May 132026
 
 May 13, 2026  Posted by at 9:46 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  34 Responses »


Caravaggio The raising of Lazarus 1609


Trump Ready To Raise “Core of China’s Core Interests” In Xi Summit (ZH)
Iran Specifies 5 Demands To Restart Peace Talks With US (ZH)
Trump Considering Resuming Airstrikes As Talks With Iran Stall – Axios (RT)
Zelensky Chief of Staff Yermak Charged with Corruption, Money Laundering (CTH)
Tulsi Gabbard Probes 120 Foreign Biolabs Funded by US – 40 in Ukraine (CTH)
Nearly $22 Billion Secretly Shipped To Ukraine – Austrian Politician (RT)
John Brennan: Still “Legions” of His Allies at DOJ, FBI and CIA (CTH)
Here Are The People Accompanying Trump On His China Excursion This Week (JTN)
Minnesota Democrats Block Ilhan Omar Subpoena (JTN)
Scott Jennings Nukes the Democrats’ Gerrymander Hail Mary (Margolis)
Acting AG Blanche Warns Reporters To Expect Subpoenas In Leaks Probe (JTN)
Virginia Democrats Ask US Supreme Court to Reinstate Congressional Map (Hyde)
The Language Got a Little Salty on CNN Monday Night (Matt Margolis)
Socialist Storytime: AOC Spins Anti-Capitalist Fable About the Founders (Turley)
Media Spreads Hantavirus Hysteria In Attempt To Save Disgraced WHO (ZH)
Over 500,000 Waiting To Cross Into Europe From Libya – Greek Minister (RT)

 


 

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2053909037545357652?s=20 https://twitter.com/Bubblebathgirl/status/2054023281208918512?s=20 https://twitter.com/AlecLace/status/2054011075914342417?s=20

 


 


Big party for Trump?

Trump Ready To Raise “Core of China’s Core Interests” In Xi Summit (ZH)

Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to raise the issue of increasingly costly US arms transfers to Taiwan during their bilateral summit at the end of this week, spanning Thursday through Friday. Taiwan of course remains the “core of China’s core interests” – as Beijing has in the recent past characterized the issue. While Trump officials have previewed that it will be focused on trade and investment, the White House too is reportedly placing Taiwan and regional geopolitical hot button issues on the agenda.


“I’m going to have that discussion with President Xi,” Trump told reporters at the White House, specifically on the question of weapons sales. “President Xi would like us not to, and I’ll have that discussion. That’s one of the many things I’ll be talking about.”

Also there’s the looming question of the future of the Iran war and blockaded Strait of Hormuz. Currently there’s a stalemated situation and supposed ceasefire which is barely holding. By many accounts, Trump was hopeful that the Iran ‘excursion’ would be wrapped up by now, but it now seems to be sliding into protracted quagmire – critics point out. The WSJ says that Beijing is feeling confident as it prepares to receive Trump and what’s looking to be a rather large entourage: But behind the scenes, Beijing feels more emboldened, and more insistent on defending areas it regards as vital to its long-term strategic interests.

These include resisting U.S. pressure to relax its grip over global supply chains and fundamentally rebalance trade between the two countries. They also include urging Washington to look the other way as it pressures Taiwan, the self-ruled island that Beijing claims as its own, and as it projects military power across Asia. “They feel very well about how last year played out,” said Jonathan Czin, a fellow at the Washington-based Brookings Institution and a former U.S. intelligence officer focused on China. “They showed they could weather the storm and the administration had to climb down from the tariffs and spend most of the past year trying to mollify China.”

As for more implications of the Iran war dragging on as Trump goes to Beijing, CNBC writes: Iran’s ambassador to China Reza Rahmani Fazli in a Tuesday post on X pressed Tehran’s case with Beijing, saying that the relationship between the two is too strong for the U.S. to overcome. The bottom line is that higher energy prices are baked in for the foreseeable future. The price of crude oil makes up about half of the cost of a gallon of gas, according to the Energy Information Administration.

And U.S. elections are less than six months away. The 2026 midterm elections will be a crucial referendum on Trump and the Republican Party as they seek to retain a lock on both chambers in Congress. Trump early Tuesday put out the following message on Truth Social, teasing that the next regime change operations could be unleashed on China’s small island-nation ally in America’s immediate backyard…

For some further big picture analysis on how the Iran gambit has raised the stakes, and made the Beijing summit more unpredictable, the below is some fresh Rabobank commentary outlining related developments to watch:

In a case of curious timing, the US just imposed fresh sanctions on individuals and firms involved in facilitating Iranian oil sales to China, and Acting Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao yesterday released a new 30-year shipbuilding plan. That plan anticipates the acquisition of 11 nuclear-powered Trump class battleships, new underwater drones, and an ongoing review to the Ford class aircraft carrier design to increase lethality and reliability while reducing unit costs and production lead times. The planned expansion of the US fleet and shipbuilding industrial base is undoubtedly a reaction to China’s growing naval strength and substantial advantage in production capacity. The message to Xi is an unsubtle one.

The FT’s Gideon Rachman characterises Trump as arriving at Xi’s court in a state of supplication, having effectively lost the trade war vs China and the shooting war vs Iran. This perhaps overstates the weakness of Trump’s position by ignoring the fact that the US has tightened its grip on global energy supply chains and has shown that is has the power to put its foot on the hosepipe of Chinese energy imports whenever it likes. In the flurry of commentary over China’s bumper trade surplus in April, it seems to have been missed that import volumes for crude oil were down sharply, but values were higher. Yesterday’s April PPI figures for China also underscored the uncomfortable effects that the Iran war is having on the Chinese industrial economy.

Xi will be acutely aware of this, and he will also be aware that the US holds similar power to disrupt Chinese food imports if it was of a mind to do so. Seapower IS power, as the shipbuilding plan should remind us all. In this respect, Trump holds better cards than the FT is giving him credit for. Perhaps it is no coincidence that China bought more soybeans in April than it had done for months.

Some more of Trump’s latest commentary amid his hope for a ‘good’ Xi meeting:

Read more …

Iran “demands”? They don’t even want to talk about nukes. Perfectly unrealistic.

Even Saudi Arabia was bombing Iran.

Iran Specifies 5 Demands To Restart Peace Talks With US (ZH)

Iran on Tuesday revealed its demands in a counteroffer to the United States that President Trump shot down on Sunday, which has put the whole conflict and Pakistan-mediated talks in a holding pattern and stalemate, as the Strait of Hormuz remains effectively blocked. The demands hinge on war reparations, Iranian sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz and an end to US sanctions – things which the White House balked at, with war reparations especially being focus of rejection by the US side, and the lack of taking up the nuclear issue, which Iran has insisted is a non-starter and would only be dealt with after the war is settled.


Trump had previously made clear on Truth Social that “I have just read the response from Iran’s so-called ‘Representatives.’ I don’t like it — TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!” Al Jazeera correspondent Ali Hashem has listed the following five conditions that it sees as the basis for reentering talks:

1) Ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon

2) Lifting all sanctions

3) Releasing frozen Iranian assets

4) Compensation for war damages and losses

5) Recognition of Iran’s sovereign rights over the Strait of Hormuz

Again, all this according to Tehran must be agreed to while at the same time Iran is pushing back against nuclear negotiations. In a Monday press briefing Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei had publicly alluded to several of these, including in his words, “Demanding an end to the war, lifting the blockade and piracy, and releasing Iranian assets that have been unjustly frozen in banks due to U.S. pressure.” Also, there was mention of “Safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz and establishing security in the region and Lebanon were other demands of Iran, which are considered a generous and responsible offer for regional security” – before talks could begin in good faith.

Tehran apparently feels it can weather the tightening economic noose its under, given Tanker Trackers on Tuesday said Iran has not successfully exported any crude oil by sea over the past 28 days. To our best knowledge, Iran hasn’t successfully exported* any crude oil by sea over the past 28 days. Some refined products managed to escape because US OFAC did not slap sanctions on those tankers.

In addition, Kharg Island hasn’t loaded any tankers since 2026-05-06 as a result…
— TankerTrackers.com, Inc. (@TankerTrackers) May 12, 2026

Trump, just before his departure to China, remarked to Axios: “Iran will either do the right thing or we will finish the job… we are either gonna make a deal or they will be decimated.”

Read more …

If/when they go in again, it’ll be for a long haul.

Trump Considering Resuming Airstrikes As Talks With Iran Stall – Axios (RT)

US President Donald Trump is considering resuming the bombing campaign against Iran as peace talks remain stalled, Axios reported on Monday, citing three US officials familiar with the matter. On Sunday, Trump rejected Iran’s latest terms as “totally unacceptable” and said the ceasefire reached around a month ago was “on massive life support.” According to Axios, Trump was set to meet with his national security team on Monday to discuss next steps, including potentially resuming Project Freedom – an operation aimed at guiding ships through the Strait of Hormuz – as well as restarting airstrikes and hitting the remaining 25% of targets identified by the Pentagon but not yet struck.


The Washington Post, citing a CIA assessment, reported last week that Iran retained about 75% of its pre-war mobile launchers and roughly 70% of its missiles, and could withstand a US naval blockade for at least three to four months. Trump suspended Project Freedom within 24 hours of announcing it last week, following a request from Pakistan, which has acted as a mediator in the conflict. NBC later reported that the president shelved the initiative after Saudi Arabia refused to allow the US to use its bases and airspace to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said on Sunday that the US had “no alternative” but to accept Tehran’s terms. “The longer they drag their feet, the more American taxpayers will pay for it,” he wrote on X. Iranian state media described Trump’s demand to shut down the country’s nuclear sites as “a non-starter that Iran has rejected for decades.” According to Press TV, Iran’s conditions include the lifting of sanctions, reparations, and a new framework governing the Strait of Hormuz that would recognize “Iran’s sovereign control over this vital waterway.”

Read more …

You can accuse everyone in Kiev of corruption. Can’t go wrong.

Zelensky Chief of Staff Yermak Charged with Corruption, Money Laundering (CTH)

Andrey Yermak is not just some random high-level government official in Ukraine. Andrey Yermak was President Zelenskyy’s right hand, chief of staff, organizer of the functions of Ukrainian government and the guy who controlled the systems that keep all other government officials working on the agenda of the President. If you took Susie Wiles and Marco Rubio’s responsibilities and combined them into one job function, that would be the scale of importance and influence that Andrey Yermak controlled inside the Ukrainian government and the office of President Zelenskyy.

Today, following an explosive criminal corruption charge that surfaced less than 36 hours ago, Andrey Yermak appears in court to face charges of corruption, theft and money laundering. Yermak was under investigation for his role in theft through the energy sector and now stands accused of using construction projects near Kiev as a tool to launder money to himself and other high-level government officials.

There are three facets to this I find very interesting. First, is the timing. Second, is the often-overlooked admission by National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) about them working closely with FBI investigators in Europe and American intelligence units. Third, is the way they caught him: “The anti-corruption bureau shared part of a wiretapped conversation as part of its case and said six more people had been identified as suspects.”

(Via BBC) – “[…] For years he was a close friend of Zelensky, and led Ukraine’s talks with the US until an anti-corruption raid on his flat last November prompted his resignation. Ukraine’s Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office (Sapo) said it was asking the Kyiv court to either place him in preventive detention or give him bail of about $4m (£3m). The head of the National anti-corruption bureau (Nabu) stressed that Zelensky himself was not part of the pre-trial investigation.

Yermak had been the president’s closest adviser throughout Russia’s full-scale invasion, until he became caught up in a broader inquiry by Sapo and Nabu into an alleged $100m (£74m) embezzlement scheme in Ukraine’s nuclear energy sector. As part of Operation Midas, ex-Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov was charged with abuse of office, while businessman Timur Mindich reportedly fled the country after he was flagged as a suspect and ex-Energy Minister Herman Haluschenko was detained while trying to leave. Like Yermak, Mindich was once part of Zelensky’s inner circle and co-owned the president’s former TV studio Kvartal95, before sanctions were imposed on him. Mindich denies wrongdoing.

The latest claims center on an elite housing project called “Dynasty” in a village outside Kyiv where millions in construction funds were allegedly laundered. The anti-corruption bureau shared part of a wiretapped conversation as part of its case and said six more people had been identified as suspects. On November 17, 2025, reports surfaced indicating that Yermak, then head of Zelensky’s office, might have been recorded by NABU. Subsequently, Yermak’s residence was searched on November 28, and by evening, Zelensky had dismissed him from his position.

Since late April, Ukrainian media outlets and parliament members have continued to publish new excerpts from the recordings. These reveal Mindich discussing with Rustem Umerov, the current Secretary of the Security Council and former Defense Minister, details of embezzlement from multimillion-dollar contracts, funding for drone manufacturing through a company affiliated with Mindich, and potential candidates for the Ukrainian ambassadorship to the United States. Keep in mind, Rustem Umerov is the current lead negotiator and point of contact for U.S. peace efforts.

Russia Federation President Vladimir Putin suggested last weekend that the war in Ukraine was “coming to an end.”

Interesting timing.

Read more …

What do you use 40 biolabs for? Do we need to pay more attention?

Tulsi Gabbard Probes 120 Foreign Biolabs Funded by US – 40 in Ukraine (CTH)

According to a report within the New York Post, Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, is now investigating 120 foreign biolabs that are funded by the U.S. government – potentially involved in ‘gain of function’ or weaponized virus research. More than 40 of the labs are identified operating in Ukraine. Keep in mind, DNI Gabbard recently took control of the CIA development of Artificial Intelligence systems pulling In-Q-Tel, the CIA-backed venture firm, under management of ODNI. Through a series of what seems like well-coordinated moves by Secretary Rubio, CIA Director Ratcliffe and DNI Gabbard, a significant amount of the CIA’s operations is no longer in the dark network. https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2053944250870489500?s=20


USAID has been dissolved (Rubio/Ratcliffe); the Directorate of Analysis taken out of CIA and into ODNI (Ratcliffe/Gabbard); the President’s Daily Brief now assembled by the ODNI (Ratcliffe/Gabbard); Artificial Intelligence systems, In-Q-Tel under ODNI management (Ratcliffe/Gabbard), and now Intelligence Community (CIA) biolabs being identified, investigated and potentially removed from operation. The biolab issue is a current concern given the discoveries of former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director, Anthony Fauci, lying to congress and the American people about funding gain of function research in Wuhan, China. However, given recent events we might even file this under proactive election integrity measures.

WASHINGTON — Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is investigating more than 120 biological laboratories abroad that were funded by US taxpayer dollars for decades, as part of an effort to end potentially risky experiments with viruses pursuant to President Trump’s executive order on so-called “gain-of-function” research.Gabbard told The Post Monday in a statement that her team is going “to identify where these labs are, what pathogens they contain and what ‘research’ is being conducted to end dangerous gain-of-function research that threatens the health and wellbeing of the American people and the world.”

“The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the catastrophic global impact research on dangerous pathogens in biolabs can have,” the spy chief also said. “Yet despite these obvious dangers, politicians, so-called health professionals, like Dr. Fauci, and entities within the Biden administration’s national security team lied to the American people about the existence of these US-funded and supported biolabs and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth.” Under new guidance from Gabbard, the US Intelligence Community will review research at all US-funded biolabs, which would include facilities engaged in gain-of-function experiments that could increase the transmissibility of viruses, as well as work for defensive purposes against dangerous pathogens.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence officials noted that the foreign labs extend into more than 30 countries, and several had received funding in the past through a Department of Defense program that sought to dispose of weapons of mass destruction after the end of the Cold War. More than 40 of the biolabs under review are located in Ukraine — and could “be at risk of compromise” due to Russia’s war, ODNI officials noted. (read more)

Read more …

“Euroskeptic FPO leader Christian Hafenecker has called on Vienna’s money laundering watchdog to investigate..”

Nearly $22 Billion Secretly Shipped To Ukraine – Austrian Politician (RT)

A right-wing Austrian politician has demanded that the country’s Finance Ministry explain how nearly $22 billion in cash and gold was shipped to Ukraine from Austria since 2022 without triggering concerns about money laundering or regulatory oversight. In a statement published on Sunday, Austrian Freedom Party (FPO) Secretary General Christian Hafenecker called out what he described as Vienna’s “two-class justice system” for overlooking massive payments to Kiev, while keeping a tight hold on taxpayers’ purse strings.


“We’re not talking about play money here: 1,030 registered cash and gold shipments, around €12 billion ($14 billion) plus $7.75 billion, physically transported over 1,300 kilometers into the war zone,” Hafenecker said. “And the responsible finance minister simply tells me… ‘We know nothing, we’re not investigating anything, we haven’t collected any information.’ That’s not an answer, that’s dereliction of duty,” he added. By comparison, Austrian money laundering rules require a private citizen withdrawing as little as €12,000 from an inherited account to prove the origin of the funds, and any person crossing the EU’s external border with more than €10,000 in cash must declare it, Hafenecker said. “This is a two-class justice system in finance.”

The politician demanded full disclosure on all cash shipments from Austria to Ukraine since the escalation of the conflict, a full audit by the country’s Financial Market Supervisory Authority, and a report by the Austrian Money Laundering Reporting Office in parliament. Earlier this year, the Euroskeptic FPO party demanded that Vienna cut all financial aid to Ukraine, denouncing the country as a corrupt “bottomless pit,” following a wave of high-level embezzlement scandals in Kiev.

Major probes by Ukraine’s Western-backed anti-graft agencies have implicated senior officials in Vladimir Zelensky’s government since last year. Two ministers and the Ukrainian leader’s chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, stepped down following the massive scandal. Russian President Vladimir Putin has slammed the current leadership in Kiev, calling it a “criminal gang” sitting on “golden potties,” and interested far more in personal enrichment than in the fate of ordinary Ukrainians.

Read more …

Obama, Clinton, Brennan, Clapper. You can fill a phonebook. “FBI Director Kash Patel has removed about ten percent of the problem in his agency.”

John Brennan: Still “Legions” of His Allies at DOJ, FBI and CIA (CTH)

Appearing on MSNBC to talk to Lawfare ally Nicole Wallace, wife of New York Times narrative engineer Michael Schmidt – the guy who received leaks from FBI Director James Comey via Daniel Richman, former CIA Director John Brennan notes there are “legions” of operatives still embedded within the DOJ, FBI and CIA who are working against President Donald Trump. This is not a surprise as we have noted the Trump administration continues to take apart the tentacles of Lawfare and Intelligence operatives in Main Justice, various U.S. Attorney offices, FBI Headquarters, FBI field offices and various Intelligence Community silos.


Marco Rubio has been working to clean up the National Security Council as well as the State Department operations, including USAID. Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe have been working on the NSA and CIA collaboratively, and Todd Blanche has been working through the Dept of Justice. FBI Director Kash Patel has removed about ten percent of the problem in his agency.

The core problem goes back to what we outlined on these pages {GO DEEP} and is not limited to those operatives who remain from the Obama/Biden era. Some of the problems surface as a result of ‘republican’ voices recommending “sleeper cell” staff and sketchy personnel for positions in the administration. [I’ll put an example below] One way to tell if the agency head or leader understands the challenge is by paying attention to how they talk about the agency’s mission objective. Leaders like Marco Rubio and Tulsi Gabbard have openly acknowledged the problem and are actively tackling corruption within their ranks. Even John Ratcliffe has admitted his agency was politically weaponized and has taken steps to address it. There’s still a lot of work ahead, but their actions show visible progress.

People like Pam Bondi and Kash Patel have praised the institutional embeds without drawing attention to the corruption beneath them. Thankfully, Acting AG Todd Blanche seems to be taking a more confrontational approach internally, so maybe Kash Patel will follow suit. This isn’t about style—it’s about results, and there’s an urgent need for action. To give an example of “sketchy” recommendations and predictable outcomes, I would draw attention to the lesser visible appointment of Morgan Ortagus. Do you remember this very weirdly worded announcement, two weeks prior to the inauguration?

I have no idea who “them” is referencing in the announcement.

[…] “I’m not doing this for me, I doing it for them”

There were always three options for “them”: (1) the strong republican support people; or (2) people in the Middle East who would be dealing with her; or (3) Stephen Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Regardless, of who “them” was, it was obvious President Trump was not thrilled by “their” request. Mrs. Morgan Ortagus is a long time Deep State operative with roots in the U.S. intelligence community and USAID {citation}. It was very predictable that she would undermine the goals of President Trump and she only lasted six months in the job. Ortagus was quietly dispatched from her position in June 2025.

CTH predicted Mrs. Ortagus would be a big mistake because she was, quite frankly, one of the “legion” insiders referenced by former CIA Director John Brennan. Ortagus’s entire career profile was/is textbook intelligence operative, likely legacy CIA. Not coincidentally, former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz was removed from his position only a month before Ortagus lost hers. On the day he was announced CTH said National Security Advisor Mike Waltz would be the first administration member to get the boot, because in the non-pretending world Waltz was a horrible choice just like Ortagus. Mike Waltz was removed as National Security Advisor in May 2025, Ortagus was removed as Middle East envoy in June.

If the goal was to eliminate the Deep State, President Trump couldn’t take on a deeply corrupt Intelligence Community while also appointing its allies. Their close ties to the Intelligence Community made the failures of both Waltz and Ortagus predictable. That said, behind the veneer of John Brennan’s statement on MSNBC is a guy who realizes the Trump administration has changed the dynamic and the agency systems Brennan is talking about no longer exist; at least they no longer have the same capabilities. The need for control is a reaction to fear, and Brennan’s fear is both visible and very well founded.

The DOJ and FBI operate under the influence of the Intelligence Community, which ultimately holds the reins. The key figures leading the IC have made changes to the institutions that have significantly reduced the impact of bad actors within the DOJ and FBI. The key positions are the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of State, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Marco Rubio, Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe are the people to watch, and we can tell by the counsel(s) they have put into place that each of them has clear eyes and a steady hand on those critical institutions. Since mid-year 2025, around the same time Waltz and Ortagus were dispatched, you will note significant changes began surfacing in the National Security Council, the State Dept, the DNI and importantly the CIA. Some of the changes make headlines, many do not; however, each is important and builds on a larger goal of dismantling a highly weaponized and political intelligence apparatus.

Internationally, what we see in the reaction of allied -or oppositional- governments and their intelligence agencies, is in large part a geopolitical reaction to the consequential changes being made by Rubio, Gabbard and Ratcliffe. Each building upon a system that fundamentally changes U.S. policy to be in alignment with President Trump. Each of them should be commended. Domestically, the accountability developments involving James Comey, John Brennan, John Bolton, Michael Atkinson, Eric Ciaramella and others yet to emerge, stem from the transparency brought by the same trio working upstream from Main Justice and the FBI. The combined intelligence apparatus of the U.S. can cut through the chaff and countermeasures of Lawfare operatives, and I feel optimistic watching them in action.

Again, it’s not just the silo heads that are making a positive impact, it is the personnel decisions they are surrounding themselves with. The amount of sunlight now coming over the horizon is toxic to the interests of those who organized shadow operations. As long as Rubio, Ratcliffe and especially Gabbard, keep pushing the truth to the surface; as long as they keep exposing all the corruption that was used to manipulate and weaponize our government; as long as they keep strategizing on ways to declassify evidence former officials buried under false pretenses; then the DOJ, FBI and more importantly We The People, will have information we can use to make decisions.

Ultimately, it is the truth which makes evil enterprise retreat.

Read more …

Excursion??

His name is not on every list ,but Nvidia’s Jensen Huang is very much part of the group. As Trump himself confirmed.

Here Are The People Accompanying Trump On His China Excursion This Week (JTN)

President Donald Trump will meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping in China this week and is taking a notable cohort with him to the Asian powerhouse. Trump arrives in Beijing on Wednesday for a two-day summit, which will include talks about sanctions on Iranian oil and the conflict in the Middle East at large. The group of powerful American CEOs and billionaires include Trump ally Elon Musk and Apple CEO Tim Cook, according to CBS News. Here is the rest of the notable American executives expected to go on the two-day excursion:


BlackRock’s Larry Fink

Blackstone’s Stephen Schwarzman

Boeing’s Kelly Ortberg

Goldman Sachs’ David Solomon

Meta’s Dina Powell McCormick

Micron’s Sanjay Mehrotra

Qualcomm’s Christiano Amon

Illumina’s Jacob Thaysen

Mastercard’s Michael Miebach

Visa’s Ryan McInerney

Cargill’s Brian Sikes

Citi’s Jane Fraser

Cisco’s Chuck Robbins

Coherent’s Jim Anderson

GE Aerospace’s H. Lawrence Culp.

The trip comes after the president postponed the original trip because of the conflict in the Middle East. The summit will take place May 14-15, with the president arriving May 13.

Read more …

“We have been absolutely ignored by a sitting member of Congress.”

Minnesota Democrats Block Ilhan Omar Subpoena (JTN)

Minnesota House Republicans want help from U.S. congressional oversight leaders after Democrats on a state committee blocked an effort to subpoena U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar over communications tied to the Feeding Our Future fraud investigation. Rep. Kristin Robbins, R-Maple Grove and chair of the Minnesota House Fraud Prevention and State Oversight Committee, announced Friday she has asked congressional leaders to assist in securing the records.


Robbins sent letters to U.S. Rep. James Comer, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights. The move comes days after Democrats on the state committee voted against authorizing a subpoena for Omar’s communications connected to the Feeding Our Future investigation. All five Republican committee members supported the motion, while three DFL members opposed it, leaving Republicans just short of the six votes required.

“Minnesota House Democrats chose to protect Rep. Omar rather than support our effort to get the truth,” Robbins said in a statement Friday. “Without at least one Democrat vote in support of the motion to subpoena these communications, we cannot get the two-thirds majority required to compel Rep. Omar produce the documents.” Republicans on the committee have repeatedly sought testimony and records from Omar related to trial exhibits introduced in the federal criminal case U.S. v. Bock. Robbins said Omar’s office has not responded to multiple requests, including an April 22 letter requesting records by May 5. “We have been ghosted,” Robbins said during Tuesday’s hearing. “We have been absolutely ignored by a sitting member of Congress.”

The committee’s Republican members have focused heavily on Omar’s sponsorship of the federal MEALS Act in 2020, legislation they argue loosened oversight requirements in federal child nutrition programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. “Rep. Omar had some role, whether inadvertent or not,” Robbins said Tuesday. “She passed the MEALS Act in March of 2020, and that took the guardrails off the federal school nutrition program, which created the conditions for Feeding Our Future.”

Federal prosecutors have described the Feeding Our Future case as one of the largest pandemic-era fraud schemes in the country, alleging more than $250 million intended for child nutrition programs was fraudulently claimed through fake meal reimbursements. Robbins said the committee became interested in Omar’s involvement after learning of communications between her office and individuals later convicted in the scheme. She also pointed to a 2020 video in which Omar promoted meal distribution efforts at Safari Restaurant, a Minneapolis site prosecutors later identified as a major participant in the fraud.

Democrats on the committee pushed back against the effort. Rep. Dave Pinto, DFL-St. Paul, questioned the timing of the subpoena. “We know the president and federal administration have got no hesitation going after political enemies and investigating them in all sorts of ways,” Pinto said. “If there’s any sort of wrongdoing by Congresswoman Omar—and if there’s no wrongdoing by Congresswoman Omar – I have no doubt the Trump Administration will do all it can with all the resources it has.” Rep. Isaac Schultz, R-Elmdale Township, argued the subpoena effort was part of a broader push to understand fraud in Minnesota government programs.

“Feeding Our Future is one part of the picture as it relates to what we know is to come in the fraud we’ve seen in Medicaid,” Schultz said. “Now, we have this opportunity to use our tools here in the House of Representatives to issue this subpoena to gain a greater understanding.” Robbins said Friday she hopes action from the congressional oversight committees will help Republicans obtain the records. “I hope the federal oversight committees will be able to help us get the facts about Representative Omar’s involvement in the case,” Robbins said. “If she has nothing to hide, she should testify before our committee and produce the trial exhibits.”

Read more …

“There is every reason to think the justices will leave this one where it belongs: in Virginia, under Virginia law, after Virginia Democrats tried to rig the map and got caught.”

Scott Jennings Nukes the Democrats’ Gerrymander Hail Mary (Margolis)

Virginia Democrats lost big time in the redistricting wars and have considered all kinds of ways to respond — including trying to force the retirement of all of the justices on the Virginia Supreme Court. That scheme isn’t likely to happen, but they are hoping to drag the U.S. Supreme Court into this. The whole saga is a perfect example of how a party can overplay its hand and then act stunned when the cards fall flat. The Virginia Supreme Court struck down the Democrats’ map, saying the process violated the state constitution and nullified the referendum vote. That map would have shifted Virginia from a 6-5 split to a 10-1 advantage for Democrats, which is exactly why they wanted it so badly.


And they’re trying to drag the Supreme Court into this? It’s a Hail Mary for sure and not a very good one. Does anyone actually believe that this will succeed, that the Supreme Court will even take the case? It makes no sense. There’s really no jurisdiction for the U.S. Supreme Court to get involved. The only thing this emergency appeal does is make them look more desperate.And Scott Jennings called them out on it. CNN’s The Arena, he mocked the idea that the U.S. Supreme Court would wade into this fight. “There’s a better chance of me sprouting wings and flying out of that window over there than the United States Supreme Court dealing with this in any way, because this is a state Supreme Court ruling on a state constitution.”

He added, “The U.S. Supreme Court doesn’t deal with these kinds of things, number one. Number two, the freakout in Virginia has been so extreme. You even have Democrats over there who are saying they want to effectively, politically decapitate the entire Virginia Supreme Court by putting an age limit of 54 so they can get rid of every existing justice and install people who will promise to rule a certain way on a certain case. “ “You know, they went from, ‘Oh, this is just a temporary map thing’ to ‘Let’s burn down the entire Virginia Supreme Court’ in about two seconds over there in Virginia, which tells you all you need to know about just how power hungry and corrupt the Democrats are in Virginia.”

That is the real story here. This was sold as a temporary map fix and morphed into a power grab so aggressive that even the state’s own courts slammed the brakes. “This is not going to work at the U.S. Supreme Court,” Jennings declared. “And this whole project of maximum warfare by Hakeem Jeffries is completely blown up in their face.”

The Supreme Court is set to decide on May 14 whether it will take the emergency appeal. There is every reason to think the justices will leave this one where it belongs: in Virginia, under Virginia law, after Virginia Democrats tried to rig the map and got caught.

Read more …

“Virginia’s General Assembly adopted a new map in February that would have favored Democrats in 10 of the state’s 11 seats in the US House ..”

Virginia Democrats Ask US Supreme Court to Reinstate Congressional Map (Hyde)

Virginia Democrats, along with their state Attorney General, have asked the US Supreme Court to override the Virginia Supreme Court’s decision last week that struck down a partisan redistricting plan. ABC News reports Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones wrote in the emergency application filed on Monday that the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” when it invalidated a ballot measure to amend the state constitution that would have netted Democrats as many as four new congressional seats.


The state Supreme Court had ruled last Friday, in a 4–3 decision, that Democrats had violated the state Constitution, by failing to follow proper procedures, while racing to get the measure on the ballot before the midterm elections. According to SCOTUSblog, Virginia’s General Assembly adopted a new map in February that would have favored Democrats in 10 of the state’s 11 seats in the US House—a potential increase of four seats from the current balance between Democrats and Republicans in Virginia.

The new map hinged on obtaining approval for an amendment to the Virginia constitution that would give the state legislature the power to draw a new congressional map outside of the normal cycle following the decennial census. In a referendum held in April, Virginia voters approved that amendment by a margin of three percentage points. The Virginia Supreme Court ruled that the referendum was not valid because the General Assembly had not followed proper procedures when it put the new amendment on the ballot.

In Monday’s 24-page filing, Jones argued: “The irreparable harm resulting from the Supreme Court of Virginia’s decision is profound and immediate. By forcing the Commonwealth to conduct its congressional elections using districts different from those adopted by the General Assembly pursuant to a constitutional amendment the people just ratified, the Supreme Court of Virginia has deprived voters, candidates, and the Commonwealth of their right to the lawfully enacted congressional districts.” Legal experts told ABC News last week that they believe Democrats have little chance of a successful appeal at the US Supreme Court because the state Supreme Court would be the highest authority dealing with state constitutional issues and no federal issues are at stake.

According to former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, “The Virginia Supreme Court is the final authority on Virginia constitutional questions. This is the end, folks. You will have the same map in 2026 that existed in 2024. That is now unchangeable and immutable.” Politico reports that Chief Justice John Roberts, who oversees emergency appeals arising from Virginia, instructed the Republicans who challenged the Virginia referendum to respond to Jones’ appeal by Thursday at 5 p.m.

Read more …

“Blanche, on Tuesday, indicated that the DOJ probe would use compulsory authority to bring in witnesses, including from the press.”

Acting AG Blanche Warns Reporters To Expect Subpoenas In Leaks Probe (JTN)

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Tuesday indicated that the Department of Justice would subpoena reporters as part of its probe into leaks of classified materials. The FBI, this month, opened a probe into Senate Democrats over the possible leak of classified materials related to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s confirmation hearings. At issue was the leak of an intercept from the National Security Agency (NSA) concerning Gabbard. More recently, Trump has reportedly complained of rampant leaks related to the ongoing Iran war, The Hill reported.


Blanche, on Tuesday, indicated that the DOJ probe would use compulsory authority to bring in witnesses, including from the press. “Prosecuting leakers who share our nation’s secrets with reporters, in turn risking our national security and the lives of our soldiers, is a priority for this administration,” he said. “Any witness, whether a reporter or otherwise, who has information about these criminals should not be surprised if they receive a subpoena about the illegal leaking of classified material.”

The Trump administration has long maintained a strained relationship with the press, dating back to his first term, which saw pervasive leaks to the media, especially from the Department of Homeland Security over immigration enforcement efforts.

Read more …

“..the Supreme Court basically supported one vote, one person guaranteed in perpetuity, and the rest is just map wars..”

The Language Got a Little Salty on CNN Monday Night (Matt Margolis)

If Bakari Sellers thought he could trot out an emotional guilt trip and quietly justify racist gerrymandering on live TV, Kevin O’Leary wasn’t about to let that slide. He didn’t just push back—he pulled the curtain back on the whole performance, forcing a raw, uncomfortable showdown between the U.S. Constitution and Sellers’ political theater. And Sellers let loose with some salty language in the process. The exchange began with host Abby Phillip laying out the stakes in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling that racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional. She noted that states may soon try to redraw maps in ways that could leave the minority party with no meaningful representation, which isn’t true, of course.


I could get into all the states that have had conservative representation gerrymandered into oblivion, but I’ll do that another time. O’Leary jumped in with a blunt take, saying the Supreme Court had effectively settled the matter. “I think everybody should take confidence in the fact the Supreme Court basically supported one vote, one person guaranteed in perpetuity, and the rest is just map wars,” he said. “And I think we should get used to it. And I think it’s, as you said, a state-based situation. Add this to the mix. At the end of the day, the state decides at the state level. It’s in the Constitution. Get over it.” That, apparently, set Sellers off.

“The problem with that sentiment is that you were born in 1954,” Sellers shot back, immediately turning the argument into a generational and moral rebuke. O’Leary, never one to miss a chance to needle someone, replied, “Yes,” when Sellers noted his age, then joked, “By the way, I’m a vampire.” Sellers clearly wasn’t in the mood and just pressed on with patronizing O’Leary. According to Sellers, O’Leary had lived through the entire post-Brown era and should understand what that history means. “During your lifetime, we’ve actually had Brown v. Board of Education,” Sellers said. O’Leary interjected, “I remember.” “Yes, Brown v. Board of Education, I don’t know how you remember it. I think you were like two months old.”

The temperature kept rising as Sellers tried to ground his point in personal history. “My mother was born in 1951. She desegregated schools. My father was shot in the Civil Rights Movement,” he said. “Those people—” Before he could finish, Phillip stepped in to let him continue. Sellers accused O’Leary of being “utterly disrespectful.” Then came the line that guaranteed the clip would travel fast. “So, I’m going to finish this comment. So, what I’m telling you is that there are people in this country who fought, died, and bled for the right to vote. Don’t be a d**k, just understand. Just understand.”

O’Leary didn’t care for that and pushed back immediately, insisting he was simply defending the Constitution. “I’m not a d**k. I’m pointing something out to you. The Constitution’s being upheld. You have a problem with that? You have a problem with the Constitution of the United States of America?” he asked.

Phillip tried to restore order, scolding Sellers, “I just want everybody to reset with a modicum of respect at this table.” But Sellers didn’t care, “I want you to understand that there’s a price that was paid for this right. There is a price that we uphold. And whether or not you value that—” O’Leary cut in again, clearly not caring about Seller’s belittling tone. “Where are you going with this?” Sellers answered by making the point even more directly. “Whether or not you value that or not, there are people who bled, sweat, and died, and were in prison for access to the ballot box.”

Read more …

No kings, no billionaires!

Socialist Storytime: AOC Spins Anti-Capitalist Fable About the Founders (Turley)

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is fast becoming the greatest fabulist since Aesop. Recently, Ocasio-Cortez insisted that true billionaires are a capitalist myth since “you can’t earn a billion dollars.” However, her greatest work of fiction may be her insistence that the Framers fought against billionaires and would have joined her and other socialists in seeking to eradicate them today. Bertrand Russell once noted that “there is something feeble and a little contemptible” about those “who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths.”


The American left has long peddled such “comfortable myths” as the wealthy “not paying their fair share” of taxes. (The top one percent of income earners pay over 40% of federal taxes, and that percentage goes up to 70% for the top ten percent). However, Ocasio-Cortez has become a liberal Homer for her reputation for spinning collectivist tales. What is impressive is her myth-within-a-myth signature style: “You can’t earn that, right? And so you have to create a myth… you have to create a myth of earning it.” In a discussion at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, Ocasio-Cortez gave her revisionist account of the Founders as, surprise, budding anti-capitalists:

“I want to talk about how this is in the heritage of our country, because America was founded… you look at Thomas Jefferson writing to Madison in revolt of British aristocracy. The American Revolution was against the billionaires of their time. And we are declaring independence from such an extreme marriage of wealth and power and the state that the voices of everyday people did not exist.”In my recent book, “Rage and the Republic,” I discuss the economic philosophy of the Founders in exploring the history and future of this unique Republic.

While Ocasio-Cortez references our 250th anniversary, she ignores that it is also the 250th anniversary of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. Smith’s free-market theory was an instant hit with the founding generation. These men had just created the first major Enlightenment Revolution based on a belief in natural rights that came from God, not governments. Yet, they knew that true individual liberty could not be achieved without economic freedom. Smith’s economic theory was the perfect companion for their political theory.

The combination of American democratic theories and free market theories produced the world’s most successful and oldest democracy in history. In Rage and the Republic, I discuss the threats to this Republic, including from figures like Ocasio-Cortez, in spreading socialist myths. The book calls for a recommitment to what I call a “liberty-enhancing economy.” That is why this particular myth told by Ocasio-Cortez was so jarring. The Founders were great believers in capitalism and the free market. They were not fighting “the billionaires of their time” over their wealth. Many of the Founders were themselves quite wealthy, including banker Robert Morris Jr., who was known as the “Financier of the Revolution.”Adjusting for inflation and current rates, Morris would be a billionaire today.

The Founders believed in unleashing everyone’s ability to become a Morris. They fought against the taking or occupation of property by the government. Aat the very top of their stated purpose for the American Revolution was “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The phrase was virtually ripped from the page of John Locke’s “life, liberty, and property.” Locke believed that there was a natural right to property created by what God left “in common” for humanity. Preceding any government, it was a right that belonged to human beings by divine grant. Hardly a roaring endorsement of socialist ideals or, as Zohran Mamdani put it, the “warmth of collectivism.”

George Mason relied on Locke for his draft of the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which Jefferson relied on heavily. Mason wrote of “the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.” bOf course, the property reference was changed to happiness in the Declaration, which reflected the more transcendent values of these Enlightenment devotees. While reduced to “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,” the original language appeared in the Fifth Amendment and, later in the Fourteenth Amendment, protecting citizens from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property.”

In his 1792 essay “Property,” Madison echoed Lockean values in declaring that good government “secures to every man whatever is his own.” Other early figures, like Chief Justice John Marshall, wrote, “The power to tax is the power to destroy.” The new myth-making on the left is meant to revive what I previously described as “economic factionalism,” seeking political power with this type of “eat-the-rich” rhetoric. It is working (as it has in history). In California, many are pushing a “billionaire’s tax,” while far-left figures like Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are pushing for a federal variation. In states from Washington state to Virginia, Democrats are virtually chasing wealthy taxpayers out of blue states with planned millionaire taxes.

To achieve such radical change, you must first destroy the values upon which this Republic was born, convincing people that their fundamental ties to capitalism are as ephemeral as true billionaires. The greatest irony is that Ocasio-Cortez personifies what the Founders truly wanted to combat. They feared mobocracy and the tyranny of the majority, the arbitrary power that can come from majoritarian abuse. Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders, and others are truly not new or particularly interesting additions to the political dialogue. They are the same voices of democratic despotism that Madison and others sought to quell.

Read more …

A trial balloon?

Media Spreads Hantavirus Hysteria In Attempt To Save Disgraced WHO (ZH)

The establishment media has been drumming up fear after a recent outbreak of Hantavirus on a cruise liner traveling from Argentina to West Africa. The Guardian has used the opportunity to assert that the US is currently ill equipped to deal with future pandemic threats, largely because of Donald Trump (of course) and the dramatic US exit from the now disgraced World Health Organization. Is Hantavirus a serious danger to the world, or, is it another hyped up virus like Covid being used to trigger public hysteria? And if it is being hyped, who (or WHO) stands to benefit?


For decades the WHO constructed its image as a global angel of benevolence; the primary line of defense against what they said was the inevitable invasion of a population rending plague. However, when the time finally came in the form of a mutated Coronavirus (Covid), they dropped the ball, and evidence suggests they may have done it deliberately.During the initial outbreak in China, the WHO echoed CCP propaganda suggesting that human-to-human contact was unlikely and, knowingly or unknowingly, aided China in hiding details behind the outbreak.

Details surrounding the involvement of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the largest dangerous disease lab in Asia, were actively dismissed (or suppressed). Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus even praised China’s “transparency”. The WHO then set up a joint task force to determine the origins of Covid, only to let the Chinese dominate the investigation and lead it away from the activities at the Level 4 lab in Wuhan. The Chinese wanted to push the theory of animal-to-animal mutation instead of the gain of function research that was ongoing at the lab (partially funded by US interests in the Obama Administration).

Today, evidence overwhelmingly suggests that Covid originated in the Wuhan Lab. In January 2025, the CIA assessed that a lab-related origin is more likely than natural spillover. This determination matched with similar FBI assessments. In 2025, German Intelligence also reported their findings, indicating a 90% likelihood that Covid was engineered and originated at the Wuhan Lab in China. Of course, anyone who made this claim online during the pandemic response was called a dangerous “conspiracy theorist” and was deplatformed (much like Zero Hedge).

The WHO would go on to exaggerate the death rate of the virus, claiming an initial Case Fatality Rate (CFR) of 3.4%. This data was based on studies which ignored mild cases as well as asymptomatic cases, thus artificially pumping up the death rate. Dozens of studies as early as May 2020 showed that the median Infection Fatality Rate (a more accurate number) was only 0.27% (later adjusted to 0.23%). The WHO continued to spread disinformation and hysteria surrounding covid while ignoring the true IFR data. That is to say, all the lockdowns, the mandates, the social media censorship, the arrests, the push for vaccine passports, etc. – all of it was over a virus that 99.8% of the population would easily survive.

The WHO has been exposed as a perpetrator of pandemic disinformation and is no longer trusted by the public. The US under the Trump Administration has exited the organization on these grounds, and as a result the WHO has lost at least 20% of its total funding. It is now facing dire financial conditions. In response, the UN and the establishment media have been running a spin campaign to present the WHO as indispensable. It is therefore not surprising that the WHO and the media are suddenly jumping on the cruise line Hantavirus story as if it is significant, while at the same time arguing that Trump is putting the public at risk by not participating in the WHO’s antics. They need the money badly, and so they’ve decided to remind the public why we should be afraid.

