World financing wars across Europe. Britain emerged from two world wars victorious but financially exhausted, surrendering its position as the center of global capital to the United States. Military power is always dependent upon economic power, yet the warmongers imagine the relationship works in reverse.
Iran also understands that Hormuz is more valuable as a threat than as a permanently closed waterway. Completely stopping trade would damage Iran and alienate China, India, and other Asian customers dependent upon Gulf energy. Tehran does not need to seal the strait with an impenetrable naval blockade. It merely needs to create enough uncertainty that commercial traffic slows and the world pays a permanent risk premium. A missile landing near a tanker can accomplish economically what a fleet might fail to achieve militarily.
The United States may possess the naval power to escort ships, but it cannot force private capital to ignore risk. Nor can it guarantee that mines, drones, missiles, or small boats will never penetrate the security perimeter. Every escalation requires more ships, more aircraft, more personnel, and still more government spending. The attempt to protect the trade route therefore adds to the fiscal burden created by the disruption itself.
The Strait of Hormuz is becoming a tax imposed upon the entire world economy. It will appear in freight costs, food prices, utility bills, interest rates, government deficits, and eventually elections. Western leaders will blame Iran, corporations, speculators, or climate change before admitting that their endless wars carry an economic price.

“The US leader emphasized that Washington was successfully achieving its goals in the conflict with Iran”

• Deaths of ‘Iranian Leaders’ Hindering Deal With US — Trump (TASS)

The deaths of a significant portion of Iran’s leadership are among the factors complicating the conclusion of a deal between Washington and Tehran, US President Donald Trump stated. “Part of the problem is [that] so many of the leaders are gone. It’s not easy to make a deal. Nobody knows who’s leading [the country],” Trump said in an interview with WABC radio. At the same time, he emphasized that Washington is successfully achieving its goals in the conflict with Iran, particularly by preventing Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Why exactly? Do we know? They seemed close to an agreement.

• U.S-Canada Trade War is Now a Reality (CTH)

Moments ago, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney delivered the news via his X account. Discussions between the U.S and Canada have collapsed. All trade representatives are called back home. The 50% U.S. tariffs against Canada are now in effect. A trade war begins. First, read the statement from Prime Minister Mark Carney, with the understanding that Carney is making the first statement because the news is exceptionally bad for Canada. Worse than bad.

When the 3-day tariff pause was announced, CTH said to be cautious. When USTR Jamieson Greer and Canadian negotiator Dominic LeBlanc said the terms were “basically agreed”, again CTH said be careful.The reason for our notes of extreme caution is because the divide between the two economies and trade policy is just too big. There was no way for both sides to close the gap without major structural economic changes within Canada. The issues are not points of friction, they are just too big and embedded within the laws of Canada that would have to change.
anking regulations would have to change. Intellectual property and media rules, regulations and laws would have to change. Industrial policy would have to change. The Canadian energy policy would have to change. The carbon trading scheme would have to change or be removed. All of this would fall upon Canada to carry out in order to position their economy in alignment with the USA. There’s literally no way for their government to accomplish this against the backdrop of their political ideology.
That was the structural argument and point made by former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. This is also why the USMCA as a trilateral trade agreement is impossible to maintain. The only trade agreement construct possible is two clearly separate bilateral free trade agreements, one with Mexico and one with Canada.
The 50% tariffs begin tonight.
A trade war is underway.

UPDATE: USTR Response
“Tonight, Canada declined to finalize the trade deal under the terms agreed earlier this week. Despite the U.S. offer to Canada to receive the best treatment of any major exporter to our market, new demands and walk backs of other commitments by Canada have upended the careful balance reached in the past days. In addition, Canada is continuing to maintain its prolonged retaliation against the United States, including, among other things, flat-out prohibitions on certain American goods and services.
For decades, Canada has enjoyed the most favorable access to the U.S. market of any country. And from the beginning of President Trump’s trade program, Canada has continued to enjoy the best treatment in the world, even after – like China – retaliating against the United States. This week, the United States agreed to provide even better treatment to Canada, offering significant tariff reductions on steel, aluminum, autos, and lumber.
The U.S. offer was also forward looking, and included a historic economic and national security partnership to cooperate on export controls, combat transshipment, enhance digital trade, and align certain external tariffs. The offer would have led to supply chain coordination on aerospace, complementary actions to address unfair trade practices, critical minerals cooperation, increased enforcement against imports produced with forced labor, and the announcement of formal U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) negotiations.
This is a missed opportunity for Canada to partner with the United States, which is the fastest growing economy in the G7.”
~ U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer

Trump gives Marco free Latino reign.