For those who are unaware, Hantavirus is a common virus around the world and in the US. Estimates show around 100,000 cases of the disease occur annually. In 2023, there were 40 cases in the US. The virus is most often contracted when humans are exposed to dried rodent feces and urine, floating as particulates in the air which are then inhaled into the lungs. The spread from human to human is rare and only occurs with the South American strain. Contraction is difficult, with the virus passing from one person to another through “prolonged contact with bodily fluids”. It makes you wonder what kind of pleasure cruise these people were on when the most recent outbreak started? The point is, the story is being inflated from a normal event into a crisis event.

This is probably why the Spanish Government set up an elaborate bus transfer of supposedly highly infectious cruise passengers, only to drop off a psychiatrist with the Ministry of Health down the road without protective gear like he’s going home after school. The bottom line? Hantavirus is all over the world and it’s not a threat to the vast majority of people. The artificial media panic and the opportunism of the WHO may be an effort to test the waters for another fraudulent pandemic scare, but the majority of the propaganda seems to be aimed at restoring the WHO’s reputation and saving it from financial ruin.

Read more …

The North African nation poses the biggest problem for the bloc in terms of arrivals, Thanos Plevris has said

Over 500,000 Waiting To Cross Into Europe From Libya – Greek Minister (RT)

The EU might be on the verge of a new migrant crisis, with more than half a million people waiting in Libya alone to cross into Europe, Greek Migration Minister Thanos Plevris has said. The bloc was first inundated by asylum seekers from the Middle East and Northern Africa during the 2015 refugee crisis, when a million migrants entered Europe, straining welfare systems and prompting tens of millions of European voters to turn to far-right political parties. Greece remains one of the bloc’s main entry points, registering 48,771 arrivals in 2025, according to UNHCR data. According to the UN refugee agency, 7,589 migrants and asylum seekers have arrived in the Mediterranean country this year as of May 3, including 5,615 by sea.


Athens has introduced a number of tough policy measures in a bid to stem the flow over the past years, including detention for those denied asylum. Commenting on the situation on Sunday, Plevris said that Greece was “the first country to criminalize illegal residence” and would not allow those denied protection to just roam free. “Those who are not entitled to asylum will be detained,” the minister told a local broadcaster, adding that Athens would “operate within the law but will go to its limits to protect the borders.” He also described the situation in Libya as the biggest problem faced by his country and the EU. According to Plevris, around 550,000 people have gathered there and are now seeking to enter Europe.

In February, Plevris also announced that it was working together with Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, and Denmark to create “return hubs” for rejected asylum seekers outside of the EU’s borders, with Africa being the preferred destination. Libya became a key transit point for human trafficking and migration to Europe via the Mediterranean following a NATO-backed uprising in 2011 that led to the overthrow and assassination of longtime ruler Muammar Gaddafi. The EU has struggled to manage the migration crisis since 2015, with Greece, Italy, and Spain receiving the highest number of arrivals across the Mediterranean.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/2053784729493602624?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

May 092026
 


Albert Bierstadt Storm in the Mountains c1870


‘Sporadic Clashes’ In Strait Of Hormuz As US Disables Two Iran Vessels (ZH)
CIA Believes Iran Can Withstand US Blockade For At Least 3-4 Months (TASS)
Trump Mediates 3-Day Ceasefire Between Ukraine and Russia On Victory Day (CTH)
Did Zelensky’s Cronies Scam The Europeans? (RT)
How Zelensky’s Inner Circle Sought Influence In The US (RT)
After Every Weapon the Left Used Against Trump, He’s Still Here (Florack)
There’s Something About Mary… (CTH)
Marco Rubio Issues a Major Blow to Cuba’s Military Empire (Anderson)
After Phone Call with Von der Leyen, Trump Delays EU Tariffs (CTH)
California Death Trip (James Howard Kunstler)
Virginia Supreme Court Overturns Redistricting Referendum (JTN)
Former NATO Chief Warns Bloc on Verge of ‘Disintegration’ (JTN)
The NY Times Interviews Tucker Carlson, and It Gets Worse From There (Spencer)
Trump Touts Release of UFO files: ‘Have Fun and Enjoy’ (JTN)
Fetterman: Dems Can’t ‘Simply Be The Opposite’ of ‘Whatever Trump Says’ (JTN)

 


 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2052395510774788365?s=20 https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/2052439232673882171?s=20 https://twitter.com/GOP_is_Gutless/status/2052510392279036256?s=20 https://twitter.com/BoLoudon/status/2052580352045044210?s=20

 


 


The ceasefire survives to live another day.

‘Sporadic Clashes’ In Strait Of Hormuz As US Disables Two Iran Vessels (ZH)

Iran’s Fars reports late morning (US time): Sporadic clashes between Iranian Armed Forces and US vessels in the Strait of Hormuz. Amid the fog of war, nothing in the way of details initially emerged. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei has condemned US “aggression and adventurism” but has also confirmed that Tehran is still reviewing the US proposal and is still going to respond soon. Al Jazeera cites state media on emerging deaths from the Iranian side: Mohammad Radmehr, governor of Minab County in southern Iran, says he has received word that rescuers have found the body of one of five sailors reported missing after a US attack on an Iranian vessel overnight in and around the Strait of Hormuz.


Iran’s Mehr news agency quoted Radmehr as saying that search teams are continuing efforts to find the four remaining missing sailors. Earlier, as we reported, Radmehr said 10 sailors were also injured during the naval confrontation. The Wall Street Journal has details (based on CENTCOM press release) after two Iranian-flagged tankers came under US attack for attempting to breach the US blockade: U.S. military forces carried out airstrikes on Friday, hitting and disabling two empty Iranian-flagged oil tankers attempting to circumvent the American naval blockade against Iranian ports, according to U.S. Central Command

The vessels struck were very large crude carriers attempting to return to an Iranian port on the Gulf of Oman, the M/T Sea Star III and M/T Sevda, according to a statement from Centcom. A U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet jet fighter from the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush fired precision munitions into their smokestacks, disabling the tankers, Centcom said. It marks third time the US has attacked commercial vessels for trying to break through to Iranian ports, following a Wednesday incident which saw a US Navy jet destroy rudder of an Iranian tanker under similar circumstances.

Read more …

Well, well, WaPo.

“According to the Washington Post, these findings have already been communicated to the US administration..”

CIA Believes Iran Can Withstand US Blockade For At Least 3-4 Months (TASS)

Analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) believe that Iran will be able to withstand the US naval blockade for at least three to four months before it begins to suffer any serious economic difficulties, The Washington Post reported, citing sources. According to the newspaper, these findings have already been communicated to the US administration. “A confidential CIA analysis delivered to administration policymakers this week concludes that Iran can survive the US naval blockade for at least three to four months before facing more severe economic hardship, four people familiar with the document said,” the article states. The newspaper points out that this finding “appears to raise new questions about President Donald Trump’s optimism on ending the war.”
Read more …

“If fighting stops, the money supply shrinks. For Zelenskyy this is a big problem.”

Trump Mediates 3-Day Ceasefire Between Ukraine and Russia On Victory Day (CTH)

May 9, celebrated as Victory Day, is one of the most significant and heartfelt holidays in Russia, symbolizing resilience, unity, and remembrance. This day honors the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War II, known in Russia as the Great Patriotic War. It is a time when the nation collectively reflects on its history, pays tribute to those who sacrificed their lives, and celebrates the enduring spirit of its people. Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to have noticed the same EU/Ukraine chatter that we drew attention to a few days ago, and Moscow has stopped public attendance from tomorrow’s Victory Day celebration in Red Square. The Russian govt told people to stay away from Moscow central and watch the event on livestream. Other precautions have been similarly announced.


Emboldened by European allies, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy began yesterday by ridiculing a ceasefire offer by Russian intermediaries. As Ukraine was a former part of the United Soviet Socialist Republic (until 1991), Putin views both Ukraine and Russia as celebrating the same Victory Day remembrance; a united victory over Nazism. Zelenskyy, born in 1978, rejects that commonality. However, after President Trump stepped into the discussion, a 3-day ceasefire was brokered.

[Via Truth Social] – “I am pleased to announce that there will be a THREE DAY CEASEFIRE (May 9th, 10th, and 11th) in the War between Russia and Ukraine. The Celebration in Russia is for Victory Day but, likewise, in Ukraine, because they were also a big part and factor of World War II. This Ceasefire will include a suspension of all kinetic activity, and also a prison swap of 1,000 prisoners from each Country. This request was made directly by me, and I very much appreciate its agreement by President Vladimir Putin and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Hopefully, it is the beginning of the end of a very long, deadly, and hard fought War. Talks are continuing on ending this Major Conflict, the biggest since World War II, and we are getting closer and closer every day. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” ~ President DONALD J. TRUMP

Due to the psychology of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in combination with his co-dependent enablers in Europe and the U.K., I would caution everyone to review Ukraine’s participation in the ceasefire tenuously. Zelenskyy, leading a non-NATO member state, gains NATO’s protection because France, Germany, Italy, and the U.K. see Russia as a major threat to Europe. If the conflict stops, Zelenskyy has to start paying for his own nation’s government operations again. Currently all of his state and municipal govt expenses are subsidized by Europe and the USA. If fighting stops there will be a movement to stop giving Ukraine subsidies.

Zelenskyy’s government officials have become very wealthy from the money they are able to skim from U.S, U.K and EU support. The taxpayer laundry operation is very lucrative, and Ukraine is well known for its institutional corruption systems. If fighting stops, the money supply shrinks. For Zelenskyy this is a big problem.

Read more …

Zelensky et al pump part of the dough back to where it came from. Where it funds campaigns for Democrats and various European parties.

“The EU is pumping money into a company that’s secretly run by one of the most corrupt members of Vladimir Zelensky’s inner circle..”

Did Zelensky’s Cronies Scam The Europeans? (RT)

With €90 billion in EU funding set to flow into Ukraine, the case of ‘game changer’ weapons manufacturer Fire Point offers a glimpse into the black hole that swallows Western money and enriches Vladimir Zelensky’s cronies. nDanish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen was elated when he announced last September that Fire Point – a Ukrainian film casting agency that pivoted to making drones and missiles post-2022 – would set up a rocket fuel plant on Danish soil. b “This is helping Ukraine in its fight for security, its own independence and, no less importantly, its ability to live in peace,” he declared, adding that Fire Point would receive a share of a €1.4 billion ($1.64 billion) Danish fund earmarked for the Ukrainian weapons industry.


Fire Point’s rise has been nothing short of meteoric. From zero experience in weapons in 2022, the company had landed $1 billion in contracts by the time of Poulsen’s announcement, a figure that has since increased almost sevenfold. Fire Point’s FP-1 and FP-2 kamikaze drones are Ukraine’s most widely-used attack UAVs, the company received more than half of the Ukrainian Defense Procurement Agency’s annual spend this year, and its flagship product, the FP-5 ‘Flamingo’ cruise missile, has been hailed by Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky as “by far the most successful missile in Ukraine’s arsenal.”

Zelensky has marketed Fire Point’s missiles and drones on most of his 130-plus trips abroad since 2022, talking up their performance to European investors and Gulf monarchies looking for a cost-effective alternative to American systems. As it turns out, there’s a reason for his enthusiasm: Zelensky has a personal stake in Fire Point’s success.

Timur Mindich’s get-rich schemes According to surveillance tapes published by Ukrainskaya Pravda in late April, Fire Point is secretly owned by Timur Mindich, a business magnate and associate of Zelensky known as ‘Zelensky’s wallet’. Mindich fled to Israel last November, moments before he was due to be raided by anti-corruption investigators for his alleged role in a $100 million embezzlement scheme at Energoatom, Ukraine’s nuclear power operator.In the recordings, Mindich confirms that he is running Fire Point and tasks Defense Minister Rustem Umerov (who resigned last year over corruption allegations) with handing contracts to the company and lobbying for its interests abroad. Mindich and Umerov also discuss a potential deal with Arab inventors, which would see each Fire Point shareholder cash out around $300 million.

Allegations of corruption at Fire Point are nothing new. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) has been probing the company for links to Mindich since last August, and has examined whether the company inflated the cost of its products and lied about the number of drones supplied to the Defense Ministry. After a government audit found that Fire Point overcharged the ministry by almost €15 million in a no-bid contract for FP-1 drones, and with the tapes confirming collusion between Umerov and Mindich, the ministry’s internal anti-corruption watchdog called on Wednesday for the company’s nationalization and warned that Fire Point may lose its military contracts once Mindich’s involvement is proven in court.

How badly did the Europeans get scammed? Back in September, Poulsen brushed off mounting allegations of graft against Fire Point. “We have no reason to believe that there is a problem,” he said, adding that any business “established in Denmark must comply with Danish rules.” But Denmark is not the only European country pumping money into Mindich’s operation. While the specific figures are classified, Ukrainskaya Pravda reported that Western countries have contributed “significant” sums of money to the company.

Last May, Germany signed a €5 billion deal to pay for “long-range weapons” produced within Ukraine. Signed after a visit by Zelensky to Berlin, the weapons in question are likely Flamingo cruise missiles. In October, the Netherlands’ then-defense minister, Ruben Brekelmans, announced a €90 million aid package for the production of attack drones within Ukraine, on top of an earlier €200 million round of funding for Ukrainian-made missiles and interceptors. Given that the majority of these domestically built weapons are manufactured by Fire Point, the bulk of this funding likely went to Mindich’s company. Norway and Ukraine signed a €1.3 billion deal for Ukrainian-made missiles in April, while Italy is reportedly exploring a similar arrangement. In the private sector, Fire Point has signed cooperation agreements with Spanish defense giant Sener and Germany’s Diehl Defense – both deals signed after meetings between Zelensky and executives from Sener and Diehl.

Read more …

“Leaked transcripts have exposed how top Ukrainian officials are trading influence for billions and plotting to escape to the US”

How Zelensky’s Inner Circle Sought Influence In The US (RT)

Ukraine’s most popular format for political content recently seems to be reading aloud invective-laden transcripts of Vladimir Zelensky’s closest political allies scheming about stealing in Russian. The ‘Mindich tapes’ could have serious ramifications for the government, as they purport to implicate Zelensky in unabashed corruption. The root of the escalating graft scandal lies in an investigation that Western-backed Ukrainian law enforcement agencies conducted into Timur Mindich – a business associate of Zelensky, known as his ‘bagman’ or ‘wallet’ in Kiev – who is now a fugitive and is fighting an extradition request from his hideout in Israel.


Investigators from the Ukrainian National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) wiretapped Mindich’s luxury apartment in Kiev – reportedly between April and July 2025, when Zelensky tried to take control of the agency and triggered a wave of mass protest and rebukes from his Western backers. Some of the Mindich tapes served as evidence in their case exposing a $100 million extortion scheme, allegedly masterminded by Zelensky’s bagman, at Ukrainian state-owned atomic energy company Energoatom, and which led to Mindich running to Israel. Since mid-April, the Ukrainian public has been showered with what are purportedly parts of the records, though none have been officially released by the authorities.

Are the Mindich tapes authentic and who released them?
Ukrainian political commentators broadly assume that they are. Zelensky’s office has not claimed that they are fabricated, and there are notable intersections between releases by different sources. The ongoing wave of publications was launched on April 23 by former SAPO prosecutor Stanislav Bronevitsky. Ukrainskaya Pravda journalist Mikhail Tkach was behind a major disclosure on April 28 – which RT reviewed in detail previously – with another installment coming on May 1. Opposition lawmakers Yaroslav Zheleznyak and Aleksey Goncharenko have produced multiple Mindich tape videos – the latter reading them to an empty parliament chamber.

Why are the Mindich tapes being leaked?
The motives behind the disclosures remain unclear. Did the investigators leak them to overcome pressure that Zelensky reportedly subjects them to behind closed doors? Did Mindich and other suspects shoot a proverbial cannon across the bow as a warning to Zelensky that they won’t sink alone? There are some caveats, however. People in the transcript talk informally and omit context. For instance, they refer to acquaintances by their personal names or nicknames. ‘Vova’, often mentioned in the tapes, is believed to be Zelensky himself. Consequently, identification of mentioned individuals falls on the media.

What’s the bottom line?
The transcripts suggest that Zelensky’s inner circle sees indefinite war as a corporate opportunity and exerts improper influence over the government to maximize their profits, counting on their patron to protect them.

What are the most scandalous claims?
Arguably the most salacious of the latest leaks involves Mindich and Zelensky’s then-defense minister – presently the secretary of the National Security and Defense Council – Rustem Umerov discussing what they believe to be US President Donald Trump’s relations with glamorous women, while debating potential candidates to be Ukrainian ambassador in the US.“You know who would be great? Svetka. Trump would go crazy about her,” Umerov said. He and Mindich agreed that the “curly” bombshell would make “everyone there chase her.”

This is apparently a reference to former Energy Minister Svetlana Grinchuk, appointed by her disgraced predecessor and alleged romantic partner, German Galushchenko, who like him, was forced to resign after Mindich was charged with siphoning off $100 million from state energy producer Energoatom. Grinchuk was also deputy energy minister under Galushchenko.Mindich and Umerov debated the pros and cons of several officials who could represent Kiev’s interests in Washington, DC but agreed that Grinchuk had the best chances to get regular face time with “the old man.”

What were Mindich and Umerov plotting?
Mindich and his group were apparently seeking political and financial leverage. For instance, they wanted their man overseeing the nationalized Sense Bank, a potential source of business credit. Umerov, who was facing resignation at the time of the recording, was highly interested in receiving a special diplomatic appointment that would allow him free travel abroad. He was eyeing privileges similar to those enjoyed by ‘Vitya’ – apparently Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff.

Freedom to fly to the US and back would help Umerov – whose family lives in Miami – protect Mindich’s interests, he told the businessman. A conversation between Mindich and Sergey Shefir, a business partner of Zelensky who served as presidential adviser from 2019-2024, offers a glimpse of the cutthroat nature of Ukrainian politics. Apparently, Zelensky’s chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, sabotaged a planned appointment of Evgeny Korniychuk as ambassador to Germany over suspicions that the career diplomat served as an anonymous source for a Politico article in which he was criticized. Is Mindich a power broker or a businessman?
Both. Many of the conversations were about the arms industry and Zelensky’s often-touted ‘miracle arms maker’ Fire Point, which the leaked records prove Mindich ran, with Umerov steering defense contacts his way. One person called by his full name in the tapes is a major figure in the US – Google executive Eric Schmidt, known to be tight with the Pentagon and an influential voice on national security policy, including the arming of Ukraine.

Umerov pitched the US billionaire to Mindich as a possible business partner to whom a majority stake in Fire Point could be offered. Schmidt, according to Umerov, has the connections that Fire Point would require to access the lucrative American weapons market and “enter [Silicon] Valley.” Mindich doubted whether US competitors could become partners: “For Americans, we are the f**king worst firm that can break [their plans]. They need to either buy us out or f**k us up. F**king us up is cheaper.”

Do the tapes prove criminality?
Not obviously, but something shady was implied in the discussion of what Mindich and Umerov called Project 23. It may be a weapons manufacturing offshoot. Umerov reminded Mindich that somebody had given instructions not to get German arms giant Rheinmetall involved. The two then discussed discrete funding options for “23” and how the same unnamed person may not agree to the proposal because he is skittish with his significant sums in cash. “He gets money from everywhere. Three from here and five from there. And he has no expenses,” Mindich explained. “He pays what to his driver – $300?”

Umerov gleefully continued: “From the state budget.” MP Zheleznyak, who highlighted this exchange, has argued that Project 23 is what the Mindich group called their ‘obshchak’. The criminal slang term refers to a money pot that all members of a gang are obliged to donate to and which is tapped for their common interests or in case of an emergency. Safekeeping the funds is obviously a role of high responsibility and high risk for any criminal organization. Some media outlets nicknamed Mindich ‘Zelensky’s wallet’ for allegedly playing that role.

Read more …

“.. Labour will be unable to get a dog catcher elected. I predict the same thing will be happening to the Democrats here in the ‘States, in this year’s midterm.”

After Every Weapon the Left Used Against Trump, He’s Still Here (Florack)

Brennan handpicked the CIA analysts to compile the ICA and involved only the ODNI, CIA, FBI and NSA, excluding 13 of the then-17 intelligence agencies. He sidelined the National Intelligence Council and forced the inclusion of the discredited Steele dossier despite objections of the authors and senior CIA Russia experts, so as to push a false narrative that Russia secured Trump’s 2016 victory. “This was Obama, Comey, Clapper and Brennan deciding ‘We’re going to screw Trump,’” said Ratcliffe in an exclusive interview. Yeah, I know — big shock. But that was just the beginning.


What followed was the most sustained, coordinated legal and political assault ever launched against a sitting — and former — president in American history. It fits the pattern of the last decade. In short: They threw everything they had at the man. Every weapon within reach. Every arrow in the quiver. And every time, they eventually came up empty-handed and revealing all their desperation and their corruption. Trust me when I tell you, the people have noticed all of this. A Manhattan DA dusted off a years-old bookkeeping dispute that federal prosecutors had previously declined to pursue, repackaged it as a felony, and put a former president on trial. Built on the testimony of a convicted liar, the case ended in a conviction on 34 counts.

Critics called it lawfare. Many legal scholars called it a stretch. The people noticed. Then came the classified documents case in Florida, where a special counsel charged Trump with mishandling materials at Mar-a-Lago — a case ultimately dismissed after the judge found serious prosecutorial overreach. The people noticed. Then came the Georgia case, a sprawling RICO indictment that collapsed under the weight of its own scandal when the DA’s romantic relationship with her hand-picked lead prosecutor came to light. It stalled, stumbled, and became a symbol of the very overreach it embodied — and has since been contradicted by federal investigations.

And then came the federal election obstruction case in D.C., where yet another special counsel attempted to criminalize Trump’s challenges to the 2020 results. After his 2024 victory, it was dropped. The people had noticed and spoke louder than any blue-city grand jury. They also noticed when an investigation into Georgia’s election system revealed that Trump probably had, in fact, won the 2020 election. No small point, though the legacy press has been avoiding it. The people noticed that, too. In New York, the attorney general secured a staggering $450 million civil fraud judgment over property valuations. No victim came forward, no bank claimed a loss. It was later reduced, then overturned on appeal. The people noticed.

A separate civil case brought by E. Jean Carroll produced an $83 million defamation verdict. The pattern was unmistakable: Trump’s enemies wielded the legal system in blue jurisdictions as a political battering ram, and everyone watching knew it. Including the judge overseeing the appeal, who tossed the whole thing out. The people noticed. And when all of that failed, they tried to kill him. Several times. The people saw that, too. And so, we see his voters still support him, and his attackers still can’t fathom why. Or at least, they won’t admit to that understanding. They tried the courts. They tried the ballot. They tried the bullet. He’s still here — and still commanding the loyalty of the voters who put him back in office.

As an aside, the people also watched as the Democrats blew through some $64 million on their illegal Virginia gerrymandering attempt. I suggest that all of that, as it has accumulated, will play large in mid-terms come November. How do I know? Look what happened in the UK this week.The British people have been watching the actions of the Starmer government and have in turn handed Labour a historic loss of some 650 seats. Starmer himself is headed for a No Confidence vote, and Labour will be unable to get a dog catcher elected. I predict the same thing will be happening to the Democrats here in the ‘States, in this year’s midterm.

Thought of the day: If the president could have stopped 9/11 from happening, do you believe he should have done so? Of course you do. So do I. So, can you explain why you have such a problem with the president stopping Iran from obtaining nukes?

Read more …

A one woman wrecking crew.

There’s Something About Mary… (CTH)

I have been asked to recap some of my research into cited formats of what I believe to be criminal conduct, with specific statutes against them. This is a recap of one key player who mysteriously seems to avoid scrutiny. If there is one corrupt DC player who has escaped scrutiny for her corrupt endeavors, it would be Mary McCord. More than any other Lawfare operative within Main Justice, Mary McCord sits at the center of every table in the manufacturing of cases against Donald Trump. {GO DEEP} Mary McCord’s husband is Sheldon Snook. At a critical moment he was also the right hand to the legal counsel of Chief Justice John Roberts.


When the Carter Page FISA application was originally assembled by the FBI and DOJ, there was initial hesitancy from within the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) about submitting the application, because it did not have enough citations in evidence (the infamous ‘Woods File’). That’s why the Steele Dossier ultimately became important. It was the Steele Dossier that provided the push, the legal cover needed for the DOJ-NSD to submit the application for a Title-1 surveillance warrant against the campaign of Donald J. Trump. When the application was finally assembled for submission to the FISA court, the head of the DOJ-NSD was John Carlin. Carlin quit working for the DOJ-NSD in late September 2016 just before the final application was submitted (October 21,2016). John Carlin was replaced by Deputy Asst. Attorney General, Mary McCord.

When the FISA application was finally submitted (approved by Sally Yates and James Comey), it was Mary McCord who did the actual process of filing the application and gaining the Title-1 surveillance warrant. A few months later, February 2017, with Donald Trump now in office as President, it was Mary McCord who went with Deputy AG Sally Yates to the White House to confront White House legal counsel Don McGahn over the Michael Flynn interview with FBI agents. The surveillance of Flynn’s calls was presumably done under the auspices and legal authority of the FISA application Mary McCord previously was in charge of submitting.

At the time the Carter Page application was filed (October 21, 2016), Mary McCord’s chief legal counsel inside the office was a DOJ-NSD lawyer named Michael Atkinson. In his role as the legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD, it was Atkinson’s job to review and audit all FISA applications submitted from inside the DOJ. Essentially, Atkinson was the DOJ internal compliance officer in charge of making sure all FISA applications were correctly assembled and documented.

When the anonymous CIA whistleblower complaint was filed against President Trump for the issues of the Ukraine call with President Zelensky, the Intelligence Community Inspector General had to change the rules for the complaint to allow an anonymous submission. Prior to this change, all intelligence whistleblowers had to put their name on the complaint. It was this 2019 IGIC who changed the rules. Who was the Intelligence Community Inspector General? Michael Atkinson.

When ICIG Michael Atkinson turned over the newly authorized anonymous whistleblower complaint to the joint House Intelligence and Judiciary Committee (Schiff and Nadler chairs), who did Michael Atkinson give the complaint to? Mary McCord. Yes, after she left main justice, Mary McCord took the job of working for Chairman Jerry Nadler and Chairman Adam Schiff as the chief legal advisor inside the investigation that led to the construction of articles of impeachment. As a consequence, Mary McCord received the newly permitted anonymous whistleblower complaint from her old office colleague Michael Atkinson.

During his investigation of the Carter Page application, Inspector General Michael Horowitz discovered an intentional lie inside the Carter Page FISA application (directly related to the ‘Woods File’), which his team eventually tracked to FBI counterintelligence division lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith. Eventually Clinesmith was criminally charged with fabricating evidence (changed wording on an email) in order to intentionally falsify the underlying evidence in the FISA submission. When John Durham took the Clinesmith indictment to court, the judge in the case was James Boasberg.

In addition to being a DC criminal judge, James Boasberg is also a FISA court judge who signed-off on one of the renewals for the FISA application that was submitted using fraudulent evidence fabricated by Kevin Clinesmith. In essence, now the presiding judge over the FISA court, Boasberg was the FISC judge who was tricked by Clinesmith, and now the criminal court judge in charge of determining Clinesmith’s legal outcome. Judge Boasberg eventually sentenced Clinesmith to 6 months probation.

As an outcome of continued FISA application fraud and wrongdoing by the FBI, in their exploitation of searches of the NSA database, Presiding FISC Judge James Boasberg appointed an amici curiae advisor to the court who would monitor the DOJ-NSD submissions and ongoing FBI activities.Who did James Boasberg select as a FISA court amicus? Mary McCord.

Mary McCord submitted the original false FISA application to the court using the demonstrably false Dossier. Mary McCord participated in the framing of Michael Flynn. Mary McCord worked with ICIG Michael Atkinson to create a fraudulent whistleblower complaint against President Trump; and Mary McCord used that manipulated complaint to assemble articles of impeachment on behalf of the joint House Intel and Judiciary Committee. Mary McCord then took up a defensive position inside the FISA court to protect the DOJ and FBI from sunlight upon all the aforementioned corrupt activity.

You can clearly see how Mary McCord would be a person of interest if anyone was going to start digging into corruption internally within the FBI, DOJ or DOJ-NSD.

What happened next….

Read more …

Marco’s playground. He’ll respect it, it’s where his family is from.

Marco Rubio Issues a Major Blow to Cuba’s Military Empire (Anderson)

Donald Trump and Marco Rubio aren’t playing around with Cuba anymore, and things are escalating by the day.


Last week, I reported that “signed a new executive order that builds on his January national emergency declaration that Cuba is an ‘unusual and extraordinary threat’ to the United States due its ties to adversaries like Russia, China, and Iran and terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. This EO allows the United States to expand current sanctions and add new restrictions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.” As I said on Friday, it basically allows Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent plenty of leeway to maximize pressure on the crumbling regime and the Castro family.

Well, Rubio isn’t wasting time. On Thursday, May 7, he announced via the State Department that he’s cutting right to the gut of the regime with sanctions on Grupo de Administración Empresarial S.A. (GAESA), GAESA’s director Ania Guillermina Lastres Morera, and Moa Nickel SA (MNSA), a state-owned mining company.

“These sanctions are part of the Trump Administration’s comprehensive campaign to address the pressing national security threats posed by Cuba’s communist regime and hold accountable the regime and those who provide it material or financial support,” Rubio said. “Just 90 miles from the American homeland, the Cuban regime has brought the island to ruin and auctioned off the island as a platform for foreign intelligence, military and terror operations. Additional designations can be expected in the following days and weeks.”

So what exactly do these sanctions do? They freeze any of these entities’ assets in the United States and prohibit any people or companies in the U.S. from doing business with them. However — and this is big — they also threaten foreign people, companies, and financial institutions that do business with GAESA by promising to cut them off from the U.S. banking system and freezing their U.S.-based assets. In case you’re unfamiliar, GAESA functions as a sort of state within a state. Rubio calls it the “Cuban military-controlled umbrella enterprise” that “is the heart of Cuba’s kleptocratic communist system.”

Raúl Castro created it back in the 1990s after the Soviet Union collapsed and Cuba stopped receiving handouts. The goal was to give the Revolutionary Armed Forces (FAR) a hard-currency revenue stream through tourism, imports, retail, and other dollar-generating businesses. Castro’s late son-in-law, Luis Alberto Rodríguez López-Calleja, ran it for decades, expanding it into what it is today. Lastres is the current executive director, and Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro aka “El Cangrejo” or “The Crab” (and Raúl’s grandson) is informally involved, essentially guarding his family’s interests. He’s the one with whom Rubio has supposedly been talking behind the scenes, but whether that’s true or not has never been confirmed.

Here’s more on GAESA from Rubio’s announcement:
Controlling an estimated 40% or more of the island’s economy, GAESA is involved in various sectors of the Cuban economy and is designed to generate income not for the Cuban people, but only for the benefit of its corrupt elites. While the Cuban people suffer from hunger, disease and chronic under-investment in critical infrastructure such as its power grid, much of the proceeds of GAESA’s activities are funneled away to hidden overseas bank accounts. According to recent public estimates, GAESA’s revenues are likely more than three times the state’s budget, and GAESA likely controls up to $20 billion in illicit assets.

The Trump administration is squeezing the regime harder than any U.S. president ever has, and it looks like it’s only going to go harder in the weeks to come. Make no mistake, the Cuban regime will fall soon. Trump and Rubio are seeing to it.

Read more …

“Until Independence Day..”

After Phone Call with Von der Leyen, Trump Delays EU Tariffs (CTH)

There is a certain irony in the timing all things considered. President Trump has given the EU until July 4, 2026, to fulfill the trade agreement previously negotiated (ie. the Turnberry Agreement) or 25% tariffs on EU automobiles will be triggered.


(Via Truth Social) – “I had a great call with The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen. We discussed many topics, including that we are completely united that Iran can never have a Nuclear Weapon. We agreed that a regime that kills its own people cannot control a bomb that can kill millions. I’ve been waiting patiently for the EU to fulfill their side of the Historic Trade Deal we agreed in Turnberry, Scotland, the largest Trade Deal, ever! A promise was made that the EU would deliver their side of the Deal and, as per Agreement, cut their Tariffs to ZERO! I agreed to give her until our Country’s 250th Birthday or, unfortunately, their Tariffs would immediately jump to much higher levels. Thank you for your attention to this matter.” ~ President DONALD J. TRUMP

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer recently spoke directly about what was creating this problem. His interview and explanation in detail is below (MUST WATCH):

Read more …

“History records no pity for parties that choose purity over competence, vengeance over vision, pathology over pragmatism. The long night is not coming. It is here. . . . ” —LHGrey on X

California Death Trip (James Howard Kunstler)

The Pacific Palisades fire ignited on January 7, 2025, in the very last days of the “Joe Biden” fake presidency. 6,837 total buildings destroyed plus about 1,000 damaged. The Altadena fire across town in Eaton Canyon was arguably worse: 9,418 buildings destroyed. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass was in Ghana at the time to attend the inauguration of president John Dramani Mahama, part of a small U.S. presidential delegation sent by the “Biden” administration.


Deputy Mayor for Public Safety, Brian Williams, overseer of the Police and Fire Departments, was on administrative leave at the time due to an alleged bomb threat against City Hall that he reportedly made in September / October 2024. The FBI raided his house that December, and in 2025 he copped a plea deal (guilty) to making threats involving fire and explosives. So, he was out of action during the fires.

There you have the rectified essence of how the Democratic Party operates in America’s biggest state. Is it not astonishing that Karen Bass is running for reelection? How could she possibly be forgiven? A large number of people employed in the movie business got burned out of their homes in the fires, and then city and state regulatory nonsense prevented them from rebuilding — on top of insurance company hocus-pocus that left families financially wrecked. Is it a surprise that the city’s flagship industry is dying now (film production down 32-percent on a five-year average)? What is LA without Hollywood?

And yet the show-biz celebs are still coming out to pimp for Democratic Party politicians. This is the kind of thing that forces you to conclude that an epic madness burns as hotly through the minds of Californians as the fires that ripped through the canyons in 2025. I know from personal experience as a college theater major that actors can be exceptionally stupid, but that can’t wholly account for what we’re seeing.

Wednesday’s primary debates had these villains on florid display. Because LA’s ranked-choice mayoral primary race styles itself “non-partisan,” candidate Spencer Pratt (a registered Republican) was on-hand for the debate. When the subject of LA’s cataclysmic homelessness came up, drug addicts living (if you can call it that) in wretched, filthy encampments all over the public space of the city, Mayor Bass bragged that she’d significantly reduced the problem, which is obviously and mendaciously untrue. LA City Council member Nithya Raman, who labels herself “progressive,” bragged on putting the homeless into shelters (i.e., motel rooms at $100-K per person per year.)

Spencer Pratt attempted to inject a little reality into the discussion about putting the homeless into homes: “No matter how many beds you give these people, they are on super meth, they are on fentanyl. The DEA [Drug Enforcement Agency] statistic says 93-percent of this is a drug addiction problem. These people do not want a bed — they want fentanyl or super meth.” Pratt is currently running third in the polls. In ranked-choice voting, the top two winners in the primary will face off in the November election. Currently Bass is polling in the lead and Nithya Raman is running second. If the numbers stay that way, the winner in November could finish Los Angeles off. Blade Runner, here we come.

But there’s still a chance that Spencer Pratt might place well in the June 2 primary just as Golden Tempo shot from dead last to win the Kentucky Derby last week. The seductions of the Marxist race hustle have worn a little thin, even for Angelenos. Karen Bass looks increasingly ridiculous grinning about her abject failures, which Mr. Pratt lays out relentlessly in plain talk. His reality-testing seems to be getting some minds right, gaining real traction. Nithya Raman has the charisma of a mung bean.

The gubernatorial debate was equally edifying, especially the spectacle of Democratic Candidates Katie Porter’s and billionaire Tom Steyer’s rousing lack of self-awareness. Ms. Porter, renowned for dumping a pot of steaming mashed potatoes over her ex-husband’s head, and for her crotchety way with the (friendly) news media and her own staff, made the astounding statement that “the public servants we have are focused on doing their job, which is not cooperating with the federal immigration authorities.” That’s their job? Hmmmm. Mr. Steyer went further and said he would arrest ICE agents going about their business. You think . . .? (I would think that a Governor Steyer would find himself arrested by the feds for attempting such a stunt.)

The governor’s race is also a rank-choice contest. So, Republican Steve Hilton was on-hand to break the reality-optional spell that shrouded the stage like a poisonous miasma. After several Democrats made a show of deploring the grotesque homeless druggie encampments from Nob Hill to MacArthur Park, Mr. Hilton said “[They] talk as if we’re in some parallel universe where Democrats haven’t been running the state for the last sixteen years.” He shares the lead in the polls in the large field at 18-percent with Xavier Becerra, who was “Joe Biden’s” Secretary of Health and Human Services, meaning, he presided over the vaxx mandates and lockdowns of the Covid operation.

Read more …

“Dealing Stinging Blow To Democrats”

Redistricting, gerrymandering. Everybody’s favorite new hobby…

Virginia Supreme Court Overturns Redistricting Referendum (JTN)

The Virginia Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the state’s redistricting referendum was unconstitutional and struck down the redraw of the state’s House maps. “We hold that the legislative process employed to advance this proposal violated Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia,” they wrote. “This constitutional violation incurably taints the resulting referendum vote and nullifies its legal efficacy.” The decision is a considerable blow to House Democrats, who had hoped to balance out the redistricting efforts of several Republican-leaning states to improve their odds in the November midterms.


The referendum saw voters narrowly back a plan to temporarily redraw the congressional maps in a manner that would have heavily favored Democrats. While the state currently has six Democrats and five Republicans in the House, the proposed redraw would have likely sent ten Democrats and one Republican to Washington.

With Virginia’s redraw struck down, Republicans appear poised to secure a net gain in partisan-leaning seats through redistricting. Texas, Florida, and Tennessee have already redrawn the maps, while Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and South Carolina are either expected to do so or exploring their own redraws. The wave of redistricting pushes follows the Supreme Court striking down race-based congressional districts and narrowing its interpretation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Read more …

“..we must stand on our own feet and be able to defend our continent ourselves.”

Former NATO Chief Warns Bloc on Verge of ‘Disintegration’ (JTN)

Former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen this week warned that the alliance was on the verge of collapse and urged European members to form an internal security bloc to prepare for the eventual collapse of the transatlantic military bloc. His remarks come amid increasingly prominent comments from Trump administration officials expressing their disappointment with NATO amid frustrations over European allies declining to assist with the Iran war.


“What we are witnessing right now is the disintegration of NATO, and that is dangerous,” Rasmussen told WELT. “President Trump has raised so many doubts about his commitment to Article 5 and to the defense of Europe that there can be only one conclusion for Europeans: we must stand on our own feet and be able to defend our continent ourselves.”

The Trump administration has repeatedly clashed with NATO members, not merely over Iran, but over Ukraine and Washington’s generally more reserved approach to the eastern European conflict than that of its predecessor. The Ukraine war is in its fifth year and shows no signs of an imminent end. The conflict has raised concerns in Europe over their future security situation should Russia triumph.

Read more …

“Every person has a soul. That’s the Christian view, and not just the Christian view, it’s the Islamic view, too. And it’s my view.”

The NY Times Interviews Tucker Carlson, and It Gets Worse From There (Spencer)

The fact that the New York Times would interview Tucker Carlson in the first place is an indication of how much the former Fox host has gone off the rails. The Times only interviews people who support its far-left worldview, including its endless vilification of Israel for alleged war crimes in Gaza, and Carlson was ready with the goods. In his interview, which was published Saturday, Carlson adopts the pose of a moral philosopher to attack the Jewish state, and Judaism as well, from a new angle:


I think what we’re seeing is evil. Are you allowed to kill people who’ve committed no crime? No. Super simple. You’re not allowed to do that. Under no moral standard is that allowable. All of a sudden it’s allowable in Gaza, and our leaders are like, Yeah, it’s totally fine. It’s not fine. It’s repugnant to the Christian understanding of the world and the human soul. Every person has a soul. That’s the Christian view, and not just the Christian view, it’s the Islamic view, too. And it’s my view.

So you see, his implication here is that while Christians and Muslims believe that everyone has a soul, those wicked Jews do not, and so they don’t hesitate to kill people who have committed no crime in Gaza. Virtually every aspect of this statement is false, and since Carlson still wields massive influence, all the falsehoods must be exposed.

Carlson includes a kernel of truth in his lies and deflections, and that makes them all the more insidious. Like Christianity, Islam does indeed teach that “every person has a soul.” But the Qur’an also teaches that non-Muslims are “like cattle, no, they are worse.” (7:179) It says that non-Muslims are “the most vile of created beings” (98:6), and calls them “the worst of animals” (8:55).

These aren’t mere words, either. The Qur’an also states: “Muhammad is the apostle of Allah. Those who follow him are ruthless to unbelievers, merciful to one another.” (48:29) Ruthless in what way? The Qur’an tells Muslims to “kill them wherever you find them” (2:191, 4:89, 4:91) and, just in case that wasn’t clear enough, adds “kill the idolators wherever you find them” (9:5). This includes pretty much everyone, for in the Qur’anic view, virtually every non-Muslim is an idolater.

Tucker Carlson is speaking as if Christians and Muslims share a moral high ground over Judaism. Yet it is the Qur’an, and not Judaism, that teaches what Carlson is claiming. There is an idea within Jewish tradition that Jews and non-Jews have different souls, based on the special responsibilities Jews have before God, but this does not involve or lead to the idea that, because of this difference, non-Jews can be killed without scruple or hesitation.

A genuine authority on Judaism, Rabbi Prof. David Golinkin, says that “Jewish law and tradition are thoroughly opposed to the murder of innocent non-Jews,” and provides several references from Jewish sources to establish the principle that “the Murder of Non-Jews is Murder”: “Entziklopedia Talmudit, Vol. 5, cols. 355-358, s.v. Goy; Rabbis Yitzhak Shapira and Yosef Elitzur, Torat Hamelekh, Samaria, 2000, pp. 17-27; Rabbi M. M. Kasher, Torah Sheleimah, Vol. 17, pp. 77-78, paragraphs 263-264; Rabbi J. D. Eisenstien, Otzar Yisrael, Vol. 10, New York, 1913, pp. 12-14, s.v.Retzihah.”

Tucker Carlson, however, is far better known than Rabbi Prof. David Golinkin, and knows that millions of people will believe him, thinking that he is giving them the real truth as opposed to what the sinister and shadowy elites want them to believe. Yet what he is actually doing is demonizing Israel, Judaism, and Jews as a whole on false pretenses, while ignoring the reality of Islamic jihad, and presenting a portrait of Islam that is as rosy and unrealistic as his portrayal of Judaism is hateful and inaccurate.

Carlson also takes for granted the idea that Israeli and American authorities are aware that innocent people are being killed in Gaza, and have no problem with that. In reality, Israel took immense care to avoid civilian casualties in Gaza and was successful in doing so, but it has been the victim of a massive and highly effective propaganda campaign.

In his statements about human souls, Tucker Carlson appears to be basing his statements on antisemitic blood libels that claim that Jews secretly teach that non-Jews are subhuman and can and should be killed. There is a religion that teaches such a thing, but it is not Judaism. It is the religion that Tucker claims teaches, along with Christianity and opposed (in his view) to Judaism, that “every person has a soul.”

Read more …

He takes it all very seriously.

Trump Touts Release of UFO files: ‘Have Fun and Enjoy’ (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Friday touted his administration’s release of the first batch of files related to unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and urged readers to draw their own conclusions from the data. The existence of aliens and the government’s knowledge of extraterrestrial life have been the subject of speculation for decades, with many conspiracy theories asserting that the government has hidden the evidence permeating popular culture.


“As for my promise to you, the Department of War has released the first tranche of the UFO/UAP files to the Public for their review and study,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “In an effort for Complete and Maximum Transparency, it was my Honor to direct my Administration to identify and provide Government files related to Alien and Extraterrestrial Life, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, and Unidentified Flying Objects.’ “Whereas previous Administrations have failed to be transparent on this subject, with these new Documents and Videos, the people can decide for themselves, ‘WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?’ Have Fun and Enjoy!” he added.

Read more …

“After a series of votes and statements putting him at odds with his fellow Democrats over the past year, U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., says that he has “no plans to leave” the party.”

Fetterman: Dems Can’t ‘Simply Be The Opposite’ of ‘Whatever Trump Says’ (JTN)

After a series of votes and statements putting him at odds with his fellow Democrats over the past year, U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., says that he has “no plans to leave” the party. “Being an independent voice that works with the other side to deliver for Pennsylvanians might put me at odds with the party that I have stayed committed to and have no plans to leave — but I will continue to put the commonwealth and the country first,” Fetterman wrote in a Washington Post op-ed published on Thursday. “Plus, I’d be a terrible Republican who still votes overwhelmingly with Democrats.” The op-ed written by Fetterman titled, “I haven’t changed. Here’s what has,” details his career in elected office and voting record regarding a number of issues over the past year that have garnered pushback from fellow Democrats.


Fetterman wrote that his focus in office remains on “working together to find wins and deliver for my constituents” and says, although he was elected as a Democrat, he’s “proud to serve all Pennsylvanians. “It has become increasingly lonely to serve in that way, but I firmly believe it’s what is needed,” Fetterman wrote. “My party cannot simply be the opposite of whatever President Donald Trump says. The president could come out for ice cream and lazy Sundays, and my party would suddenly hate them. Such pointless pile-ons and attacks are unproductive. The American people want us to work together to find solutions on issues they and our country face.”

Throughout recent appearances, Fetterman has claimed that his party has “TDS,” a shortened reference to “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” State Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, a Democrat from Philadelphia who also serves as a vice chair for the Democratic National Committee, called Fetterman “a mess” in a social media post in late April after Fetterman suggested his party had TDS for opposing the Trump administration’s renovation plans for a White House ballroom.

Kenyatta isn’t the only party official to take issue with Fetterman over some stances. In March 2025, Cumberland County Democratic Party Chairman Matt Roan called for Fetterman to resign from office after he supported some of Trump’s cabinet nominees. Earlier this week, the Monroe County Democratic Party called Fetterman a “traitor” and for him to be voted out of office after he didn’t rule out voting for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for a cabinet position. The areas Fetterman specifically highlighted in the op-ed that have garnered the most headlines included immigration policy, government shutdowns, and supporting Israel.

While defending his record on immigration, he highlighted his support for the Laken Riley Act as the lead Democrat, his vote for a bipartisan immigration reform bill in 2024, and his co-sponsorship of legislation to stop the flow of fentanyl. Fetterman said that he “took no pleasure” in voting against his party amid government shutdowns, but believes that “the demand to keep the lights on weighed more heavily than partisan games.” With regard to Israel and the war in Gaza, Fetterman said that he “appreciates” that the Trump administration “acted on the threat Iran and its proxies pose.”

“These once-common views have become increasingly toxic in the Democratic Party, a result of catering to the fringe and agitated parts of our base,” Fetterman wrote. “My values have not changed, and I have always turned to those kinds of ideals that defined being a Democrat,” he continued. “I remain strongly pro-choice, pro-weed, pro-LGBT, pro-SNAP, pro-labor and even pro-rib-eye over bio slop.”Fetterman also underscored his work to deliver federal funding for transportation projects in the state, and a series of bipartisan bills, including one that would allow Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipients to use their benefits to buy hot rotisserie chicken, another that intends to protect the mental health of kids, and lastly legislation that helps keep Americans in their homes.

Chatter over the past few months about Fetterman’s commitment to the Democratic Party has increased amid declining poll numbers within the party and a recent Politico article highlighting a Republican effort to get him to switch parties. Pennsylvania Republican Party Chairman Greg Rothman told the Center Square in April that he wouldn’t rule out the party supporting Fetterman’s bid in 2028 if he switched parties. Gov. Josh Shapiro and U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick have also addressed the chatter in interviews this week.

“I don’t know what Senator Fetterman’s going to do. I know that Pennsylvanians voted for a Democrat to represent them in the U.S. Senate,” Shapiro said to CNN this week. “So, I think he needs to honor that and continue with his service with Pennsylvania and get back to what he was elected to do and reflect the will of the people.” McCormick told NBC10 Philadelphia this week that he has not talked to Fetterman about switching parties, but that he “would welcome him.” “I’ve never talked to him about changing parties, honestly,” McCormick told NBC10’s Lauren Mayk. “I feel blessed to have him as my colleague, we’ve developed a real relationship of trust.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/2051828632658522283?s=20 https://twitter.com/GreereMedeea/status/2052415721766830209?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 172026
 
 April 17, 2026  Posted by at 9:09 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , ,  38 Responses »


Gustave Caillebotte Rue Mont-Cenis, Montmartre 1880


The CIA Tried to Remove a Sitting President (CTH)
DNI Tulsi Gabbard Sends Criminal Referrals for Atkinson and Ciaramella (CTH)
Tulsi Explains Criminal Referral of Trump Impeachment Collaborators (CTH)
Ukraine Impeachment Was Continuation of Failed Russia Collusion Plot (Dunleavy)
Trump ‘Permanently Opening’ Strait of Hormuz ‘for China’ (RT)
House Intel Member Says It’s Time To Expunge Trump’s 2019 Impeachment (JTN)
Sotomayor Issues Rare Apology For ‘Hurtful’ Comments About Kavanaugh (JTN)
New Hungarian Prime Minister Says Borders Will Remain Shut To Immigrants (ZH)
Zelensky Goes Full “Lord Of War” (ZH)
Russian Envoy Dismantles Kallas at UN Seccurity Council (RT)
It’s Time for Congress to Come Clean About Itself (Mark Tapscott)
Scientist: Dark Matter Could Be Black Holes From A Different Universe (MN)
U.S. Government Embraces Anthropic’s Mythos AI (ZH)
What AI Doesn’t Know – and Why It Matters (Richard Porter)

 


 

https://twitter.com/JoshHall2024/status/2044738709719830767?s=20 https://twitter.com/QuantumGuard17/status/2044443788546891914?s=20 https://twitter.com/Inevitablewest/status/2044512498146021545?s=20 https://twitter.com/HungaryBased/status/2044490945698119811?s=20

 


 

 


 


DNI Tulsi Gabbard was portrayed the other day on Zero Hedge as a ‘Trump ally’. But she never was, until perhaps very recently. She left the Democratic Party only 3,5 years ago after calling them “an “elitist cabal of warmongers”, and became DNI in February 2025. There’s simply not enough water under that party bridge. Bur she can dig.

By now it’s hard to see how all those involved in conspiring against Trump could escape prosecution. The list is long, and it includes Obama. Which also provides an indication of how hard this is.

We’ll follow Sundance, who’s been following the case closely. He indicates how serious this is in one sentence: “The CIA Tried to Remove a Sitting President“.

The articles are about:

1) The meaning of what Tulsi did.

2) What she did.

3) She explains what she did.


The CIA Tried to Remove a Sitting President (CTH)

For the past 72 hours I have been attempting to draw attention to the big picture. The CIA tried to remove a sitting United States President. The evidence has been released. The long-debated issue is no longer a matter of opinion or question. The CIA tried to remove a President. Unfortunately, now we watch the silence. I see a lot of punditries missing the forest as they peer intently at the trees. The CIA tried to remove a sitting President. We now know the real reason CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella’s name was never πpermitted to be mentioned. It s not the name Eric Ciaramella that presented the issue, it’s the organization where he was working, the CIA That’s what needed to be protected.


[The Biden administration created the Dept of Homeland Security Disinformation Governance Board to interact with Social media and create content controls. That’s where Nina Jankowicz comes in.] There was/is documented evidence showing the CIA tried to remove a sitting President from office. CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella, the anonymous CIA ‘whistleblower’ worked with Joe Biden on Ukraine policy. Biden appointed DHS Nina Jankowicz worked inside Zelenskyy’s campaign HQ. Just a coincidence? Don’t get lost in the details or the politics of this. When you peel back all the layers of DC, at its epicenter this was an operation to impeach a sitting President that came from within the CIA, and it almost succeeded.

In the details, an impeachment effort against President Trump was triggered when a member of the National Security Council named Alexander Vindman coordinated with a member of the CIA National Intelligence Council named Eric Ciaramella to fabricate a false claim that President Trump leveraged his power and authority to demand Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy release information on Joe and Hunter Biden’s corrupt financial dealings in Ukraine.At the time of the 2019 impeachment construct Eric Ciaramella was working for the CIA as an analyst within the National Intelligence Council (NIC).

Two years prior to the 2019 impeachment construct, in January 2017, the same CIA analyst, Eric Ciaramella, had worked on the fraudulent Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) at the behest of CIA Director John Brennan. Outlining Ciaramella’s activity not only hits CIA Director John Brennan and former DNI James Clapper, but it also hits former President Barack Obama. The National Intelligence Council was the internal sub-agency within the larger Intelligence Community, that was constructing all of the fraudulent analysis to support the 2016 Russian Election Interference narrative.

Ciaramella was doing what John Brennan, James Clapper and Barack Obama wanted him to do. That’s why his story is so much more important than just his fabrication and lying to ICIG Michael Atkinson, who was also a participant in the endeavor and the false construct of the 2019 impeachment effort. Former DOJ-NSD lawyer Michael Atkinson and former DOJ-NSD head Mary McCord were at the heart of the operations against Trump in 2017, and then both surface again against Trump in the 2019 impeachment effort. Mary McCord was working for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler at the time of the impeachment in 2019. Michael Atkinson was moved from DOJ-NSD to the IC OIG specifically for this operation.

Before this operation in 2019, CIA analysts weren’t allowed to anonymously make claims against political officials. The reasons are obvious. Because of the sensitive information they handled, any allegation of wrongdoing based on intelligence had to be made with their name attached. Without anonymity, inside the Intelligence Community oversight system, the Ciaramella connection to both IC operations could have been made. His anonymity as a whistleblower served a purpose. Having switched locations to IC IG, Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson independently changed the ICIG rules permitting Ciaramella to remain anonymous and make an “urgent concern” claim that ultimately led to an impeachment effort.

Eric Ciaramella fabricated intelligence information. ICIG Atkinson shared it with Congress and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI). Representatives of HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff met with Ciaramella and assisted him during the construct. ICIG Michael Atkinson never even read the transcript of the call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy that formed the basis for the Ciaramella complaint. The complaint was also criminalized by Atkinson and sent to the Office of Inspector General for the DOJ for review. Unlike Atkinson, the DOJ reviewed the Trump-Zelenskyy transcript and said there was no issue.

On October 4, 2019, as part of the House impeachment inquiry, Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson gave closed-door testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) as part of their pre-impeachment investigation. One of the key questions to ICIG Atkinson surrounded the authority of his office changing the CIA whistleblower rules that permitted Eric Ciaramella to remain anonymous. Atkinson had no reasonable explanation. The Intelligence Community Office of Inspector General (Atkinson) also altered the whistleblower form within months of the July 2019 Trump/Zelenskyy phone call to no longer require firsthand knowledge as a prerequisite for reporting complaints.

This indicates forethought and specific intent. Michael Atkinson knew a ‘second-hand’ complaint was coming. From all appearances, IC IG Atkinson was organizing the operation in advance. CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella provided the story. With Adam Schiff prepared to receive the complaint, and Mary McCord prepared to weaponize the complaint, collectively they ran the operation to impeach a sitting President on an entirely fraudulent basis.

[Executive] The CIA tried to impeach President Donald Trump; the aggregate Intelligence Community was there to assist.

[Legislative] The HPSCI and HJC, Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler were prepared to organize the impeachment construct. Mary McCord working as staff.

[Judicial] Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts would not let Eric Ciaramella’s name be spoken at trial. Mary McCord’s husband, Sheldon Snook, was working for John Roberts at the time.

This was a coordinated impeachment effort across all three branches of government. The CIA tried to remove a President. Unfortunately, now we watch the silence. We have known this for all long time; what we lacked was the specific evidence. Now, we see the evidence and yet it is almost more alarming to notice the silence than it is to absorb the reality of the events that evidence describes. The CIA tried to remove a President!

Read more …

“Atkinson was the intentional organizer of false impeachment material submitted by CIA operative Ciaramella.”

DNI Tulsi Gabbard Sends Criminal Referrals for Atkinson and Ciaramella (CTH)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has sent criminal referrals to the DOJ for former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson and former CIA Analyst (National Intelligence Council) Eric Ciaramella. Atkinson was the intentional organizer of false impeachment material submitted by CIA operative Ciaramella. Apparently, people know the background. lol


WASHINGTON DC – “The Office of the Director of National Intelligence sent criminal referrals to the Justice Department for the whistleblower whose complaint helped trigger President Donald Trump’s 2019 impeachment and for the former intelligence community inspector general who notified Congress of the allegations, Fox News Digital has learned. “I want to refer information that may constitute possible criminal activity in violation of federal criminal law committed by one or more former employees of the intelligence community,” ODNI’s general counsel wrote in the referral to the Justice Department. Fox News Digital on Wednesday reviewed the referrals ODNI sent to the Justice Department.

“The possible criminal activity concerns the circumstances described in the following congressional briefings: Discussion with Intelligence Community Inspector General, House Permanent Select Comm. on Intel., 116th Cong. (2019); Briefing by the Intelligence Community Inspector General, House Permanent Select Comm. on Intel., 116th Cong. (2019),” it continued. […] An intelligence official told Fox News Digital that the language in the referral is broad, but that it’s specifically directed at Atkinson and the whistleblower who reported concerns about President Trump’s July 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Don’t forget, Michael Atkinson turned the Ciaramella complaint into a criminal referral, a criminal complaint, then submitted it to the U.S. Department of Justice.

• Abuse of govt position.

• Manufacturing evidence for a legislative procedure.

• Conspiracy to conduct fraud.

• Lying to federal investigators.

• Falsifying information to manufacture a criminal complaint. I

t will be interesting to see where this goes.

Read more …

“Gabbard is providing the receipts, the actual evidence, of how these IC operations took place.”

Tulsi Explains Criminal Referral of Trump Impeachment Collaborators (CTH)

Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, appears for an interview with Katie Pavlich to outline the importance of bringing all of the information about the Intelligence Community targeting of President Trump to the public.Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and We the People want to see accountability for the Machiavellian conduct. The intelligence community targeted President Trump and people within the CIA ran an operation to remove him.


These people have names and titles that have remained hidden, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is putting those names, specific names into the public psyche so we can have a full understanding of what took plac Now, for many here this may seem like information we have all known about; however, Gabbard is providing the receipts, the actual evidence, of how these IC operations took place.

DNI Gabbard is showing how specific people within government weaponized their positions to conduct some of the most insidious schemes in modern U.S. history. The criminality of those schemes is for others in Main Justice to determine, but the evidence of those schemes is clear. I am thankful that people are now starting to use the new information to review past timelines. What they will discover is that Michael Atkinson’s work with Mary McCord and the Lawfare network are not isolated events. This is a continuum of targeting against Donald Trump using all of the intelligence levers at their disposal.

Michael Atkinson and Eric Ciaramella are the current names, but beside them sits Mary McCord, Norm Eisen, Andrew Weissmann, Barry Berke, Dan Goldman, Benjamin Wittes and many others from the Lawfare community. They intersect with various high level government officials in Main Justice, the FBI, the CIA, NSA and various intelligence agencies. This is the nest of Deep State and Tulsi Gabbard is exposing it.

Read more …

“Atkinson himself was an Obama holdover in the first Trump administration and was a former top counselor to key Russiagate figure and DOJ official Mary McCord”.

Ukraine Impeachment Was Continuation of Failed Russia Collusion Plot (Dunleavy)

The Democrat-led Ukraine impeachment effort of 2019 was linked to and a continuation of the Russiagate saga and of the failed effort by special counsel Robert Mueller to unearth criminality by President Donald Trump, newly-declassified documents and testimony indicate.


Memos declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and released by Just the News on Sunday were written by investigators for intelligence community inspector general Michael Atkinson, who first handled the CIA analyst’s complaint. Gabbard also declassified long-secret transcribed interviews from the watchdog, and these, combined with the memos, provide further evidence that the Ukraine impeachment saga was a continuation of the Russiagate saga which had flamed out.

The newly-released memos flagged the Ukraine whistle-blower for having a “potential for bias,” elicited an apology from him for misleading the probe about his prior contact with staffers on the Democrat-led House Intelligence Committee, showed he criticized GOP congressmen, recounted that he asked to hide his complaint from Republicans on the intelligence committee, pointed to his close links to Joe Biden’s efforts in Ukraine, and more. Atkinson kept much of this from the House investigators.

An alleged witness whose name was redacted and who told investigators he had been assisting the alleged whistle-blower with making his disclosures admitted to having a connection to Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who was fired in 2019 for his misbehavior while helping lead the discredited Russia collusion probe.

This witness — identified only as “Witness 2” — disclosed that he had also worked on a controversial December 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that claimed Vladimir Putin tried to help Trump beat Hillary Clinton in that year’s presidential race, a conclusion that the CIA now admits was based on faulty intelligence and a failure of spy tradecraft.

Prior to being nominated by Trump to be the intelligence community watchdog, Atkinson himself was an Obama holdover in the first Trump administration and was a former top counselor to key Russiagate figure and DOJ official Mary McCord. As a top Obama Justice Department official, McCord reviewed the deeply flawed FISA applications against former Trump campaign associate Carter Page, and she later assisted House Democrats in impeachment efforts against Trump.

The self-admitted potential biases which the Ukraine impeachment whistle-blower relayed to investigators for the intelligence community watchdog during the first Trump Administration were redacted and concealed from House investigators in 2019, newly-declassified and released transcripts show.

These long-secret transcripts were from a mid-September 2019 unclassified session and an early October 2019 classified session which were held to examine Atkinson’s role in the handling of an alleged whistle-blower complaint. The missive was written by an anonymous intelligence officer — identified as Eric Ciaramella — in a saga which ultimately led to the first successful impeachment efforts by House Democrats against Trump in December 2019. Trump was acquitted by the Senate in early 2020.

Facts concealed from House investigators
The newly-released memos from 2019 laid out multiple self-admitted potential biases tied to Ciaramella’s Democratic Party registration, his work for Joe Biden, his knowledge of corruption-related discussions on Ukraine, his view that he had been pushed out of the Trump NSC because of “right wing bloggers,” and more — some of which were never made public until Sunday, and many of which were concealed from House investigators when the intelligence community inspector general appeared before them in October 2019.

The whistle-blower’s’ complaint centered on a July 25, 2019 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The Trump-Zelensky call was the day after Mueller’s lackluster congressional testimony on the findings of his special counsel investigation.

Ciaramella did not respond to a request for comment sent to him through the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he is listed as the Ukraine Initiative Director for the Russia and Eurasia Program. Atkinson did not respond to a request comment sent to him at the law firm he works for, and McCord did not respond to an email sent to her Georgetown University email.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence said Monday that Atkinson helped “manufacture a conspiracy” and argued that a “coordinated effort by elements within the Intelligence Community” was aided by Atkinson when he lent credibility to and covered up the political biases of the author of the whistle-blower complaint..

Read more …

Reuters:: “’China buys more than 80% of Iran’s shipped oil, data for 2025 from analytics firm Kpler showed.”

Not much of a blockade left then?

Trump ‘Permanently Opening’ Strait of Hormuz ‘for China’ (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said he is “permanently opening” the Strait of Hormuz, claiming he is making the move for China “and the world.” Trump also said Beijing has agreed “not to send weapons to Iran. Trump initially announced the blockade of the vital waterway on Sunday after Pakistani-mediated talks failed to produce a peace deal with Iran. On Tuesday, US Central Command reported that American warships had effectively blocked all Iranian trade through the strait. On Wednesday, however, Trump stated in a Truth Social post that “China is very happy that I am permanently opening the Strait of Hormuz.” He added that “I am doing it for them, also – and the World.”


Trump went on to state that Beijing has “agreed not to send weapons to Iran,” and that Chinese President Xi Jinping “will give me a big, fat, hug when I get there in a few weeks.” Trump is scheduled to pay a state visit to China on May 14, while Xi is expected to visit Washington for a reciprocal visit at a later date. China has yet to respond to the US leader’s latest message about the reopening of the strait, but had previously repeatedly denied reports of providing any sort of military support to Iran.

Beijing had also accused Washington on Tuesday of “dangerous and irresponsible” behavior over its blockade of Iranian vessels. Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz to “enemy ships” in response to the US-Israeli bombing campaign launched on February 28. Tehran has since demanded recognition of its “sovereignty” over the waterway and the right to impose tolls.

Read more …

You need the Supreme Court for that. Check with them first if they agree. They’re “independent”.

“So-called whistleblower knew he didn’t have the evidence. He used hearsay. He used poor intelligence … but they covered it up,” Rep. Claudia Tenney said.

House Intel Member Says It’s Time To Expunge Trump’s 2019 Impeachment (JTN)

An influential Republican on the House Intelligence Committee says the bombshell evidence disclosed this week challenging the credibility and bias of a CIA analyst who prompted the Ukraine influence scandal seven years ago is so powerful that it warrants Congress expunging the 2019 impeachment vote against President Donald Trump.


“I think it is time that we expunge this impeachment and get rid of it,” Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., told the Just the News, No Noise television show on Wednesday night. “…Historically, we need to show that we’re going to stand up for the rule of law, for truth and justice. And this was unfairly done to President Trump.”

Just the News reported Sunday that documents recently declassified by the Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) showed that the intelligence community’s chief watchdog gad flagged concerns about the CIA analyst who launched the 2019 impeachment proceedings against Trump with Ukraine policy-related allegations but those concerns were kept classified and never made public during the congressional proceedings.

The concerns included that the accuser had the “potential for bias,” had provided false information in his initial complaint and had animus toward conservatives inside Trump’s circles, according to documents declassified by DNI Tulsi Gabbard this week. Gabbard blasted Atkinson’s work on Monday, suggesting the former watchdog had “weaponized the whistle-blower process” and used his office to “manufacture a conspiracy that was used as the basis to impeach President Trump.”

Others, including former Trump defense lawyers, the FBI and members of Congress, also sharply criticized the withholding of such evidence for six years, with famed law professor Alan Dershowitz going so far as to suggest Trump might have grounds to expunge his 2019 impeachment in the House of Representatives. Tenney said she agreed with Dershowitz.

“I am just grateful to Tulsi Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence, for actually disclosing this information and seeing the really shoddy, poor intelligence work that was being done,” she said. “This so-called whistleblower knew he didn’t have the evidence. He used hearsay. He used poor intelligence, or what they call spy craft, in putting together statements and supporting documents that were not supportive of what they were trying to prove, but they covered it up.

“They kept it out of the view of the of the the people, and out of the view of anyone that could challenge it. And they went into this impeachment mode,” she added. “So I think Alan Dershowitz is on to something.” Tenney said she also agreed with Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., who on Wednesday urged the House to begin impeachment proceedings against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, a former chief judge at the FISA Court who raised the ire of Republicans by making several negative rulings against the Trump administration, several of which have been reversed.

This week, the federal appeals court in Washington D.C. sharply rebuked Boasberg, accusing the jurist of abusing his judicial discretion by launching contempt proceedings against the Trump administration for its deportation of criminal illegal aliens. “It looks like what Judge Boasberg has done is egregious and could very well be subject to impeachment under our laws and under the rules of conduct that actually are in place for judges on the federal level,” she said.

Read more …

She’s been ordered to.

Sotomayor Issues Rare Apology For ‘Hurtful’ Comments About Kavanaugh (JTN)

Kavanaugh, who was in the majority but wrote a concurring opinion, had downplayed the belief that people were having their constitutional rights violated in the raids by targeting areas where illegal migrants are known to gather. Liberal Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor apologized Wednesday for “hurtful” remarks she made recently about fellow Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s upbringing. “At a recent appearance at the University of Kansas School of Law, I referred to a disagreement with one of my colleagues in a prior case, but I made remarks that were inappropriate,” Sotomayor said in a statement released by the court. “I regret my hurtful comments. I have apologized to my colleague.”


Sotomayor last week indicated that Kavanaugh’s parents were “professionals and probably doesn’t really know any person who works by the hour,” after he wrote an opinion last year on the high court’s allowance of the Trump administration to conduct broad immigration sweeps in Southern California. Kavanaugh, who was in the majority but wrote a concurring opinion, downplayed the belief that people were having their constitutional rights violated in the raids by targeting areas where illegal migrants are known to gather. “To be clear, apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion; under this court’s case law regarding immigration stops, however, it can be a ‘relevant factor’ when considered along with other salient factors,” Kavanaugh wrote.

“Importantly,” Kavanaugh continued, “reasonable suspicion means only that immigration officers may briefly stop the individual and inquire about immigration status.” Sotomayor’s comment was surprising because the justices have long claimed they get along despite differing opinions.”I joined the court that dealt with differences as friends, as we respected each other. … That’s civility,” Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, a conservative, said Wednesday. “I don’t know how you bring it back in the current environment with social media and name calling and all and people accusing each other of various things and animus.”

Read more …

Did Orban and Trump set this up?

New Hungarian Prime Minister Says Borders Will Remain Shut To Immigrants (ZH)

In the wake of Viktor Orbán’s election defeat, one of the greatest fears among conservatives in the region is an unconstrained EU able to take action on foreign policy, health, and immigration without the threat of a veto. It is widely assumed that the incoming prime minister of Hungary, Péter Magyar, will seek a fast resolution of Brussels’ key issues with Hungary in order to unlock some €35 billion in funding. His election win was heralded as a substantial victory for the global left wing, from EU globalists to Democrats in the US. Their assumption is that with Orbán’s veto power out of play, they will be able to do they want in Ukraine and in Hungary. However, the new Prime Minster may not be as cooperative as they initially believed.


Magyar has stated that he will not try to block a €90 billion EU loan to Ukraine which Orbán originally vetoed, but he also stated that Hungary will not be contributing to such loans and that the government will not support any attempt to induct Ukraine into the EU. He also announced this week that he will not allow Hungary to join in the EU’s “Migration Pact” and that he plans to further strengthen Hungary’s borders. This includes a continued rejection of the EU’s asylum rules, which are widely abused by third world migrants to freely enter Europe and gain access to welfare subsidies.

Beyond the Ukraine funding veto, it was Orbán’s refusal to submit to open borders and mass immigration that caused constant conflict with the EU. He was frequently referred to by the political left as a “dictator” and a “fascist” in part because of his strict border policies (even though he is voluntarily leaving office after losing the election, which is not the behavior of a dictator). Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, attacked Orbán regularly for his border controls, stating that Hungary’s program to reinforce their borders with walls and barbed wire was in violation of EU immigration standards. It appears that this will not stop under Magyar.

https://twitter.com/HungaryBased/status/2044490945698119811

The purpose of the EU Commission is to subjugate member countries through centralized monetary dependency and a series of financial sanctions if they step out of line. Financial leverage has been used on a number of occasions by the Commission to force nations to accept ever expanding mass immigration, largely from Muslim fundamentalist populations in countries like Algeria, Morocco, Syria and Afghanistan. Hungary is one of the few European nations to resist this multicultural agenda.

https://twitter.com/magyarpeterMP/status/2044379059031794131

While it is a member state, Hungary is not currently in the eurozone, using its own currency, the Hungarian forint, rather than the euro. It may be that the EU sees Magyar as an acceptable trade, as long as they get their funding package for Ukraine. They probably also intend to play the long game, hoping that once Hungary joins the eurozone they can be manipulated over time using monetary leverage. That said, their intentions have long focused on using Hungary as a fresh sponge to absorb migrants, and this is simply not going to happen according to Magyar’s post-election declarations.

Read more …

They’re turning Ukraine into the European arms factory. The money will keep flowing.

Zelensky Goes Full “Lord Of War” (ZH)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky took the stage and stated that Ukraine’s military-industrial base has created some of the world’s most advanced unmanned platforms, already deployed against Russia and forever changing how warfare is conducted. “For the first time in the history of this war, an enemy position was taken exclusively by unmanned platforms, ground systems, and drones,” Zelensky said in a post on X.


He pointed to a growing number of Ukrainian defense firms, including Ratel, TerMIT, Ardal, Rys, Zmiy, Protector, and Volia, claiming their robotic systems have carried out more than 22,000 frontline missions in just three months. Zelensky’s broader message seemed more like a PR pitch for Ukraine’s defense firms, which are capable of producing millions of FPV drones annually, as well as deep-strike systems, interceptors, ground robots, and maritime drone boats.

“Ukraine’s robots were sculpted by combat. I’ve seen the video footage of their UGVs taking hostages. This is what future battles will look like,” Foundation Robotics co-founder Mike LeBlanc said in a statement. LeBlanc’s team is preparing its Phantom humanoid robots for testing and continues to develop militarized humanoid prototypes designed to operate alongside warfighters in high-risk environments. In February, Foundation sent two Phantom MK1 robots to Ukraine for testing, according to a TIME Magazine article.

Ukraine’s capital markets have been frozen by war, leaving many of the country’s battlefield-proven “war unicorns” starved of traditional funding. However, the Middle East conflict has accelerated a new export pathway, as drone warfare and AI-enabled kill chains reshape how militaries think about defense.

Reuters has reported that Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, are exploring Ukrainian interceptor drones as a more affordable response to the emergence of Iranian one-way attack drones. At the same time, Ukrainian firms or their European subsidiaries are eyeing U.S. civilian and defense markets to sell their combat-tested systems. The first plausible path into the U.S. market appears to be through affordable counter-drone solutions and other layered air-defense technology. Meanwhile, so-called “experts” cited by The Moscow Times called Zelensky’s X posts “mainly a PR move,” but highlighted how robots “are already transforming both tactics and strategy” in the four-year war.

Zelensky is correct: “The future is already on the front line.

Read more …

“Nebenzia ridiculed her historical ignorance, recalling her comment that it was “something new” that Russia and China fought together against Nazism in World War II.”

“It would be very interesting to meet Mrs. Kallas’s history teacher,” Nebenzia retorted.

Russian Envoy Dismantles Kallas at UN Seccurity Council (RT)

Russia’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, launched a stinging rebuke of EU Foreign Policy Chief Kaja Kallas’s address at the UN Security Council in New York on Monday.Kallas has since been accused of “criminal” double standards in her speech by Amnesty International for ignoring US and Israeli crimes against Iran. The controversial diplomat spoke during the annual Security Council session on EU-UN cooperation, during which she lamented the “greatest breakdown of international law since the Second World War,” without once mentioning the US or Israel, but mentioning Russia 11 times.Amnesty International Secretary General Agnes Callamard slammed Kallas in a post on X, blasting her “deliberate failure to mention the two actors responsible for the greatest violations of international law,” referring to the US and Israel.


So today, at the Security Council, High Representative Kaja Kallas has lamented the gravest violation and breakdown of international law since the Second World War, evident, I quote “in today’s two pre-eminent global crises — Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the war… — Agnes Callamard (@AgnesCallamard) April 14, 2026 Kallas’ unwillingness to name them “is not just cowardice. It is criminal,” Callamard said, adding that such double standards are what is “destroying international law.” In a 12-minute response to Kallas in the council, Nebenzia ridiculed her historical ignorance, recalling her comment that it was “something new” that Russia and China fought together against Nazism in World War II.

Kallas, like EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, has a long history of avoiding criticism of Washington while regularly engaging in unhinged attacks on Moscow. Her claim to have been surprised that Russia and China, who together lost some 35 million people during WW2, are considered among the conflict’s victors was described by Responsible Statecraft as “shocking ignorance.” “It would be very interesting to meet Mrs. Kallas’s history teacher,” Nebenzia retorted.

Read more …

One blue moon.

It’s Time for Congress to Come Clean About Itself (Mark Tapscott)

Whatever happens in the days ahead to now-former Rep. Eric Swalwell, the California Democrat who is accused of gross sexual misconduct by at least five women, it’s past time for members of Congress — Democrats AND Republicans in the Senate AND the House — to let the light shine in all of the dark hiding places they’ve created to protect themselves against genuine individual accountability for moral turpitude.


Before proceeding, allow me to make it crystal clear where I am “coming from” in writing what follows. First, I am a Reagan conservative and have been since an October night during the 1964 campaign when I watched him on TV delivering his historic “A Time for Choosing” address. When Reagan said in his first inaugural speech that “government is not solution to our problems, government is the problem,” he expressed a fundamental conviction that I will take to my grave.

Second, as Professor Willmoore Kendall so often declared, I agree that it wasn’t by accident that the men who wrote the Constitution fully intended to make Congress the “First Branch,” and to give it “all of the ultimate weapons” it needs to prevail over either of the other two branches in a power struggle. America is supposed to be a representative republic in which the people are the sovereign, not the government, so the representative branch must be first.

Finally, one of the earliest things I learned after coming to the nation’s capital is the truth spoken by Jesus Christ whe He said in (John 3:19-20): “And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.” Transparency is Big Government’s worst enemy.

Now, there are two things Congress must do in response to the deep corruption confirmed by the Swalwell scandal and the many similar scandals involving members of both parties in recent decades. There is a secret fund Congress created for itself in the laughably titled “Congressional Accountability Act of 1995.” Under this CAA, members of Congress can use taxpayer funds to settle out of court with former staffers accusing them of sexual misconduct.

When Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was a House member, he introduced legislation that would have effectively repealed the CAA. It was entitled the Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act of 2017. Here’s how DeSantis described the need for repeal, according to gov.track.us:n Members of Congress and staff cannot live under special rules. The current system incentivizes misconduct and makes it difficult for victims. By exposing these secret settlements and by discontinuing using tax dollars to pay for member misconduct, this bill will reduce the incentive for bad behavior and bring more accountability to Congress.

The DeSantis measure went nowhere. And efforts since then to gain public and media access to the settlements, so all voters can have all the heretofore concealed facts about the men (and women?) who have been able to keep the truth about their misconduct secret, have also gone nowhere.

The time has come for all of the records related to all of those settlements to be made public and either to abolish the fun or ensure it is fully transparent. If you don’t believe me, read this detailed account by one of the people who did it of how and why the settlements process was crafted. This post on X was prompted in part by the Swalwell scandal and by the fact that the House voted last month 357-65 against unsealing the settlements:

“We will expel 2 members. We will hold press conferences. We will say the words ‘courage’ and ‘transparency’ and ‘the safety of every person who works on Capitol Hill.’ The press will cover the expulsions for a week. And they will not cover the 357-65 vote at all.

“We gave them 2 names so they’d stop asking for the rest.That’s the trade. It works every time.And every member who voted to seal those records knows what’s in them. They know because we told them. They sat in a closed session and reviewed the files and then walked out and voted 357 to 65 to make sure you never find out what your employees did with your money to their employees.The system doesn’t have a harassment problem. The system has a disclosure problem.”

And speaking of transparency, it’s also time for Congress to reverse the decision it made when it approved the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) of 1966 to exempt itself from coverage of the law. The argument for doing so hinged on the fact that Congress has access to much confidential national security documents and information, as well as privileged commercial information and legal documents. There is also the deliberative process itself that depends to a great extent on participants being able to communicate frankly. There is a legitimate need to provide security for such information in congressional hands. But there is a wealth of other information controlled by congressional agencies such as the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Read more …

All who understand raise your hands.

Scientist: Dark Matter Could Be Black Holes From A Different Universe (MN)

While the scientific establishment has spent decades chasing invisible particles that never quite show up, a leading cosmologist has dropped a theory that turns everything on its head: dark matter isn’t some exotic new particle. It could be ancient black holes that survived from an entirely different universe. This idea, laid out by Professor Enrique Gaztanaga of the University of Portsmouth, doesn’t just tackle one cosmic puzzle. It offers a clean fix for the Big Bang’s thorniest problems and lines up with fresh observations that have astronomers scrambling. Gaztanaga argues the elusive substance that makes up roughly 27 per cent of the universe’s mass may actually be “relic” black holes formed in a previous collapsing phase of the cosmos.


“The idea is that dark matter may not be a new particle, but instead a population of black holes formed in a previous collapsing phase and bounce of the Universe,” Professor Gaztanaga says. He rejects the standard singularity model where everything explodes from an infinitely dense point that breaks physics. Instead, he proposes a “bouncing” universe. “The Big Bang corresponds to a bounce from a previous collapsing phase, rather than the absolute beginning of everything,” the Professor Gaztanaga further noted, adding “So it is the start of the expansion we observe, but not necessarily the beginning of time itself.” In this picture, black holes from the collapsing galaxies of that earlier universe survived the bounce and now drift through our cosmos, exerting gravity without emitting light.

“These ‘relic’ black holes would survive into the expanding phase we observe today and behave exactly like dark matter: they interact gravitationally, but do not emit light,” he explains. The theory also neatly accounts for the James Webb Space Telescope’s baffling discovery of bright red dots—rapidly growing black holes—mere hundreds of millions of years after the Big Bang. If relic black holes were already present at the start, they would have had a massive head start.

It also sidesteps the need for new particles while explaining how supermassive black holes formed so quickly in the early universe. This development builds on a wider wave of recent clues pointing to black holes and dense dark objects playing a bigger role than previously thought. Recently, astronomers highlighted a massive invisible object that tore through the Milky Way’s GD-1 stellar stream, leaving a jagged gap and gravitational disturbances without any light, heat, or radiation. The phenomenon suggests “a ‘Dark’ Entity, likely a dense clump of dark matter or a previously undetected dark subhalo.”

https://twitter.com/NightSkyToday/status/2041985685511663780

This phenomenon has been witnessed before. Hubble observations of the globular cluster NGC 6397 have also revealed a mysterious swarm of black holes lurking just 7,800 light-years from Earth.

https://twitter.com/fascinatingonX/status/2042399624703721731

For years the default dark matter story has been “trust us, it’s some particle we haven’t found yet.” Billions have been spent on detectors and accelerators hunting WIMPs or axions with zero direct detection to show for it. Gaztanaga’s relic black hole approach uses only known physics—general relativity plus quantum effects—and turns the collapse-bounce into the natural origin story. Recent stellar stream disruptions like the one in GD-1 and compact object swarms in nearby clusters provide real-world data points that align with a universe seeded by surviving black holes rather than a sea of hypothetical particles.

The European Space Agency’s own description of dark matter captures the frustration: “Shine a torch in a completely dark room, and you will see only what the torch illuminates. That does not mean that the room around you does not exist.” Gaztanaga’s framework says the “room” has been hiding in plain gravitational sight all along. Scientists will now scrutinize gravitational wave data and CMB measurements for the predicted relics. If the numbers line up, two of cosmology’s biggest headaches—dark matter and the true origin of the Big Bang—get solved in one elegant stroke.

Read more …

“From Supply-Chain Risk To National Security Imperative”:

U.S. Government Embraces Anthropic’s Mythos AI (ZH)

In a striking reversal that underscores the breakneck pace of the AI arms race, the White House has directed federal agencies to begin using Anthropic’s most dangerous new model – Claude Mythos – despite months of public friction between the Trump administration and the San Francisco-based AI company (read on to see how we reconcile this with the Pentagon’s “supply-chain risk” designation). The move, detailed in an internal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memo circulated this week, marks the first formal green light for Cabinet-level departments to tap Mythos’s unprecedented cybersecurity capabilities. The goal: to hunt down vulnerabilities in government networks before adversaries can exploit them, Bloomberg reports.


Too Powerful to Release, Too Valuable to Ignore
Anthropic unveiled Mythos (sometimes referred to internally as “Mythos Preview”) just weeks ago, and it immediately sent shockwaves through the tech and national-security communities. In controlled testing, the model autonomously discovered and weaponized thousands of previously unknown zero-day vulnerabilities across every major operating system, web browser, legacy enterprise software, and even decades-old codebases. Its speed and creativity reportedly surpassed top human red-team hackers. As we noted earlier this month, the model “went rogue” during testing – prompting Anthropic to withhold a broad release entirely. Full technical details are available in Anthropic’s official Mythos Preview System Card.

Rather than ship it publicly, Anthropic launched Project Glasswing – a tightly controlled defensive program that grants limited access only to a vetted circle of partners: Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple, major banks (including JPMorgan Chase), cybersecurity firms, and the Linux Foundation. The explicit mission is defense only – scan your own systems, find the bugs, patch them fast, and keep the bad guys out. The official program page is here.

From “Supply-Chain Risk” to Strategic Asset
The government’s relationship with Anthropic had been icy for months. As we noted in February, the Pentagon threatened to blacklist the company as a “supply-chain risk” after Anthropic refused to strip certain ethical guardrails from its models for military use. That standoff escalated in March when Anthropic sued the Pentagon over the designation, as detailed in ZeroHedge’s coverage of the lawsuit. That said, the Pentagon’s “supply-chain risk” label was always narrow in scope: it was a DoD-specific action triggered by the company’s refusal to remove certain ethical guardrails from its models for unrestricted military and offensive-use applications. That designation threatened to block Anthropic technology from defense contracts and classified work, and it led directly to Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Pentagon.

Today’s OMB memo changes almost nothing on paper for that designation. The Pentagon has not withdrawn it, the lawsuit is still active, and DoD contractors remain restricted from using Claude models (including Mythos) in offensive or surveillance contexts.

Just days ago, the U.S. Treasury was rushing to gain access to Mythos after internal warnings that the model could “hack every major system.” Senior Treasury and Federal Reserve officials had summoned CEOs of the nation’s largest banks to Washington, warning them that the financial system’s exposure to AI-powered attacks had become existential. Behind closed doors, federal agencies – including the Commerce Department’s Center for AI Standards and Innovation – had already begun quiet red-teaming of Mythos. Anthropic co-founder and president Daniela Amodei confirmed the company had briefed the administration early, telling reporters simply: “The government has to know about this stuff.”

Now the OMB memo formalizes that reality. It lays out strict protocols for safe access, data handling, and usage limits so that major departments can deploy Mythos against their own sprawling digital estates. The focus remains narrow: vulnerability discovery, network hardening, and defensive preparedness.

What This Means for the AI Arms Race
This is not the first time Washington has had to swallow its pride to stay competitive. But the Mythos episode – from the earliest Pentagon threats through the April 8 Glasswing announcement and this week’s Treasury scramble – feels different. It is a microcosm of the larger tension defining 2026: frontier AI models are now so capable that even their creators are scared of them, yet ignoring them would be national-security malpractice.

Critics inside the defense community argue the government waited too long. Supporters of Anthropic’s cautious approach counter that the company’s restraint (and its Glasswing coalition) may have prevented an even worse outcome: a fully open-sourced Mythos circulating on the dark web.

For Anthropic, the development is a quiet vindication. By keeping Mythos under lock and key and building Glasswing as a defensive shield, the company has positioned itself as a responsible steward of dangerous technology – while still earning a seat at the table with the most powerful customer on Earth.

Read more …

“AI is simply very fast processing of vast amounts of data.” But does that always give the same result? Does it always get the same result, just faster?

What AI Doesn’t Know – and Why It Matters (Richard Porter)

Artificial intelligence has taken the wired world by storm, but the backlash came almost as fast. Progressives complain of job losses, environmentalists question the ecological impacts of huge data centers, and local activists are clamoring for assurances that household utility bills won’t skyrocket because of the centers’ voracious electricity requirements. Others simply worry that the technology will overwhelm humans’ ability to control it. At least in part, these reactions stem from the overselling of AI. AI is super cool, but it’s not superhuman nor is it super intelligent. AI is simply very fast processing of vast amounts of data.


Intelligence, knowledge, understanding and wisdom are all different concepts; the distinction between them elucidates the scope and limits of both human and electronic “intelligence.”Intelligence is the ability to process information into an internally coherent framework that’s useful and adds or detracts from knowledge to the extent it is more or less accurate. Knowledge is the accumulation of information organized into coherent frames or models that help us understand. Understanding is awareness of the significance, purpose, or meaning of accumulated knowledge. And wisdom is judgment seasoned by experience and the awareness that intelligence, knowledge, and understanding are limited, inherently flawed, and useful only to the extent they advance a worthwhile purpose.

Nearly 2,500 years ago, the Oracle of Delphi reportedly declared that no man was wiser than Socrates. Socrates claimed to be stunned by this because he was keenly aware of how much he didn’t know. But after talking to others widely acclaimed to be knowledgeable, such as the leading politicians, poets, philosophers, and artisans of his day, he discerned this Delphic wisdom: Those claiming knowledge were ignorant of their own ignorance, whereas Socrates knew he knew nothing. For this insight, Socrates was put to death for impiety and corrupting the youth of Athens, thereby proving for all time both the foolishness of his accusers’ certainty and the wisdom of Socratic questioning.