• Cocaine Networks and Communists — Marco’s Been Busy Today (Sarah Anderson)

I was just getting ready to take the rest of the day off when the State Department flooded my inbox with emails. It seems that Marco Rubio has been pretty busy this week, and he’s largely focused on eradicating communism, crime, and drug trafficking from the Western Hemisphere, which is exactly where I like him. Let’s start with our old pal, Cuba, which Rubio has been sanctioning to death this summer. Or close to death. Unfortunately, the regime is still breathing, but it’s doing so with a massive statue of the secretary on its chest.

Today, the Department of State is designating nine entities and three individuals to further the Trump Administration’s comprehensive push to end the Cuban regime’s malign activities, both in Cuba and across our hemisphere. This action targets the leadership of the U.S.-designated Cuban Institute of Friendship with the Peoples (ICAP) and designates nine Cuban entities supporting the regime.These designations build on the Department’s July 20 report Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Communism, which summarizes the Cuban regime’s decades-long use of brigades, such as the one coordinated by the designated ICAP earlier this month, to advance Cuban interests at the expense of the United States.
ICAP is the organization Fidel Castro began in 1960 to build global “friendship” and “solidarity” and maintain relationships with foreign activist groups. In reality, it’s a way to spread communist propaganda. According to the State Department, “it claims to have more than 2,000 solidarity organizations across over 150 countries [and] serves as the main organizing hub of Cuba’s ideological network.” Think Code Pink and the like. Additionally, “it coordinates research, educational, and cultural exchanges between American and Cuban institutions, builds relationships between American political movements and Cuban officials, and harnesses its global reach to draw leftwing activists, intellectuals, students, influencers and politicians to Cuba from across the world.”
It’s also directly tied to Cuban intelligence, and 90% of its staff are affiliated with the Cuban spy agency. Anyway, on Thursday, Rubio sanctioned some of ICAP’s leadership, including: Fernando Gonzalez Llort, the president of ICAP and is one of the “Cuban Five” group of Cuban intelligence officers arrested in 1998. Llort was released from U.S. custody to Cuba in 2014. Noemi Ramona Rabaza Fernandez, who serves as the first vice president of ICAP. Leima Martinez Freire, who serves as the ICAP North America Director.
But he didn’t stop there. Rubio also sanctioned entities he accuses of exploiting Cuba’s metals and mining sector for the benefit of the regime. These include:
• Empresa de Níquel Comandante Ernesto Che Guevara, a state-owned enterprise dedicated to the extraction and processing of nickel and cobalt.
• Empresa Importadora Exportadora y Comercializadora de Metales or METALCUBA, a “Cuban state-owned enterprise that facilitates the import of heavy industrial products, including specialized fuel and metal components, on behalf of state and non-state actors.”
• Grupo Empresarial Geominero Salinero (Geominsal), a group that “develops and markets mineral resources and salt, and provides technical services associated with these industries.”
• Acinox Comercial, a state-owned enterprise that facilitates the import and export of metallurgical goods and industrial equipment.

In addition to those, he sanctioned several regime-controlled entities, including the Ministry of Construction of Cuba and Agencia de Contratacion a Representaciones Comerciales S.A. (Acorec S.A.), an organization that supplies Cubans to foreigners for labor inside Cuba and then garnishes 90% of the workers’ wages. That’s not all. He also designated: • Coratur S.A., the organization that “manages international trade, import-export operations, and foreign market partnerships.”
• Empresa Central de Abastecimiento y Ventas de Equipos de Transporte Pesado y Sus Piezas (Transimport), a group that has “imported over $5 million worth of vehicles, automotive parts, and industrial equipment in recent years.”
• Empresa Comercializadora de Articulos en General (Consumimport), a group that “imports and exports a wide variety of goods, including appliances and construction materials.” Meanwhile in Ecuador…

The State Department also announced on Thursday that it is sanctioning “an Ecuador-based network of 15 individuals and entities and identified 10 Ecuador-based fishing vessels as blocked property for their role in trafficking thousands of kilograms of cocaine each month from South America to Mexico, destined for distribution in our homeland.” It goes on to state that these groups in Ecuador are growing closer to Mexican cartels, particularly the two biggest and most dangerous, Sinaloa and Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG), as well as Ecuadorian Foreign Terrorist Organizations, Los Choneros and Los Lobos.
“These trafficking operations generate billions of dollars annually for cartels responsible for a significant share of the deadly drugs flowing into our communities,” the State Department reports. “The United States will continue to use all our tools to dismantle the cartels profiting at the expense of American lives.” The network operated under the cover of legitimate fishing fleets out of Manta, using government-subsidized fuel to resupply go-fast boats hauling multi-ton loads across the Pacific.
Editor’s Note: Thanks to President Trump and War Secretary Pete Hegseth’s leadership, the warrior ethos is coming back to America’s military.