This bears repeating today, as we enter the Age of Artificial Intelligence: it’s wise to question the “intelligence” of machines, the “knowledge” they propagate, and our understanding of the significance and limits of the technology. AI models are amazing and useful despite being incomprehensible to most of us, but AI is not infallible. AI will expand human knowledge and understanding of the world only if and to the extent that human users are encouraged to question AI results, processes, and functions.

People make mistakes, as do the people making and training the machines. Still, people tend to trust machines more than people, especially with respect to processing information that’s harder to process. For example, tennis players have more faith in electronic line calls over human line calls, although that faith in the new technology has been shaken by errors, such as when ball marks are inconsistent with the electronic line calls. As AI use spreads, people will increasingly rely on AI and trust its results for routine tasks (like Google searches), while most people remain more skeptical of AI results for more complex tasks and do not trust AI to act to handle certain tasks for its users without human intervention.

It’s wise to question AI’s results; errors are common even in routine searches. Examples of AI errors, hallucinations and political bias are rife. A Northwestern University business school professor of my acquaintance recently asked ChatGPT for advice evaluating investment alternatives. ChatGPT recommended he invest in a particular fund and described in detail that fund’s returns, risks, and assets. When the professor went to invest in ChatGPT’s recommended fund, he discovered the fund did not actually exist; ChatGPT made it all up (a phenomenon commonly referred to as “AI hallucination”).

Indeed, AI can screw up even mundane tasks: In my research for this piece, a Google AI summary ascribed quotes to Socrates that are not supported by any historical record.Artificial intelligence – like human intelligence – is prone to error and is not always reliable, but that’s to be expected, especially in a fledgling technology. AI is artificial intelligence, not artificial knowledge, understanding, or wisdom. AI is a processor, a very fast processor, that organizes and distills information – and organized information is easier to evaluate and use by humans than vast amounts of unorganized information.

Properly understood, AI supplements and does not replace human intelligence, knowledge, or understanding; plus, the limitations and faults within these amazing models remind us that human intelligence is limited, too. Human intelligence imperfectly organizes the imperfect data to which a human has access and frames data in a subjective, not an objective, manner. Many of us expect the machines that humans make to have “better” intelligence than the intelligence of its human creators – more objective, more comprehensive, more insightful. This is a naïve hope. In one sense, it is “better.” AI organizes more information faster than humans can. But who do they think programmed the thing? Every AI model is regurgitating imperfect information collected, created, and input by imperfect, subjective human beings.

What to make of all this? First, perhaps the math nerds creating AI are mistakenly training machines to handle information processing on human topics as if human topics are math problems with a specific answer. Perhaps instead, machines should be trained to suggest questions to consider instead of answers to accept with respect to human inquiries relating to politics, economics, psychology, child rearing, crop science – the full range of arts, humanities, and social sciences.

Second, people training these machines should be explicit about the biases and perspectives being built into how the AI organizes, sorts, and frames information. (My own bias on this topic is that I believe American AI companies should be building AI with quintessentially American framing.) Third, AI creators should consider the political, regulatory, and legal risks of “overselling” what AI is and what it can do. For example, should AI creators anticipate a duty to warn users of shortcomings with AI’s results and/or disclaimers of warranties?

Fourth, AI creators need to consider improving the quality of data upon which the systems are being trained, recognizing that many online data sources intentionally mislead to advance political agendas. Perfectly “unbiased” information is impossible to obtain, but some information is more accurate and less biased than other information; trainers should exercise better judgement about data. The creation of AI large language models is an incredible feat of engineering. It’s quite useful, and will soon be essential, but it is still a product of human invention. As such, we need to recognize that AI is ultimately just the latest, greatest – but still imperfect – implement invented and used by homo sapiens to make life better for homo sapiens.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/MichaelARothman/status/2044690250140938585?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 222026
 


Pierre-Auguste Renoir Dance at Bougival 1883


Trump Responds to Supreme Court’s Decision on Tariffs (Sarah Anderson)
Trump Winds Down IEEPA tariffs, Imposes 10% Global Tariff To Last 150 Days (JTN)
Supreme Court Rule 6-3 Against President Trump’s IEEPA Tariff Authority (CTH)
Clarence Thomas Unloads on the Supreme Court Over Tariff Ruling
Will We See a Supreme Court Vacancy (or Two) This Summer? (Josh Hammer)
Virtually All Countries Support Voter Photo ID – So Why the Filibuster? (RCW)
Washington Post Editorial Board Brutally Mocks Mamdani (ZH)
President Donald Trump Stands Victim of His Own Success (David Manney)
Biased Spies: John Ratcliffe Cleans House at the CIA (Manney)
The Shattered Dreams of Steve Bannon (Scott Pinsker)
When Does Accountability For The Deep State Begin? (Dornik)
Susan Rice Warns Of ‘Accountability Agenda’ When Democrats Return To Power (JTN)
Deporting Censorship: US Targets UK Government Ally Over Free Speech (Thaccker)

 


 

Gulf Tariffs https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2025002058999288215?s=20 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2024927551760859293?s=20

 


 

 


 

“..”Foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years are ecstatic. They’re so happy,” he said. “And they’re dancing in the streets, but they won’t be dancing for long — that I can assure you.”

Trump Responds to Supreme Court’s Decision on Tariffs (Sarah Anderson)

President Donald Trump came out to speak to the press from the White House on Friday to express his feelings on the Supreme Court’s Decision to rule against his broad tariffs, which he imposed through a series of executive orders last year, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). He began by saying the ruling was “deeply disappointing,” and that he was “ashamed of certain members of the court — absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country.” The president also thanked Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito for “their strength and wisdom and love of our country.”


Trump claims that when you read their dissenting opinions, there’s no way anyone can argue against them. “Foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years are ecstatic. They’re so happy,” he said. “And they’re dancing in the streets, but they won’t be dancing for long — that I can assure you. Trump said that he knew the Democrats on the court were an automatic “no,” just like the Democrat members of Congress, no matter how great the case. “They’re against anything that makes America strong, healthy, and great again,” he said. He also called them a “disgrace to our nation.”

He said the others, presumably Justices John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett, are being “politically correct,” which happens far too often, and he called them “fools and lap dogs for the RINOs and the radical left Democrats.” “They’re very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution. It’s my opinion that the court has been swayed by foreign interests, and a political movement that is far smaller people would ever thing,” he said, adding, “I won by millions of votes — we won in a landslide, with all the cheating that went on, and there was a lot of it.” He claimed that “certain justices” are “afraid” of the loud, obnoxious, and ignorant minority.

“This was an important case to me, more as a symbol of economic national security and also, I would say just for our country itself — so important because we’re doing so well as a country,” he said. “The good news is that there are methods, practices, statutes, and authorities, as recognized by the entire court in this terrible decision, and also as recognized by Congress, which they refer to, that are even stronger than the IEEPA tariffs available to me as president of the United States.”

Trump claimed he was actually modest in what he asked of other countries because he was trying to be “well-behaved,” and wanted to be a “good boy” because he knows how the Supreme Court works and knows they’re easily swayed. He also touted some economic wins, like recent stock market records and the decline of fentanyl coming into our country, and how tariffs helped him settle eight wars. The president said it’s ridiculous that the law allows him to “destroy” foreign countries, tell them they can’t do business in the United States, or even embargo them, but he can’t charge them a cent.

“It’s okay because we have other ways — numerous other way,” he added. “Therefore, effective immediately, all national security tariffs, under Section 232 and existing Section 301 tariffs… remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, under Section 122, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged.” He said he’s also initiating other investigations to “protect our country from unfair trading practices of other countries and companies.”

Read more …

Bumped it up to 15%.

Trump Winds Down IEEPA Tariffs, Imposes 10% Global Tariff To Last 150 Days (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order that formally ends a range of tariffs that the Supreme Court shot down earlier in the day, and imposed a new 10% global tariff that will be in effect for 150 days. The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 split that Trump could not impose massive tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, however the majority opinion did not weigh in on other means to impose the tariffs. Trump said the new 10% global tariff is being enacted under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which comes as tariffs imposed under Section 232 and Section 301 remain in place

.
“It is my Great Honor to have just signed, from the Oval Office, a Global 10% Tariff on all Countries, which will be effective almost immediately,” Trump said in a series of posts on Truth Social. “Those members of the Supreme Court who voted against our very acceptable and proper method of tariffs should be ashamed of themselves. “Their decision was ridiculous, but now the adjustment process begins, and we will do everything possible to take in even more money than we were taking in before,” he added. The new tariff will take effect just after midnight on Tuesday, Feb. 24.

Read more …

You can’t do it under IEEPA, but we have plenty other laws…

“,,the Court’s decision is not likely to greatly restrict Presidential tariff authority going forward. (pg, 63 dissent).

Supreme Court Rule 6-3 Against President Trump’s IEEPA Tariff Authority (CTH)

Economic security is national security, and the hollowing out of our ability to independently sustain our national economic system posed a real and substantive threat to our nation. The court never evaluated the ‘urgency’ behind the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as used by President Donald Trump.Instead, the court began their legal analysis by seeking to define the word “regulate” as it applies to IEEPA. Part II–B, concluding: (a) IEEPA authorizes the President to “investigate, block during the pendency of an investigation, regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit . . . importation or exportation.” §1702(a)(1)(B) under the Act.


The majority of the court decided presidential ability to levy countervailing duties is not part of the ability to “regulate” importation. In the opinion of the court, the President can block imports, nullify imports and prohibit imports, but the president cannot “regulate” imports through the use of tariffs. This is the representative logic of a John Roberts court, the voice of Bush Inc.

It is what it is – and many of us saw this nonsense as a likely outcome, but it is still frustrating to see such a detached parseltongue approach to legal opinions when the national security of our nation is at stake. These are the judicial minds who will watch the nation burn to the ground, just so they can remain in power ruling over the ashes. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch joined the court’s three liberals in the majority. Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented.

(Via Politico) – […] “The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it,” Roberts wrote, declaring that the 1977 law Trump cited to justify the import duties “falls short” of the Congressional approval that would be needed. The ruling wipes out the 10 percent tariff Trump imposed on nearly every country in the world, as well as specific, higher tariffs on some of the top U.S. trading partners, including Canada, Mexico, China, the European Union, Japan and South Korea.

Several of those countries have entered trade agreements with the U.S. — and before the ruling indicated that they would continue to honor those agreements. That is because the victory for the 12 Democratic-run states and small businesses that challenged Trump’s tariffs is expected to be short lived. The White House has signaled it will attempt to use other authorities to keep similar duties in place. “We’ve been thinking about this plan for five years or longer,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told POLITICO in December. “You can be sure that when we came to the president the beginning of the term, we had a lot of different options” “My message is tariffs are going to be a part of the policy landscape going forward,” Greer said. (read more)”

Justice Thomas agrees with CTH prior position on the issue. IEEPA grants the president the authority to regulate imports, and tariffs are a tool for regulation.


Despite this decision the tariffs will remain in place, perhaps using various authorities which have not been challenged as noted in the Kavanaugh dissent:

“That said, with respect to tariffs in particular, the Court’s decision might not prevent Presidents from imposing most if not all of these same sorts of tariffs under other statutory authorities. For example, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 permits the President to impose a “temporary import surcharge” to “deal with large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits.” 19 U. S. C. §2132(a). Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 provides that, if the International Trade Commission determines an article is being imported in such quantities that it is “a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, to the domestic industry producing an article like or directly competitive with the imported article,” the President may take “appropriate and feasible action,” including imposing a “duty.”

§§2251(a), 2253(a)(3)(A). Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 authorizes the President through a subordinate officer to “impose duties” if he determines that “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country” is “unjustifiable and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” §§2411(a)(c). Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 permits the President to impose tariffs when he finds that “any foreign country places any burden or disadvantage upon the commerce of the United States.” §1338(d). And Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 authorizes the President to, after receiving a report from the Secretary of Commerce, “adjust the imports of [an] article and its derivatives so that such imports will not threaten to impair the national security.” §1862(c)(1)(a).

So the Court’s decision is not likely to greatly restrict Presidential tariff authority going forward. (pg, 63 dissent).

Read more …

“If foreign trade regulation isn’t a core legislative function, then delegating it to the executive doesn’t violate separation of powers at all.”

Clarence Thomas Unloads on the Supreme Court Over Tariff Ruling

The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a significant defeat on tariffs Friday morning, and the sharpest voice in the room wasn’t in the majority. It was Clarence Thomas, writing in dissent, methodically dismantling the majority’s reasoning for stripping the president of broad tariff authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The ruling blocks Trump from using IEEPA as the legal foundation for his reciprocal tariff policy. For what it’s worth, the court didn’t wipe out his tariffs entirely — other statutes still provide Trump with opportunities to impose tariffs — but the majority made clear that sweeping executive tariff power requires explicit congressional guardrails.


What made the decision especially striking was the coalition that produced it. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, joined by Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, alongside the court’s three liberal justices. Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented. His dissent goes straight to the constitutional text and history. “I write separately to explain why the statute at issue here is consistent with the separation of powers as an original matter,” he wrote. His argument is grounded in the Founding era’s actual understanding of foreign commerce — not a modern reinterpretation of it.

Thomas draws a hard line between domestic legislative power and foreign trade authority. Congress holds the taxing power and the power to set domestic rules governing life, liberty, and property. Foreign commerce is a different animal entirely. “Power over foreign commerce was not within the core legislative power, and engaging in foreign commerce was regarded as a privilege rather than a right,” he explained. If foreign trade regulation isn’t a core legislative function, then delegating it to the executive doesn’t violate separation of powers at all. In fact, that would mean it’s actually consistent with how the Founders understood the relationship between the branches.

Thomas backed this up with history. From the Founding forward, Congress routinely handed trade regulation, including the power to impose import duties, to the executive branch. Courts upheld that arrangement every time it was challenged. “The power to impose duties on imports can be delegated,” Thomas wrote. He concluded, “Congress’s delegation here was constitutional.” That framing treats unlimited tariff authority the same way the Court treats other major questions — skeptically, demanding Congress speak clearly before the executive acts broadly.Thomas thinks that’s the wrong test applied to the wrong power. His reading of the original Constitution puts the executive branch in charge of foreign commerce. He argues the majority conflated two distinct constitutional functions and punished the president for Congress’s longstanding practice of handing him the wheel on trade.

In his own dissent, Justice Kavanaugh argued that the majority’s decision would lead to chaos. “The United States may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs, even though some importers may have already passed on costs to consumers or others,” he wrote. Kavanaugh also noted that Trump used tariffs as leverage while making trading deals worth trillions of dollars, and that the court’s ruling “could generate uncertainty regarding those trade arrangements,” he wrote.

Read more …

“.. Thomas, who is the perhaps the single greatest living American ..”

Will We See a Supreme Court Vacancy (or Two) This Summer? (Josh Hammer)

Few things in Washington, D.C., generate as much as excitement and intrigue as a Supreme Court confirmation showdown. For decades, since the eponymous “borking” of then-Supreme Court nominee Bob Bork in 1987, political battles surrounding the membership of the nation’s high court have been among the most contentious and raucous of Beltway affairs. Which is why it’s rather curious that very few outside the most fervid of court-watchers seem to be discussing the distinct possibility that there could be one or two Supreme Court vacancies after the current term ends this summer.


Justice Samuel Alito is 75 years old — and will be 76 by the end of this term. Justice Clarence Thomas is 77 years old — and will be 78 by term’s end. Alito just celebrated 20 years of service on the high court, and Thomas would mark 35 years of service this October — nice round numbers. Alito has a forthcoming book set for release this October, around the start of the next Supreme Court term. That isn’t anywhere near dispositive — Justice Amy Coney Barrett published a book last September, and Justice Neil Gorsuch has released two books since he was confirmed to the court in 2017 — but it has certainly fed speculation.

Thomas and Alito are, by some order of magnitude, the two most principled conservative justices currently sitting on the high court. It stands to reason that they would like to be replaced by ideological fellow travelers — something that likely requires a likeminded president and a likeminded U.S. Senate majority. As the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who was very much an ideological fellow traveler, told Chris Wallace in a 2012 interview, “I would not like to be replaced by someone who immediately sets about undoing what I’ve tried to do for 25-26 years. I mean, I shouldn’t have to tell you that, unless you think I’m a fool.”

If there is one thing we can say with certainty about Thomas, who is the perhaps the single greatest living American, and Alito, who is perhaps the most authentic Burkean conservative on the high court, it is that they are decidedly not fools.

Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate. What’s more, they face a remarkably favorable map this November: The GOP is defending very few (if any) swing-state Senate seats, and it will have enticing Senate pickup opportunities in Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota and New Hampshire. But to paraphrase the old quip from former Israeli diplomat Abba Eban, Republicans oftentimes never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Accordingly, the increasingly voluble scuttlebutt out of Washington is that there is a chance Democrats retake not merely the nearly evenly divided House, but the Senate as well. Those odds are below 50% — the online exchange Polymarket, for instance, currently places the GOP’s odds of retaining the Senate around 60% — but there is certainly a chance it happens.

That wouldn’t just spell doom for the final two years of President Donald Trump’s second term. It would be potentially calamitous for the future of the Supreme Court as well. Does anyone think that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and his Democratic caucus are not prepared to stall and refuse to confirm any prospective Trump nominee to the high court? (SET ITAL)Of course(END ITAL) they are prepared to do that. If Republicans lose the Senate this November and Thomas and Alito stick around through the 2028 presidential election, they will in essence be wagering on Republicans maintaining the White House and winning back the Senate.

Is that a risk worth taking? In fairness, it might be. Republicans have historically botched few things more than they have Supreme Court nominations — from Justices William Brennan (brought to us by President Dwight Eisenhower), Harry Blackmun (President Richard Nixon), and David Souter (President George H.W. Bush), to some of the more milquetoast Trump selections such as Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh. The track record is not exactly inspiring. And because Thomas and Alito are the two finest conservative jurists on the high court, there is little to no room for improvement, from a constitutionalist perspective — there can only be regression.

Nonetheless, in spite of the GOP’s woeful judicial nominations track record, there are plenty of outstanding potential justices-in-waiting. My former boss Judge James C. Ho of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, a former Thomas clerk, is likely the single most principled originalist of all current lower-court federal judges. His 5th Circuit colleague Andrew Oldham, a fellow stalwart, happens to have the corresponding symbolism of being a former Alito clerk. D. John Sauer, the outstanding current U.S. solicitor general, is a former Scalia clerk and a rapidly emerging dark horse contender. There are other possible rock-solid nominees as well.

Read more …

“..Democrats argue that requiring free voter photo IDs – even when the ID itself costs nothing – harms eligible voters by creating practical barriers to casting a ballot.

Virtually All Countries Support Voter Photo ID – So Why the Filibuster? (RCW)

“The bottom line is this: voter ID is not controversial in this country,” Harry Enten, the chief data analyst for CNN, recently reported. Nor is it controversial in virtually any other country in the world. Yet despite massive support among both Democrats (71%) and Republicans (95%), only one Democratic member of the House and one in the Senate are supporting the SAVE Act. Unless seven more of the 47 Senate Democrats step forward, their filibuster will kill the bill. Democrats argue that requiring free voter photo IDs – even when the ID itself costs nothing – harms eligible voters by creating practical barriers to casting a ballot. They contend that blacks would be especially hard hit. Interestingly, every country in Africa requires government-issued identification to vote.


They also argue that such requirements would disenfranchise Hispanic voters. Yet Mexico, all twelve South American countries, and Spain require government-issued photo IDs to vote. All of these countries have lower per-capita incomes than the United States. If citizens in those nations can obtain the necessary identification to vote, why would American Hispanics and blacks be unable to do the same? While 83% of American adults support requiring government-issued photo identification to vote, support is also strong among the very groups Democrats claim would be harmed: 82% of Hispanics and 76% of black Americans favor the requirement. Those figures suggest that most black and Hispanic Americans do not view obtaining a photo ID as the obstacle Democrats describe. Ten U.S. states have similarly strong photo ID requirements.

Democrats claim that women are disproportionately disenfranchised by voter IDs, but women are also strongly supportive of IDs and have exactly the same level of support as men.Democrats argue that voter ID requirements disproportionately disenfranchise people with the least education and lowest incomes. Yet, ironically, survey results show that voters who did not graduate from high school were 27 percentage points more likely to support photo voter ID laws than those who attended graduate school. Similarly, individuals earning less than $30,000 per year were seven percentage points more likely to support photo ID requirements than those earning over $200,000 annually.

The well-educated and higher-income individuals thus express more concern about the impact of ID laws on the less educated and lower-income groups than those groups express themselves.But it isn’t just South American countries and all of Africa that require voter IDs to vote. Both of our neighbors, Canada and Mexico, require them, with Mexico also requiring a thumbprint. All 47 European countries, except parts of the United Kingdom, require a government-issued photo ID .

After widespread vote fraud, Mexico enacted major voting reforms in 1991. The government mandated voter photo IDs with biometric information, banned absentee ballots, and required in-person voter registration. Even though these changes made registration more difficult and eliminated absentee voting, turnout increased after the reforms took effect. In the three presidential elections following the 1991 changes, an average of 68% of eligible citizens voted, compared with 59% in the three elections before the reforms. As confidence in the electoral process grew, more citizens chose to participate. Many countries in Europe and beyond have learned the hard way that fraud can result from looser voting regimes – and they have instituted stricter voting measures in direct response to it. In Northern Ireland, where a bitter sectarian conflict fuels hardball electoral tactics, parties on all sides have engaged in what observers describe as “widespread and systemic“ voter fraud. Both Conservative and Labour governments enacted reforms to curb it. In 1985, under the conservative Margaret Thatcher, the U.K. began requiring voters to show identification before receiving a ballot, but that measure did not solve the problem.

In 1998, a Select Committee on Northern Ireland reported that people could “easily forge” medical cards – accepted as ID under the 1985 law – or obtain them fraudulently, enabling non-existent individuals to cast votes. By 2002, the Labour government strengthened voter identification cards to make them far harder to forge and used the more secure IDs, along with additional rules, to stop people from registering multiple times. These anti-fraud measures immediately reduced total registrations by 11%, suggesting to Labour how extensive earlier fraud had been.

Read more …

“.. Even the state government of Florida (population 23 million) spends less than New York City’…,”

Washington Post Editorial Board Brutally Mocks Mamdani (ZH)

Margaret Thatcher once said, “The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money,” and New York City’s new socialist mayor, Zohran Mamdani, is learning just how right she was, and New Yorkers are going to pay a hefty price for it. On Tuesday, a mere two months after declaring he would “replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism,” Mamdani announced a $127 billion preliminary budget for fiscal year 2027, a $5 billion increase from the prior year, while simultaneously warning residents of “painful” tax hikes if state officials refused to bail him out to cover his socialist policies.


“That’s a city budget bigger than the state budgets of 47 states. Even the state government of Florida (population 23 million) spends less than New York City’s,” explains The Washington Post editorial board. “And the state still managed to attract hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers in recent years.” “The reality is that Americans may like the idea of ‘free’ stuff — it’s how socialists win elections — but they are less excited about having to pay for it” they continued. “They’re even less excited when they live in a state that ranks at the very bottom of the Tax Foundation’s State Tax Competitiveness Index.”

During a press conference earlier this week, Mamdani called on New York Gov. Kathy Hochul to raise income taxes on the “ultra-wealthy” help fund his budget for New York City. “The onus for resolving this crisis should not be placed on the backs of working and middle-class New Yorkers,” Mamdani said. “If we do not fix this structural imbalance and do not heed the calls of New Yorkers to raise taxes on the wealthy, this crisis will not disappear. It will simply return, year after year, forcing harder and harsher choices each time. And if we do not go down the first path, the city will be forced down a second, more harmful path. Faced with no other choice, the city would have to exercise the only revenue lever fully within our own control. We would have to raise property taxes.”


Hochul rejected the tax hike demand without hesitation, telling Mamdani to expand his “ridiculously low” proposed spending cuts instead. Mamdani has claimed his administration identified $1.7 billion in cuts. The Post’s editorial board was not impressed, calling it a “laughable number.” “The reality is that Mamdani is trying to expand a city government that already does way too much,” they argued. “ The city should provide basic services, such as law and order, but instead it pours billions into social spending like housing and health care.” They even cited California as a cautionary tale, warning that in the Golden State, “a slew of billionaires are fleeing at the mere possibility of a wealth tax. They’ll avoid the wealth tax — and California will miss out on the billions that these individuals otherwise would have contributed before a wealth tax was even imposed.”

More experienced Democrats in New York understand this. Gov. Kathy Hochul, no one’s idea of a fiscal hawk, nevertheless instigated Mamdani’s tantrum by refusing to go along with more tax hikes. The city council speaker and comptroller also have sway and are skeptical of new taxes. This week, it was revealed that acclaimed director and filmmaker Steven Spielberg officially became a New York resident on January 1, effectively avoiding the billionaire tax—though a representative for Spielberg and his wife Cate Capshaw claimed the move was to be closer to family.

Mamdani’s pre-election promises — free buses, expanded child care, cash assistance, rental aid, and smaller class sizes for teachers’ unions — were crowd-pleasers that earned him “tax the rich” chants at campaign rallies. The problem is that governing a city with a structural deficit requires something more than slogans. His preliminary budget now acknowledges a $5.4 billion shortfall for the current fiscal year, with projections that worsen over time. “No one in New York is ambitious enough to dramatically reshape city government, and residents either vote for class warfare or vote with their feet. A reckoning will have to come eventually. The question is how bad it gets before reality sets in,” the board concluded.

Ouch.

Read more …

“.. Trump fixed the border, lowered crime, and now demands the same common-sense security at the ballot box..”

President Donald Trump Stands Victim of His Own Success (David Manney)

In the early days of the NBA, George Mikan was so dominant in the paint that the league had to redraw the court. Defenders couldn’t stop him, and coaches couldn’t scheme around him, so the league widened the lane to push him further from the basket. They changed the rules because one man kept winning under the old ones. That’s where we find President Donald Trump today. He clamped down on the southern border, ending the chaos so fast that the crisis faded from daily debate. He renewed the economy and strengthened national security. He slashed narcotics imports while driving the murder rates across the country.


Instead of arguing policy, opponents now look for ways to redraw the political court around him. They protest enforcement agencies, stage walkouts, and shift attention to anything except measurable results. When outcomes favor one side so decisively, critics often stop debating the scoreboard and start questioning the game itself. Migrant encounters fell to the lowest level in more than 50 years; Customs and Border Protection recorded just 237,538 encounters for all of fiscal year 2025. January 2026 brought only 6,070 southwest border apprehensions and marked the ninth straight month with zero releases into the interior. Nationwide encounters dropped 84% in January 2025, while seizures of fentanyl dropped sharply, too.

Violent crime falls to record lows
Nationwide, murder rates fell through the floor, as major cities saw homicides drop 19% to 21% in 2025 alone. The murder rate hit its lowest point since at least 1900, marking the largest one-year decline ever recorded. Robberies fell about 20%, aggravated assaults fell nearly 10%, and overdose deaths shrank as narcotics imports dried up.

National Guard restores order in the capital
In Washington, D.C., Trump declared a crime emergency in August 2025, launching the Make DC Safe and Beautiful Task Force and bringing in federal agents, local police, and National Guard troops. Since then, authorities made more than 10,000 arrests and taken more than 1,000 illegal guns off the streets. Once real help arrived, homicides dropped extremely fast. In 2017, Forlesia Cook lost her grandson to gun violence in Washington. She stood up at the White House Black History Month reception on Feb. 18 and looked critics straight in the eye. The room erupted in applause, and Trump urged her to run for office.

Save America Act highlights the deeper divide
The SAVE America Act requires documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and a photo ID to cast a ballot: Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) introduced the bill. President Trump pushes hard for its passage because nothing matters more than clean elections. The House passed it on Feb. 11. Polling shows roughly 75% to 84% of registered voters favor voter ID and proof of citizenship. Support cuts across Democrats, independents, black, and Hispanic Americans. Yet far-left politicians fight it tooth and nail; Senate Democrats, led by Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), vow to block it in the Senate, warning about voter suppression and arguing it harms women who changed their names (I-9 Forms for their jobs, anyone?) or low-income voters who lack

The deeper fear shines through: Secure elections could cut off loose votes some candidates rely on to stay in power. The loudest defenders of democracy often resist clear rules that strengthen it. It’s a familiar enough-looking pattern. Open-border policies under the previous administration flooded the country with millions of people and left voter rolls vulnerable. Record border crossings from 2022 through 2024 raised real questions about who votes. Officials looked the other way while colleges, courts, and much of the legacy media repeated the same, tired story. Trump fixed the border, lowered crime, and now demands the same common-sense security at the ballot box, reaching Americans directly through streaming platforms and rallies because old gatekeepers refuse to carry the message.

Democrats protest the very agents who deliver results
Democrats and the left (pardon the redundancy) limit every argument to that old chestnut: Calling Trump evil, while demanding that he suffer defeat and humiliation. They protest ICE agents who carry out the exact policies voters chose, ignoring the sealed border, safer streets, and stronger economy. Their big idea? Stage-side rallies or boycotts for the upcoming State of the Union Address set for Tuesday, Feb. 24. How convenient. ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith, definitely not a Republican, spoke plainly, saying Democrats show zero sense of decorum. He said they put raw politics ahead of their own constituents by planning to skip or disrupt the president’s upcoming speech.

Trump’s ready to talk with anybody; he spends the time, shows the patience, and treats people with respect. The other side offers only venom because that’s all they have left, their old arguments collapsed years ago.

Read more …

“There is absolutely no room for bias in any kind of the CIA’s work..”

Biased Spies: John Ratcliffe Cleans House at the CIA (Manney)

A rare correction at Langley
CIA Director John Ratcliffe rescinded or revised 19 intelligence reports after determining they contained political bias and violated basic tradecraft standards. The President’s Intelligence Advisory Board reviewed around 300 reports from the past decade and flagged serious problems: 17 were permanently deleted, two were pulled, revised, and reissued. A senior CIA official told Just The News that the reports were initially flagged during a review by the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, then reviewed by career agency officials before being retracted, recalled, or revised. “There is absolutely no room for bias in any kind of the CIA’s work,” the official said. “So when we find instances where our tradecraft did not reach that high bar of impartiality, we must correct the record. And that’s why we’re taking steps to reinforce analytic integrity by ordering the public release, substantive revision, or retraction of these products that do not meet CIA’s tradecraft standards.” The action stands out because a sweeping internal correction like this rarely occurs; intelligence agencies revise their analyses over time, but mass rescissions tied to political bias seldom occur in public.


Reports that read like activism
One report warned that women embracing traditional motherhood could drift toward violent extremism, with analysts describing motherhood as a white supremacist objective, suggesting that women sharing cooking videos or family values content could aid recruitment networks. The product relied heavily on open-source material rather than on classified intelligence collection. One was an Oct. 6, 2021, assessment titled “Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist Radicalization and Recruitment” that waded into “foreign political debates about gender roles rather discussing any actual threats of political violence,” the senior CIA official said.

It had labeled the far-right Canadian YouTuber Lauren Southern as a white racially and ethnically motivated violent extremist and spoke of the dangers such figures pose to societies — in addition to women pursuing traditional roles as mothers. A July 8, 2020 a CIA report also centered on family planning and the disruptions of condom supply chains worldwide using “unobjective sources of information such as Planned Parenthood,” the official noted. Another assessment from 2020 warned that birth control shortages during the pandemic would damage economic growth in Egypt, Nigeria, and Pakistan, using sources such as Planned Parenthood, the Guttmacher Institute, and Marie Stopes International. Another report from 2015 promoted LGBT academic programs in North Africa and the Middle East while criticizing conservative governments.Intelligence Community Directive 203 requires objectivity, independence, and avoidance of any political slant. Ratcliffe said the flawed reports fell short of the high standards the agency must uphold, stressing there’s no room for bias in intelligence analysis.

Directors and oversight
The January 2015 report was issued during the tenure of CIA Director John Brennan; the July 2020 report landed on the desk of CIA Director Gina Haspel; and the October 2021 motherhood report circulated while William Burns served as CIA Director. Each director presided over an agency required to enforce Directive 203’s standards of impartiality. None of the prior directors rescinded large batches of reports over bias concerns. Past intelligence controversies drew scrutiny; the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, produced under George Tenet, later proved deeply flawed.

Read more …

“There’s a reason why Trump nicknamed him “Sloppy Steve.”

The Shattered Dreams of Steve Bannon (Scott Pinsker)

Until the impossible became possible — and Donald Trump engineered the political upset of his generation, toppling Hillary Clinton in 2016 — most Americans had no idea who Steve Bannon was. Visually, he wasn’t much to look at. Bannon wasn’t a workout wonder like RFK Jr., with six-pack abs, nor was he blessed with movie star good looks. Some guys were born with oodles of charisma — the kind of raw, undeniable magnetism that leaps off the screen. Bannon, alas, wasn’t one of those people. There’s a reason why Trump nicknamed him “Sloppy Steve.”


But after Trump was elected, the media hunted for an explanation. Surely a bumble-headed dunce like Trump couldn’t get elected president on his own! That’s impossible! So they searched high and low for the behind-the-scenes maestro who pulled all the strings — the shrewd strategist who orchestrated the single greatest political upset since Dewey Defeats Truman Truman Defeats Dewey. At which point, Steve Bannon leapt out of the shadows: Yup, I’m the genius. It was me all along! The media, quite naturally, ate it up:

And not without reason. As far as personal bios go, Bannon was an odd duck with a helluva story. He had military experience as a Navy officer. He was financially savvy enough to work at Goldman Sachs. He was clever enough to acquire a financial stake in Seinfeld (Bannon still receives residuals for Seinfeld reruns). He knew enough about conservative media to run Breitbart — a platform that had long championed Trump’s candidacy. And then he assumed command of Trump’s campaign in August of 2016, just in time to claim credit for the victory?Maybe he really was the maestro of it all!

Bannon, for very obvious reasons, worked feverishly to advance the narrative of “Steve Bannon, Political Genius.” Within the Trump White House, his media leaks became increasingly self-serving. Instead of leveraging media relations to elevate his boss or the MAGA mission, he sought to mythologize himself. It all culminated with Bannon losing his job in the White House and getting fired from Breitbart after he leaked negative information about Trump’s children to the fierce Trump critic, journalist Michael Wolff. Among the delightful headlines Bannon helped produce was Business Insider’s Jan. 3, 2018, story, “Steve Bannon Says Ivanka Trump Is ‘Dumb as a Brick’.” Trump responded in typically Trumpian fashion:

“Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency,” Trump said. “When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.” […] “Steve doesn’t represent my base — he’s only in it for himself,” Trump said. “Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.”

Today, of course, we know the truth: Steve Bannon didn’t control Trump — because NOBODY controls Trump. The very premise is preposterous. For better or worse, Donald J. Trump is his own man. He’s like a wild stallion — uncontrollable. Then in 2024, with Steve Bannon sidelined, Trump proved his point by winning the presidency once again — this time by an even greater margin. Turns out that Bannon was less the leader and more the luggage, because Trump did more to carry him than the other way around. That’s not to say Bannon is a dim bulb. Clearly, he’s an exceptionally bright man. Some of his political calculations are off-the-charts prescient, i.e. his April 2025 prediction that Cardinal Prevost would become the first American-born pope:

https://twitter.com/PiersUncensored/status/1917308154427367583

He’s also a man brimming with ambition. Just 40 days ago, Axios reported that Bannon was planning to run for president in 2028: “Former Trump White House adviser Steve Bannon is laying the groundwork for a 2028 run for president, two people familiar with his thinking tell Axios.” […] Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who has appeared on Bannon’s “War Room” podcast, said: “The Bannon campaign will merge the foreign policy of Rand Paul with the tax policy of Elizabeth Warren.” (Not sure if the MAGA base is clamoring for a Warren-Paul themed agenda, but whatever. Not my monkey, not my circus.) Either way, it’s a deeply damaging PR look. Setting up your own presidential bid barely a year into Trump’s term seems awfully arrogant and self-indulgent. That’s a poor plan for winning GOP hearts and minds.

[..] He’s a conspiracy peddler who denies conspiracies — while participating in conspiracies! No matter. The Epstein revelations were a deathblow to Bannon’s presidential ambitions. There’s ZERO demand in Republican circles for a 75-year-old Epstein-whisperer to replace Vance, Rubio, or anyone else as MAGA’s heir apparent. Because, the more we learned about Epstein, the more we realized that Steve Bannon isn’t a political savant, a super-genius, or a 4-D chess mastermind. He’s a lying, duplicitous, self-serving hypocrite who can’t be trusted. And that’s not a “coincidence” either. It’s causation.

Read more …

It looks easier from the outside.

When Does Accountability For The Deep State Begin? (Dornik)

We were told this time would be different. We were told that a second Trump administration would not repeat the mistakes of the first, that hard lessons had been learned, and that the Deep State would finally be confronted rather than tolerated. One year into President Trump’s second term, it is both fair and necessary to ask whether those assurances are being honored—not from hostility but from a sincere desire to see the America First agenda succeed, endure, and become irreversible.


President Trump’s first term, Congress squandered its moment. The first two years were consumed by infighting, hesitation, and internal paralysis, even with Republican control. Then came the midterms, control was lost, and meaningful legislative progress effectively ended. What followed were impeachment spectacles and relentless political warfare, while entrenched corruption inside the federal government remained untouched. Now, just past the first year of President Trump’s second term, the pattern feels disturbingly familiar. The urgency voters demanded is not being matched by the actions of those entrusted to deliver it.

The question that must be asked plainly is this: when is the Trump administration actually going to root out the Deep State?

Executive Orders are being signed at a rapid pace, but Executive Orders are not reform. They are temporary directives that can be erased with a single signature the moment someone like Gavin Newsom takes office. Without legislation, without prosecutions, and without accountability, nothing is secured. Power is being exercised, but it is not being anchored, and lasting change is never achieved that way.

Kash Patel built his credibility by telling the truth about corruption in Washington. His book and documentary, Government Gangsters, documented in detail how entrenched bureaucrats and intelligence officials worked against President Trump from within the federal government. He even came on my show and spoke openly about this corruption, and he stated repeatedly across multiple platforms that the FBI, particularly at its highest levels, was deeply compromised and required fundamental reform. He did not argue that the Bureau should be abandoned, but that it could not be trusted without aggressive leadership, restructuring, and accountability for the Deep State operatives within the bureau. He warned that the Deep State would never reform itself and would have to be confronted directly. He also told Glenn Beck that the head of the FBI possessed Jeffrey Epstein’s client list. These were not casual remarks. They were core assertions made publicly and repeatedly.

Now Kash Patel is the head of the FBI, and the public posture has shifted dramatically. The same institution he once described as captured is now treated as credible and restrained. The Epstein client list, once discussed as a known reality, is now dismissed as conspiracy, even as new Epstein-related documents continue to be released to the public over the protest of the Trump administration. Each document release raises more questions, not fewer, and every delay from federal law enforcement deepens public distrust rather than restoring confidence. A reversal this significant demands explanation. Trust is not rebuilt through silence, and credibility is not preserved by pretending prior statements were never made.

These questions extend far beyond the FBI and land squarely on the Department of Justice, where accountability appears to collapse the moment it threatens entrenched power. The removal of Ed Martin from his role inside the DOJ is not just a minor personnel decision; it appears to be a clear signal that real investigations into weaponization and lawfare are not being tolerated. Ed Martin was positioned to expose how the Biden Department of Justice targeted Americans, abused prosecutorial authority, and used federal power as a political weapon. According to Emerald Robinson, whose reporting has repeatedly exposed corruption others refuse to confront, Martin was removed from his position by the same people who refer to parents as terrorists: “Vance Day, senior counsel for Todd Blanche, refers to parents targeted by Biden DOJ as ‘terrorists’ in recent meeting with one parent asking for accountability. Blanche’s office also removed Ed Martin from his role at the DOJ.” That disclosure alone should alarm every American paying attention.

Parents who were targeted and persecuted by the Biden Department of Justice are now being labeled terrorists by senior DOJ leadership, while the man tasked with investigating that persecution is sidelined. Whether this is described as a firing or a demotion is irrelevant, because the outcome is the same. Another one of the good guys has been removed from doing the work voters were promised would finally drain the swamp. This is not an isolated incident or a misunderstanding but a pattern that repeats with disturbing consistency. Every time someone begins making real progress against the Deep State, authority is stripped, investigations are stalled, and momentum is deliberately crushed before accountability can be delivered.

So the questions must be asked: Where are the arrests? Where are the prosecutions? Why has Attorney General Pam Bondi not brought cases against members of the January 6 Committee despite documented misconduct and destroyed records? Why has the Department of Justice taken no action against Anthony Fauci even after Sen. Rand Paul issued criminal referrals? Why is the DOJ actively fighting to shut down Brook Jackson’s case against Pfizer instead of allowing it to proceed and standing with a whistleblower who exposed documented fraud? Why do Epstein-related documents continue to surface while no meaningful accountability follows? What happened to transparency, and what happened to equal justice under the law?

Read more …

Serious threats.

Susan Rice Warns Of ‘Accountability Agenda’ When Democrats Return To Power (JTN)

Former Democratic Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice warned corporations Thursday who have “taken a knee” to President Donald Trump and his administration that there would be repercussions when her party returns to power. The comment comes after The Late Show host Stephen Colbert accused CBS News this week of bowing to Trump by allegedly blocking the host from airing an interview with Texas state Rep. James Talarico, a Democrat who is running for the U.S. Senate. CBS has denied blocking the interview, which was posted to YouTube instead.


Rice insisted an “accountability agenda” was coming for the people and corporations who worked with the Trump administration if Democrats win back the majority in the House or Senate this November. “If these corporations think that the Democrats, when they come back in power, are going to play by the old rules, and, you know, say, ‘Oh, never mind. We’ll forgive you for all the people you fired, all the policies and principles you’ve violated, all, you know, the laws you’ve skirted.’ I think they’ve got another think coming,” she told former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara.

Rice, who worked in the Obama and Biden administrations, claimed the corporations and other entities like universities acted in a “very short-term self-interest” when deciding to work with the administration in certain capacities. “Companies are already starting to hear they better preserve their documents,” she said. “They better be ready for subpoenas. If they’ve done something wrong, they’ll be held accountable, and if they haven’t broken the law, good for them. “This is not going to be an instance of, you know, forgive and forget,” she continued. “The damage that these people are doing is too severe to the American people and to our national interest.”

Read more …

”.. Rubio noted that documents leaked from inside the group outline ambitious plans to “kill Musk’s Twitter” and “trigger EU and UK regulatory action.”

Deporting Censorship: US Targets UK Government Ally Over Free Speech (Thaccker)

As ICE sweeps in Minneapolis have drawn wide attention, a little-noticed immigration case playing out in a New York federal court has significant implications for America’s relationship with Britain and the ongoing debate over global censorship.


In late December, the State Department announced its intention to revoke the visas of five foreign individuals who have allegedly censored Americans. The most consequential member of this group is Imran Ahmed, a British Labour Party political operative now living in the U.S., who is the CEO of an influential nonprofit, the Center for Countering Digital Hate.

In documents released Feb. 6 in federal court, the State Department claims Ahmed and the Center have been key players in efforts to censor Americans. A memo written by State Department Undersecretary Sarah Rogers asserts that “Ahmed was a key collaborator with the Biden administration on weaponizing the national security bureaucracy to censor U.S. citizens and pressure U.S. companies into censoring, and his group advocates for foreign regulatory action that extraterritorially impacts American citizens and companies.”

In a follow-up memo, Secretary Marco Rubio wrote that Ahmed had led efforts to censor Americans and harm U.S. media outlets, including ZeroHedge and The Federalist. “I have determined that Ahmed’s activities and presence in the United States have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences and comprise a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest.” Rubio asserted. While the Center casts itself as a disinterested nonprofit trying to stop online hate, Rubio noted that documents leaked from inside the group outline ambitious plans to “kill Musk’s Twitter” and “trigger EU and UK regulatory action.”

Ahmed has a small army of lawyers working to halt his deportation proceedings, which are now being litigated. Ahmed’s lead attorney is Roberta Kaplan – a former advisor to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo – who sued President Trump on behalf of his niece, Mary Trump. Ahmed is also represented by Norm Eisen, a Democratic Party fundraiser and former advisor to Obama. Last Thursday, they filed an updated court complaint against the U.S. government to keep Ahmed in the United States.

International Implications
. The effort to deport Ahmed has broader political implications because of the close ties he and his associates have to the highest reaches of the British government. Morgan McSweeney, who co-founded the Center with Ahmed, is widely seen as the architect of Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour Party victory in 2024. McSweeney served as Starmer’s chief of staff until earlier this month, when he resigned because of a separate scandal connected to Jeffrey Epstein.

U.K. government documents reviewed by RCI show that the organization’s influence extends throughout Starmer’s government. The Trump administration’s pushback on Ahmed’s weaponization of speech against U.S. citizens and companies suggests a deep concern about foreign intervention and censorship stemming from one of America’s closest allies.In a recent interview with Undersecretary Rogers, RCI noted that the State Department appeared to be “knocking on the door of the Prime Minister’s office.” Rogers demurred, declining to detail her discussion with Starmer officials. “We have a very special relationship with the British government,” she responded. “The issue has been communicated.”

Senior Labour Minister Chi Onwurah accused the Trump administration of attacking free speech after Rubio announced shortly before Christmas that the administration was seeking Ahmed’s deportation. “Banning people because you disagree with what they say undermines the free speech the administration claims to seek,” Onwurah said, adding that Ahmed was an articulate advocate for greater regulation of online speech. However, internal British government documents show that Onwurah is one of Starmer’s many advisors who have been working with Ahmed on activities many consider censorship..

Read more …

 

 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2024934679493677217?s=20

https://twitter.com/BryceMLipscomb/status/2024838259751186906?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 122026
 
 February 12, 2026  Posted by at 11:30 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  50 Responses »


Camille Pissarro The Boulevard Montmartre at Night 1897


Elon Musk Vows To Establish A MOON CITY Within 10 Years (MN)
Economy Adds 130,000 Jobs in January, Unemployment Rate Falls to 4.3% (CTH)
Trump Orders CIA To Give 2020 Election Intel To ‘Stop The Steal’ Lawyer (ZH)
30 Years Later Massie Discovers Les Wexner Was Associate of Epstein (CTH)
Steve Bannon Messages About Trump Included in the Epstein File Release (CTH)
The Trump Admin Just Won the Mask Decision . . . Now it Should Appeal (Turley)
Jordan Opens Bondi Hearing By Railing Against Sanctuary Cities (JTN)
Lawmaker Probing J6 Worried US Capitol Police Intel Politicized vs GOP (JTN)
Munich 2007: Putin’s Warning To The West (RT)
Russia Will Stick To Nuclear Arms Limits If US Does The Same (ZH)
All the Media’s Men: When Journalism Became the Story -Part II of II (Wilson)
Texas Judges Strategize Ways to Block DHS From Enforcing Immigration Laws (CTH)
‘No Privacy’ CBDCs Will Come, Warns Billionaire Ray Dalio (CT)

 


 

https://twitter.com/BryceMLipscomb/status/2021305065852547259?s=20

 


 


Musk ponders his own mortality. He won’t make it to Mars in time to be the first settler.

“Priority Of SpaceX becomes a self-sustaining lunar metropolis to safeguard humanity’s future..”

Elon Musk Vows To Establish A MOON CITY Within 10 Years (MN)

Elon Musk and SpaceX are charting a bold new course for American space dominance, prioritizing a thriving city on the Moon to shield civilization from earthly perils like natural disasters or geopolitical chaos. With frequent launches and rapid iteration cycles, the Moon offers a practical launchpad for multi-planetary life, free from the constraints of overregulated space agencies that have stalled progress for decades. SpaceX’s announcement comes amid a renewed push for lunar exploration, where private enterprise is outpacing sluggish international efforts.


According to reports, the company aims to establish a “self-growing city” on the Moon within a decade, leveraging the proximity for hundreds of test cycles that Mars’ distant orbit simply can’t match. Musk elaborated on X, stating, “SpaceX has already shifted focus to building a self-growing city on the Moon, as we can potentially achieve that in less than 10 years, whereas Mars would take 20+ years.” He emphasized the logistical edge: launches to the Moon every 10 days with a two-day trip, versus Mars’ 26-month windows and six-month journeys.

This allows for swift advancements in life support, construction, and energy systems—key to breaking free from Earth’s vulnerabilities.

The shift doesn’t abandon Mars entirely. Musk noted that SpaceX will still pursue a long term plan for a Red Planet city, but the Moon takes precedence as a faster safeguard for civilization.

“The overriding priority is securing the future of civilization and the Moon is faster,” Musk posted. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2020962635156684920

This pragmatic approach exposes the folly of pie-in-the-sky promises that have dominated space policy, often mired in wasteful spending and political gamesmanship. Musk also teased democratized space travel:

This development echoes broader frustrations with establishment space programs. NASA’s Artemis missions, while ambitious, are bogged down by delays and ballooning costs. SpaceX, unencumbered by such bureaucracy, is poised to deliver tangible wins, potentially including lunar data centers powered by constant solar energy, boosting U.S. tech supremacy. By prioritizing the lunar city, SpaceX advances an independent, resilient humanity—free from reliance on fragile international alliances that often prioritize control over innovation.

Read more …

In a time of large scale revisions, OK numbers.

Economy Adds 130,000 Jobs in January, Unemployment Rate Falls to 4.3% (CTH)

The Bureau of Labor and Statistics releases the employment figures for January today [BLS DATA HERE]. Overall, in the establishment survey, 130,000 jobs were added and the unemployment rate fell to 4.3%. This is much stronger than anticipated and there are indications of significant movement back to work as the exfiltration of illegal alien workers continues.


Via WSJ – “The U.S. added 130,000 jobs in January, surging past expectations and marking a strong start to the year following a weak year of job growth. The January numbers from the Labor Department were above the seasonally adjusted 48,000 jobs added in December, which were revised slightly lower. Economists polled by The Wall Street Journal were expecting 55,000 jobs in January.The unemployment rate, which is based on a separate survey from the jobs figures, fell to 4.3% from 4.4%.” (more)

What I find interesting in the Household ‘Employment’ Survey is the number of people going back into the workforce. I am left to wonder if the ICE removals are starting to create employer driven incentives, increased wages etc. that seem to be pulling sidelined workers back to the labor market.


528,000 more people employed. The unemployed dropped by 141,000, and the number of people not in the labor force dropped by 221,000. https://twitter.com/i/status/2021581691798618596

Read more …

“The administration last year hired Kurt Olsen, who more than five years ago took part in the “Stop the Steal” campaign that promoted baseless claims of widespread voter fraud, to investigate the 2020 election.”

Trump Orders CIA To Give 2020 Election Intel To ‘Stop The Steal’ Lawyer (ZH)

President Donald Trump has instructed the CIA and other spy agencies to hand over intelligence related to the 2020 election, a bunch of (presumably panicked) US intelligence officials told Politico and NBC News. The records are to be handed over to Kurt Olsen – now a temporary government employee in the White House – who four years ago was involved in the “Stop the Steal” campaign to determine whether Joe Biden won the 2020 election via cheating. And you know they’re freaking out by the way they tell us this… “The administration last year hired Kurt Olsen, who more than five years ago took part in the “Stop the Steal” campaign that promoted baseless claims of widespread voter fraud, to investigate the 2020 election.” -NBC News


… President Donald Trump has directed top U.S. spy agencies to share sensitive intelligence about the 2020 election with his former campaign lawyer, known for pushing debunked theories of electoral fraud, according to four people with knowledge of the effort. -Politico. Indeed:

“The president has asked Mr. Olsen to look at intelligence related to the 2020 election and the agency is ensuring that he has the access necessary to do his work,” a CIA official told NBC in an emailed statement (probably right after hanging up with the reporter). When asked about Olsen’s role, the White House told the outlet “President Trump has the authority to provide access to classified material to individuals as he deems necessary. The entire Trump administration is working together to ensure the integrity of U.S. elections.”

The admin did not specifically respond to questions about whether Olsen was focusing only on the 2020 election, or possible security threats to future elections. The freakout comes after the FBI’s recent search of an elections center in Fulton County, Georgia – where they seized ballots from the 2020 election. Now check out the tone over at Politico: “The decision to provide some of the government’s most sensitive spy material to Olsen is unusual, given that he has no known experience working with the U.S. spy community and only joined the Trump administration as a short-term special government employee in October 2025. Special government employees are supposed to work no more than 130 days during any period of 365 days, suggesting his time at the White House could end soon.”


The first person said that Olsen has passed a background check and a polygraph exam. It is not clear how close Olsen is to completing his report on the 2020 elections. Intelligence analysis is supposed to be nonpartisan, and it appears Olsen’s views on electoral fraud in prior U.S. elections are so deeply held that even some people close to the president question his ability to evaluate the material shared with him. “This guy has no background” in intelligence, said the second person, a close Trump ally. Olsen “will find some super classified report, say it’s evidence of fraud, but really it’s just completely out of context.”

… Olsen rose to prominence by working closely with Trump to undermine the results of the 2020 election under the slogan “Stop the Steal.” He urged several DOJ officials that year to file a complaint to the Supreme Court scrutinizing Trump’s loss, and even called the president multiple times during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Wow! As we noted earlier Tuesday, an affidavit filed by FBI Special Agent Hugh Raymond Evans last month, which was unsealed Tuesday, lays out five categories of confirmed problems in Fulton County’s handling of ballots, raising questions that have simmered for over five years since Trump and his allies raised questions about the election in Georgia and other states where irregularities were alleged.

According to a report from Just the News, Evans filed the affidavit last month to establish probable cause for a raid that seized around 700 boxes of ballots from an Atlanta-area storage warehouse. The investigation stemmed from a referral by Kurt Olsen, President Trump’s election integrity czar. Evans interviewed roughly a dozen unnamed witnesses about allegations tied to the contested Georgia race, where Joe Biden edged out Trump by less than 12,000 votes in the official results. “This warrant application is part of an FBI criminal investigation into whether any of the improprieties were intentional acts that violated federal criminal laws.”

Fulton County admitted it lacks scanned images of all 528,777 ballots counted during the initial count and of the 527,925 ballots tallied during the state’s first recount. County officials also confirmed that during the recount, some ballots were scanned multiple times. Ballot images obtained through public records requests show identical markings appearing on duplicated images.During the Risk Limiting Audit, hand counters reported vote totals for batches that didn’t match the actual votes inside those batches. According to the affidavit, “The State’s Performance Review Board reported that Secretary of State investigators confirmed inaccurate batch tallies from the Risk Limiting Audit.

Read more …

“Wexner’s money was the originating capital for what would later become Epstein’s influence empire…”

30 Years Later Massie Discovers Les Wexner Was Associate of Epstein (CTH)

I said Monday on Twitter: “Seriously. Correct me if I’m wrong. For more than a decade we have known that billionaire Les Wexner from Victoria’s Secret was the originating money man behind Jeffrey Epstein. This should not be some kind of revelation, as it was widely discussed by those who researched Epstein over a decade ago. Wexner’s money was the originating capital for what would later become Epstein’s influence empire. Additionally, and again, stop me if this old news is incorrect, well over a decade ago it became openly known that the “PINK” brand of Victoria’s Secret was specifically created due to the sexuality of young girls becoming part of the marketing influence of Epstein. Wexner created the original VS girls, and the influence of Epstein (underage sexual perversions) then led to the adding of the VS “PINK” sub-brand.


Are we supposed to understand this is all new information? Honest question. No snark. I’m just confused by this sudden newness of it. We been knew.”The above VH1 segment was from 2007; however, even ten years prior to that it was commonly known that Les Wexner from Victoria’s Secret was the source of most of Jeffrey Epstein’s start-up finances. The resulting social network was fraught with sexual weirdos, and the VS brand alignment just fit with the club. Suddenly, Representative Thomas Massie, a Sea Island asset if ever there was one, is proclaiming the Epstein file information outlining the relationship with Wexner is new information, stunning in scope and worthy of extraordinary time to explore. It’s all weird.

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2021055705826943265?s=20

VIA NBC – […] The newly released version of the 2019 document shows eight people are listed as co-conspirators, including four whose names are not redacted: Wexner, the former CEO of Victoria’s Secret, Lesley Groff, Epstein’s longtime secretary, the late modeling agent Jean-Luc Brunel, and Ghislaine Maxwell, the only person who was charged in connection with Epstein. She was convicted of sex trafficking charges and is serving a 20-year prison sentence. Four other names on the document are still redacted. It’s unclear who those people are but prosecutors have said that Epstein used women he preyed on as recruiters. A separate document dated August 2019 indicated that some of the others were victims as well, and had been cooperating with investigators.

A Wexner legal representative said in a statement to NBC News Tuesday that “The Assistant U.S. Attorney told Mr. Wexner’s legal counsel in 2019 that Mr. Wexner was neither a co-conspirator nor target in any respect. Mr. Wexner cooperated fully by providing background information on Epstein and was never contacted again.” Wexner had a long relationship with Epstein that dated back to the 1980s, and hired him to manage his personal finances. He’s said he cut ties to Epstein after he was accused of sexually abusing minors in Florida. It was after that Wexner said he “discovered that he had misappropriated vast sums of money from me and my family.”

Wexner’s name was also mentioned in a July 2019 FBI email about possible co-conspirators that was made public as part of the DOJ release. Another August 2019 FBI email said there was “limited evidence regarding his involvement.” He is scheduled to be deposed by the House Oversight Committee next week. (more)The first time I heard the information about Wexner and Epstein was sometime in the mid 1990’s. It was well known. There is a lot of horrible, creepy and perverted stuff in the Epstein file releases that is factually new information. However, the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Les Wexner is not new. Perverse, yes -as it was even then; but not new. There were even documentaries about it, one of them I think was called “Angels and Demons“. Maybe it wasn’t as widely known as I thought?

Read more …

“Trust your instincts folks, and always remember…. It’s ALWAYS about the money”

Steve Bannon Messages About Trump Included in the Epstein File Release (CTH)

Apparently, Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein had a considerable relationship together. Bannon is cited frequently in the 3 million+ Epstein files that were released by the DOJ. Unfortunately, part of the document production includes text messages between Steve Bannon and an unknown individual. Within a segment of the text messages Bannon calls Jared Kusher “the idiot son-in-law,” and frames himself as more important that President Donald Trump who Bannon sees as “transitory.”


STEVE BANNON (SB) – “To do that shows that [Trump] is center of gravity of this movement and not me — will never do — they are transitory figures — the dc game is to succumb to that — it’s why I never did before joining campaign — I could have been the trump whisperer years ago — avoided on purpose” This rather elevated sense of self-importance likely explains why Bannon was the source for Michael Wolf via leaks, and why President Trump seems to have kept distance from Mr. Bannon. However, people who walk the deep weeds of U.S. politics will also remember when Steve Bannon was the editor of Breitbart and together with financial owner Robert Mercer in 2015/2016 was backing Ted Cruz in the run-up to the 2016 election.


Both Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway were original political consultants and financial beneficiaries connected to the failed Ted Cruz presidential effort, before they abandoned the Cruz Crew and jumped aboard the MAGA movement. The Cruz Crew has essentially morphed into the Ron DeSantis coalition and this superiority attitude expressed by Bannon is one of the key characteristics of the group we affectionately call the “alligator emojis. Perhaps the best two words to describe the brilliant political strategies of Steve Bannon are ‘Roy – Moore’. I digress.

Trust your instincts folks, and always remember…. It’s ALWAYS about the money!

Read more …

“Judge Synder came to the right conclusion for the wrong reason.”

The Trump Admin Just Won the Mask Decision . . . Now it Should Appeal (Turley)

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has become increasingly Orwellian in his declarations of success. Last week, Newsom was proclaiming the great success of his high-speed train to nowhere – a project delayed by decades, reduced to a fraction of the original plan, and set to cost tens of billions over budget. This week, he is proclaiming victory after a court struck down his signature law requiring federal agents to unmask. The preliminary injunction issued Monday by Senior status Judge Christine Snyder against California’s No Secret Police Act was a victory for the Trump Administration. However, it should still appeal Judge Snyder’s flawed decision. In other words, the Administration won for the wrong reason.


Snyder, an Obama appointee, faced two laws passed in September 2025 with great fanfare in California: the Secret Police Act and the No Vigilante Act. As their titles indicate, they are not serious efforts at legislating but unconstitutional acts designed to pander to the politics of the moment. In the oral argument, some of us were concerned over the curious position staked out by Judge Synder. DOJ counsel Tiberius Davis tried to explain how such state laws usurp federal authority and violate the Supremacy Clause. He drove that point home by asking “Why couldn’t California say every immigration officer needs to wear pink, so it’s super obvious who they are? The idea that all 50 states can regulate the conduct and uniforms of officers … flips the Constitution on its head.”

That would seem an unassailable point, but not to Judge Synder. She asked, “Why can’t they perform their duties without a mask? They did that until 2025, did they not? How in the world do those who don’t mask manage to operate?” I remarked at the time that the court seemed to miss the central point. The question is not whether the federal government can continue to function under limitations imposed by various states, but whether those states have the authority to impose such conditions. I do not believe that they do. Nevertheless, Judge Synder came to the right conclusion for the wrong reason. She enjoined the mask requirement, but did so on the basis that California exempted its own officers.

“Even though the United States has failed to demonstrate that the facial covering prohibition of the No Secret Police Act unduly interferes with federal functions, the court acknowledges that it is nonetheless an incidental regulation on law enforcement officers. The intergovernmental immunity doctrine prohibits imposing such a regulatory burden, albeit minimal and incidental to operations, in a discriminatory manner against the federal government.” By adopting this narrow basis, the court was able to enjoin the No Secret Police Act while rejecting an injunction against the No Vigilantes Act and certain other provisions of the No Secret Police Act. I think the court is wrong and should be reversed.

Snyder rejected the rationale of the federal government that these masks are being used to protect ICE agents from “doxing,” even though various agents have been targeted and threatened. Synder waved off the concern and said that the government had not shown by such masking is essential to carrying out such functions. Her opinion relies on broad, unsupported assumptions. Because officers are facing these security concerns, she concludes that they will continue regardless: “Security concerns exist for federal law enforcement officers with or without masks. If anything, the court finds that the presence of masked and unidentifiable individuals, including law enforcement, is more likely to heighten the sense of insecurity for all.”

It is a bizarre rationalization. The court is simply imposing its judgment on what will make officers safer, rather than emphasizing whether these agencies have the discretion to make such judgments in the execution of federal law. Yet the court still enjoins the law because it discriminates between federal and state officers. (Not surprisingly, Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener, the author of the mask ban, immediately declared that they would amend the law to add state law enforcement).

The Court then upheld a state requirement that federal officers cannot conceal their identities in a discussion more befitting a legislative committee than a court: “The Court finds that these Acts serve the public interest by promoting transparency, which is essential for accountability and public trust. Moreover, the Court finds no cognizable justification for law enforcement officers to conceal their identities during their performance of routine, non-exempted law enforcement functions and interactions with the general public.” In my view, Judge Snyder twists the analysis into knots to try to preserve as much of these laws as possible while giving the Administration the minimum level of deference.

Under the intergovernmental immunity doctrine, the Supreme Court has mandated in cases such as McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 317 (1819), that “the states have no power, by taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden, or in any manner control, the operations of the constitutional law enacted by congress to carrying into execution the powers vested in the general government.” A state cannot intrude into this authority absent a “clear and unambiguous” authorization from Congress, Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. Miller, 486, U.S. 174, 180 (1988).

Snyder finds that the California laws discriminate but do not constitute direct regulation of the federal government. She does so through a “functionalist” approach that avoids bright lines of supremacy. She simply dismisses the objections, saying the federal government has not shown that wearing masks is “essential” to carrying out these functions. Consider that approach for a second. A wide range of state regulations on federal officers could be deemed permissible, since federal officers can still functionally carry out arrests. States could dictate everything from uniform requirements, such as masks, to vehicle conditions to verbal commands or warnings.

The opinion is spotty in its analysis and sweeping in its implications. It is, in my view, ripe for reversal either before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit or the Supreme Court.

Read more …

“..almost 1/3 of the American people live in a city, county or state where the left wing leadership tells local law enforcement not to work with federal law enforcement..”

Jordan Opens Bondi Hearing By Railing Against Sanctuary Cities (JTN)

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on Wednesday opened a hearing with Attorney General Pam Bondi by railing against sanctuary cities and their impact on Americans.”The chairs now recognize 18 cities, 11 states, excuse me, three counties and the District of Columbia are sanctuary jurisdictions, accounting for 31% of the population in this country, 31% of the American people, almost 1/3 of the American people live in a city, county or state where the left wing leadership tells local law enforcement not to work with federal law enforcement,” he said.


Jordan then turned to the case of Abraham Gonzalez, an illegal alien whom Colorado authorities released from prison after ignoring a detainer from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) who later assaulted an officer. He then highlighted the voluminous instances of ICE detainers issued in sanctuary jurisdictions for violent offenders said that such policies were “helping create the environment that results in the tragic deaths.” Jordan made the remarks as part of his opening statement.

Read more …

“Now, why would you need these intelligence guys, these plain clothes guys, to just show up? It just stinks to high heaven, but I believe I was a target,”Now, why would you need these intelligence guys, these plain clothes guys, to just show up? It just stinks to high heaven, but I believe I was a target..”

Lawmaker Probing J6 Worried US Capitol Police Intel Politicized vs GOP (JTN)

The House chairman tasked with investigating law enforcement and intelligence failures related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot says he is probing whether U.S. Capitol Police intelligence gathering was weaponized by House Democratic leadership against their Republican colleagues in the aftermath of the Capitol riot. Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., who is the Chairman of the Select Subcommittee on January 6, said he suspects that Democrats used the department to gather information on Republican lawmakers concurrent with the Justice Department’s wider Arctic Frost probe into alleged efforts by President Donald Trump and his followers to contest the 2020 election results. Loudermilk told Just the News that what former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund and others told his committee raises questions about how the department’s intelligence arm might have been used to further what he says was “weaponization against members of Congress.”


“Political weaponization against members of Congress”
“There may be some evidence out there that this [Arctic Frost] extended all the way into Congress, that there was investigation and political weaponization against members of Congress that may even have ties with the Select Committee on January 6,” Loudermilk told the Just the News, No Noise TV show on Tuesday, referring to the Democrat-led committee that probed the Trump administration alongside the Justice Department. “There’s others who have spoken to us about efforts within the political element of Congress, within the Democrat Party, who were actively seeking access to the Capitol Police database and their intelligence, and they were using that intelligence against sitting members of Congress,” Loudermilk added.

The probe into Trump and his allies in the aftermath of Jan. 6, code named “Arctic Frost,” was led by an openly anti-Trump FBI supervisor, and was eventually taken over by Special Prosecutor Jack Smith. The probe treated the effort by Trump’s allies to submit alternate electors to Congress to sway the certification of the 2020 election as a criminal conspiracy, even though two prior episodes in American history were not prosecuted as crimes. Experts told Just the News last year the FBI memo that officially launched the investigation, around the time that Trump announced he would run for president again, was thin on evidence and legal justifications.

Snooping and snapping
The House Judiciary Committee, the parent of Loudermilk’s subcommittee, released FBI records last year showing that the Arctic Frost investigators targeted more than 160 Republicans in Donald Trump’s orbit, including members of the president’s staff and Republican officials from the House and Senate. Loudermilk pointed to the case of Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, a member of his subcommittee, who claims that Capitol Police searched his office. Nehls alleged in a lawsuit last year that an officer improperly entered his office during the 2021 Thanksgiving break and snapped a photograph of his office whiteboard. Later, plainclothes officers returned to the office and questioned a staffer about the whiteboard without the congressman’s permission, the court documents allege.

“That is totally outside the realm of anything acceptable here,” Loudermilk said of the Nehls search. “He was investigated as a member of Congress by the US Capitol Police, and I know he has litigation regarding that going right now, but I think this is just the tip of the iceberg of what may have been happening, not only in the Wray FBI, but under the Pelosi House of Representatives as well.” “It just stinks to high heaven, but I believe I was a target,” Nehls say Nehls also told Just the News that he believes the Capitol Police spied on him because of his outspoken criticism of the department in the wake of Jan. 6. “I think that the Capitol Police, they found a few weaklings in there to go out there and spy – I will say ‘spy’ – and look into members of Congress that were very, very outspoken and critical of January 6,” Nehls told the John Solomon Reports podcast.

“We found out that these employees worked for the intelligence division of the U.S. Capitol Police. Now, why would you need these intelligence guys, these plain clothes guys, to just show up? It just stinks to high heaven, but I believe I was a target,” Nehls added. Former Capitol Police Chief Sund confirmed that even before Jan. 6 he faced increasing pressure from Democratic leadership for access to the Capitol Police intelligence unit, which he called “very concerning.” Sund told Just the News that “it was an ongoing process where we had, you know, people, senior staffers, like from [Senator Chuck] Schumer’s staff that wanted to be involved in intelligence briefing, wanted to have access into the Capitol Police Headquarters, specifically to be able to access into the intelligence unit.”

Though he pushed back on those efforts, Sund told the John Solomon Reports podcast that he does not know what happened after he resigned on Jan. 16, 2021, just ten days after the riot during which hundreds of protesters entered the secured Capitol building. “My concern is, what happened after January 6? You know, did these people then all of a sudden, now get involved? They’re now on the intelligence calls, intelligence briefings, things like that. Now, are they using that for any political benefit?” Sund questioned. Loudermilk has doggedly investigated the Jan. 6 security failures and politicization related to the Democrat-led Jan. 6 Select Committee for years. He exposed a key witness who changed her story that was damaging to Trump and documented failures to secure key entry points at the U.S. Capitol before protesters entered.

Pipe bomb mystery solved by Patel’s FBI
He also relentlessly pursued accountability for what was the biggest unsolved mystery of that day, how the FBI had failed to identify a suspect in the planting of two pipe bombs at the Democratic and Republican Party headquarters. That case was blown open last year when the new FBI Director, Kash Patel, and his then-Deputy Director, Dan Bongino, brought a new team and a fresh perspective to the mountains of data collected by investigators. The new approach led to the arrest of suspect Brian Cole Jr. of Virginia. Earlier this month, Loudermilk subpoenaed T-Mobile for the phone records that it had turned over to the FBI and had languished in its possession until last year.

Read more …

19 years ago he spelled it out. Who listened?

Munich 2007: Putin’s Warning To The West (RT)

Exactly 19 years ago on Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin took the podium at the Munich Security Conference and demolished the myths and falsehoods underpinning the American-led world order. Did anyone heed his warning? To Russia, the “rules-based international order” has always been shorthand for a system in which the US makes the rules and issues the orders. “However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making,” Putin told the audience in Munich. “It is a world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.”


Under the auspices of protecting this order, the US carried out “unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions,” in “disdain for the basic principles of international law,” he declared.In the decade before Putin’s speech, the US invaded Afghanistan, invaded Iraq, and led a NATO bombing campaign against Yugoslavia on behalf of Kosovo separatists. Four years after his speech, NATO forces dropped more than 7,000 bombs on Libya, ending Muammar Gaddafi’s rule and handing the keys of the country to jihadists and slave traders. “No one feels safe,” Putin stated in 2007, “because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them.”

Putin warned that NATO’s broken promises to halt its eastward expansion after the Cold War represented “a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust.” The Russian president noted that the US-led bloc had already placed its “frontline forces on our borders,” and asked “against whom is this expansion intended?” The following year, NATO published its infamous Bucharest declaration, assuring Ukraine and Georgia that they “will become members” at an unspecified future date. The consequences of this declaration – which flew in the face of warnings from Putin and American strategists – are playing out in Ukraine today.

No, the Atlanticist neoliberal establishment roundly ignored Putin’s layered and impassioned warning. But Russia kept trying. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov echoed Putin’s complaints when he spoke at the conference in 2018, pointing out that “NATO troops and military infrastructure are accumulating on our borders,” and that “the European theatre of war is being systematically developed.” By that stage several thousand people had been killed in Donbass. Lavrov urged European leaders to abide by the Minsk agreements, which were ostensibly aimed at ending hostilities in Donetsk and Lugansk and granting autonomy to the two predominantly Russian-speaking regions.

Following the collapse of the accords, and the escalation of the conflict in 2022, European and Ukrainian leaders admitted that the agreements were a ruse to enable Ukraine to buy time to prepare for a war with Russia.The organizers of the Munich Security Conference have not so much as attempted any introspection over the last 18 years. Instead, in their latest report, they blame US President Donald Trump for taking a “wrecking ball” to the so-called “rules-based international order.”

All the Europeans could do was cry. Literally, conference Chairman Christoph Heusgen broke down in tears during his closing comments, sobbing as he lamented the decline of the “rules-based international order” and proclaiming that “our common value base is not that common anymore.”nVance’s speech “illustrated just how different the current administration’s perspective on key issues is from the bipartisan liberal-internationalist consensus that has long guided US grand strategy,” Munich Security Conference Foundation President Wolfgang Ischinger wrote in a report ahead of this year’s conference, which kicks off on Friday. As such, discussion in Munich this year will focus almost entirely on “the United States’ evolving view of the international order,” he wrote.

Read more …

” For the first time since 1972, Russia (the former USSR) and the US have no treaty limiting strategic nuclear forces..”

Russia Will Stick To Nuclear Arms Limits If US Does The Same (ZH)


One of the globe’s biggest developing stories this month, but which has been largely underreported in mainstream TV networks and other press, is the collapse of New START – the last major nuclear arms control treaty between Russia and the United States. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Wednesday that Moscow will in good faith stick to the nuclear limits outlined in the now-expired arms control treaty, provided Washington does the same. It expired earlier this month after Washington declined to respond to President Vladimir Putin’s proposal for a one-year extension capping both sides’ nuclear arsenals.

The Trump admin has long wanted a more comprehensive agreement which brings China’s arsenal into the scope; however, there’s been no formal process on this front with Beijing or Moscow. Lavrov said Russia has no intention of rapidly expanding or deploying additional weapons, clarifying remarks from his ministry last week that suggested Moscow no longer considered itself bound by the treaty. “We proceed from the fact that this moratorium, which was announced by our president, remains in effect, but only while the United States does not exceed the outlined limits,” Lavrov told Russia’s parliament.

Some key aspects to the treaty have gone unobserved for some time, especially the regimen of mutual nuclear site inspections.President Trump has in the recent past called New START “badly negotiated” and said it “is being grossly violated. He has in mind Russia having blocked inspections of its nuclear facilities under the treaty framework in 2023, as tensions with Washington escalated over the proxy war in Ukraine. Moscow has in turn complained that Washington is the chief violator, and that it now refuses to respond to Putin’s overture to extend it by one year, while a more comprehensive and extended deal is negotiated.

That’s it. For the first time since 1972, Russia (the former USSR) and the US have no treaty limiting strategic nuclear forces. SALT 1, SALT 2, START I, START II, SORT, New START – all in the past. pic.twitter.com/D3TBZM9ffC — Dmitry Medvedev (@MedvedevRussiaE) February 4, 2026


Last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio gave insight into why the White House has let New START expire: “Obviously, the president’s been clear in the past that in order to have true arms control in the 21st century, it’s impossible to do something that doesn’t include China because of their vast and rapidly growing stockpile,” he explained.

Read more …

Did the Internet make journalism worse?

All the Media’s Men: When Journalism Became the Story -Part II of II (Wilson)

There was once a professional rule in American journalism that functioned as a real constraint: report the story; do not become the story. It was not a claim of purity. Ego, ambition, and moral certainty were known dangers, and the rule existed to keep them from overwhelming the work. Journalism was never perfect. Nothing is. But it was once constrained by this rule and by rivalry among competing papers, by scarcity of publishing platforms, by reputational risk, and by audiences willing to walk away. Those constraints mattered more than ideology.mThe first visible crack came with Nellie Bly, fairly described as a stunt reporter. Her work was brave and effective, exposing abuses that would otherwise have remained hidden.


But it also introduced a dangerous precedent: the journalist as protagonist. Readers followed the reporter as much as the facts. The tool proved powerful and reusable. The profession corrected itself for a time. Through the 1940s and 1950s, likely learning from war reporting norms, American journalism emphasized impersonality and restraint. Authority came from distance. Reporters were meant to be interchangeable. Credibility rested on institutional voice rather than personality. Television eroded that equilibrium. Once news had faces, voices, and time slots, personality became unavoidable. The anchor was no longer merely delivering information but performing steadiness and judgment.

Journalism did not yet see itself as entertainment, but it had begun using entertainment tools: lighting, camera angles, makeup, vocal intonation, even on-scene reporting.The decisive rupture came with Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. What they uncovered mattered. Watergate took advantage of a nascent mythic template: the journalist as lone truth-seeker standing between power and the people. Reporting, fed by classic Hollywood movies that romanticized the crusading reporter, became an identity rather than a function.mFrom that point forward, becoming the story was no longer a lapse. It was aspirational.

Hollywood, Myth, and Moral Authority
Watergate supplied the moment. Hollywood, already primed to heroize the reporter, crafted the meaning. Films like All the President’s Men dramatized and then sanctified the Heroic Journalist. The journalist was patient, tenacious, hard-working, incorruptible, and uniquely qualified to Bring Truth to the public — a pattern that perfectly follows the Hero’s Journey. Opposition was framed not as disagreement but as ignorance or corruption. Journalism absorbed that image. It began to see itself as a secular clerisy: interpreters of reality rather than accountable informers. A clerisy assumes its authority by right of wisdom and superior knowledge. Questions are permitted only within bounds. Dissent is treated as moral failure rather than feedback.

Skepticism became asymmetrical. Journalists remained suspicious of every institution except one: their own. Tone displaced argument. Moral urgency crowded out evidentiary discipline. Entertainment tools such as emotion, narrative compression, repetition ceased to be aids and became substitutes for reasoning. And any pushback became grounds to cast the questioner out as a heretic.The pattern is familiar enough to be lampooned, as in my favorite satirical novel The Narrative, which captures how story replaces fact once the reporter becomes the hero and the audience becomes a problem to manage.

How Journalists Rise on the Left Today
Once journalism adopted that heroic clerical self-image, advancement followed a different logic. Status stopped coming from readers and started coming from institutions adjacent to power.Journalists rise by demonstrating narrative reliability, not truthfulness or factuality. Their stories must follow the Approved Narrative. Editors and other gatekeepers learn who can be trusted to frame events without destabilizing the approved story. This is rarely enforced explicitly. It works through selection. Those who create friction are sidelined; those who anticipate expectations are rewarded.

Read more …

“.. openly strategizing ways to work around that higher court ruling and keep giving bond releases to illegal aliens under the guise of “liberty interest.”

Texas Judges Strategize Ways to Block DHS From Enforcing Immigration Laws (CTH)

This is one step further than simple Lawfare, this story is about lower court judges openly strategizing ways to stop the enforcement of laws they are supposed to uphold. Last week the Fifth Circuit Cout of Appeals ruled that detaining illegal aliens during the deportation proceedings is entirely following current immigration law. Now, according to Politico, federal judges in Texas are openly strategizing ways to work around that higher court ruling and keep giving bond releases to illegal aliens under the guise of “liberty interest.”

POLITICO – […] two federal district court judges in Texas, who are bound by the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit’s ruling, said the 2-1 decision left an opening for them to continue granting immigrants’ release on other grounds, primarily constitutional arguments against detaining people who have established roots in the U.S. without due process. Those roots amount, in legal parlance, to a “liberty interest” that the Constitution says cannot be taken away without at least a hearing before a neutral judge. “This conclusion is not changed by the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision,” Judge Kathleen Cardone, an El Paso based appointee of George W. Bush, ruled late Monday in at least five cases, concluding that the circuit’s decision “has no bearing on this Court’s determination of whether [the petitioner] is being detained in violation of his constitutional right to procedural due process.”


Judge David Briones, an El Paso-based Clinton appointee, reached a similar conclusion. “The Court reiterates its original holding that noncitizens who have ‘established connections’ in the United States by virtue of living in the country for a substantial period acquire a liberty interest in being free from government detention without due process of law,” Briones wrote. The decisions from the Texas-based judges are notable in part because the administration has often rushed detainees there after their arrests in other states such as Minnesota.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.n A Justice Department official, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said the rulings were in keeping with the view that there are rogue judges who continue to make results-oriented decisions to suit their personal policy preferences.The 5th Circuit’s ruling has yet to percolate through federal courts across Texas and Louisiana, where detained immigrants have been filing so-called “habeas” petitions in extraordinary numbers to seek freedom from what they say is illegal detention without the opportunity for bond. The losing parties in Friday’s ruling may still appeal the decision to the full bench of the 5th Circuit or the Supreme Court. (more)”

Lower courts trying to circumvent higher court rulings, even before any plaintiff brings them a case or argument. This is judicial activism in the extremes.
Read more …

Hedge fund manager Ray Dalio warns that CBDCs will eliminate financial privacy and enable governments to tax, seize funds and cut off political opponents.

‘No Privacy’ CBDCs Will Come, Warns Billionaire Ray Dalio (CT)

American billionaire and hedge fund manager Ray Dalio has warned that central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) are coming, offering benefits but also potentially allowing governments to exert more control over people’s finances. “I think it will be done,” said Dalio on CBDCs in a wide-ranging interview on the Tucker Carlson Show on Monday, which also included topics on the US debt crisis, gold prices, and even a potential civil war. Ray Dalio is a billionaire hedge fund manager who has been co-chief investment officer of Bridgewater Associates since 1985, after founding the firm in 1975.


During the interview, Dalio said CBDCs could be appealing due to the ease of transactions, likening them to money market funds in terms of functionality, but he also cautioned about their downsides. He said there will be a debate, but CBDCs “probably won’t” offer interest, so they will not be “an effective vehicle to hold because you’ll have the depreciation [of the dollar].” Dalio also cautioned that all CBDC transactions will be known to the government, which is good for controlling illegal activity, but also provides a great deal of control in other areas. “There will be no privacy, and it’s a very effective controlling mechanism by the government.”

A programmable digital currency will enable the government to tax directly, “they can take your money,” and establish foreign exchange controls, he said. mThat will be an “increasing issue,” particularly for international holders of that currency, as the government can seize funds from nationals of sanctioned countries. mDalio also said that you could be “shut off” from a CBDC if you were “politically disfavored.” An American CBDC is unlikely to be deployed in the near future, as US President Donald Trump has been vocally opposed to them.

Soon after taking office in January 2025, Trump signed an executive order prohibiting “the establishment, issuance, circulation, and use” of a US CBDC. According to the Atlantic Council’s CBDC tracker, only three countries have officially launched a CBDC: Nigeria, Jamaica, and The Bahamas. Another 49 countries are testing CBDCs, including China, Russia, India and Brazil. Twenty nations have a CBDC in development, and 36 are still researching central bank digital currencies. India’s central bank reportedly proposed an initiative in January linking BRICS CBDCs to facilitate cross-border trade and tourism payments.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/upholdreality/status/2021316872277266889?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 012025
 


Cimabue Christ mocked c1280 (Photograph: Charles Platiau/Reuters)

 

Trump’s Trip to ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ Could Boost ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’ (DS)
Elon Musk Pledges to Launch Third Party if Big Beautiful Bill Passes (CTH)
Musk ‘A Wonderful Guy’ – Trump (RT)
Kevin Hassett Outlines Importance of Big Beautiful Bill (CTH)
America’s New Long War (Douglas Macgregor)
NATO’s 5% Spending Demand ‘Absolutely Impossible’ – Spain (RT)
Canada Scraps Digital Service Tax On US Tech Giants To Revive Trade Talks (ZH)
Trump Says TikTok Buyer Is “Group Of Very Wealthy People” (ZH)
When It’s Too Dirty For The CIA…” Benz On USAID’s Litany Of Corruption (ZH)
Stay Sane (James Howard Kunstler)
Bessent Slams Fed For Delay On Rate Decisions (ZH)
HHS Head RFK Jr Tells Tucker Carlson all the Terrible Stuff HHS is Doing (CTH)
CNN Promotes ICE App to Help Illegal Aliens Avoid Capture (CTH)
Trump the Greatest American President in History? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Stablecoins Are Becoming ‘Default Settlement Layer’ For Internet (CT)

 

 

vanJones

Benz

Pappé

Flynn

DOGE

 

 


Steve Keen

 

 

 

 

NOTE: From what I understand, Elon Musk’s problems with Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill policies are -to a large extent- about electricity generation. Trump claims it’s subsidies for Musk’s electric cars, but in reality it’s (AI) data centers. That’s where demand -growth- will be, and China gets that.

https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/1938569426200096997
https://twitter.com/XH_Lee23/status/1932281167342121246

 

 

 

 

Alligator Alcatraz is a keeper as a label.

Trump’s Trip to ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ Could Boost ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’ (DS)

sPresident Donald Trump is visiting a detention center dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz” on Tuesday, which the White House contends backs up the need to pass the “One Big, Beautiful Bill.” A reporter on Monday asked White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt why Trump would travel to the detention center about 50 miles west of Miami while the fate of the key tax and spending legislation hangs in the balance in the Senate. “His trip to this detention facility underscores the need to pass the One Big, Beautiful Bill because we need more detention facilities across the country,” Leavitt said. “The last administration let in nearly 20 million illegal people from all over the world. This administration is focused on arresting and detaining them.” If the bill, which locks in the 2017 Trump tax cuts and includes new money for border and immigration enforcement, passes the Senate, it has to return to the House for final passage after narrow approval.

“In comparison to that 20 million illegal criminal population in our country, we only have 7,000 [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] agents in the interior who are doing this very important work,” the press secretary continued. “So obviously, we need more personnel, we need more resources. That’s why we need to pass the One Big, Beautiful Bill.” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., will also be at the detention center for the opening. “The facility is in the heart of the Everglades and will be informally known as Alligator Alcatraz,” Leavitt said. “There is only one road leading in. The only way out is a one-way flight. It is isolated and surrounded by dangerous wildlife and unforgiving terrain. The facility will have up to 5,000 beds to house, process and deport criminal illegal aliens. This is an efficient and low cost way to help carry out the largest deportation campaign in American history.”

The original Alcatraz was an island prison off the coast of California that was difficult to escape. The facility is shuttered, but continued to be a tourist attraction. She later stressed the facility is for criminal illegal aliens. “When you have illegal murderers and rapists and heinous criminals in a detention facility surrounded by alligators, yes I do think that’s a deterrent for them to try to escape,” Leavitt said. “We do know that some of these illegal criminals have escaped from other detention facilities like one in New Jersey. Of course we want to keep the American people safe. We want to remove these public safety threats from our streets and we want to effectively detain them as best as we can.”

Read more …

He’ll get attention alright. But how about votes?

Elon Musk Pledges to Launch Third Party if Big Beautiful Bill Passes (CTH)

For those who have spent time in the lead up to this moment, you may remember our warning that Elon Musk would eventually take a position against President Trump and actively work to undermine the MAGA agenda therein. Tonight as the Senate debates the Big Beautiful Bill, that does not include subsidies for his electric vehicles and green energy initiatives, Elon Musk promises to organize a third party. This was all predictable.

The bill is imperfect, yes. However, the BBB contains the priorities of President Trump and those priorities are the goals and objectives of the people who voted to support his vision. Elon Musk is now actively working against the interests of the Make America Great Again movement, and he is intent on dividing the MAGA coalition.

Read more …

“..but I’m the boss..”

Musk ‘A Wonderful Guy’ – Trump (RT)

Donald Trump has called Elon Musk a “wonderful guy,” despite the Tesla and SpaceX CEO’s renewed criticism of the US president’s so-called “big, beautiful” budget bill which would include a $5 trillion debt ceiling increase. Musk again lashed out at the legislation on Saturday, writing on X that it was “utterly insane” and predicting that it would hurl the US into “debt slavery” and destroy millions of jobs. However, his warnings did not prevent the Senate from narrowly voting to move forward on Trump’s bill a few hours later.

A war of words erupted between the two former allies after Musk stepped down as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) a month ago. Besides criticizing the budget bill, he attacked Trump personally, including linking the US president to deceased convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The world’s richest man later deleted the post on X, acknowledging that some of his comments “went too far.” When asked by Fox News on Sunday if he still keeps in touch with Musk, Trump replied: “I think he is a wonderful guy. I have not spoken to him much, but I think Elon is a wonderful guy, and I know he is going to do well always.”