“She’s palling around with Bernie Sanders and will likely inherit his very large, very sophisticated political movement.”

• AOC for President? It’s Time We Take That Proposition Seriously (Rick Moran)

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) may be uninformed, poorly educated, and without scruples. But she’s the frontrunner in some polls for the Democratic Party’s 2028 presidential nomination and is well-positioned to ride the growing wave of radical-left energy now taking over the Democratic Party all the way to the top. Getting past superficial profiles of her, AOC has many gifts and a jungle savviness about politics that makes her a formidable opponent for any Democrat who’s been mentioned as a potential presidential candidate.

Her clownish social media gimmicks aside, this is a woman with a plan. And Republicans who underestimate her do so at the party’s peril.Mark Halperin, a veteran of several presidential campaigns, writes in The Free Press, “AOC boasts three indispensable factors for a successful presidential race: national name recognition, the capacity to raise tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, and insatiable media interest.”
A Democrat Trump? Don’t laugh it off. She’s palling around with Bernie Sanders and will likely inherit his very large, very sophisticated political movement. In that, she’ll have a leg up on Trump, who didn’t have much of an organization when he started running for president in 2014.
AOC maintains one of the largest digital footprints of any politician in Congress, with a combined social media following exceeding 23 million across major platforms. It doesn’t matter if they’re all brain-dead millennials and Gen Zers. They don’t care about “issues” the same way that older voters might consider before deciding who to vote for. It’s all about “feelings” and “vibes.” And AOC knows how to tap into that zeitgeist.
The Free Press: “An iconic face of the zeitgeisty progressive movement, a fundraising dynamo on a first-name basis not just with cable news hosts but with producers, network executives, hair and makeup folks, and popular influencers as well, AOC showcases other en vogue traits. She is a young outsider railing against the establishment. She is a master of the attention economy, a social media wizard with a keen sense of timing. She is bracingly gruff and tart, unafraid of conflict and controversy, and comfortable in the eye of the storm. She is widely considered gorgeous, with a sharp fashion flair. She possesses ineffable magnetism that catches attention; when she appears on any television or tablet, she compels viewers to turn up the volume to find out what she is saying.”
AOC understands that modern politics is part ideology, part organization, and part show business, and she does not pretend to be offended by the performative superficialities of the profession. Most politicians say they hate the circus while making sure they are standing in the center ring. AOC genuinely enjoys the circus. She is soulful, sincere, winking, ironic, and a ham all at the same time. Many Republicans have a hatred for AOC that’s so rabid they can’t acknowledge her obvious political gifts and the threat she poses. This is suicidal. She will be a formidable opponent in 2028 if she doesn’t stumble over her own stupidity.
Her obvious weak spot is foreign policy. Her recent efforts to create a foreign policy résumé resulted in an embarrassing appearance at the Munich Security Conference in February. Halperin notes that “even an intensive course in national security and foreign policy might leave her vulnerable to a career-stalling gaffe.” That’s because talking about foreign policy with simple-minded talking points or stumbling over a “what I believe” question shows a shallowness voters will recognize immediately.
Foreign policy is not simply a matter of expressing the ideologically accepted values. Presidents have to know things. They have to understand NATO, China, deterrence, nuclear doctrine, intelligence, trade, alliances, sanctions, the Middle East, the history behind the current crisis, and the interests behind the public rhetoric. They have to know enough to tell when the generals, diplomats, and intelligence officials sitting around the table are right, and when they are protecting their own bureaucratic interests.
At Munich, AOC at times seemed like someone who had learned the broad strokes but was not particularly capable of comprehending or interested in the intricacies. A presidential campaign would ultimately unmask that weakness, and her opponents would run with it as far and fast as possible. Furthermore, her Munich stumble laid bare the broader question of gravitas. AOC has spent her entire national political life as an insurgent legislator. She has never been a governor. She has never run a large executive branch. She has never had to balance a state budget, manage a natural disaster, command a National Guard, negotiate a major bipartisan agreement, or make the kind of lonely executive decision for which there is no politically easy answer.
She’s got a little more than a year to change that impression. The frightening possibility is that it might not matter as much as it has in the past. The younger voters are far more impressionable and have less ability to recognize a lightweight like AOC. Her communication skills will only take her so far, as long as her voters don’t question the intellectual basis for her ideology. Personally, I believe 2032 will be her year. If she’s the nominee in 2028, she will lose and lose big.