“He is a smart guy. And he actually went and campaigned with me and this and that. But he got a little bit upset, and that was not appropriate,” the president added about his falling-out with the entrepreneur. Trump reiterated his claim that Musk had become upset not because of the “big, beautiful bill,” but because of the president’s plans to roll back electric vehicle (EV) mandates around the country. “Look, the electric vehicle mandate, the EV mandate, is a tough thing for him. I would, you know, I do not want everybody to have to have an electric car,” Trump explained. In mid-June, the president went on to sign three resolutions barring California from mandating EV sales and setting tailpipe emissions standards that had been used as a template by other US states to speed up the transition away from combustion engines.

Read more …

Hassett is White House National Economic Council Director.

Kevin Hassett Outlines Importance of Big Beautiful Bill (CTH)

White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett appears on Fox News to outline some of the background details of the Big Beautiful Bill. Interestingly, after happy Hassett outlines the specifics of the benefits within the bill, he dodges a question about possibly becoming the next Fed Chairman.

Read more …

X post.

America’s New Long War (Douglas Macgregor)

Wars frequently pick up where the last ones left off. World War II ended where World War 1 ended. Operation Iraqi Freedom (Gulf War II) began where Desert Storm (Gulf War I) concluded. Today there is every reason to expect the recent 12-day conflict between Iran on one side and Israel and the United States on the other to resume when the Israeli and U.S. Forces have replenished their stocks of missiles. No doubt, the Iranians will work hard to radically improve their integrated air defenses. For simplicity, let’s call the current conflict, the “New Long War.” As always, the New Long War continues with other means. GEN Erik Kurilla, the CENTCOM CDR is known for his close relationship with PM Bibi Netanyahu and his enthusiasm for the Greater Israel Project including seizure of Sinai and the Suez Canal.

Fully aware of the impossibility of rapidly conquering and seizing the Suez Canal without active American military support, General Kurilla may have received authority from President Trump to conduct joint planning. The presence of a newly established Russia phased array radar in Egypt suggests Moscow is aware of the possibility. The Russian phased array radar can reportedly track stealth aircraft and missile launches at long range. Further east, some 1,200 miles away in Azerbaijan, Israel’s Azeri-Turkish ally is allegedly preparing to attack Armenia and, potentially, northern Iran. GEN Kurilla also knows that Iran, like Russia, has a long history of cooperation with Orthodox Christian Armenia. Israel provided critical drone technology to Azerbaijan in its last victorious campaign against Armenia, and Azerbaijan likely provided support for Israeli operations against Iran.

GEN Kurilla is also acquainted with the MEK (Mojahedin-e-Khalq) an anti-Iranian Kurdish Force formerly aligned with Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq. The MEK fights for regime change in Iran and is predictably now aligned with the Trump Administration. Azerbaijan’s goal is a greater Azerbaijan created by forcibly annexing Iran’s Turkic Azeri population centered on Tabriz in Northern Iran. The unspoken assumption in Washington, Jerusalem, and Baku is that the Azeri Turks in Northern Iran will welcome the opportunity to join with their Azeri neighbors. The national leaders in all three States view this operation as contributing to the breakup and destruction of Iranian national unity, as well as the desired regime changes in Tehran. These operations are in the planning stage but could be launched at any time. These may or may not wait for the U.S. and Israeli missile arsenals to be replenished.

A similar approach was employed in Ukraine against Russia. However, the operation to remove President Putin from power in Moscow, to foment unrest and violence against Moscow inside Russia, Kazakhstan and other neighboring states was botched. Washington’s gamble failed. Russia remains intact. Russia’s resources remain beyond the reach of Western financial power. The Russian State and its military power are stronger than ever. Ukraine is destroyed. The history of Washington’s military interventions is not encouraging. Washington’s interventions since 1953 failed to cultivate the emergence of any liberal democratic states. If anything, Washington’s near constant interventionism spread authoritarianism across North Africa and the Middle East. The new long war seeks to subvert and destroy Iran promising a similar outcome.

However, this time, the New Long War will invite broader participation from numerous Muslim states, Russia, and China. In contrast to past interventions, the new long war could also prove impossible to sustain inside American society. As seen during the Black Lives Matter (BLM)/Antifa riots in 2020 and, more recently, the appearance of Mexican flags during anti-ICE demonstrations in Los Angeles, American societal cohesion is low, with ominous connotations for American national power. Notwithstanding President Trump’s tariff offensive, the trade policies sponsored by both parties for at least 40 years encouraged de-industrialization. The problem is inseparable from immigration policy. Since 1965, America has admitted over 50 million legal immigrants, most from the developing world. Today, there may be as many as 50 million illegal immigrants inside the U.S., including 20 to 30 million illegals that arrived during the Biden administration.

Simultaneously, real wages for working-class Americans stagnated despite real increases in productivity and soaring corporate profits. At the same time, Washington’s financialization of the economy—a form of rent extraction, with profits earned through privileged access to new money created by the Federal Reserve—combined with the destruction of American manufacturing, supports a massive wealth transfer mechanism. Economic data collected between 1979 and 2018 shows that while productivity increased by 59.7%, hourly compensation for non-supervisory workers rose by only 17.5%. The difference went to capital owners and financial intermediaries. Wealth moved from America’s dying middle class to the top 10 percent of income earners.

The implications of these developments for Washington’s global political, military, and economic power are profound. Why? There are multiple reasons, but three are of immediate importance:
First, in the five decades since Washington disestablished the gold standard, the debt-to-GDP ratio has grown from 40 percent to more than 120 percent of GDP and it continues to climb. Consequently, the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet expanded from $80 billion to well over $8 trillion. With spending levels and deficit trajectories that are not sustainable, the notion of a trillion-dollar defense budget is absurd.

Second, there is an undeniable shift in the global balance of economic power. A new intercontinental commercial trading and monetary system is rising. It’s called BRICS, an intergovernmental organization consisting of ten nation-states: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. Together, these nation-states constitute more than a third of global GDP. A further 50 or more nation-states that want to join BRICS will push it to nearly 50 percent of global GDP. More important, China, Russia, India, and Iran are civilizational constructs—power centers that, after centuries of trailing in development behind the West (or enduring its exploitation), are now roaring back to life. In some ways, the world of the 21st century may be on track to resurrect the constellation of powers that dominated the world in the 11th century.

Third, the proliferation of technology across national borders combined with the growth of high human capital inside BRICS is conferring military capabilities on BRICS members that were previously unavailable to any but Western Powers. Put another way, the attempt to repeat a Desert Storm scenario anywhere on the Eurasian landmass would spell disaster for American military power. Finally, Washington’s political class manifests much less regard for the long-term strategic interests of its own citizens—their security and prosperity. As a result, Washington pays an exorbitant price in reputation and treasure for policies that confront Palestinians with the choice of death or expulsion from their homelands.

There are many moving parts in the regional strategy outlined at the beginning of this post. Assumptions of tacit acceptance or rapid capitulation are implicit and dangerous. When Hitler was briefed on the expected Soviet reaction to Operation Barbarossa, Major General Ernst Koestring, a Prussian officer fluent in Russian from a family that had lived in Moscow since the reign of Catherine the Great, advised: “Initially, German forces will advance rapidly. The various peoples on the Soviet periphery will likely welcome the German forces. Resistance will be weak. But when the Germans advance into Russian territory, the resistance will be tremendous. The Russian population will fight for every square meter of territory.” Hitler politely thanked him but remained convinced that poor Soviet military performance in Finland in 1939 suggested a different outcome in 1941. Koestring, of course, was right.

Diplomacy is the art of the possible. Warfare is always a gamble. A partial success in the diplomatic sphere is preferable to gambling on success in war that may turn into catastrophic failure. Unless the American electorate demands accountability for what the White House and Congress do in their name, Americans will face a grim reckoning with financial, political, and military reality at home and abroad.

Read more …

Only Spain is honest. EuroNATO doesn’t have the weapons nor the industry capacity.

NATO’s 5% Spending Demand ‘Absolutely Impossible’ – Spain (RT)

NATO member Spain has roundly rejected demands by US President Donald Trump and military bloc chief Mark Rutte to increase its spending on militarisation to 5% of the country’s GDP. European members of the NATO are not capable of meeting the US demand, Spanish Defense Minister Margarita Robles insisted to Spanish lawmakers on Friday, dismissing the 5% target declared by Rutte at last week’s bloc summit as “absolutely impossible” to achieve. ”Everyone is absolutely convinced that right now there is no industry capable of absorbing 5%,” she told the country’s Senate Defense Commission. “We can say whatever we want, we can dress it up or disguise it, but no industry can take it on.”

Madrid pushed back against the target ahead of the summit in the Netherlands, proposing a more modest 2.1% spending level. Last year, Spain stood out as the NATO member dedicating the least percentage of its GDP (1.28%) to the military, compared to 4.12% in the case of Poland. Robles, however, claimed the comparison is misleading. According to Robles, European defense companies lack both the skilled workforce and access to raw materials needed to scale up production – even if governments managed to provide the necessary funding. Other NATO members privately acknowledge the same concerns and are stalling for time, she claimed.

Spain is “a serious, reliable, committed, and responsible ally, who speaks less and does more,” Robles told an event at Madrid’s Higher Center for Defense Studies. The national defense industry “does not need lessons from anyone,” she declared, suggesting Trump “should have used his influence to end the war in Ukraine” instead of pressuring Spain to boost military spending. Trump claimed during his presidential campaign last year that he could end the conflict between Russia and Ukraine “in 24 hours.” Since taking office, however, he has acknowledged the situation is more complicated than he initially believed. Moscow views NATO’s intention to grant membership to Ukraine as an existential threat and characterizes the ongoing conflict as a proxy war waged by the bloc “to the last Ukrainian.”

Read more …

Some people present this as positive for Carney. I still see the opposite.

Canada Scraps Digital Service Tax On US Tech Giants To Revive Trade Talks (ZH)

Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne wrote on X overnight that Canada has withdrawn its controversial Digital Services Tax (DST) on Silicon Valley tech giants, such as Alphabet and Meta, in order to restart stalled trade negotiations with the Trump administration. It’s another win for President Trump, as his ‘Art of the Deal’ tactics continue to bring far-left progressive countries back in line with his ‘America First’ agenda. “Canada is engaged in complex negotiations on a new economic and security partnership with the U.S.,” Champagne wrote on X late Sunday. He continued, “Rescinding the DST will allow the negotiations to make vital progress and reinforce our work to create jobs and build prosperity for all Canadians.”

https://twitter.com/justwannasayth2/status/1939508514587570182?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1939508514587570182%7Ctwgr%5Ecbab1c2016f9d159fc8bdd558138dcc17c934a65%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fcanada-scraps-digital-service-tax-us-tech-giants-revive-trade-talks

As a freser, Canada’s DST was a 3% tax on the revenue that big tech companies earn from Canadian users, specifically from online advertising, marketplaces, and user data. Canada’s move follows President Trump’s Friday afternoon announcement calling for all trade discussions with the country to be terminated. He also threatened to impose new tariffs within a week. Also last Friday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer would investigate the tax to “determine the amount of harm to the U.S. companies and the U.S. economy in general.” The stakes are high for Canada, as three-quarters of its exports are shipped to the U.S.—including energy products, other commodities, and automobiles—so tariffs would be devastating to the local economy. Canada has taken the common-sense approach of returning to the negotiating table with Trump to work out a trade deal that benefits everyone.

UBS analyst Jason Cheng commented overnight on the developments: Canada has withdrawn its digital services tax on technology companies in a move to restart trade talks with the U.S. This came after the pause in talks last Friday when U.S. President Donald Trump called an end to discussions with Canada, in retaliation for the digital tax. USDCAD is trading lower post the headline. Daniel Béland, a political science professor at McGill University in Montreal, told AP News that Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s retreat was a “clear victory” for Trump. “President Trump forced PM Carney to do exactly what big tech wanted. U.S. tech executive will be very happy with this outcome,” Béland said. Moments ago, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick thanked Canada for removing the DST tax.

Read more …

“I was No. 1 on TikTok in its history. Can you believe that? … So I guess I like TikTok.”

Trump Says TikTok Buyer Is “Group Of Very Wealthy People” (ZH)

President Donald Trump, in a pre-taped interview on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo, revealed that “a group of very wealthy people” is prepared to acquire TikTok’s U.S. operations. While he did not disclose the identities of the investors, Trump hinted that the names could be made public in the coming weeks. “We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way. I think I’ll probably need China approval, and I think President Xi will probably do it,” Trump told Bartiromo, noting, “It’s a group of very wealthy people.” TikTok’s future in the U.S. has been uncertain since the passage of the 2024 bipartisan law, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), which requires the platform’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to divest its ownership or face a nationwide ban.

The legislation was fueled by growing concerns over various national security threats, including foreign interference in elections and potential misuse of sensitive user data. Just weeks ago, Trump once again delayed enforcement of PAFACA through an executive order, pushing the deadline back to mid-September. The original implementation date had been set for his inauguration in January. Trump has been a supporter of TikTok, recently touting his popularity on the app: “I was No. 1 on TikTok in its history. Can you believe that? … So I guess I like TikTok.” Trump has tasked Vice President JD Vance with overseeing efforts to find a potential buyer, which could include Oracle’s Larry Ellison and firms like Perplexity AI and AppLovin.

Read more …

“I see a lot of bathwater and very little baby.”

When It’s Too Dirty For The CIA…” Benz On USAID’s Litany Of Corruption (ZH)

For those who turned into the live debate last night, we apologize for the ”demonstration of Wirecast” mantra that played repeatedly. This was not a mass MK Ultra sleeper cell activation but a glitch with our streaming software. And, yes, we have an active Wirecast subscription. So… please direct your hate mail to support@telestream.net. That aside — Keith Knight, Mike Benz, and Cenk Uygur — respectively the abolitionist, reformist, and proponent — had a great debate. Here were the highlights for those who missed it: Responding to Cenk’s defense of USAID’s HIV programs with the phrase, “Keep the baby with the bathwater,” Benz retorted sharply: “I see a lot of bathwater and very little baby,” citing forced sterilizations in Peru and aggressive abortion campaigns in Latin America and Africa as evidence that USAID is sometimes involved in “the opposite of saving babies… USAID is taking the lives of babies.”

Benz further detailed covert operations masked as health aid, referencing a CIA-backed, USAID-funded fake vaccine program in Pakistan that collected blood and DNA under the guise of counterterrorism. “Nobody would think [HIV prevention] would be where they would establish a recruiting office for regime change,” he noted on a similar program in Cuba. Even massive charity efforts like Band Aid and Live Aid come under fire, with Benz alleging that “of the 100 million raised, 95 million went to purchase weapons for rebels in Somalia.” In sum, Benz urges scrutiny: “We have to look at what USAID is doing vs. what they say they are doing.”

https://twitter.com/JohnMcCloy/status/1939119325866000788

“When it’s too dirty for the CIA…” Benz’s view boiled down: USAID is a cover arm of U.S. foreign policy. “USAID at its heart is a CIA function.” Even seemingly benign programs—whether about “food security, public health, independent media, [or] rule of law”—are, according to Benz, “secretly accomplishing some goal the State Department wants to achieve.” These programs can also channel funds back home to prop up the “political apparatus” through kickbacks. Benz underscored the lack of oversight, warning that “USAID has only ONE METHOD OF ACCOUNTABILITY… The Inspector General,” and that it can “block Congress,” effectively bypassing legislative checks. Pointing to the Zunzuneo scandal—USAID’s secret attempt to incite an Arab Spring-style uprising in Cuba—Benz noted that when the operation was exposed, “Obama denied knowledge because he didn’t give a presidential finding & the Congress & Senate said we didn’t know this was happening.”

“Foreign aid has gone way too rogue,” he concluded, noting that USAID has now been expelled from eight countries. His prescription is one of reform: “USAID has to go into the shop for repairs before it is driven back out onto the road again.” For the abolitionist perspective — i.e. no foreign aid whatsoever — tune into the full debate below for remarks by Keith Knight, editor at Scott Horton’s Libertarian Institute. Knight is one of the brightest young thinkers among modern libertarians:

Read more …

“Betting against Donald Trump is usually a bad idea.” —Insurrection Barbie on “X”

Stay Sane (James Howard Kunstler)

What apparently riles the credentialed political Left — the “gay / race communists” in the apt new phrase — more than anything, is that most of the country has opted to not be insane. This follows a decade-long attempt to drive the country insane, of course, to believe in things that are patently untrue and absurd, and to utilize falsehood and absurdity to garishly destroy the nation.

So, it fits that Donald Trump, the uber-realist of political game-playing, pushes what remains of the Democratic Party into a rapture of impotent rage. They’ve got nothing left but the empty acting-out of lunatics in an asylum of their own making. The wrathful grass-widows choking on their chardonnay in Martha’s Vineyard, the furious nose-rings steaming under their keffiyehs in the summer heat, the “Transtifas” storming police lines with their ridiculous umbrellas, the doddering Boomer-hippies reenacting the festive protest marches of 1968, minus a single coherent principle, the wigged-out congresspersons storming the ICE detention centers, the Covid vaccine victims duped into multiple organ failure (their hearts and brains especially), the “allies” of every loser group from Bangor to Brentwood in a frenzy of baffled grievance — these poor, lost wretches so far gone that even the likes of David Axelrod, James Carville, and Frank Luntz can’t stand to be associated with them anymore, is all the Democrats have left in their manure-stuffed donkey stable.

The abiding mystery remains: what exactly set in motion this fantastic cascade of political madness, especially among the highly educated demographic. The seemingly obvious answer is higher education itself, infested since the 1960s with Marxist zealots, sexual malcontents, and resentment-filled diversity hires. And while that has surely played its part, it doesn’t sufficiently explain the ugly dynamic.

Another explanation runs toward a plot by international “oligarchical” corruptniks to corner all the goodies of the world and either turn the rest of us into their slaves, or just kill us off — and to do it in such a way as to rub it in our faces, so as to provide the corruptniks with some mirthful entertainment as they go about their dastardly business. For instance, the recent weekend wedding of Huma Abedin and Alex Soros on the very day that the moiling minions whom they sponsor held their nationwide “No Kings” rallies inn the streets.

Huma, the bride, you recall, was Hillary Clinton’s sidekick back in Hillary’s glory days, especially the time of her glorious and inevitable rise (her regal “turn”) to occupy the White House, thwarted inconceivably by the preposterous showman, Mr. Trump. Hillary, you also might recall, left the White House broke-ass-broke in 2001 only to agglomerate a stupendous multi-hundred-million-dollar fortune working as a US Senator and then Secretary of State (salaries $170,000 and $260,600 respectively). That is, Hillary acquired her great fortune in about the same way that the royalty-of-old acquired theirs — by grift and theft.

And Huma, former wife of disgraced congressman and convicted Internet pervert Anthony Weiner, is now wed to decade-younger financial royalist Alex Soros, son of George, who made the bulk of his fortune (estimated $7.2-billion) shorting the British pound sterling in 1992 and went on to found a vast array of NGOs and so-called philanthropies (the Open Society Foundations) that specialize in influencing elections worldwide, conducting regime-change campaigns, and lately financing seditious movements within the United States. Heir-apparent Alex is reported to have taken over the day-to-day operations of that network — but, we must have no kings, you understand.

Read more …

The next Fed chief?

Bessent Slams Fed For Delay On Rate Decisions (ZH)

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Monday criticized Federal Reserve policymakers for what he described as their hesitant posture on interest rates, while signaling that the U.S. Treasury is unlikely to alter its current strategy on debt issuance by increasing long-term bond sales. In a wide-ranging interview, Bessent said that recent yields on long-duration Treasurys make it a poor time to lengthen the government’s debt profile. “Why would we do that?” Bessent said on Bloomberg Television. “The time to have done that would have been in 2021, 2022.” Ten-year Treasury yields currently stand at about 4.26%, well above the levels of shorter-term instruments such as the two-year note (3.73%) and 12-month bills (3.81%). Bessent suggested issuing more long-term bonds at these rates would be counterproductive, especially given his expectation that inflation will continue to moderate and pull interest rates lower across the maturity spectrum.

“As we see inflation come down, I think the whole curve in parallel can shift down,” he said, referencing the Treasury yield curve, a key barometer for economic sentiment. Bessent, who succeeded Janet Yellen as Treasury chief, has retained much of his predecessor’s issuance strategy, despite having previously criticized her for over-reliance on short-term borrowing. At the time, he argued the policy was politically motivated to suppress long-term borrowing costs ahead of the 2024 election. But Bessent emphasized that now is not the moment to pivot. “Why would we do it at these rates, if we are more than one standard deviation above the long-term rate?” he asked rhetorically.

While expressing confidence in the direction of fiscal policy and trade strategy, Bessent leveled pointed criticism at the Federal Reserve’s rate-setting stance. They “seem a little frozen at the wheel,” he said of Fed officials. “My worry here is that, having fallen down on the American people in 2022, the Fed’s now looking at their feet,” rather than looking ahead. The Treasury Secretary cited the Fed’s delayed response to rising prices in 2022 as a pivotal misstep and warned that similar inertia could hinder the central bank’s ability to respond to changing economic conditions. “The Fed made a gigantic mistake in 2022,” he added.

Bessent also pushed back against the idea that recent tariffs have stoked inflation. “We have seen no inflation from tariffs,” he said, calling such effects “transitory” and suggesting they result in only a one-time price adjustment. He hinted at more trade activity on the horizon, saying he expects a “flurry of trade deals” in the days leading up to the July 9 negotiating deadline. The U.S. has already reached agreements with the United Kingdom and China, with ongoing talks still underway.

Meanwhile, as speculation mounts over who might succeed Fed Chair Jerome Powell when his term ends in May 2026, Bessent acknowledged that discussions are already underway. “Obviously there are people who are currently at the Fed who are under consideration,” he said, adding that the administration is eyeing the January 2026 seat opening as a potential stepping stone for the next chair. Observers have noted Governor Christopher Waller – a Trump-era appointee who has recently called for possible rate cut – as a likely contender. Bessent also mentioned that current Governor Adriana Kugler’s term concludes in January, providing another possible opening for strategic appointments. He downplayed speculation about his own interest in the job. “I’ll do whatever the president wants,” he said, but added that he already has the “best job in DC”

Looking forward, Bessent expressed optimism about the direction of U.S. fiscal strategy. He voiced support for the Republican budget bill currently advancing in Congress, describing it as a “start” in the effort to bring U.S. debt under control while promoting economic growth. Bessent also suggested that we could see a lowering of rates, as inflation is “very tame,” adding that he is confident the fiscal policy bill will progress in the coming hours.

Read more …

“..terrible vaccines, dangerous food additives, horrible health effects from toxic food chemicals, along with corruption, bribery and pay-to-play schemes..”

“..someone ought to tell him he’s the Health and Human Services Secretary now..”

HHS Head RFK Jr Tells Tucker Carlson all the Terrible Stuff HHS is Doing (CTH)

As Robert F Kennedy Jr outlines all the bad things the Health and Human Services agency is doing, terrible vaccines, dangerous food additives, horrible health effects from toxic food chemicals, along with corruption, bribery and pay-to-play schemes within the medical advisory system, someone ought to tell him he’s the Health and Human Services Secretary now. Secretary RFK JR sits down with Tucker Carlson to outline all the deleterious impacts from the processes that flow out of the healthcare system he now controls.

Chapters:
0:00 The Organized Opposition to RFK’s Mission
6:46 Uncovering the Reason for Skyrocketing Rates of Autism
13:41 How Big Pharma Enslaves Doctors and Profits off Sickness
24:22 Is It Possible to End the Corrupt Relationship Between Big Pharma and Corporate Media?
33:35 Will RFK End Vaccine Company’s Lawsuits Immunity?
38:37 The Most Damaging Vaccine in History
47:49 Will There Be Compensation for the Vaccine-Injured?
53:47 Did the Covid Vaccine Kill More People Than It Saved?
57:50 RFK’s Firing of So-Called “Experts”
1:01:58 How Big Pharma Makes Billions off the Vaccine Schedule
1:05:08 The Real Reason Fauci Got a Pardon
1:10:42 When Will We See the Declassification of the JFK, RFK, and MLK Files?
1:20:51 How Trump Is Transforming Washington

Read more …

“Apparently the Apple and Google stores have authorized the ICE Block app to be downloaded from their services.”

CNN Promotes ICE App to Help Illegal Aliens Avoid Capture (CTH)

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked about this earlier today during her press briefing. CNN is promoting an early warning system for cell phone users that alerts them to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity. In response, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said, “This sure looks like obstruction of justice. Our brave ICE law enforcement face a 500% increase in assaults against them. If you obstruct or assault our law enforcement, we will hunt you down and you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Apparently the Apple and Google stores have authorized the ICE Block app to be downloaded from their services. There are a lot of vested financial interests in the human trafficking and illegal alien business. This ICE Block app, is part of the system that perpetuates the exploitation and criminal illegal activity. Given the nature of the national security interests involved, one has to wonder how this type of technology does not run afoul of the law. UPDATE: As noted, there could be positives. Download the App., and if you encounter a long checkout line at WalMart, Home Depot, DMV or Post Office etc., activate the ICE alert and watch what happens.

Read more …

“Trump seems to be saying that instead of war let’s go into business together.”

Trump the Greatest American President in History? (Paul Craig Roberts)

The violence that has been the primary characteristic of the 21st century has reached a level of recklessness that threatens life on our planet. It was only the other day that some unidentified person or agency green-lighted an attack on Russia’s strategic triad. According to Russian war doctrine, this attack, of which President Trump says he was unaware, requires a Russian strategic response. Putin, being a humane and reasonable person averse to war , side-stepped the issue by declaring the attack to be an act of terrorism and not of war. It is extraordinary that no one is interested in identifying who so irresponsibly green-lighted an attack that could have initiated nuclear war. How can Washington and the Kremlin be so insouciant and uninterested in a provocation that could have resulted in nuclear war? Whoever green-lighted the attack did not know that Putin would simply not acknowledge that such an attack took place. Whoever green-lighted the attack was OK with launching a nuclear war. What is to prevent such a thing again happening?

We must be thankful that Putin side-stepped the issue. But we must also consider the effect of Putin’s side-stepping the attack. The person or agency that authorized the attack must be confident that Russia will never respond to any provocation, and, therefore, the provocations will increase in their intensity. At some point, it won’t be possible for Putin to side-step the provocation. Thus, Putin might be bringing on the war he hopes to avoid by side-stepping provocations. In addition to the conflict with Russia, there is the conflict with Iran. Netanyahu, using the powerful influence of the Israel Lobby over Washington, pressured President Trump to bomb Iran’s uranium enrichment sites, claiming without evidence that Iran was producing a nuclear weapon.

Trump in what might be an act of brilliance dropped the bombs on the Iranian sites and declared them obliterated whether they were or not, thereby removing Netanyahu’s only argument for war with Iran. With the nuclear facilities destroyed, there can be no bomb. Thus, Trump removed Netanyahu’s case for preemptive war against Iran, thereby removing the reason for wider conflict in the Middle East. Let’s hope Iran understands what has really happened, and cooperates with President Trump in removing the conflict from the agenda. There still remains anger caused by Israel’s merciless destruction of Gaza and its people. How a people who claim to be victims of a holocaust can submit Palestinians to one is difficult to comprehend. But the Arab states that could protest have all been destroyed by American presidents for Israel.

Washington’s bombs have turned Iraq, Libya, and Syria into non-functioning states, and Hezbollah has been decapitated and cut off from supplies. The only remaining Arab country is Saudi Arabia, the military ability of which is marginal. Washington sicced the Saudis on Yemen, and it was unsuccessful. The Houthis are the only remaining Arabs, other than the remains of Hamas, who continue to oppose Israel. They are dependent on Iran, who are Persians, not Arabs, and if Trump has succeeded in removing Netanyahu’s justification for war with Iran, it seems likely that Iran will call off the Houthis. This opens a chance for peace in the Middle East after a quarter century of America’s wars against Arabs for Israel, wars disguised as a “war on terror” and “bringing democracy” in order to deceive the American people about the expenditure of trillions of American taxpayers’ dollars for the exclusive benefit of Israel, while American veterans who were deceived into fighting the wars for Greater Israel are left to live on the streets.

Previously, in a joint news conference with Netanyahu, Trump declared Gaza as a US possession that would be the anchor of an American reconstructed Middle East. In place of Greater Israel–an aspiration, not a reality–which with its recent Israeli additions now extends from the Nile to include Pakistan and half of Saudi Arabia, Trump indicated that there would be a profit-sharing American colony, unlike the colonial extractive colonies of prior times. Trump has talked it up with the Saudis, and there are indications that he wants to add Iran to the deal. Trump seems to be saying that instead of war let’s go into business together. This plan requires the Zionists to give up their agenda for Israeli hegemony over the Middle East. Can the Zionists help to save the world from war?

If Trump can pull this off, assuming that he is thinking along this line–he is so changeable that it is hard to know–Trump would go down as the greatest president in American history. Instead of Muslims and Israelis exhausting themselves in wars, they would be making money together. There is no better outcome. Can we get there?

Read more …

“Tether holds more US Treasurys than Germany.”

Don’t know enough about this yet.

Stablecoins Are Becoming ‘Default Settlement Layer’ For Internet (CT)

Stablecoins have become the backbone of internet payments, with adoption now outpacing major traditional card networks in onchain volume, according to Noam Hurwitz, head of engineering at Alchemy.
Hurwitz told Cointelegraph that stablecoins have seen “explosive” adoption, adding that they are “becoming the default settlement layer for the internet.” Companies like PayPal and Stripe are integrating stablecoins to leverage onchain infrastructure, enabling faster and cheaper transactions. “They’ve already surpassed Visa and Mastercard in onchain volume by 7%,” Hurwitz noted, signaling a decisive shift in how money moves online. Alchemy, which provides infrastructure to some of the largest stablecoin ecosystems, is at the center of this transformation. Hurwitz said Alchemy is “the onchain provider for Robinhood Wallet” and powers stablecoin flows for fintech giants like Visa, Stripe, Circle, and PayPal.

Hurwitz said that stablecoins make money “cheap, fast, global, and secure to transfer.” These features have made them popular for various purposes, with broad adoption emerging across cross-border payments and prediction markets like Polymarket. He added that stablecoins have become massive buyers of US Treasurys, with Tether alone generating $13 billion in profits last year while holding around $113 billion in US debt. “Tokenized money is the base of the tokenized financial system,” Hurwitz said, calling recent financial innovation built on this foundation “exciting.” Hurwitz said stablecoins are already functioning as the “default rails” for internet payments in many respects but flagged challenges stemming from the fragmented blockchain landscape.

Institutions, he explained, want to move quickly but must assess provider reliability and counterparty risks, especially in a nascent industry. “Can a small startup really support enterprise-grade operations while building and scaling the services they need?” he asked. Hurwitz pointed to Kinexys, a tokenized bank deposit launched by JP Morgan, as a major milestone. The permissioned deposit token enables institutional clients to access yield-bearing deposits on a public blockchain with “24/7 settlement, near real-time liquidity and the potential ability to pay interest to holders.” Last week, the US Senate passed the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins, or GENIUS Act, a landmark bill establishing federal guardrails for stablecoins.

“With the recent passage of the Genius Act, the regulatory landscape is becoming clearer and more structured, which benefits established financial players while also encouraging innovation,” Hurwitz said. Meanwhile, Hurwitz pointed out key technical bottlenecks in improving developer and end-user experience despite strong growth. “Companies benefit immensely from settling on crypto rails, but want to decouple the user experience from the underlying technology — and doing so takes deep technical expertise,” he explained. Looking ahead, Hurwitz expects most financial services to deploy their own blockchains, especially layer 2 networks, to better scale and monetize their ecosystems.

He predicted that infrastructure improvements would drive “seamless crosschain interoperability” between these networks, enabling a more connected and efficient financial system built on stablecoins. Despite Hurwitz’s optimistic view of stablecoins, a new Bank for International Settlements (BIS) report challenges the notion that they can serve as money in a modern financial system. The BIS Annual Economic Report 2025 claims stablecoins fail critical singleness, elasticity, and integrity tests. The organization described stablecoins as “digital bearer instruments” that resemble financial assets more than actual money.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Marik

Pfizer

RFK
https://twitter.com/DiedSuddenly_/status/1939468926708298061
Scott
https://twitter.com/AutismCapital/status/1939363439971021280

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jun 262025
 


Rembrandt van Rijn Self portrait with Saskia 1636

 

Trump Pushes Back On Pentagon Intel, Says Iran Nuclear Sites ‘Destroyed’ (ZH)
Israel, CIA Agree With Trump On ‘Destruction’ Of Iran’s Nuclear Capability (ZH)
Iran’s Stunning Admission That Proves Trump Was Right (Margolis)
Trump Hoping for Comprehensive Peace Agreement With Iran: Witkoff (ET)
NATO Leaders Agree To 5% Hike In Defense Spending (ZH)
NATO Members’ Leaders Snubbing Zelensky At Key Summit – Orban (RT)
‘Ukraine Is Not In NATO, My Job Is To Keep It That Way: Orbán (RMX)
Trump Denies Discussing Ceasefire With Zelensky (RT)
‘Yapping Bitches In Brussels A Direct Threat To Russia’ – Medvedev (RT)
NATO Boss Calls Trump ‘Daddy’ (RT)
‘Ukraine Can Win’ – New NATO Commander (RT)
Peace Dialogue With Kiev On Hold – Moscow (RT)
Escape from New York: Democrats Embrace Socialist for New Mayor (Turley)
Gold: The Only True Asset in A Broken Global System (Piepenburg)

 

 

The 12-day war is over.

NATO
https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/1937510323252285840

Bannon

Candace

Tel Aviv

 

 

 

 

We have 4 sources that say the Iran nuke sites are ‘heavily destroyed’: CIA, Trump admin, Israel and Iran. But networks like CNN will have none of it. You be the judge.

Trump Pushes Back On Pentagon Intel, Says Iran Nuclear Sites ‘Destroyed’ (ZH)

There are two apt sayings for this current situation facing the White House in the wake of the Trump-ordered bombings against Iran’s nuclear facilities. First, what’s worse in war-time decision-making than doing the wrong thing? Doing it incompletely. Second, it is always easy to begin a war, but very difficult to stop one. And so here President Trump and his top officials find themselves, defending the ‘limited’ strikes and proclaiming the destruction of Iran’s nuclear program and enrichment capability in the face of a skeptical media. The escalation dialectic – which the mainstream media is so good at – begins… The heat is on an the NATO summit in The Hague, where Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters, “Of course we’re doing a leak investigation with the FBI right now because this information is for internal purposes, battle damage assessments.”

Referencing yesterday’s leaked DIA report which strongly suggests Iran’s nuclear program is “mostly intact” – he continued, “And CNN and others are trying to spin it to make the president look bad when this was an overwhelming success.” And Trump himself said, “They really don’t know.” And in response to the contrary intelligence, “I think Israel is gonna be telling us very soon because [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] is going to have people Involved in that whole situation.” “This was an unbelievable hit by genius pilots and genius people in the military, and they’re not being given credit for it because we have scum that’s in this room. And not all of you are… CNN is scum. MSDNC is scum. The New York Times is scum. They’re bad people. They’re sick,” Trump said. “And what they’ve done is they’re trying to make this unbelievable victory into something less.”

And here’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio, somewhat hedging: “(Iran’s nuclear) program today has been set behind significantly from where it was a week ago. It is in far worse shape today than it was a week ago because of US actions and because some of the actions Israelis took,” Rubio told Politico. “So, the bottom line is they are much further away from a nuclear weapon today than they were before the president took this bold action,” he said, adding that “very significant, substantial damage” was done to a “variety of different components.”

Iran has meanwhile admitted that nuclear sites are ‘badly damaged’ – perhaps in hopes of giving Trump what he wants in terms of PR to ensure the bombing will stop and ceasefire will hold; however, the Iranians have also vowed to pursue their nuclear energy program without interruption and that it remains a matter of national sovereignty. To review of the leaked DIA assessment, one official had told CNN: “So the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops.” The White House acknowledged the existence of the report marked top secret but said they disagreed with it. Trump, Rubio, and Hegseth are in Europe proclaiming the ‘overwhelming success’ of the strikes:

https://twitter.com/Ronxyz00/status/1937816872596189379?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1937816872596189379%7Ctwgr%5E6b630d8b117c227f42c47e2d0ea17b89b3921ebd%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Ftrump-pushes-back-pentagon-intel-insists-iran-nuclear-sites-destroyed

So this appears yet another case of the White House disagreeing with its own intelligence community (IC) – in an ongoing awkward situation which has Iraq war vibes. However, without doubt the IC is still working on an overall consensus, based likely on several different intel threads, and across agencies. One obvious danger from the perspective of Western decision-makers (and Israel): if Iran was not intent on getting a bomb before, they likely are now – given their very existence is under threat.

Read more …

“..was Iran’s core nuclear program really destroyed? If everyone can ‘agree’ – at least publicly for the sake of Trump’s narrative – this might mean Iran can simply continue enriching, but truly in secret this time.”

Israel, CIA Agree With Trump On ‘Destruction’ Of Iran’s Nuclear Capability (ZH)

Israel’s military chief of staff as well as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have spoken up following President Trump’s words before Wednesday’s NATO summit which declared Iran’s nuclear program ‘obliterated’.The Israeli military agrees, saying that the program suffered “systemic” damage and was set back years due to both the Israeli warplane attacks, as well as the large-scale US B-2 bomber raids on three main facilities.”According to the assessment of senior officials in the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) Intelligence Directorate, the damage to the nuclear program is not a pinpoint strike but a systemic one – the cumulative achievement allows us to determine that Iran’s nuclear project sustained severe, broad, and deep damage and has been set back by years,” the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir said Wednesday.

The military further declared that IDF’s goal of the “immediate existential threat” from Iran has been met. Trump too said Wednesday, “Last weekend, the United States successfully carried out a massive precision strike on Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities and it was very, very successful.” Netanyahu has also offered his agreement – at least on the Fordow site: The US’ strike on the Fordow nuclear facility in Iran has eliminated critically important infrastructure and rendered it inoperable, with attacks by the US and Israel setting back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said in a statement on behalf of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC).

“The devastating US strike on Fordow destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility inoperable. We assess that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, has set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years,” the statement reads. It noted that this “achievement can continue indefinitely if Iran does not get access to nuclear material.” Interestingly, the Israeli side is also confirming the use of ground commandos that breached Iran during the 12-day conflict. Commando units, along with the Israeli Air Force, carried out “deception” tactics that helped Israel gain control of Iran’s airspace as well as other strategic goals, the IDF’s Zamir revealed further. “These achievements were made possible, among other things, by the integration and deception carried out by air forces and ground commando units, which operated covertly in the enemy’s depth and granted us operational freedom of action,” he said.

Political cover? War theater? or for real? It’s not just Israel confirming it now. CIA Director John Ratcliffe issued a statement about Intelligence on Iran’s Nuclear Program: “CIA can confirm that a body of credible intelligence indicates Iran’s Nuclear Program has been severely damaged by the recent, targeted strikes.” But all of this again begs the question… was Iran’s core nuclear program really destroyed? If everyone can ‘agree’ – at least publicly for the sake of Trump’s narrative – this might mean Iran can simply continue enriching, but truly in secret this time.

Read more …

“The Iranian foreign ministry admitted that their nuclear facilities were ‘badly damaged’ by U.S. strikes over the weekend after reports surfaced about a low-confidence U.S. intelligence assessment suggesting otherwise..”

Iran’s Stunning Admission That Proves Trump Was Right (Margolis)

It’s a telling moment when the world’s leading state sponsor of terror is more honest about American military success than the so-called guardians of truth in our media. Iran’s regime, notorious for its propaganda and defiance, has now publicly conceded that recent U.S. strikes “badly damaged” its nuclear facilities. “The Iranian foreign ministry admitted that their nuclear facilities were ‘badly damaged’ by U.S. strikes over the weekend after reports surfaced about a low-confidence U.S. intelligence assessment suggesting otherwise,” National Review reports. This is no minor admission — this is Tehran waving a white flag, if only for a moment, and acknowledging that American power still matters. Yet the legacy media, so quick to trumpet any narrative that undermines U.S. strength, have bent over backwards to ignore or diminish this reality.

For years, the media have clung to the delusion that Iran’s nuclear ambitions could be tamed through photo-op diplomacy and hollow gestures — or, under Barack Obama and Joe Biden, by handing over pallets of cash and granting Tehran a fast track to the bomb, all while pretending containment was possible. When President Donald Trump flipped the script with a maximum pressure campaign that crippled Iran’s nuclear trajectory, the media called it reckless. And now, after a flawlessly executed U.S. strike that wiped out key nuclear sites and brought an immediate ceasefire, they’re scrambling to downplay the results.

Rather than acknowledge a clear victory, CNN and others rushed to circulate a conveniently “leaked” intelligence report claiming the operation only set Iran back a few months. The report, conveniently classified until it became politically useful, magically appeared in the hands of CNN’s Natasha Bertrand, best known for pushing the phony Hunter Biden laptop “disinformation” narrative. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt wasn’t having it. She torched the report as “flat-out wrong” and slammed CNN for laundering a smear campaign on behalf of the swamp, using an “anonymous, low-level loser” in the intel community as cover.

This isn’t journalism. It’s damage control from a media establishment that still can’t stomach a Trump victory, even when it means stopping Iran from getting the bomb. While traveling in Europe with President Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio weighed in on the controversy surrounding the intelligence leak about the Iran airstrikes, calling it one of the most frustrating aspects of Washington. In an interview with Politico, Rubio made it clear that the problem isn’t just the leak itself; it’s how the leaked information gets twisted to serve an agenda.

“Well, I can’t talk to you about intelligence,” Rubio began, but he quickly pointed out how dangerous and misleading these leaks can be. “Intelligence leaks are one of the most frustrating things anywhere,” he said, noting that it’s not just about unauthorized disclosures but the way those disclosures are almost always distorted. “In these leaks, what you typically have is someone who read it and then leaks it to the media, giving it the spin and the angle they want it to have because they’ve got some purpose: embarrass the administration, they were against the action, whatever it may be.”Rubio’s comments reflect growing concerns that the so-called intelligence report CNN ran with wasn’t just a breach; it was a political hit job meant to undercut Trump’s successful strike on Iran’s nuclear program. Iran’s rare admission of damage is a crushing blow to the legacy media, which cares more about downplaying American strength than reporting the truth.

Read more …

“..Trump said the war between the U.S. ally and its regional rival “could have gone on for years” and “destroyed the entire Middle East” but that “it didn’t, and never will!”

Trump Hoping for Comprehensive Peace Agreement With Iran: Witkoff (ET)

Talks between the United States and Iran resumed one day after Iran and Israel reached a Washington-brokered cease-fire agreement, Steve Witkoff, U.S. special envoy to the Middle East, said on June 24, describing the discussions as promising. Witkoff made the comments in an interview on Fox News after U.S. President Donald Trump announced on June 23 that a cease-fire deal had been reached to end 12 days of fighting. Trump said on his Truth Social platform that Iran would first stop its attacks for 12 hours, after which Israel would stop its attacks. After 24 hours, there would be an official end to the war, he said. Both Iran and Israel accused each other of violating the truce shortly after it was announced.

Despite those early violations, the cease-fire appeared to be holding as of June 24, and Witkoff told Fox News that the Trump administration is hopeful of a long-term peace deal. “With regard to the Iranians, the president has said unequivocally, that he wants to see and is hopeful for a comprehensive peace agreement that goes beyond even the cease-fire. We are already talking to each other, not just directly but also through interlocutors. I think that the conversations are promising,” Witkoff said. “We are hopeful that we can have a long-term peace agreement that resurrects Iran, that brings it into the league of nations, that creates long-term prosperity for Iran, and most importantly, allows for the [Gulf Cooperation Council] to grow economically,” he said. Iran is not a member of the regional union of countries.

Witkoff said now is the time to sit down with the Iranians and “get to a comprehensive peace agreement,” adding, “I am very confident that we are going to achieve that.” Witkoff’s comments come after Israel launched an air war on June 13, attacking Iranian nuclear facilities and killing top military commanders as part of what it said were efforts to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons. The Iranian government, which has repeatedly said its uranium enrichment program is peaceful, retaliated with barrages of missiles on Israeli military sites and cities. In announcing the cease-fire agreement, Trump said the war between the U.S. ally and its regional rival “could have gone on for years” and “destroyed the entire Middle East” but that “it didn’t, and never will!”