“. . . it’s subversion and nothing about it is accidental. it’s a well worn playbook to use the democratic institutions of a high trust state to destroy a civilization.” —El Gato Malo on Substack

Jim has been in fine form for quite a while..

• Remember the Names (James Howard Kunstler)

An eerie quiet masks the panic rising among the many players in the long-running train of crimes carried out under color-of-law against the people of the this country that goes roughly under the clunky name of The Grand Conspiracy. What is Joe DiGenova up to, exactly, in the Southern District of Florida, with its several grand juries grinding away? Indictments will fly, for sure, but then who will flip on whom? It won’t take a whole lot of flippers to seal many fates in this skein of sedition and treason. The tension must be terrible for them.

The question has long been: how do you even begin to organize a set of coherent cases around this roaring avalanche of nefarious acts that got bigger with each successive attempt at cover-up? Let’s see if we can block out a panoramic picture of potential prosecutions. The gigantic mess must be separated into packets.
It’s probably best to begin with the FBI’s “Midyear Exam” op of 2016 — the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server. You can bet that the server contained evidence of HRC’s two seminal crimes that kicked things off: 1) the transfer of US military technology to Russia’s Skolkovo high-tech hub and payments from seventeen companies involved coincidentally received by the Clinton Foundation when she was Sec’y of State; and 2) the “Uranium One” deal transferring US-owned nuke material to Russia (via Canada) that required a State Dept signoff by HRC — coincident with husband Bill receiving a half-million dollar “lecture fee” from a Russian bank. Players involved in Midyear Exam: Comey, Strzok, McCabe, Page, then-AG Loretta Lynch.
That potential embarrassment of this sketchy business was simply squashed by Lynch and Comey, while HRC took care to physically destroy the server and devices linked to it. But it also prompted the creation of the Russian collusion prank against then-candidate Donald Trump, (“Crossfire Hurricane”) to distract attention from all that. . . which turned into the huge RussiaGate operation that marshaled the FBI, the CIA, the Senate Intel Committee, and offices deep in the Pentagon to put over a gigantic hoax. It was green-lighted by President Barack Obama and organized by CIA-Director John Brennan, with FBI Director Comey and DNI James Clapper.
Supporting players (potential defendants) include Susan Rice, Sally Yates, Veep Joe Biden (or “Joe Biden”), then White House aide Lisa Monaco, and CIA agent Eric Ciaramella (who wrote the actual Intel Community Assessment that jump-started the op). McCabe, Stzrok, Page, Ohr (and wife, Nellie), Rosenstein, and many FBI agents are potential defendants. Also Gina Haspel, CIA London station chief, who coordinated with the UK’s MI6 agent, Christopher Steele of the Steele Dossier. Throw in DOD-sponsored spook Stefan Halper and FBI liaison in London, Alan Kohler. After May, 2017, Christopher Wray was responsible for all FBI mischief and FISA Court irregularities (along with FISA Judge James Boasberg).
The Mueller Investigation was a subset of RussiaGate, but deserves its own case packet. It was an attempt to legitimize the RussiaGate hoax, and to keep the news media fed with innuendo. In effect it was a hoax unto itself, consumed $32-million, and ran nearly two years. It produced exactly nothing in evidence that President Trump had “colluded” with Russia about anything. Since Robert Mueller was mentally incapacitated, the investigation was run by subordinates, Aaron Zebley, Andrew Weissmann. Attorneys Jeanie Rhee, Elizabeth Prelogar, Brandon Van Grack and others. It was a fraud on the public and probably an obstruction of justice.
Impeachment No. 1 (the Ukraine phone call impeachment) was an entirely false operation cooked up by lawfare ninja Norm Eisen in collusion with Reps. Jerrold Nadler and Adam Schiff, with assistance from CIA agent (“whistleblower”) Eric Ciaramella and NSC member Lt. Col. Alex Vindman, with a boost from then-IC Inspector General Michael Atkinson. Eisen later admitted on a video that the aim of the impeachment was to “prebunk” Veep “Joe Biden’s” bribery and grift activities in Ukraine as the Democratic party prepared to run him for president in 2020. Ciaramella had accompanied Veep “Joe Biden” on several trips to Ukraine and knew what “JB” was up to there. Indict them all for sedition and treason.