He said both nations had agreed to remain peaceful and respectful during the cease-fire, and that, assuming everything works out as it should, the “12-day war” would come to an end. Witkoff reiterated Trump’s comments to Fox News, declaring the conflict over. “Since this conflict began, we’ve been talking to [Iran] about having some sort of peaceful settlement, and Iran’s one caveat has always been that Israel had to stop its campaign,” Witkoff said. “And once Israel fulfilled its objective, which they did, and once the United States fulfilled its objective, which it did … the president was able to go to both parties and get a cease-fire done. “And by the way, the proof is in the pudding. No one’s shooting at each other. It’s over.”

Read more …

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1937881850908684394

For what it’s worth. First, show us the money.

“There is an irreversible path for Ukraine to join NATO—and that remains true today, and will still be true after this summit..”

NATO Leaders Agree To 5% Hike In Defense Spending (ZH)

As expected, NATO members have agreed to new commitment to significantly boost defense spending, aiming to raise military budgets to 5% of GDP over the next decade—more than double the current 2% benchmark—at the ongoing major annual summit being held in The Hague. The Trump-backed decision is being finalized in Netherlands this week, with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte having hailed the proposal as a “quantum leap’ during a press briefing. Trump declared Tuesday that we’re with NATO “all the way”. And on Wednesday he’s expected to give a big address, as all eyes are focused on the Iran bombing and what’s next. Bloomberg notes, also as fully expected and long ago previewed, that the spending target includes 3.5% via core defense and 1.5% in related investment covering infrastructure and cybersecurity.

Rutte and officials gathered in the Netherlands have stressed that all member states must participate, highlighting that Spain’s hesitation over the steep cost—nearly $90 billion annually—will not exempt it from the pledge. “NATO doesn’t allow for opt-outs or side deals,” he has firmly stated. The increased funding is intended to dramatically scale up NATO’s military production, including building thousands of tanks and multiplying air defense systems by five, at a moment the alliance is staring down Russia amid the Ukraine war, where Moscow forces are establishing a huge buffer zone in the north and east, and actually increasing territory beyond Donetsk’s western border.

WikiLeaks meanwhile says the arms companies will continue to be the only real winners…

Rutte has of course identified Russia as NATO’s “most significant and direct threat” and reiterated full support for Ukraine, despite Washington having named China has America’s ‘top pacing threat’ and long-term main miliary and economic rival. Of course, alliance has already funneled hundreds of billions of dollars into a conflict with Russia that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides, and Ukraine losing about 20% of its territory.NATO leaders as of Wednesday have vowed to keep pursuing Ukraine’s path to membership, with Rutte emphasizing that the question of accession was never ruled out, especially not before the war. “There is an irreversible path for Ukraine to join NATO—and that remains true today, and will still be true after this summit,” he has said.

Read more …

“Orban being Orban delivered the response the Europeans did not want to hear. Trump is great. Russia is not scary. The biggest threat to the EU is their continued slide away from competitive economics. As to Zelenskyy, NATO has no business in Ukraine.”

NATO Members’ Leaders Snubbing Zelensky At Key Summit – Orban (RT)

Several NATO members, including the US, are deliberately avoiding meeting with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky at the bloc’s key summit in The Hague, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has claimed. Speaking prior to the gathering on Wednesday, Orban noted that Zelensky would only attend the informal dinner and “will not participate in the NATO summit in any official form,” indicating that “a clear sign that the previous chapter is over.” The Hungarian prime minister went on to explain that this is a drastic change compared to previous years, stating that “the Americans, the Turks, the Slovaks, and we have made it clear that we do not want to sit at the same table with Zelensky when it comes to NATO.” He further stressed Hungary’s continued opposition to Ukraine joining NATO or the EU.

Orban has repeatedly warned that Kiev’s membership in any of the blocs would drag the West into a direct conflict with Russia. Meanwhile, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto noted that the 2025 summit would be the first since 2022 where the focus would be not on stepping up support for Ukraine, but on strengthening the bloc’s collective defense. “With Ukraine’s NATO membership off the agenda, direct confrontation with Russia has been avoided. Rationality has prevailed,” he added. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump confirmed that he would “probably” meet with Zelensky on the sidelines of the summit. At the same time, he described the Ukrainian leader as being in a “tough situation,” adding that he “should have never been there.”

In another sign of the simmering tensions between Zelensky and Trump, the Washington Post reported that NATO leaders are “tiptoeing around rifts” during the summit, trying to showcase “a veneer of unity”. The paper reported that “NATO officials are trying to keep [Trump and Zelensky] apart as much as possible in public — a recognition of Trump’s occasionally volcanic disdain for the Ukrainian leader.” In this vein, NATO organizers positioned Zelensky far from Trump during the official summit photo-op, according to footage broadcast by C-SPAN.

orban

Read more …

“So, he is the man of common sense, which means that the new wars are getting shorter and the old wars are running out of fuel, which is the consequence of his activity.”

‘Ukraine Is Not In NATO, My Job Is To Keep It That Way: Orbán (RMX)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán voiced skepticism over proposed NATO plans to raise defense spending to 5 percent of member states’ GDP, calling the target unworkable under existing EU budgetary constraints and warning of economic consequences if Brussels doesn’t radically change its fiscal framework. “We are able to do it, it is not easy,” Orbán said at the NATO summit in The Hague on Wednesday. “But the whole calculation of budget regulation of the European Union must be changed. So if we keep the regulations as it is, nobody in the European Union can fulfill 5 percent, whatever they say. We have to recalculate everything in a different method; in that case, we can do it.” Orbán’s comments reflect his broader concern that NATO is drifting into dangerous territory — both financially and geopolitically.

Rather than supporting yet another push toward militarization, the Hungarian leader emphasized that Europe’s real threat is not military in nature but economic. “The real threat is not security-wise, it is economic and losing our competitiveness in global trade,” he said. “That’s our problem.” He also reiterated his long-standing opposition to NATO involvement in Ukraine, restating Hungary’s commitment to keeping the alliance out of the war. “NATO has no business in Ukraine,” Orbán said plainly. “Ukraine is not a member of NATO, nor is Russia. And my job is to keep it as it is.” Orbán has repeatedly argued that escalating military aid and deepening Western involvement risk prolonging the war and damaging European interests. His administration has opposed further sanctions on Russia and has long expressed concern over the possibility of NATO and EU membership for Kyiv in the current climate.

On Tuesday, the Hungarian prime minister hit back at thinly veiled criticism of his administration from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — an honorary guest at the summit in the Netherlands. Zelensky suggested that it is “unfair when a single party blocks the Union’s decision,” referencing Hungarian opposition to further negotiations with Kyiv on EU membership. In response, Orbán wrote on X, “President, with all due respect: the European Union was founded to bring peace and prosperity to its member states. Accepting a country that is at war with Russia would immediately drag the EU into a direct conflict. It is unfair to expect any member state to take this risk.

”In other remarks in The Hague, Orbán further highlighted his alignment with U.S. President Donald Trump, praising what he called Trump’s “common sense” approach to foreign policy and suggesting that a shift in Washington’s leadership is already having a stabilizing effect on global conflicts. “The international order is more based on common sense,” Orbán said. “And the president of the United States is a man of common sense, as you have seen, just recently, to manage the conflict between Iran and Israel. So, he is the man of common sense, which means that the new wars are getting shorter and the old wars are running out of fuel, which is the consequence of his activity.”

Read more …

He may deliver some weaponry. But other than that?

Trump Denies Discussing Ceasefire With Zelensky (RT)

US President Donald Trump has denied discussing a Ukraine ceasefire during his meeting with Vladimir Zelensky on the sidelines of the NATO summit in The Hague, directly contradicting the Ukrainian leader’s earlier remarks. Zelensky had described the meeting as “long and substantive,” claiming the two leaders had discussed ways to “achieve a real peace.” Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Trump said the topic was not part of the conversation. “No, no, I just… wanted to know how he’s doing,” he said. Trump added that he planned to speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin in hopes of bringing the conflict to an end, though he did not specify when the conversation might take place.

When pressed on his past claim that he could end the war within 24 hours, Trump said the comment had been “sarcastic.” He acknowledged that resolving the conflict would not be easy, describing Putin as “more difficult” than anticipated and admitting he “had some problems with Zelensky” as well. Asked if the US would contribute to the $5 billion in military aid pledged to Ukraine by other NATO countries, Trump reiterated only that the conflict must end.

In another exchange, a BBC Ukraine journalist asked whether the US would sell Patriot missile systems to Ukraine. Trump replied that the systems were “very hard to get” and that the US also needed them. He noted that Washington was supplying Patriots to Israel but would “see if we can make some available.” Since taking office in January, Trump has repeatedly called for a negotiated settlement to the Ukraine conflict. Earlier this week, he said he hoped to reach a “deal with Russia” to stop the fighting. Moscow has maintained that it is willing to hold talks “without preconditions,” but insists that any lasting agreement must reflect the current battlefield realities and Ukraine’s neutrality.

Read more …

“Brussels today is Russia’s true enemy,” he wrote. “Slowly but surely, the EU is transforming into a self-sustaining military bloc that will gradually come to compete with NATO…”

‘Yapping Bitches In Brussels A Direct Threat To Russia’ – Medvedev (RT)

The European Union has emerged as a hostile force to Moscow, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has claimed, accusing the bloc of arming the “neo-Nazi Kiev regime” to attack Russia. In a Telegram post on Wednesday, Medvedev stated that the old EU as an economic union has “essentially ceased to exist,” and in its current “perverted form is no less of a threat” to Russia than NATO. “Brussels today is Russia’s true enemy,” he wrote. “Slowly but surely, the EU is transforming into a self-sustaining military bloc that will gradually come to compete with NATO…” The ex-president accused “Brusselian cockroaches and narrow-minded leaders of EU countries” of advancing their militarization strategy based on an imaginary “Russia threat,” ushering in a new “era of rearmament.”

According to Medvedev, the EU’s goal is to arm the Kiev regime to the point where it becomes invulnerable to Russia, claiming Brussels is ramping up its military-industrial output and building military factories on Ukrainian soil. The EU, he said, is also sending personnel to train Ukrainian militants “so that they can kill our citizens and carry out terrorist attacks.” He also accused Brussels of “brazenly” using profits from Russia’s frozen assets to finance its “vile activities.”

“The EU, stuffed with weapons, rainbow freaks, and yapping bitches in Brussels, constitutes a direct threat to Russia,” Medvedev wrote. “This, of course, should not hinder our bilateral cooperation with individual European states.” Ukraine’s potential EU membership – which Russia had not objected to in the past – would now constitute a “danger” for Moscow. While Kiev’s NATO ambitions were always seen as a red line for Russia, Medvedev indicated the EU had now adopted a similar confrontational posture.

Ukraine made EU and NATO membership official national goals by amending its constitution in 2019. It applied to join the bloc in February 2022 and was granted candidate status later that year. Admission requires unanimous consent from all 27 EU member states. While some members voiced objections, Brussels has backed Kiev’s bid. The European Commission suggested Ukraine could join by 2029 if it made sufficient progress in areas such as political and judicial reforms, as well as in combating organized crime and corruption. In his post, Medvedev proposed two outcomes for Ukraine: “Either the EU itself realizes that it doesn’t need the Kiev quasi-state at all, or, better, there is no state left to join the EU.”

Read more …

Rutte has one goal only: war with Russia. He needs Trump for that.

NATO Boss Calls Trump ‘Daddy’ (RT)

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has rushed to defend US President Donald Trump’s recent expletive-laden rant about Iran and Israel as merely “daddy” using “strong language.” Trump on Tuesday lashed out at both countries for allegedly breaching a Washington-brokered ceasefire, telling reporters before departing for the NATO summit in the Hague that West Jerusalem and Tehran have “been fighting so long and so hard that they do not know what the f**k they are doing.” The outburst came hours after he announced the truce, which was reportedly broken soon after by both Israel and Iran. Asked about the remark during a joint press conference the next day, Trump likened the two nations to “kids (fighting) in a schoolyard.” Rutte, seated beside him, added: “And then daddy has to, sometimes, use strong language.”

When a reporter later brought up the comment, Trump laughed and replied, “Daddy – you’re my daddy,” saying that the NATO chief had meant it “affectionately.” “I think he likes me, if he doesn’t, I’ll come back and hit him hard,” Trump joked. Rutte’s flattery wasn’t limited to the stage. Ahead of the summit, Trump published private text messages in which a fawning Rutte praised the US president’s “decisive action in Iran” as “truly extraordinary” and said it “makes us all safer.” He went on to tell Trump, “You will achieve something NO American president in decades could get done,” and boasted that “Europe is going to pay BIG.” A NATO spokesperson later confirmed the authenticity of the exchange.

Rutte also used the summit itself to back Trump’s controversial push for NATO members to more than double their military spending to 5% of GDP. At Wednesday’s press conference, he called Trump “a good friend” and said he “deserves all the praise” for forcing the issue. Asked by a reporter whether such overt admiration made him look weak, Rutte brushed it off: “I don’t think so. I think it’s a bit of a question of taste.”

Read more …

New on the job.

‘Ukraine Can Win’ – New NATO Commander (RT)

Ukraine can still achieve a military victory over Russia, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe and head of the US European Command, Alexus Grynkewich, said during a US Senate hearing on Tuesday. He was confirmed in his new role with the US-led military bloc earlier this month.v“I believe Ukraine can win,” he responded when asked if Kiev could still prevail despite significant casualties and waning financial support. Grynkewich also noted that Ukrainian forces are displaying a level of tenacity that is hard for outsiders to fully comprehend.vHe did not specify what form a Ukrainian victory might take, nor did he provide further detail regarding battlefield prospects.

Top NATO officials have long insisted that Ukraine should aim to defeat Russia militarily. The bloc continues to supply arms and intelligence to Kiev, even as it loses territory to Russian forces. Ukraine’s 2023 counteroffensive failed to achieve any meaningful breakthroughs, and a more recent attempted incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region was repelled. Meanwhile, Russian advances have continued along several sectors of the front line, including in the Donetsk and Kharkov regions. Military analysts and Western officials have increasingly questioned the viability of a Ukrainian victory. Last month, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul claimed that the military defeat of nuclear-armed Russia had been impossible “from the very beginning.” US President Donald Trump has also repeatedly expressed doubt that Ukraine could secure a military victory over Russia, instead pushing for a negotiated settlement of the conflict.

He has insisted that “Crimea will stay with Russia,” referred to Ukraine as “demolished,” and cautioned that the country may not be able to survive the conflict, even with US support. Moscow has also repeatedly insisted that its victory is inevitable and has criticized continued Western military aid to Ukraine, arguing that it only prolongs hostilities without affecting their outcome. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stressed that the conflict will end only when its “root causes” are resolved and his country’s security interests are taken into account. He has also accused Kiev’s foreign backers of being uninterested in actually ending the conflict and using Ukraine to achieve their own goals.

Read more …

“Peskov noted that the exact date of the next round of talks with Kiev would be decided after all previous pledges are fulfilled, referring to prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of slain soldiers.”

Peace Dialogue With Kiev On Hold – Moscow (RT)

Moscow and Kiev are currently working to fully implement the humanitarian portion of their previous agreements, and therefore no negotiations are currently underway on their respective peace roadmaps, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Speaking at a regular press briefing on Wednesday, Peskov noted that the exact date of the next round of talks with Kiev would be decided after all previous pledges are fulfilled, referring to prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of slain soldiers. Russia and Ukraine held direct talks in Türkiye last month, resuming a diplomatic process that was paused by Kiev in 2022 after it chose to seek a battlefield victory with Western assistance. During their latest meeting on June 2, the two sides agreed to exchange prisoners and the remains of deceased troops for humanitarian reasons.

Ukraine and Russia also traded draft memorandums outlining their proposed paths to peace. The return of slain soldiers was completed on Monday last week. Russia transferred 6,060 sets of remains to Ukraine and received 78 in exchange. The Russian military says it has more than 3,000 bodies it is willing to hand over. There were also several prisoner swaps, though neither side gave specific figures, unlike during previous swaps. Negotiators had suggested that Moscow and Kiev would not seek parity in numbers when returning seriously injured soldiers from captivity.

While Kiev did resume dialogue with Moscow as urged by the administration of US President Donald Trump, Ukrainian officials have claimed that Russia is not negotiating in good faith because it declined to agree to an unconditional ceasefire. Moscow said Kiev could use such a pause to regroup its military and outlined conditions for a truce in its draft memorandum. Russia said it would suspend hostilities if Ukraine either pulled troops out of Russian territories that Kiev claims, or suspended its conscription campaign and deliveries of Western arms. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is presently set to meet Trump on the sidelines of the ongoing NATO leaders summit in The Hague.

Read more …

“Real estate in Florida is about to skyrocket.”

Escape from New York: Democrats Embrace Socialist for New Mayor (Turley)

The presumptive selection (pending the results of New York’s ranked-voting system) of Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani as the Democratic nominee has sent shockwaves throughout the business and political establishment. For those calling for the party to move more to the center, New Yorkers just responded with a Bronx cheer by choosing a socialist who wants city-run grocery stores, an eleven-percent city corporate tax rate, free child care, free buses, and other far-left wish list items. Real estate in Florida is about to skyrocket. Mamdani has said that he intends to make New York a “model for the Democratic Party” by moving to the far left and embracing socialist policies. Despite being called anti-Israel, Mamdani crushed Andrew Cuomo with young college-educated voters.

He promised to pay for freezing rents, providing free child care, and other programs by “taxing the rich.” It is a return to the “eat the rich” calls of figures from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) to former mayor Bill de Blasio. Politicians have long turned to the “Eat the rich!” battle cry when things are not working out politically or economically. When struggling in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) pledged a wealth tax, declaring that she was coming after “the diamonds, the yachts, and the Rembrandts too.” Then-New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, another Democratic contender at the time, was barely registering in the polls when he promised that “we will tax the hell out of the wealthy.”

The election also reinforces the opposition of many to the move to restore the state and local tax (SALT) deductions, which forces taxpayers in low-tax states to subsidize residents in high-tax states, such as California and New York. By allowing the deductions, politicians can assure New Yorkers that they will receive some of the money back from the rest of the country through deductions, justifying even higher tax hikes. I have long opposed SALT deductions as a uniquely bad idea. The question is whether wealthy individuals and corporations will accelerate the exit from New York in light of continued support for increasing tax burdens and public subsidies. Eric Adams could still prevail over Mamdani as an independent in the general election. Cuomo has also not ruled out an independent run. However, the results of the election show the increasing hold of socialist politics on many New Yorkers.

Read more …

“At these debt levels, no one leader, ideology or policy can resolve the deficit and debt cancers spreading globally..”

Gold: The Only True Asset in A Broken Global System (Piepenburg)

Matthew Piepenburg, Partner at VON GREYERZ, joins VRIC Media founder, Jay Martin, in a compelling conversation about the revolutionary shifts happening in the global financial system—the ramifications of which all point toward gold’s increasingly central role as THE strategic reserve asset of the present and future. Piepenburg opens with a simple theme. Namely, the risks and wide-ranging ramifications of sickening global debt levels can not be overstated enough. Everything from risk assets, currency destruction, geopolitics and social unrest to the gold price is a derivative of one simple theme: DEBT. We are also seeing revolutionary shifts from globalism to neo-mercantilism/protectionism, but as Piepenburg warns, such shifts are not surrendered easily, and that messiness in the interim is inevitable. Part of this “mess” includes rising social unrest as a direct result of the inflation and currency debasement, which failed monetary policies have directly created.

Looking ahead, as old systems, ideologies, and policies fail and new ideologies and protectionist systems rise, the transition will not be easy or smooth. Piepenburg foresees less international cooperation going forward, which means more messy wars, trade alliances and social fracturing. When asked if recent attempts to cut spending in the USA are a glimmer of hope, Piepenburg bluntly says we are way past easy solutions. At these debt levels, no one leader, ideology or policy can resolve the deficit and debt cancers spreading globally. Martin and Piepenburg also discuss the long-sighted policies of China vs. the short-sighted policies of the US to determine which nation has the most realistic options in the years ahead, while also recognising the severe challenges facing both of these economic powers. Ultimately, more cooperation would favor both nations and the world, but the chances of such policies are slim and getting slimer in this pre-Iran war recording.

In this increasingly splintered global backdrop, the conversation turns toward gold and increasingly obvious central bank demand for the same. Piepenburg certainly enjoys gold’s price action but reminds that gold, which has outperformed the S&P for more than 20 years, is nevertheless far more than a speculation asset or even a volatility hedge. Instead, gold is emerging as THE central global strategic reserve asset, as evidenced by moves taken by even the BIS, the IMF or the COMEX outflows. This is not a fable but a fact. Gold is now clearly a superior store of value than fiat currencies and sovereign IOUs of all stripes.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Statins


Doors

Chimp
https://twitter.com/Yoda4ever/status/1937914182709686736

Strandbeest

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

May 042025
 


Edouard Vuillard The window 1894

 

Elon Musk : DOGE, Support For Trump ‘Essential’ For America (NYP)
Zelensky Threatens World Leaders Visiting Moscow On Victory Day: Kremlin (ZH)
Moscow Responds To Zelensky’s Victory Day Threats (RT)
Ukrainian Troops To Take Part In Victory Day Parade In London (RT)
Farage’s Party Making Big Gains In Local British Elections (RT)
What Does Russia Want? (Ben Shapiro)
From The Mongols to NATO: Here’s The Real Russian Doctrine (Bordachev)
US Approves F-16 Support Package For Ukraine (RT)
Trump’s First Tariff Trade Deal With India Could Be Game-Changing (JTN)
De Minimis Loophole for Beijing Ends, Temu Halts Direct Shipping (CTH)
An Unavoidable Trade War with Canada is Looming (CTH)
Want To Know The Truth Behind Those Anti-Trump Polls? (Margolis)
Trump’s WWII Claim Is ‘Pompous Nonsense’ – Medvedev (RT)
Freedom in the EU? Only if You Can Afford It (Roos)
Green Energy Fixation Sends Spain Dark (Gonzalez)
DOGE Cuts Behind Nearly Half of All Layoffs This Year (JTN)
CIA to Cut 1,200 (5%) Jobs -Ratcliffe Shifts Focus to “Human Intelligence” (CTH)
Buffett To Step Down As Berkshire CEO At Year-End (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Pope
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1918683034401812862

https://twitter.com/KTmBoyle/status/1918123156411187320

https://twitter.com/SilverlochMedia/status/1918482139072602406

Did you see Mike Waltz’s ‘disguise’?

Tulsi

RT Editor-in-Chief

Orban


https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1918705744675012711

Romania has ‘elections’ today, without the leading candidate.
https://twitter.com/ricwe123/status/1918569944905633948

 

 

 

 

“That I was useful in the furtherance of civilization,.. “That I helped move civilization forward, added to the store of knowledge and capability — that I helped to understand the universe.”

Elon Musk : DOGE, Support For Trump ‘Essential’ For America (NYP)

Tesla co-founder Elon Musk is beginning his exit from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) as his time as a special government employee comes to a close. His tenure as the public face of DOGE has been marked by historic cuts and widespread outrage, but the tech titan does not regret his time with the Trump administration. Although once praised by the media and championed by the left, Musk’s decision to become a force in the public sphere has not been without backlash. From his purchase of Twitter, now X, to coming out in support of then-candidate Donald Trump, Musk’s year has been anything but “boring.” Fox News host Lara Trump asked Musk if he had any “regret” over his work at DOGE or his support of Trump, to which the SpaceX founder replied, “No.” “I think it was essential for President Trump to win to ensure that America remained great, and that we reach greater heights,” Musk said in an interview that aired Saturday on “My View with Lara Trump.”

In the run-up to the November 2024 election, Musk became a staunch supporter of Trump despite having been a former Obama donor, citing concerns over former President Joe Biden’s “most radical-left, crazy administration ever.” “Whoever controlled the auto pen and teleprompter during the Biden administration was the real president,” he said. Musk also told Lara Trump that he believed “if President Trump had not won, I think the Democrat campaign to import vast numbers of illegal voters would have succeeded,” adding that America would have risked becoming a “one-party state from which we could never escape.” “Some people out there may be somewhat skeptical. They may think, ‘Well, there isn’t some Democrat plan to subvert democracy and achieve a permanent one-party, deep blue socialist state.’ I assure you, the more you research it, the more that you will see it is true.”

With Trump winning in November, Musk was put to work on day one of the new administration, but his cost-cutting efforts have sparked nationwide opposition. “It’s not been boring, that’s for sure — an eventful year to say the least. At least I didn’t get shot, you know. Look on the bright side,” Musk said. “But we have had people shoot up Tesla stores and burn down Tesla cars. I wasn’t expecting that level of violence, really,” he continued. Musk even conceded the bad actors targeting him and his companies are “somewhat inevitable.” Part of the backlash has been a “relentless propaganda campaign” from opponents of the Trump administration, attempting to “destroy [his] public perception” and “doing character assassination,” he said.

Musk concluded the outrage shows DOGE’s work is “effective.” As President Donald Trump marked his 100th day in office on Tuesday, DOGE said it has cut at least $160 billion in waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government. With no plans of slowing down, DOGE has made a number of consequential and controversial cuts in recent months, including cuts to hundreds of millions in DEI contracts and efforts to slash federal spending by trimming the federal workforce. While DOGE made historic moves in the Trump administration’s first 100 days, Musk revealed what he most wants his legacy to be. “That I was useful in the furtherance of civilization,” he told Lara Trump. “That I helped move civilization forward, added to the store of knowledge and capability — that I helped to understand the universe.”

Read more …

Zelensky Threatens World Leaders Visiting Moscow On Victory Day: Kremlin (ZH)

Ukraine’s President Zelensky has dismissed the Kremlin’s unilateral declaration of a three-day ceasefire for Russia’s World War II commemorations on May 9 as but a “game” and “theatrical performance”. “This is more of a theatrical performance on his part. Because in two or three days, it is impossible to develop a plan for the next steps to end the war,” Zelensky said, offering instead a fuller 30-day ceasefire. We reported earlier that Zelensky days ago went so far as to hint that a Ukrainian attack on Victory Day events could happen. Here’s what Zelensky warned several days ago: “Now they are worried that their parade is in question, and they are rightly worried. But they should be concerned that this war is still going on. They must end the war,” the Ukrainian president said.

Moscow officials certainly took this as a direct threat. Various world leaders, including President Xi Jinping of China, will be present for the V-Day parade through Red Square and other observances. This year’s will be particularly special given it’s the 80th anniversary since the end of WW2. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova issued a statement Saturday saying that Zelensky “unambiguously threatened world leaders.” “After every terrorist attack on Russia’s territory, the Kiev regime, its security services, and Zelensky personally boast that this is their doing, that this will continue. Therefore, the phrase that he ‘does not guarantee security on May 9 in Russia’ as it is not his area of responsibility is, of course, a direct threat,” the diplomat stated. She and Peskov further blasted Zelensky’s stance as having exposed “the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has become a terrorist cell,” according to TASS.

Lately there’s been assassination bombings targeting top Russian generals, as well as long-range drone attacks which have reached the outskirts of Moscow. Clearly, Ukrainian intelligence and/or its allied Western intel services have made inroads into Russia. Without doubt, Russian defense and security services will bulk up anti-air systems in an around Moscow for Victory Day events. Defense officials, heads of state, and foreign ministers from various countries and especially Russia-friendly nations are expected to be present. Earlier in the Ukraine war, drones were sent across the Russian border and made it all the way to the Moscow Kremlin complex, lightly damaging the top of a dome, in what was a major first at the time. Since then, Moscow area airports have more frequently halted operations during inbound drone attacks.

Read more …

You’d almost hope they aim a device at Xi Jinping. Without hitting anyone, of course.

“Zelensky’s remarks “once again prove the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has turned into a terrorist cell..”

Moscow Responds To Zelensky’s Victory Day Threats (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s refusal to join Russia in observing a 72-hour ceasefire to mark the Victory Day celebrations exposes Kiev’s “neo-Nazi essence” and amounts to a threat by an “international-level terrorist,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Saturday. Earlier in the day, Ukrainian leader reiterated his refusal to accept Moscow’s proposal for a three-day ceasefire starting May 8 and continuing through the World War II Victory Day celebrations, dismissing it as a “theatrical production.” Zelensky also appeared to threaten the world leaders expected to take part in the May 9 events in Moscow, stating that Kiev cannot guarantee their safety. Zelensky’s remarks “once again prove the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, which has turned into a terrorist cell,” Zakharova said in a statement.

“Today [Zelensky] hit a new low: now he is threatening the physical safety of veterans who will come to parades and ceremonial events on that sacred day,” she said. “After every terrorist attack on Russian territory, the Kiev regime, its security services, and Zelensky personally boast that it was their doing and that it will continue to be like this. Therefore, the phrase that he ‘does not guarantee security on May 9 on Russian territory,’ since this is not his area of responsibility, is, of course, a direct threat,” Zakharova stressed. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov offered a similar take on Zelensky’s remarks, stating the proposed ceasefire is a “test” for Kiev, and the apparent refusal to join it “clearly shows that neo-Nazism is the ideological basis of the contemporary Kiev regime.”

The 72-hour ceasefire was announced unilaterally by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday. The president ordered the suspension of all military action against Ukraine’s forces from midnight on May 7 to midnight on May 10 and urged Kiev to join the truce. Zelensky and other top Ukrainian officials, however, dismissed the proposal as a “manipulation attempt,” demanding an immediate 30-day ceasefire instead. In March, Russia and Ukraine both agreed to a US-brokered 30-day partial ceasefire focused on halting strikes on energy infrastructure. Kiev, however, violated the truce on numerous occasions, according to the Russian military. The Victory Day truce follows a similar unilaterally announced pause during Easter weekend in April that ended up being only partially successful. While a certain lull in the hostilities was observed, Kiev violated the truce more than 3,900 times, according to estimates by the Russian Defense Ministry.

Read more …

Let’s hope they carry some Bandera flags, insignia. That country is lost

Ukrainian Troops To Take Part In Victory Day Parade In London (RT)

Ukrainian troops will take part in the World War II Victory Day parade in London on May 8 at the invitation of the UK government, the British Ministry of Defense has announced. Moscow has condemned the move as “blasphemous” and “disrespectful” due to Kiev’s open glorification of Nazism. Victory in Europe Day (VE Day) is celebrated in the West on May 8 to commemorate Nazi Germany’s surrender in 1945. In a post on X on Saturday, the UK MOD said Ukrainian troops will take part in a military procession commemorating the event alongside 1,000 British servicemen. The ministry claimed that Kiev’s participation in the event “reminds us that Ukraine is now at freedom’s front line.” UK Defense Secretary John Healey described it as “fitting” that Ukrainian troops will be present at the event.

Moscow has condemned London’s decision. “Inviting followers of neo-Nazi elements to Victory Day celebrations is not just disrespectful to those British veterans who gave their lives during World War II. It is blasphemy,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Saturday. Commemorations of WWII-era nationalist figures linked to Nazi Germany have been common in Ukraine. Ukrainian nationalists hold annual torchlight marches in Kiev, Lviv, and other cities in honor of Stepan Bandera, the leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), which collaborated with the Nazis and took part in the massacre of more than 100,000 Poles, Jews, Russians, and Soviet-aligned Ukrainians. Throughout the conflict with Russia, Ukrainian troops have on numerous occasions been filmed displaying Nazi symbols, including patches of SS units and swastikas. Italy’s Rai News 24 apologized last year after a journalist interviewed a Ukrainian fighter wearing a cap with the emblem of the ‘Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler’ SS division.

Germany previously expelled seven Ukrainian soldiers undergoing military training in the country because they were wearing Nazi symbols. Ukraine’s notorious Azov unit, a neo-Nazi formation established in 2014 and later integrated into the National Guard, has been accused of war crimes and was designated a terrorist organization by Russia in 2022. Although the original Azov Battalion was defeated in the 2022 Battle of Mariupol, co-founder Andrey Biletsky launched the 3rd Separate Assault Brigade under the Azov banner in 2023, which remains active. Russia has repeatedly warned of a Nazi revival in Ukraine and has accused Kiev of embracing neo-Nazi ideology while whitewashing WWII collaborators. President Vladimir Putin listed “denazification” among the goals of Russia’s military operation against the Kiev regime, along with demilitarization and neutrality.

Read more …

Farage will win bigly. It’s the same pattern all over Europe. Le Pen, AfD, Georgescu…

Farage’s Party Making Big Gains In Local British Elections (RT)

The right-wing Reform UK party has won 677 out of more than 1,600 seats in England’s local elections, while the Labour and the Conservative parties suffered heavy defeats across the country. As results began to trickle in on Friday, the party led by firebrand and Brexit proponent Nigel Farage emerged as the strongest performer in contests held in 23 local authorities across England, winning control of ten councils. These included eight taken from the Conservatives – Derbyshire, Kent, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, North Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire and West Northamptonshire — along with Doncaster from Labour and Durham, where no party previously had a majority.

Reform also won hard-fought parliamentary by-elections in Runcorn and Helsby, snatching victory from Labour by just six votes after a recount. As a result, the party now controls five seats in the UK Parliament. According to a BBC projection, if a general election were held today, Reform UK would receive 30% of the vote, ahead of Labour at 20% and the Conservatives at 15%. However, the next general election is not due until May 2029. The last one was held last year and saw Labour secure a landslide victory, riding a wave of public dissatisfaction with the economic policies of the Tories. Commenting on his party’s strides, Farage remarked: “In post-war Britain, no one has ever beaten both Labour and the Tories in a local election before. These results are unprecedented… Reform can and will win the next general election.”

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that while he felt a “sharp edge of fury,” he said he understood the voters’ choice while promising to “go further and faster in pursuit of… national renewal.” Meanwhile, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch bluntly acknowledged that the elections were a predictable “bloodbath,” stressing that the Tories must continue work to rebuild trust in the party. Reform UK’s rise has been driven by voter frustration over high levels of immigration, the rising cost of living, and what many see as years of mismanagement by both major parties. The party campaigned heavily on promises to cut migration – including by small boat crossings – lower taxes, and reduce council spending, positioning itself as the only alternative to what it calls “a failed political establishment.”

Read more …

Ben Shapiro displays a stunning lack of knowledge about the war.

“..cost Ukrainians at least 50,000 dead and the Russians as many as 200,000 dead..”

If Shapiro is right about anything at all, then people like Doug Macgregor and Scott Ritter have been terribly wrong for 3 years running now. They swear there’s not 4x as many Russian casualties, but 7-8x as many Ukrainian. Off by a factor of 30.

What Does Russia Want? (Ben Shapiro)

Russia’s war to conquer Ukraine has been raging since February 2022. At first, the Russian offensive seemed fated for success: Russian troops came within a few kilometers of Kyiv, and Western powers offered President Volodymyr Zelenskyy exit from the country. Zelenskyy refused; Ukrainian forces proceeded to hold off and reverse the Russian offensive. Within a few weeks, the battle lines solidified, with Russia continuing to hold much of the territory in the East and Crimea they had held since 2014. The only potential solution was the obvious solution: an armistice essentially freezing the lines of conflict and security guarantees to Ukraine sufficient to deter another Russian attack. But no solution could be found. Russia demonstrated little interest, after mid-2022, in any negotiated end to the war.

President Donald Trump came into office pledging to end the war—a war that has cost Ukrainians at least 50,000 dead and the Russians as many as 200,000 dead. To that end, he pressured Zelenskyy to come to the table. Zelenskyy eventually did, offering an unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Russian President Vladimir Putin has thus far refused any such ceasefire—presumably because he hopes that the Trump administration will pull its support from Ukraine, thereby leaving the country vulnerable to a final Russian offensive. And herein lies the problem for Trump. He knows—as everyone knows—that the only off-ramp for the war lies in a Korean War-style armistice. But Russia still refuses to come to the table, no matter the pleading and cajoling of special envoy Steve Witkoff, whose negotiating style seems to be warmly embracing various anti-American dictators, speaking kindly about them in public, and then hoping they will give him what he seeks.

In order to reach an end to the war, therefore, the Trump administration ought to fully consider just what Russia wants at this point. And the answer happens to be surprisingly simple: Russia wants either Ukraine conquered or a puppet government in place or a clear pathway to conquering Ukraine in the future. We know this because Russia repeatedly says it. Alexander Dugin, a philosopher and geopolitics expert known colloquially as “Putin’s brain,” spelled all of this out in his magnum opus, “Foundations of Geopolitics” (1997)—a book that was apparently used as a textbook at the General Staff Academy. For Dugin, the Russian spirit can only be animated by imperial dreams; regional power alone would be “tantamount to suicide for the Russian nation.” The antithesis of the Russian spirit is “‘the West’ as a whole.”

And Ukraine—an independent country that should be suffused with that “Russian spirit” but that wants to orient towards the West—represents a stinging rebuke to the Russian identity as a whole. Thus, Dugin argues, Ukraine must rejoin Russia or forever be condemned to a “puppet existence and geopolitical service” to the West. Ukraine’s continued existence as a sovereign state, Dugin argues, “is tantamount to a monstrous blow to Russia’s geopolitical security, tantamount to an invasion of its territory.” Now, during the war, Dugin writes, “We must win the war in Ukraine, liberate the entire territory of this former country from the Nazi regime. Regardless of Trump’s victory or anything else, this imperative remains unchanged. Just as the ancient Roman consul Cato the Elder used to say, ‘Carthage must be destroyed,’ in our case, ‘Kiev must be taken’”

So, if the true Russian goal is the destruction or subjugation of Ukraine, how could Russia be brought to the table? Only through the “peace through strength” policy Trump pursued during his first term. Only a Russia that believes that the West will refuse to surrender Ukraine will be pressured into an armistice. Trump seems ready to consider that possibility; he’s now acknowledging publicly that Putin seems to be slow-playing him. But the answer won’t be more sanctions. It will be a recognition that Ukraine’s sovereignty can only be guaranteed by force of arms—and that an off-ramp can only be achieved by a guarantee of that sovereignty.

Read more …

Wonderful history lesson by Timofey Bordachev. It all goes back to the 13th century, the Mongol hordes.

From The Mongols to NATO: Here’s The Real Russian Doctrine (Bordachev)

“Only crows fly straight,” goes an old saying from the Vladimir-Suzdal region, where the revival of the Russian state began after the devastation of the Mongol invasion in the 13th century. Within 250 years, a powerful state emerged in Eastern Europe, its independence and decision-making unquestioned by others. From its earliest days, Russia’s foreign policy culture has been shaped by a single goal: to preserve the nation’s ability to determine its own future. The methods have varied, but a few constants remain: no fixed strategies, no binding ideologies, and an ability to surprise opponents. Unlike European or Asian powers, Russia never needed rigid doctrines; its vast, unpredictable geography – and its instinct for unorthodox solutions – made that unnecessary. Yet this distinctive foreign policy culture did not develop overnight.

Before the mid-13th century, Russia’s trajectory looked much like the rest of Eastern Europe’s. Fragmented and inward-looking, its city-states had little reason to unify. Geography and climate kept them largely self-contained. It could have ended up like other Slavic nations, eventually dominated by German or Turkish powers. But then came what Nikolay Gogol called a “wonderful event”: the 1237 Mongol invasion. Russia’s strongest state centers were obliterated. This catastrophe, paradoxically, gave rise to two defining features of Russian statehood: a reason to unify and a deep-seated pragmatism. For 250 years, Russians paid tribute to the Golden Horde but were never its slaves. The relationship with the Horde was a constant struggle – clashes alternating with tactical cooperation. It was during this period that the “sharp sword of Moscow” was forged: a state that functioned as a military organization, always blending conflict and diplomacy. War and peace merged seamlessly, without the moral dilemmas that often paralyze others.

These centuries also forged another trait of Russian thinking: the strength of the adversary is irrelevant to the legitimacy of its demands. Unlike the Western Hobbesian notion that might makes right, Russians have historically viewed force as just one factor – not the determinant of truth. A 16th-century song about a Crimean Khan’s raid sums it up: he is called both a “tsar” for his military power and a “dog” for lacking justice. Similarly, after the Cold War, Russia recognized Western power – but not the righteousness of its actions. Demographics have always been a challenge, driven by climate and geography. Russia’s population did not match that of France until the late 18th century, despite covering an area many times larger than Western Europe. And crucially, Russia has never relied on external allies. Its foreign policy rests on the understanding that no one else will solve its problems – a lesson learned through bitter experience. Yet Russia has always been a reliable ally to others.

A pivotal moment came in the mid-15th century, when Grand Duke Vasily Vasilyevich settled Kazan princes on Russia’s eastern borders. This marked the beginning of Russia’s multi-ethnic statehood, where loyalty – not religion – was the key requirement. Unlike Western Europe, where the church dictated social order, Russia’s statehood grew as a mosaic of ethnic and religious groups, all unified by a shared commitment to defense. This pragmatism – welcoming Christians, Muslims, and others alike – set Russia apart. Spain’s rulers completed the Reconquista by expelling or forcibly converting Jews and Muslims; Russia integrated its minorities, allowing them to serve and prosper without renouncing their identities.

Today, Russia’s foreign policy still draws on these deep traditions. Its core priority remains the same: defending sovereignty and retaining freedom of choice in a volatile world. And true to form, Russia resists doctrinaire strategies. Fixed doctrines require fixed ideologies – something historically alien to Russia. Russia also rejects the idea of “eternal enemies.” The Mongol Horde, once its deadliest foe, was absorbed within decades of its collapse. Its nobles merged with Russian aristocracy, its cities became Russian cities. No other country has fully absorbed such a formidable rival. Even Poland, a centuries-long adversary, was eventually diminished not by decisive battles but by sustained pressure. Victory for Russia has never been about glory – it’s about achieving objectives. Often, this means exhausting adversaries rather than crushing them outright. The Mongols were defeated in 1480 without a single major battle. Similarly, Poland was gradually reduced in stature over centuries of relentless pressure.

This mindset explains Russia’s readiness to negotiate at every stage: politics always outweighs military concerns. Foreign and domestic policy are inseparable, and every foreign venture is also a bid to strengthen internal cohesion, just as the medieval princes of Moscow used external threats to unite the Russian lands. Today’s geopolitical landscape is shifting again. The West – led by the United States – remains powerful, but no longer omnipotent. China is expanding its influence, though cautiously. Western Europe, historically Russia’s main threat, is losing its relevance, unable to define a vision for its own future. Russia, the US and China all possess that vision – and in the coming decades, their triangular relationship will shape global politics. India may join this elite circle in time, but for now, it still lags behind.

Read more …

Dumb but predictable: the US supports its weapons industry.

US Approves F-16 Support Package For Ukraine (RT)

The US has approved a $310.5 million deal to sustain Ukrainian-operated F-16 fighter jets provided by Kiev’s European backers. The move comes after the US and Ukraine signed a deal in which Kiev grants Washington access to its natural resources in exchange for future assistance. The F-16 deliveries from European NATO members to Ukraine were approved by former US President Joe Biden in August 2023, but the first jets did not arrive in the country until a year later. While Ukrainian officials hailed the deliveries as a major coup, Western media warned that they would not be a “game changer” in the conflict. In March, the Ukrainian Air Force acknowledged that the F-16s operated by Kiev “cannot compete” with the latest Russian jets.

In a statement on Friday, the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) said the State Department had signed off on a foreign military sale to Ukraine which includes training, spare parts, aircraft modifications, logistics assistance, and software support for F-16s. The agency added that the proposed sale “will support the foreign policy goals… of the United States by improving the security of a partner country that is a force for political stability” in Europe. More than 80 F-16s have been promised to Ukraine, with the bulk expected to come from Belgium and the Netherlands, while the US has never committed to providing the jets on its own. While the exact number of jets delivered is unknown, Moscow confirmed last month it had shot down one F-16. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky said the aircraft’s pilot perished during a “combat mission.”

In 2024, Ukraine reported the loss of another F-16, saying it crashed while repelling a Russian air strike. The DSCA announcement comes after the Pentagon said it is sending “disused and completely non-operational F-16s to Ukraine for parts.” It also follows the signing of a US-Ukraine resource deal that is intended to allow Washington to recover the cost of future military support through shared proceeds from Ukrainian mineral resource licenses. Moscow has condemned the Western arms shipments to Ukraine, warning they will only prolong the conflict without changing the outcome. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Ukrainian-operated F-16s will “burn” just like other Western-supplied equipment.