The 2020 election op was pulled off in coordination with the Covid-1 scam that positioned the nation for massive mail-in ballot fraud, which was coordinated by lawfare ninja Marc Elias, then employed by the Democratic Party law firm Perkins Coie. Elias was assisted by Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook, now Meta), whose nonprofit, Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), distributed over $400-million to roughly 2500 election districts around the country, much of it used to pay select officials who would count and report mail-in ballots. The mail-in ballot fraud had been planned and gamed-out previously by the non-profit org Transition Integrity Project, run by Rosa Brooks and Nils Gilman.
In October 2020, fifty-one former intel officials signed a public letter denouncing the Hunter Biden laptop as having “the earmarks of Russian disinformation.” The letter was organized by Antony Blinken and former CIA-Director Michael Morrell. It was done in coordination with a social media campaign to suppress public knowledge of the laptop (and the Biden family record of international grift inside it) to influence the presidential election a month later. Potential fraud indictments.
The Jan 6 riot at the US Capitol has never been adequately investigated. FBI Director Wray was allowed to evade answering to Congress about the number of FBI agents and associated employees (including CIA personnel) that were mixed in with the crowd to provoke the intrusion inside the building and related violence. Speaker Nancy Pelosi engineered the situation so that the certification of electoral vote slates would not be challenged as procedure allowed. Sedition and Treason.
The Jan 6 Congressional Committee was a fraud on the American people put together by Speaker Nancy Pelosi to coverup her involvement in the crimes behind the Jan 6 Capitol riot. The members involved likely enjoy Congressional immunity for the spectacle itself, but perhaps not for destroying all the evidence that was collected in the course of the investigation. Chairman Bennie G. Thompson was responsible for that.
The Mar-a-Lago raid of August 2022 was authorized by Attorney General Merrick Garland and carried out by FBI Director Wray with Assistant Director Steven D’Antuono. Three months later, Garland appointed Jack Smith Special Counsel to oversee the Mar-a-Lago documents case, which he botched, resulting in its dismissal two years later. The raid itself arguably lacked probable cause and was based on an improper scope of evidence sought. Indict Merrick Garland under 18 U.S.C. § 241, conspiracy against rights.
The lawfare operations of 2023-2024 in several jurisdictions resulted in indictments against candidate Donald Trump and others in Fulton County, GA, and New York City. The Fulton County case under DA Fani Willis (later disqualified for “the appearance of impropriety”) was assisted by the “Joe Biden” White House, possibly by attorneys Richard Sauber and Beth Mueller in the WH Counsel’s Office, giving it the odor of a purely political prosecution.
In the the Stormy Daniels hush money case against Donald Trump brought by Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, DOJ officer Matthew Colangelo left his cushy position as Principal Deputy Associate US Attorney General to take a job assisting DA Bragg in the NYC court. Colangelo delivered the opening statement at the 2024 trial and played a central role in the prosecution. The trial was presided over by political judge Juan Merchan. Just days ago, The New York Times reported that the Democratic Party fundraising company, Authentic Campaigns, previously owned by Judge Merchan’s daughter, Loren Merchan, has been under investigation the past year. Anybody detect the odor of politics? Malicious prosecution, improper judicial conduct.
Many of the political celebrities mentioned above, and probably many not-so-well-known players, must be freaking out as the waves ominously pound the beach and the summer days tick down toward the ill winds of fall. I’m pretty sure that readers and commentors can add some candidates to the list of potential indictments, and perhaps some ops I might have overlooked. (The entire odious Covid-19 affair is partly a separate matter, but that has also commenced a new phase with the guilty plea deal announced days ago by Dr. Fauci’s chief advisor, Dr. David Morens.) Even former President Obama looks boxed-in. He enjoys immunity from actions he took as president, but that immunity prevents him from hiding behind the fifth amendment as a now-private citizen in a court of law. Things are livening up.

CNN finds it a juicy story. So they keep running with it.

• ‘My Guardian and Protector’: Natalie Harp’s Devotion to Trump (CNN)

President Donald Trump’s close aide Natalie Harp expressed her utmost loyalty to him in at least two letters addressed to the president, which were published by The Daily Beast on Thursday amid increased scrutiny of the close aide’s relationship to Trump. “I want things to always be right between us,” Harp wrote in one of the letters, which were printed out and signed. It began with “Dear Mr. President” and concluded with, “With all my heart, Natalie.” Excerpts of one of the letters had previously been published by the New York Times.

Harp’s constant and dedicated presence at Trump’s side has been in the spotlight this week after Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff mentioned her by name in a now-viral speech attacking Trump. The Georgia senator swiped at the president’s “travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the Emir of Qatar,” a reference to her joining the president — along with a very limited group of aides — when he secretly boarded a smaller aircraft to leave Turkey due to a threat from Iran in July.
She added in the letter from 2023: “I never want to bring you anything but joy. I’m sorry I lost my focus. You are all that matters to me. I don’t want to ever let you down. Thank you for being my Guardian and Protector in this Life.” In another letter, Harp reminisced about their relationship when she was a host on the conservative One America News Network. “I miss the days when you used to call, during my Talkshow days, and we’d talk about everything and nothing,” Harp wrote. “I want to get back to that synergy. We shouldn’t have to talk about work all the time!!” In the same letter, Harp added: “And please, when I fail, will you tell me? You have the absolute right to cuss me out, if need be, when I deserve it, because no one knows or cares about me more.”

US President Donald Trump and aide Natalie Harp exit Marine One on the Ellipse near the White House on August 16, 2026.

CNN has not independently confirmed that Harp wrote or sent these letters to Trump in 2023. The Daily Beast said the writer Michael Wolff obtained them while he was writing a book about Trump’s 2024 campaign. White House spokesperson Davis Ingle defended Harp in a statement to CNN, saying she is “one of the most loyal and hardest working aides on President Trump’s team.” But White House officials have privately acknowledged in recent days that the sharper, widespread attacks have had the adverse effect of bringing more attention to Harp’s relationship with Trump.
Harp is so close to Trump that she once rode in an SUV trunk to accompany him to a court appearance in New York City in October 2023, CNN reported on Tuesday. There wasn’t room for her in the vehicle, but she insisted that Trump had personally asked her to attend and was determined not to be left behind.
Harp is omnipresent in Trump’s orbit, officials familiar with her role have told CNN. But unlike past staff secretaries and aides to the president — like Trump’s former personal secretary Madeleine Westerhout, who similarly served as the president’s gatekeeper of information during his first term — she doesn’t sit outside the Oval Office, but in it. Harp is with Trump much of the day, sitting in on meetings and in constant communication with him.
She speaks with Trump late into the night about social media posts, the officials said. Harp is also a channel for foreign leaders to try to reach the president and is tasked with contacting people he sees on television. She is someone he will ask to send notes to others when he doesn’t want to reach out directly. Their working relationship is so effective, officials said, because of her total loyalty to the president.
But Harp’s methods have irked senior aides and at times prompted efforts to box her out of the president’s inner circle, according to multiple sources who described her dynamic with Trump. The former television host began working for Trump after crediting him with saving her life. Harp has become a main conduit between the president and the outside world, passing along messages from allies and setting up meetings, typing out Truth Social posts and toting printouts of laudatory articles, all while staying in close physical proximity at all hours of the day.
She is known as the “human printer” — a title she referenced in one of the letters, in which she said Trump “forced me to ‘unplug’” during a trip to Scotland and Ireland. “I didn’t have to be ‘Human Printer.’ I could take time to enjoy good conversation, and still get all my work done at the end of the day. In fact, I even had time to take long morning and evening walks to enjoy each Sunrise and Sunset (though I did forget to eat and sleep!),” she wrote.

“…During Investigation of Rape and Sexual Misconduct.”

• FBI Seizes Devices Belonging to Eric Swalwell (CTH)

Generally speaking, when the FBI seizes devices it’s usually to bury them and protect affected interests in/around Washington DC. Rarely, if ever, does the confiscation of electronic devices result in any public awareness of the contents – unless the release runs in alignment with the interests of those in Washington DC.

EX. If it was the confiscation of electronic devices deemed adverse to the interest of DC (Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, Scott Perry, Mike Lindell, etc.) then the content of those devices is publicly exposed. However, most confiscations are to protect the guilty – therefore they are buried. SEE: Hunter Biden laptop, Huma Abedin laptop, Anthony Weiner cell phones, Hillary Clinton phone(s) and laptops; Awan Brothers laptops (4) and phones; Seth Rich phone and laptop; Jeffrey Epstein, phones, laptops, hard drives; Stephen Craig Paddock phones and laptops, Syed Rizwan Farook/Tashfeen Malik cell phones, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev phones and laptops; Senator Bob Menendez, phones and laptops etc.
Therefore, accepting things as they are most likely – and not as we would prefer them to be – it is best to think of the recent story as one of protecting the downstream issues from Eric Swalwell, as they are associated during his tenure as a targeting conduit for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) and later as a Trump impeachment manager and J6 Committee official.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal agents seized electronic devices from former Rep. Eric Swalwell and searched his Washington home as part of an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct by the ex-Democratic congressman from California, according to a person familiar with the matter. Swalwell’s devices were seized at the San Francisco airport on Saturday and agents executed a search warrant at his home a day later, said the person, who was not authorized to publicly discuss an ongoing investigation and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

A message seeking comment was left Thursday with an attorney for Swalwell, who has denied allegations of sexual assault and misconduct. The Daily Mail first reported the seizure of Swalwell’s devices on Thursday. Swalwell announced his resignation from Congress in April following allegations that Swalwell had sexually assaulted a woman twice, including when she worked for him. The San Francisco Chronicle, followed by CNN, first reported the allegations. CNN also reported that three other women alleged various kinds of sexual misconduct by Swalwell, including sending them unsolicited explicit messages or nude photos.
[…] A lawyer representing Lonna Drewes, a California woman who in April said she had been raped in 2018 by Swalwell, said his team was cooperating with all law enforcement agencies investigating the former congressman. “We are encouraged to learn about the escalation of the FBI’s investigation into the allegations against Eric Swalwell,” attorney Arick Fudali said in a statement. (read more)

Sarah Anderson. “I’m gonna need a real man to represent my state, not this clown.”

• Mirror, Mirror on The Wall: Who Is the Prettiest Politician of Them All? (SA)

(I bet some of you regulars thought I was about to write about Marco Rubio. That’s not what this is about.) Somehow, this story slipped through the cracks a bit when the Free Beacon came out with it in July, but it’s making the rounds this week. I know our own Scott Pinsker mentioned it in passing a few days ago, but I felt it deserved its own standalone article.

Because, as a Georgia resident, I’ll do anything I can to ensure this person is not my senator anymore. So if you had to guess, which prominent political candidate (at the federal level) spends the most on hair and makeup? Maybe it’s Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)? She might not be the brightest bulb in the box, but she’s a pretty girl who looks put together most of the time. Or maybe it’s Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.)? Another lovely lady who obviously puts a lot of effort into her appearance.
Well, if you guessed it was either of them, you’re wrong. If you guessed it was any woman at all, you’re wrong. The answer is Sen. Jon “Pee-wee Herman” Ossoff (D-Ga.). According to campaign finance records, Ossoff has paid “makeup artist Stephanie Ponder $2,887 for ‘makeup services'” since February. The Free Beacon reports that the most recent payment came in June to the tune of $900. Here’s more:
Ossoff’s four-figure makeup expenditures stand out among federal candidates. The Georgia senator who is running for reelection against Republican Rep. Mike Collins (Ga.), has reported spending more on makeup than any other candidate this year, beating out the likes of far-left Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) and Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.). Ocasio-Cortez has spent $1,837.93 on ‘campaign event hair & makeup services’ in 2026, while Tlaib has spent $320 on ‘hair and makeup services.’
The spending also comes as liberal media figures praise the 39-year-old Ossoff’s carefully managed on-camera presence and float him as a prospective 2028 presidential candidate. He’s not only paying big bucks for hair and makeup, but he’s also paying them to a high-profile artist. Ponder has a resume that includes working on The Notebook, Hunger Games, and Remember the Titans. The article also mentions that, “A recent Puck profile asserted that Ossoff ‘has seemingly reinvented himself’ in anticipation of a 2028 presidential bid, adding a ‘beefier physique to his studied, Obama-like cadence.'”
And the media is falling for it, of course. Ezra Klein of the New York Times has pointed out that Ossoff knows how to make himself appear imposing and powerful on TV (I invite Mr. Klein to come to Atlanta and watch these campaign commercials that are in my face constantly because that’s not what I see — I see a weasel). Vogue did an article on his “internet thirst” and called him “an attractive camp counselor.” Queerty reported that “Jon Ossoff & his slutty little glasses are already our summertime political crush” and called him “an attractive version of Atticus Finch.”
All I can say is gag me with a spoon. You can’t see me, but I’m trying not to throw up as I write this. The idea of a man who spends more on hair and makeup than I do — and I love expensive makeup, I must confess — is just gross. I’m gonna need a real man to represent my state, not this clown.

Two audio files. Not sure what the difference is.

• Wait, What? Trump Was on Michael Cohen’s Radio Show? (Matt Margolis)

Donald Trump spent part of Thursday swapping pleasantries with Michael Cohen, his former “fixer” who then became the left’s favorite anti-Trumper and even testified against the president in court and before Congress. It’s hard to say which is more bizarre: that this interview happened at all, or how warm it was. Part of the sit-down aired Thursday evening on Cohen’s radio show on 77 WABC-AM in New York, with the full interview set to air Sunday. It was an exceptionally friendly affair. Believe it or not, the whole segment played like a reunion special.

Cohen is currently filling in for Andrew Cuomo, who is taking a break from the show for the summer. Apparently, station owner John Catsimatidis, a Trump ally, ran it by the White House. The administration “had no objection,” Catsimatidis told the New York Post, adding that Trump had “expressed empathy” for Cohen. Empathy. For Michael Cohen. Sit with that for a moment.
On the air, Trump told Cohen, “They weaponized you like nobody’s ever been weaponized, like few have been.” He went from empathy to esteem. “I respect the fact that you recanted everything you said,” Trump said. “That’s a big thing that you did.” In a separate interview before the radio segment aired, Cohen told CNN he’d resubmitted a pardon application to the White House after the Biden administration denied his original request, and he hadn’t heard back yet. “I took that same application with the same documentation, and I just rewrote the cover letter removing the name of President Joe Biden and inserting the name President Donald Trump … I do have a receipt,” Cohen said.

LIVE NOW: Michael and President Trump discuss 2016.

Listen Now: https://t.co/JYtLGcmjeq pic.twitter.com/sXCbatGRfH
— TalkRadio 77 WABC (@77WABCradio) August 20, 2026

Cohen is hardly the first Trump ally to blow up publicly and find his way back into the fold, following Elon Musk and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.). He once said he’d “take a bullet” for Trump, before his testimony in Trump’s 2024 trial, on charges of falsifying business records to illegally influence an election, helped secure a 34-count felony conviction that carried no punishment. It’s worth noting that Trump never said a warm word about Cohen before Thursday, though he’d linked to Cohen’s own comments this year about feeling pressured by prosecutors Cohen has spent the past year trashing.
Cohen framed it all as forgiveness in his Substack. “Forgiveness does not mean amnesia,” he wrote. “It is about having the courage to decide that yesterday will no longer dictate tomorrow.” At one point, he even got sentimental. “Boss, remember when I was by your side?” he asked. Cohen now says he only turned on Trump because prosecutors squeezed him. “I felt pressured and coerced to only provide information and testimony that would satisfy the government’s desire to build the cases against and secure a judgment and convictions against President Trump,” he wrote on Substack in January.
That tracks. We know how desperate the Deep State was to stop Trump. Heck, the Biden administration didn’t even try to hide that it was weaponizing the government against Trump.

https://twitter.com/RobotaxiRadar/status/2090557478689734670?s=20

Retail doesn’t believe. Wall Street doesn’t believe.

JPMorgan walked the factory. They saw Optimus.

Let’s cook. $TSLA https://t.co/xAjVFOxurL
— InvestAnswers (@Investanswers) August 20, 2026

TESLA'S NEW OPTIMUS AD HAS A SLOGAN THAT SHOULD MAKE EVERY WORKER SIT UP: "NEVER SEND AN ORGANIC TO DO A MACHINE'S JOB"

Read that line again. "never send an organic to do a machine's job."
organic. that's you. that's the word for humans now, in a car company's ad.

Watch the… https://t.co/E0RozvR3w3 pic.twitter.com/oCkjk892rH
— Axia (@0xAxia) August 20, 2026

Elon Musk predicts Optimus will become a better surgeon than the best humans within just next three years and at scale

Robots don’t get tired, they can scale everywhere and work surpassing human limitations

The world is currently facing a growing shortage of surgeons. Human… https://t.co/noVSSzD6uC
— X Freeze (@XFreeze) August 20, 2026

https://twitter.com/niccruzpatane/status/2089885020328505454?s=20

BREAKING: Elon Musk says SpaceX is aiming for 30+ Starship launches per day by 2030, roughly 10,000 launches annually. pic.twitter.com/lZxq0KXb72
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) August 21, 2026

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

Older Entries