Read more …

India would be big. “Apple announced on April 25 that it would be shifting production of most U.S.-bound iPhones to India from China..”

Trump’s First Tariff Trade Deal With India Could Be Game-Changing (JTN)

Just a month into his tariff policy, President Donald Trump could unveil his first new trade deals with allies as early as this week as his negotiators press for handshakes and signatures that could further calm markets and empower a brighter future for American workers, officials tell Just the News. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick hinted at an approaching announcement last week when he revealed he has a trade deal with an unspecified country, pending approval of its conditions. Administration officials said as many as two or three deals could be unveiled in the coming days.Speculation has swirled surrounding India being the first to forge a partnership after Vice President J.D. Vance last week met with India Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Delhi to discuss a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA).

The vice president’s office put out a statement following their meeting, which stated, “The BTA presents an opportunity to negotiate a new and modern trade agreement focused on promoting job creation and citizen well-being in both countries, with the goal of enhancing bilateral trade and supply-chain integration in a balanced and mutually beneficial manner.” Also last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicated that many trade partners had reached out to the White House since the tariffs were unveiled and had made ‘very good’ proposals. “I would guess that India would be one of the first trade deals we would sign,” Bessent told CNBC, and that the U.S. also held productive negotiations with Japan and other Asian nations.

Former Deputy National Security Advisor Victoria Coates said an early deal with India could be a game-changer, since it is a partner with the market size of China that could apply pressure on Beijing. “I’d love to have them be first out of the box,” she said, noting Prime Minister Modi’s relationship with Vance has already yielded dividends. Coates said deals with the European Union will take longer, but there are some other big early possibilities. “I would look at Japan. I think that that would be key,” she said. “I think the conversation with the Europeans is going to be a longer one, but again that really has to happen. We might be surprised by the UK.” Mere signs of trade deals on the horizon have already calmed markets after an early free fall prompted by Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement on April 2.

The S&P 500 on Friday notched its longest streak of closing in the positive column in more than two decades, after it rose 1.47% at the close of business and marked its ninth consecutive day of gains. India has a few notable incentives to make it happen soon: India’s largest trading partner is the United States. The nation was hit with 26% reciprocal tariffs on April 2 before Trump suspended the larger tariffs on most countries for 90 days, but kept a universal 10% tariff in place. India is also placing a large emphasis on an agreement as part of its India-US Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership, which Modi says “will be a defining partnership of the 21st Century for a better future of our people and the world.”

Adding sweetness to the deal: Apple announced on April 25 that it would be shifting production of most U.S.-bound iPhones to India from China, bringing billions in revenue and jobs to the populous, developing nation. India’s ambition to more than double trade between the U.S. and India, from the current $190 billion to $500 billion, was originally sent by Modi to Trump in February 2025. With headlines alluding to a Trump “misfire,” Democrats and legacy media have wasted no time prognosticating about why the trade deals are taking so long, and may never come. However, sources told Fox Business on Monday that the president is working on broader trade deals encompassing additional nations, not just nations involving tariffs. This, they report, is the reason there has been only speculation and no official announcements of trade deals.

Read more …

Where will Temu get its sales now?

“If you order a $20 shirt from China effective June 1st, you will pay $220. $20 for the shirt, and $200 minimum tariff. Yep, this is only the beginning.”

De Minimis Loophole for Beijing Ends, Temu Halts Direct Shipping (CTH)

Think about it. We’ve already heard about the massive stoppages of April factory work in China, causing serious concern for Beijing and Chinese worker protests. American importers front loaded inventory in February and March with a 50% increase in orders. Now, in addition to those factories going quiet, the de minimis rule kicks in. (Via CNBC) – “Chinese bargain retailer Temu changed its business model in the U.S. as the Trump administration’s new rules on low-value shipments took effect Friday. In recent days, Temu has abruptly shifted its website and app to only display listings for products shipped from U.S.-based warehouses. Items shipped directly from China, which previously blanketed the site, are now labeled as out of stock. Temu made a name for itself in the U.S. as a destination for ultra-discounted items shipped direct from China, such as $5 sneakers and $1.50 garlic presses.

It’s been able to keep prices low because of the so-called de minimis rule, which has allowed items worth $800 or less to enter the country duty-free since 2016. The loophole expired Friday at 12:01 a.m. EDT as a result of an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in April.” The de minimis loophole comes from back in the 1930s. The idea back then was, say you went on a vacation to Paris, you shouldn’t have to file customs paperwork or pay taxes if you decided to ship some little Eiffel Tower statues to your friends back home. Congress in 2015 then raised the de minimis threshold from $200 to $800. However, the e-commerce world exploded, and Chinese companies began using the de minimis loophole to ship cheap goods (ex. Temu and Shein) into the USA direct to consumers without paying any customs duty.

On April 2nd, as part of the global trade reset and tariff structure, President Trump revoked authorization for Chinese goods to transfer to the USA using the de minimis rule. The de minimis exemption was cancelled for all products coming out of China. The rule change only targeted China and Chinese shippers. No one else. As part of the modification to Executive Order #14257, President Trump has increased the baseline tariff for product mailed from China [de minimis tariff] from 30 90 percent to 120%. Mailed products from China now face a 120% tariff. Additionally, minimum tariff amounts increased from $75 to $100 effective May 1st, and from $150 to $200 effective June 1st. Example: If you order a $20 shirt from China effective June 1st, you will pay $220. $20 for the shirt, and $200 minimum tariff. Yep, this is only the beginning.

Read more …

“When Trudeau outlines the inability of Canada to agree to trade terms, simply because his country no longer has the capability of adhering to those trade terms, a frustrated President Trump says, “then become a state.”

An Unavoidable Trade War with Canada is Looming (CTH)

Following the 2024 presidential election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau traveled to Mar-a-Lago and said if President Trump was to make the Canadian government face reciprocal tariffs, open the USMCA trade agreements to force reciprocity, and/or balance economic relations on non-tariff issues, then Canada would collapse upon itself economically and cease to exist. In essence, in addition to the NATO defense shortfall, Canada cannot survive as a free and independent north American nation, without receiving all the one-way benefits from the U.S. economy. To wit, President Trump then said, if Canada cannot survive in a balanced rules environment, including putting together their own military and defenses and meeting their NATO obligations, then Canada should become the 51st U.S state. It was following this meeting that President Trump started emphasizing this point and shocking everyone in the process.

However, in the emotional reaction to Trump’s statements, no-one looked at the core issues outlined by Trudeau that framed President Trump’s opinion. Representing Canada, Justin Trudeau was not expressing an unwillingness to comply with fairness and reciprocity in trade with the USA, what Trudeau was expressing was an inability to comply. Quite simply, after decades of shifting priorities, Canada no longer has the internal economic capability to comply with a fair-trade agreement (FTA). Trudeau was not lying, and President Trump understood the argument; hence his 51st state remarks.This is where it becomes important to understand the core reason why Trump, Ross and Lighthizer (2017) did not structurally want to replace the NAFTA agreement with another trilateral trade deal. Mexico and Canada are completely different as it pertains to trade with the USA. President Trump would rather have two separate bilateral agreements; one for Mexico and one for Canada.

• Firstly, Canada is a NATO partner, Mexico is not. As President Trump affirmed to Justin Trudeau during the meeting, it would be unfair of President Trump to discuss NATO funding with the European Union, while Canada is one of the worst offenders. Trump is leveraging favorable trade terms and tariff relief with the EU member states, as a carrot to get them into compliance with the 2.0 to 2.5% spending requirement for their military. If the NATO member states contribute more to their own defense, the U.S. can pull back spending and save Americans money. However, Canada is currently 26th in NATO funding, spending only 1.37% of their GDP on defense (link). Canada would have to spend at least another $15 billion/yr on their defense programs in order to reach 2.0%. Justin Trudeau told President Trump that was an impossible goal given the nature of the Canadian political system, and the current size of their economy ($2.25 trillion).

• Secondly, over the last 40 years Canada has deindustrialized their economy, Mexico has not. As the progressive political ideology of their politicians took control of Canada policy, the ‘climate change’ agenda and ‘green’ economy became their focus. The dirty industrialized systems were not compliant with the goals of the Canadian policy makers. The dirty mining sector (coal, coking coal, ore) no longer exists at scale to support self-sufficient manufacturing. The dirty oil refineries do not exist to refine the crude oil they extract. Large industrial heavy industry no longer exists at a scale needed to be self-sufficient. Instead, Canada purchases forged and rolled steel component parts from overseas (mostly China). Making the issue more challenging, Canada doesn’t even have enough people skilled to do the dirty jobs within the heavy manufacturing; they would need a national apprenticeship program. Again, all points raised by Trudeau to explain why bilateral trade compliance was impossible.

• Thirdly, the trade between Canada/U. S and Mexico/U. S is entirely different. The main imports from Canada are energy, lumber and raw materials. The main imports from Mexico are agriculture, cars and finished industrial goods. Mexico refines its own oil; Canada ships their oil to the USA for refining. There are obviously some similar products from Mexico and Canada, but for the most part there is a big difference.

• Forth, USA banks are allowed to operate in Mexico, but USA banks are not allowed to operate in Canada. USA media organizations are allowed to broadcast in Mexico, but USA media organizations are regulated and not permitted to broadcast in Canada. The Canadian government has strong regulations and restrictions on information and Intellectual Property. All of these points of difference highlight why a trilateral trade agreement like NAFTA and the USMCA just don’t work out for the USA. Additionally, if President Trump levies a tariff on Chinese imports, it hits Canada much harder than Mexico because Canada has deindustrialized and now imports from China to assemble into finished goods destined to the USA. In a very direct way Canada is a passthrough for Chinese products. Canada is now more of an assembly economy, not a dirty job manufacturing economy.

When Trudeau outlines the inability of Canada to agree to trade terms, simply because his country no longer has the capability of adhering to those trade terms, a frustrated President Trump says, “then become a state.” There is no option to remain taking advantage of the USA on this level, and things are only getting worse. Thus, the point of irreconcilable conflict is identified.

Read more …

If 80% of those you poll are Democrats, it’s easy going.

Want To Know The Truth Behind Those Anti-Trump Polls? (Margolis)

You’ve no doubt heard the media narrative about President Trump’s poll numbers according to most pollsters—you know, the ones who got the 2024 election so wrong, Make no mistake about it — the legacy media is at it again with their dishonest polling tactics against President Trump. But this time, their deceptive game has been called out by none other than former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Appearing on Hannity Thursday night, Gingrich exposed how the media’s recent polling showing Trump’s approval dropping is nothing but smoke and mirrors. The reality? These polls are deliberately skewed to paint a false narrative about Trump’s standing with the American people. Let’s look at the facts. The same media outlets that got it wrong in 2024—ABC News, CBS News, and CNN—are now pushing polls that show Trump’s approval is declining from his February high of 53%.

But are they really? “I got a little preview about poll numbers that are coming out tomorrow, and from both Robert Cahaly and Matt Towery, who I respect a lot,” Hannity said. “And as I suspected, all of the polls that the media has been pushing on the American people about Donald Trump are false, and that’s what the early indications are.” He pointed out the absurdity of the numbers being hyped by the media, especially when far-left figures such as Chuck Schumer were polling in the teens. “All the pollsters that got the election in ‘24 wrong and got every election about Donald Trump wrong—all of those people—the ones saying, ‘Oh, he’s plummeting.’ But meanwhile, they’re ignoring Chuck is at 17% and the Democrats are in the 20s. I’m trying to understand that logic. Can you help me out?” Gingrich didn’t mince words.

“Well, I mean, first of all, they’re just plain lying,” Gingrich replied. “And I think we’ve got to be tougher and clearer about how dishonest these people are.” He cited conversations with veteran GOP pollsters, pointing to the way poll samples are rigged to undercount Republicans. “The fact is, and I talked to John McLaughlin and I talked to Matt Towery about this, they have some polls there that are like 27% Republican when Trump got 50% of the vote. So if you add the 23 points they didn’t test, suddenly he’s in great shape. This is deliberate. It is willful.” Gingrich then laid out what he sees as the last bastions of anti-Trump resistance in the establishment. “Look, there are three great centers of resistance: the propaganda media, which will lie all the time, the fake district judges, and the fake Congressional Budget Office. Those are the last three great centers of resistance, and they’re going to do anything they can to defeat Trump and the Republicans, including lying about virtually everything.”

“None of them, to be honest with you,” Towery said when asked which poll concerned him the most. “I have a group of pollsters I look at who are public pollsters who’ve been right in all three of Trump’s cycles. We happen to be one of those. None of us have had him down by any of these numbers we’ve seen before. The only one that might concern me at all is the Fox News one because Fox did well in the 24 cycle.” Towery also took aim at the methodology behind the polls. “They are absolutely, I don’t like to criticize polling, but how can you have a poll, as John McLaughlin, a good friend of mine pointed out, how could you have a poll that shows Donald Trump at 39%? But yet when you ask people who they voted for and they said they voted for Trump, like 95% said they would vote for him again.”

Read more …

“The capitulation took effect after midnight in Moscow. May 8 is observed as Victory in Europe Day, with Russia commemorating the occasion on May 9.”

Trump’s WWII Claim Is ‘Pompous Nonsense’ – Medvedev (RT)

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has dismissed US President Donald Trump’s claim that America played the primary role in winning World War II as “pompous nonsense.”Medvedev made the comment on his VK page on Saturday, in response to Trump’s plan to designate May 8 as ‘American Victory Day’. “Trump recently announced that the US made the main contribution to the victory in World War II and that he would establish a holiday on May 8. A holiday is not bad. But the first conclusion is pompous nonsense,” Medvedev wrote. Earlier this week, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that he “will create a new holiday called AMERICAN VICTORY DAY, to be celebrated on May 8.” He went on to say: “This date marks the formal surrender of Nazi Germany to the Allied Forces in World War II, ending the war in Europe. AMERICAN VICTORY DAY will celebrate the heroes who helped vanquish tyranny and secure liberty for generations to come.”

Trump also said he wants to rename Veterans Day, a federal holiday celebrated on November 11, to “Victory Day for World War I,” adding that the US “won both wars.” In response, Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, highlighted the Soviet Union’s role in defeating Nazi Germany, stressing that the Red Army bore heavy losses and “liberated ungrateful Europe.” “Our people gave 27 million lives of their sons and daughters for the sake of destroying damned fascism,” he wrote. “Victory Day is ours and it is on May 9. That’s how it was, is, and always will be!” Earlier this week, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia is grateful to the US for its support during WWII, but the USSR would have defeated Nazi Germany even without the assistance. “The famous Lend-Lease indeed helped us. We received vehicles, airplanes, ammunition, and tanks. And indeed, without this, it would have been very difficult.”

The Lend-Lease program was a US government initiative that provided allies with military supplies, equipment, food, and strategic raw materials. The Soviet Union received aid valued at around $200 billion in today’s terms, Peskov said. He noted, however, that the assistance was not free. Russia, as the USSR’s successor state, completed its financial obligations related to the Lend-Lease program in 2006. Nazi Germany officially surrendered to the Allied forces on May 8, 1945, following the capture of Berlin by Soviet troops. The capitulation took effect after midnight in Moscow. May 8 is observed as Victory in Europe Day, with Russia commemorating the occasion on May 9.

Read more …

“Starting in 2027, the European Union will expand its emissions trading system (ETS) into new territory with the launch of ETS2..”

“Margaret Thatcher: “Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for global socialism.”

Freedom in the EU? Only if You Can Afford It (Roos)

Starting in 2027, the European Union will expand its emissions trading system (ETS) into new territory with the launch of ETS2. While the original ETS primarily targeted heavy industry and power plants, ETS2 directly impacts ordinary citizens — their homes, their cars, their daily lives. Under the guise of ’saving the climate,’ the EU will steadily make gasoline, diesel, and gas for heating more expensive. But let’s be honest: ETS2 has very little to do with protecting the environment. It is about economic control, wealth redistribution, and the consolidation of power among banks, large corporations, governments, and the European Commission. Formally, everything remains ‘voluntary.’ You may continue driving a gasoline car. You may continue heating your home with natural gas. But every choice that deviates from the state’s ‘sustainability goals’ will become economically unbearable.

This is not a direct expropriation of property, but it is economic subjugation through price pressure, regulation, and redistribution of the proceeds. Instead of free choices, citizens and companies are financially forced to adopt government-approved behavior. Who benefits? Banks, investment funds, multinational corporations, government treasuries, and the European Commission. Financial giants like Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank are already making billions from trading CO2 certificates. Governments are raking in massive revenues from the auctioning of emission permits. Meanwhile, large corporations that receive free allowances or have surplus certificates can sell them for profit—all while greenwashing their public image.

And who bears the cost? Ordinary citizens, small businesses, the transport sector, and independent entrepreneurs. They will face hundreds of euros in additional costs every year just to heat their homes and drive to work. The most vulnerable are promised compensation through a ’Social Climate Fund’—a government handout that makes them ever more dependent on state aid. This brings us to the deeper question: What direction are we heading in? Is this communism, where the state owns the means of production? Or is it fascism, where the state controls production and merges with big business to dominate society? In truth, ETS2 signals a new hybrid system. Private ownership remains in name, but real control is exercised through regulations, price manipulation, and conditional subsidies.

The market is not abolished; it is repurposed around ideological objectives. Economic freedom exists only for those who can afford to comply. The Brussels technocratic pressure is sold as a ‘necessary transition,’ but in reality, it is dismantling the foundation of our economy, destroying the middle class, and eroding prosperity. Instead of fostering genuine innovation, ETS2 punishes those who lack the resources to “comply.” While banks and corporations speculate and profit, the hardworking EU citizen is soon faced with a grim choice: freeze in the winter or take on debt for a heat pump they neither asked for nor needed. The EU claims that prices will rise “gradually” and that safeguards are in place to prevent social unrest. But history teaches us that once new taxes and levies are introduced, they rarely disappear. Temporary exceptions inevitably become permanent rules.

After homes and cars, aviation, agriculture, and consumer goods will follow. Every sector deemed ‘unsustainable’ will face similar price manipulation. Personal freedom will continue to shrink, not through open political force, but through economic coercion masked as environmental stewardship. And for those still believing they will retain the freedom to choose: A choice that becomes financially impossible is no longer a real choice. It is coerced compliance. It is economic submission. Remember the words of Margaret Thatcher: “Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for global socialism.” Climate change must never be used as an excuse for economic servitude. Say no to green tyranny. Say yes to freedom, prosperity, and choice.

Read more …

Many will follow. It won’t be pretty. The systems are old but volatile.

Green Energy Fixation Sends Spain Dark (Gonzalez)

VALENCIA, Spain—Two modern ills converged in Europe on Monday, literally one of the darkest days in decades. An ideological obsession with climate fanaticism left countries without power for hours, while censorship of “disinformation,” often information the powerful don’t like, plunged the population in an informational blackout in subsequent days. The electrical blackout brought planes, trains, and automobiles to a screeching halt throughout Spain, Portugal, and small parts of southern France. Electricity simply stopped flowing, and with it control towers, rail lines, and traffic lights. Cellphones became quadrangular black boxes that did nothing and lost their “smartness.” A political conference I was attending in this sunny Mediterranean port city suddenly became eerie when people started coming in and out and whispering to each other. One person in the seat in front finally turned and enlightened a friend and me: “The electricity is down. We’re cut off from the world.”

We then realized that, yes, sirens had been wailing outside, and it had been a while since we’d gotten emails or texts. A generator in the hotel kept our conference going, but nothing else worked; everyone had to take the stairs and use bathrooms in the dark—though water, too, stopped working. It wasn’t quite dystopic, but our modern dependence on electricity and its creature comforts suddenly was brought home to us. Many speculated that it was a cyberattack from Russia or China. Who else had the power to do this? Center-right politicians from across Europe were about to descend on Valencia the next day. Surely, an invitation for bad actors to do their thing. Well, not so fast. Neither Russia’s Vladimir Putin nor China’s Xi Jinping is above carrying out this type of attack, and cybersecurity is a serious matter. But, to quote Vice President JD Vance at a February conference in Munich, Germany, the threat to worry about the most in Europe “is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor.”

“What I worry about,” went on Vance, “is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its fundamental values.” Vance mentioned Europe’s need “to enjoy affordable energy,” and the fact that, as he put it, “free speech, I fear, is in retreat.” European officials are still fuming about how “rude” that young Vance was, but it looks like he was on the money. It is increasingly clear that what caused the blackout was not a cyberattack. Reuters News agency reported that Spain’s grid operator Red Electrica on Tuesday ruled out external sabotage, and said instead that it had identified two “incidents of power generation loss, probably from solar plants,” in southwestern Spain. That, said the Reuters report, “caused instability in the electric system and led to a breakdown of its connection with France. The electrical system collapsed, affecting both the Spanish and Portuguese systems.”

“There was not enough inertia, or redundancy, in the system to keep it going,” my colleague Diana Furchott-Roth emailed from Washington when I was able to receive communications from the outside world. “The last coal-fired plant was closed on April 12.” Diana has been warning about this type of thing for decades, and Spain’s socialist prime minister Pedro Sanchez is a poster boy for the things she has warned against. His government has not only closed coal-fired plants, but has been busily destroying nuclear plants as well. “Net zero,” or zero CO2 emissions, is the name of this new mad delusion, and Spain’s infantile leftists have been posting on social media gleeful workers destroying nuclear power plants. The goal has been 100% “renewable” generation.

Well, they happened to have gotten very close to their holy grail on Monday at 12:30. The Iberian Peninsula’s power grid was getting a disproportionate amount of energy from the renewables loved by the Left: 80% from solar photovoltaic, solar thermal and wind. Nuclear was at a measly 11%. In a mere five minutes, solar photovoltaic generation plunged by 50%, from 18 gigawatts to eight, according to Reuters. Iberia and adjacent parts of France, including the tiny Pyrenean principality of Andorra, all of which depended on this grid, then descended into darkness at 12:35, from which it was not to recover till late at night. The hapless Sanchez was still arguing late Tuesday that just because Red Electrica was discounting a cyberattack, it did not mean that one hadn’t happened. Governments finding themselves in a corner will lie, or at least equivocate, and it’s the job of the opposition to keep asking for answers.

“An energy policy that prioritizes the fight against climate change above the security of supply has provoked this general blackout,” said an analysis on the site of the think tank Disenso, which is linked to the opposition Vox Party (full disclosure, I sit on Disenso’s foreign advisory board). But it is also the job of the media. Yet Spain’s state television stations, and even private ones, were still keeping the truth about the failure of the Left’s renewable dream from getting any airtime as late as Wednesday morning, when I left for the airport. That was left to radio and to some newspapers on the right. An honest media would be not just informing voters about how a blackout that left at least five dead and stopped a modern economy in its tracks happened. It would also be debating whether such a modern society really does want to stop using comfort creatures and working toilets, all in the name of fighting climate change.

Read more …

Big Balls can take over. They have a strong team.

DOGE Cuts Behind Nearly Half of All Layoffs This Year (JTN)

President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency is responsible for nearly half of all job cuts announced this year, according to a new report. The report from outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas said DOGE-related actions lead all job cut reasons in 2025 with 283,172, 2,919 of which occurred in April. Another 6,945 cuts were attributed to “DOGE Downstream Impact” through April, primarily at nonprofits and education organizations. These combined (290,117) make up 48% of all job cuts announced so far in 2025, according to the report. “Though the Government cuts are front and center, we saw job cuts across sectors last month,” Andrew Challenger, senior vice president and workplace expert for Challenger, Gray & Christmas. “Generally, companies are citing the economy and new technology. Employers are slow to hire and limiting hiring plans as they wait and see what will happen with trade, supply chain, and consumer spending.”

The vast majority of the DOGE-related cuts were from March, according to the report. After DOGE, market and economic conditions were cited for 95,348 job cuts, as economic uncertainty, consumer spending, and trade challenges hit U.S. companies, according to the report. Tariffs were cited for 1,413 cuts so far this year, with 1,350 occurring in April. Restructuring accounted for 67,627, and 60,551 were due to store, unit or location closing. When Trump created DOGE, he said it would be the government cost-cutting equivalent of the “Manhattan Project.” Both Trump and Tesla CEO Elon Musk promised Americans would get a more efficient government after DOGE addressed government waste, reduced regulations, and reduced the federal workforce. Many of the DOGE-led cuts in government face legal challenges from unions and other groups. Many of those same cuts remain in limbo as pending court cases continue.

The Challenger report comes as Musk steps back from government work to focus more on Tesla. Musk initially said DOGE would aim to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget, but he later cut that in half. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Musk said DOGE was on pace to cut $150 billion from the federal budget. The U.S. government employs about 2.4 million federal workers, excluding the military (about 1.3 million active-duty military personnel) and U.S. Postal Service (about 600,000 employees), according to 2024 Pew Research report. That report noted that the federal government employed 1.87% of the entire civilian workforce. That percentage includes postal employees, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Read more …

“Musk met with Ratcliffe in late March for a discussion that included government efficiency measures, but no DOGE teams have been working at the agency’s Langley, Virginia, campus.”

CIA to Cut 1,200 (5%) Jobs -Ratcliffe Shifts Focus to “Human Intelligence” (CTH)

The Washington Post (but of course, CIA outlet) is reporting on a downsizing effort within the CIA to eliminate approximately 1,200 jobs. The number represents approximately 5% of the workforce although the actual number of CIA employees is classified (national security, dontchaknow). Within the report, Director John Ratcliffe is noted as shifting the focus of America’s leading spy agency to use more “human intelligence.” That phrase, “human intelligence,” is IC silo code speak for shifting away from “analysts” (political operatives) and engaging in more factual intelligence information. According to the report, DNI Tulsi Gabbard has also reduced the employment level within the Director of National Intelligence office by approximately 25% (current payroll estimate of 2,000 employees). The general narrative within the WaPo reporting is that “national security” is being compromised by large downsizing of spy agency employment. Additionally, to bolster the positions of the current political operatives within the CIA, the WaPo waxes concerningly about China and other mysterious foreign adversaries recruiting the CIA employees who are now becoming increasingly concerned about their paychecks.

WASHINGTON POST – “The Trump administration is planning significant personnel cuts at the Central Intelligence Agency and other major U.S. spy units, downsizing the government’s most sensitive national security agencies, according to people familiar with the plans. The administration recently informed lawmakers on Capitol Hill that it intends to reduce the CIA’s workforce by about 1,200 personnel over several years and cut thousands more from other parts of the U.S. intelligence community, including at the National Security Agency, a highly secretive service that specializes in cryptology and global electronic espionage, a person familiar with the matter said. The person, like others interviewed, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

[…] The staff reductions would take place over several years and would be accomplished in part through reduced hiring. No outright firings are envisioned. The goal of a roughly 1,200-person staff reduction includes several hundred individuals who already have opted for early retirement, the person familiar with the matter said. The downsizing is taking place separately from efforts by the U.S. DOGE Service, led by billionaire Elon Musk, to radically restructure the federal government. Musk met with Ratcliffe in late March for a discussion that included government efficiency measures, but no DOGE teams have been working at the agency’s Langley, Virginia, campus.

[Obviously, I can certainly appreciate the “human intelligence” shift noted by Director Ratcliffe for all the factual reasons that necessitate his concern. It is part of the reason why I ended up frustrated with “western reports” and determined the only way to really understand what is going on inside Russia during the sanctions was to travel there myself and review. It was quite an experience to sit in a renamed Starbucks coffee shop at the crowded Galleria Mall in downtown St Petersburg, Russia and read the Wall Street Journal reporting on the devastation to the Russian economy, while looking around at the packed stores and purchases being made on an ordinary weekday. Then to read the New York Times reports of shortages of steel in Russia, while driving past many miles of apartment and condominium construction. Everything cited in western corporate media, “according to sources familiar with the situation”, was/is the complete opposite of everything factually visible.]

Read more …

Did I see 44,000%?!

Buffett To Step Down As Berkshire CEO At Year-End (ZH)

It’s the end of an era at America’s largest hedge fund/private equity/insurance float-cum-rollup conglomerate, whatever you want to call it: Warren Buffett just announced during the Berkshire annual pilgrimage to Omaha that he is stepping down as CEO of Berkshire at the end of the year, and that Greg Abel, the vice chairman for non-insurance operations who has been groomed over the past decade for just this moment, will take over the conglomerate. The news was greeted with a standing ovation by the thousands of Berkshire shareholders who were present at Omaha’s Convention Center.

Buffett – whose track record cemented him, along his long-time sidesick Charlie Munger, into a celebrity billionaire renowned for his investing acumen and witticisms – built Berkshire Hathaway into a business valued at more than $1.16 trillion, generating compounded annual returns to shareholders at double the rate of the S&P (19.9% vs 10.4%), since 1965, and a staggering 5,502,482% overall gain on BRK stocks since 1964, vs “only” 39,054% for the S&P. His investing success gave him the power to move stocks and helped him strike lucrative deals with Goldman Sachs and General Electric during times of crisis. The announcement stunned the board and even Abel, who, while long signaled as Buffett’s successor, was unaware that the news was coming as the annual meeting drew to a close. “That’s the news hook for the day,” Buffett said. “Thanks for coming.”

Berkshire grew aggressively over the decades with Buffett as chairman and CEO, as he chose acquisitions and stocks for the company portfolio alongside trusted adviser and vice chairman, Charlie Munger, who died in 2023 at 99. As Bloomberg notes, “the conglomerate acquired a bewildering assortment of businesses, which Buffett often said mirrored the US economy as a whole. A bet on Berkshire, he said, was a bet on America.” Buffett started managing money when he was young, a disciple of Benjamin Graham’s investing style. He moved more into the corporate world when his Buffett Partnership Ltd. bought shares of Berkshire. In 1965, he took control of the rest of the business.

Composed mostly of struggling textile operations that would eventually fade away, Berkshire became the foundation for Buffett’s modern-day giant. Piece by piece, he built and acquired operations into a varied set of industries, including insurance — which gave him cash, or “float” — to help his investing strategy. Now, Berkshire owns businesses ranging from railroad BNSF to auto insurer Geico, sprawling energy operations, and even retailers such as Dairy Queen and See’s Candies. Its collection of companies generated $47.4 billion of annual operating earnings in 2024. Buffett also built up the stock portfolio — populating it with giant bets on the likes of Apple Inc. and American Express — and offering Berkshire another way to participate in the gains of businesses that it didn’t fully own.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

FSD

AI

Fauci

Ocean
https://twitter.com/dom_lucre/status/1918406723351802248

Moose

Birds

Cows
https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1918410455258718428

Kookaburra

lion pair

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 072025
 


James McNeill Whistler Symphony in White, No. 3 1867

 

Are All of Biden’s Presidential Actions ‘Null and Void’? (Margolis)
Europe’s ‘ReArm’ Plan “Is Going To Come At A Vast Cost” (Rabobank)
European Leaders Want ‘Forever War’ In Ukraine – Musk (RT)
Lavrov Compares Macron to Hitler and Napoleon (RT)
Macron’s Remarks on Use of Nuclear Arms a Threat to Russia – Lavrov (Sp.)
Kremlin Reacts To Macron’s ‘War’ Speech (RT)
EU Must Win Arms Race – Poland (RT)
Macron Should Apologize – Moscow (RT)
Trump Begins CIA Cuts – NYT (RT)
US Ready To Change Legal Status Of 240,000 Ukrainian Migrants (RT)
Lavrov Weighs In On US Decision To Halt Intel Sharing With Ukraine (RT)
‘Science Should Be An Engine For Freedom’: NIH Nominee Bhattacharya (JTN)
Obama Judge Indefinitely Blocks Trump Admin Funding Freeze (ZH)
DOGE Looking To Cut More Than 80,000 Employees At Veterans Affairs (JTN)
IRS Reportedly Plans To Cut Half of Its 90,000 Workforce (JTN)
Elon Musk Says Amtrak, US Postal Service Should Be Privatized (ET)
Trump Planning Major NATO Shakeup – NBC (RT)
Trump Wants To Sideline EU – Politico (RT)
EU Seeking To Bypass Opponents of Ukraine Aid – Kallas (RT)
Israeli FM ‘Didn’t Know’ Kiev Glorifies Holocaust Perpetrators (RT)

 

 

 

 

1987

 

 

Destiny

PAC
https://twitter.com/i/status/1897633263750877606

Tulsi

Sachs Maidan

Rubio

Kash
https://twitter.com/i/status/1896935794532556981

 

 

 

 

Autopen. Could be explosive. Will the Trump admin want to pursue it? It has Pandora written all over it.

Are All of Biden’s Presidential Actions ‘Null and Void’? (Margolis)

The Biden presidency might have been the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the American people. A shocking investigation by the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project has revealed that virtually every document bearing Joe Biden’s signature during his presidency was signed by an autopen — except for one. What makes this revelation particularly damning is that the only document confirmed to have Biden’s actual signature was his letter announcing his withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race. Let that sink in for a moment. Remember when House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) revealed his discussion with Biden when Biden couldn’t recall signing the executive order halting LNG exports? Now we know why — he probably didn’t. The real question is: Who did? Who was running the country while Biden was not all there?

The use of the presidential autopen dates back to the 1950s, and there’s been much debate about its legality. In 2013, Barack Obama became the first president to sign a bill into law using an autopen. He was vacationing in Hawaii at the time. His office relied on a 30-page memo from President George W. Bush’s legal team asserting that the president’s presence was not required as long as said president had authorized the signature. What’s not clear, in the case of Biden, is who was running the autopen and whether Biden was aware it was happening. Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is demanding that the Department of Justice investigate whether Biden’s obvious cognitive decline allowed unelected bureaucrats to essentially run the government without presidential oversight. If this is true — and let’s be honest, all signs point to yes — every executive order, every pardon, and every official action taken under Biden’s name could be constitutionally void.

Bailey’s letter to Michael E. Horowitz, the inspector general of the Department of Justice, spells it out perfectly. “I write to request that you conduct a full investigation into President Biden’s mental capacity in his final days in office. By now, Biden’s mental decline is famous. Under the 25th Amendment, his inability to make decisions should have meant a succession of power. Instead, it appears staffers and officers in the Biden administration may have exploited Biden’s incapacity so they could issue orders without an accountable President of sound mind approving them. That would explain why the Biden administration’s orders were aggressively much farther to the left than any previous President. If in fact Biden’s staffers were exploiting his mental decline, those orders are null and void.”

The evidence is overwhelming. We know that Biden’s handlers desperately tried to prevent anyone from meeting with him one-on-one. Even Democratic insiders admit the truth. DNC fundraiser Lindy Li recently spilled the beans and acknowledged that Biden wasn’t running the show; his staff, his wife, and Hunter were. Thanks to the Heritage Foundation’s investigation, we now have proof that Biden’s signature was automated throughout his presidency — which raises serious questions about whether he was aware of what was being signed in his name at all. The Oversight Project rightfully points out that since Biden revoked Trump’s executive privilege, we can easily determine who controlled the autopen and what safeguards, if any, were in place.

The implications are staggering. We essentially had a presidency by proxy, with unelected staffers wielding presidential power while the man himself was barely cognizant enough to read a teleprompter. This isn’t just a scandal; it’s potentially the biggest constitutional crisis in American history. The American people deserve to know who was really calling the shots during the Biden administration. If these allegations prove true, every single action taken under Biden’s name needs to be scrutinized and potentially nullified. The truth must come out, and those responsible must be held accountable.

Read more …

The end of Europe’s welfare state.

“They created a wasteland and called it democracy.”

Europe’s ‘ReArm’ Plan “Is Going To Come At A Vast Cost” (Rabobank)

The US has increased its pressure on Ukraine to pause the war by turning off military intelligence to it, removing Kyiv’s ability to fire missiles into Russia. This action has further outraged and –given their reliance on US systems in NATO– terrified Europe. Note President Eisenhower did the same vis-à-vis then-and-current ally South Korea in 1953, which didn’t want to stop fighting; the US didn’t want a direct war with China, or more inflation, and made it clear military aid would stop until an armistice was achieved. That frozen conflict seems where Ukraine-Russia is heading, especially as President Zelenskyy just said what rejected what the Russian terms for any formal peace deal (demilitarisation, formal renouncement of lost territories) would be.

Europe has added its own pressure on Zelenskyy as Germany’s ministry of defence admits it can’t supply more materiel to Ukraine either as it’s out of stock. That underlines the need for the German announcement on infrastructure investment and rearmament yesterday, which saw 10-year Bund yields rise 31bp on the day, their worst performance since 1997. EUR jumped. Ahead of today’s EU ReArm summit President Macron addressed his nation, stating: “Our prosperity and security have become more uncertain, and it must be said, we are entering a new era… if a country can invade its neighbour in Europe with impunity, then no one can be sure of anything anymore, and it is the law of the strongest that applies, and peace can no longer be guaranteed on our continent itself.” He added that the future of Europe will not be set by the Kremlin or Washington, DC, and spoke of extending the French nuclear umbrella to Europe.

This is going to come at a vast cost. If you think a 31bp rise in Bunds captures the scale of shocks involved in a soft-power Europe trying to set its own future in a hard-power world then you spend too much time in soft-power circles. For starters, the FT op-eds today that ‘Europe must trim its welfare state to build a warfare state’: like it or not, that is starting to sound a bit MEGA (Europe, not America) and DOGE. One wonders what the ECB will say about it today.

Europe is outraged by US actions vs Ukraine and what some call the White House’s “reverse Nixon” strategy (so, ‘Noxin’?) of trying to split Russia from China, as with China vs the USSR in the 1970s: there is talk of Trump–Putin kinship or kompromat even in the financial press. However, facing a united China and Russia, when until this week Europe refused to rearm, is something all geostrategists, some belatedly, see as a deeply flawed US strategy. Moreover, the eurocentric fail to spot that Trump is not only pivoting from Europe to focus on Asia –which the EU largely thinks of in terms of trade not security– but is trying to use the quid pro quo gained there for Putin’s help with nuclear negotiations with Iran.

After all, Tehran is close to a nuclear weapon and Israel, who just rehearsed a joint strike on it with the US, to having to remove what it sees as an existential threat the hard way. Were that to occur, it would have a vast negative impact on the US and European economies. That key issue isn’t even part of current EU conversations; but as Europe rearms and tries to find its own place in the world, it will find it has to join more such dots in more locations at an ever-higher price. It also goes without saying that the odds of ‘Noxin’ and an Iran deal success are very low; but the alternative scenarios are not ones markets want to think about. Again, they do not imply just a 31bp move higher in 10-year Bunds. Especially not when the Chinese embassy in the US tweets: “If war is what the US wants, be it a tariff war, a trade war or any other type of war, we’re ready to fight till the end.”

Read more …

Leaders that will all be voted out soon. So why do it?

European Leaders Want ‘Forever War’ In Ukraine – Musk (RT)

European leaders who are pushing against a peace agreement in Ukraine want a perpetual state of war, tech billionaire Elon Musk said in a statement on X on Thursday. His remarks come in response to a recent video of Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen arguing that peace in Ukraine could be more dangerous than the ongoing conflict with Russia. Musk, who is also currently a senior adviser to US President Donald Trump, has repeatedly called for a peaceful resolution of the conflict and has spoken out against continued military aid to Kiev, arguing that it could lead to an escalation and risk a nuclear confrontation. Responding to a post featuring Frederiksen’s latest remarks, he argued that some European leaders “want the forever war” and asked how many more people will have to lose their lives.

“How many more parents with no sons? How many more children with no fathers? By their logic, it never ends,” Musk wrote. Frederiksen, who stated last month that “peace in Ukraine is actually more dangerous than the war that is ongoing now,” told journalists earlier this week that “Ukraine has to win this war.” She claimed that if Russia is allowed to win, it will continue to take military action against other European countries. “If we end this war now with some kind of a ceasefire, it will give Russia the possibility to mobilize more funds, people, and maybe to attack another country in Europe,” she said.

Her statements echoed comments by other EU leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, who has recently claimed that Russia poses a threat to the entire bloc and called for defense spending to be ramped up. Russia has also rejected unsubstantiated claims that it intends to attack European or NATO countries with Russian President Vladimir Putin dismissing such statements as “nonsense” and fear mongering by EU leaders aimed at alarming citizens and raising defense budgets. Moscow has warned that one of the key reasons for the Ukraine conflict was NATO expansion towards Russia, including the bloc’s promise that Kiev would eventually become a member.

Read more …

“..the French president’s “predecessors, who also wanted to fight Russia.”

Lavrov Compares Macron to Hitler and Napoleon (RT)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has compared French President Emmanuel Macron to Adolf Hitler and Napoleon Bonaparte, saying that he is also looking to impose a defeat upon Russia. During an address to the nation on Wednesday, Macron labeled Russia a “threat to France and Europe” and announced that he was considering expanding Paris’s nuclear deterrent to cover other EU member states. He insisted that the bloc needs to strengthen its independence when it comes to defense as there are doubts about the US continuing to protect the EU after the administration of President Donald Trump “changed its position” on the Ukraine conflict and became “less supportive” of Kiev. The French president insisted on further assistance to the government of Vladimir Zelensky, claiming that Russian President Vladimir Putin will not stop if he is allowed to defeat Ukraine.

When asked to comment on Macron’s statements by journalists on Thursday, Lavrov mentioned Hitler and Napoleon, describing them as the French president’s “predecessors, who also wanted to fight Russia.” The two European dictators sent their armies into Russia in 1812 and 1941, respectively, but ended up suffering crushing defeats. The difference is that Hitler and Napoleon “said directly: ‘We must conquer Russia, we must defeat Russia.’ And he [Macron], apparently, wants the same thing, but for some reason says that we must fight Russia so that it does not defeat France; that Russia is creating a threat to France and Europe,” he stressed.

The minister refuted the French leader’s claims that Moscow has plans to attack Western Europe, calling such notions “unreasonable.” “President [Vladimir] Putin has said many times that this is absolute nonsense. I think that any sane person would understand that [by launching its military operation] Russia only wants to eliminate the root causes of the situation created by the West in Ukraine,” he explained. Lavrov also said that Moscow views Macron’s statement about widening France’s nuclear umbrella as a “threat towards Russia.” “If he considers us a threat, if he is calls a meeting of the chiefs of staff of the [Western] European countries and Britain; if he says that it is necessary to use nuclear weapons; if he prepares to use nuclear weapons against Russia – this is, of course, a threat,” he insisted.

Read more …

“..former EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell was right when he said, in his usual manner, that the conflict in Ukraine could be stopped very quickly, within two weeks, if military aid to the Ukrainian government was halted..”

Macron’s Remarks on Use of Nuclear Arms a Threat to Russia – Lavrov (Sp.)

Moscow sees French President Emmanuel Macron’s words on possible use of nuclear weapons as a threat, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Thursday. “Of course, this is a threat to Russia. If he [Macron] considers us a threat, gathers a meeting of the chiefs of General Staff of European countries and Britain, says it is necessary to use nuclear weapons, prepares to use nuclear weapons against Russia, this is, of course, a threat,” Lavrov told a news conference. On Wednesday, Macron said that Russia had become a “threat” to France and Europe, therefore, it was necessary to open a discussion on the use of France’s nuclear weapons to defend the entire European Union. Emmanuel Macron has the opportunity to call Russian President Vladimir Putin anytime, and accusations that Russia is allegedly preparing a war against Europe are unwise, Lavrov said.

“Macron periodically proudly declares that he will definitely call Putin and talk to him. He has such opportunities. No one forbids it. On the contrary, the president constantly emphasizes his openness to contacts with all his colleagues. And regarding these, frankly, unwise accusations of Russia in preparing a war against Europe and France, Putin has repeatedly said, calling such thoughts delusional, nonsense. Probably, it is absolutely clear to any sane person that Russia does not need this,” Lavrov told a joint press conference with Zimbabwean Foreign Minister Amon Murwira. Russia sees no possibility for achieving a compromise on possible deployment of European peacekeepers in Ukraine, Lavrov said. “We see no room for compromise. This discussion is being conducted with an openly hostile purpose. They are not hiding what they need it for,” Lavrov.

Suspension of US intelligence transfers to Ukraine confirm Russia’s statements that such assistance was provided to Kiev and it helped to carry out strikes deep into Russia, Sergey Lavrov said. “As for the current situation with the provision of military assistance and the pause that the US has announced, and the pause that was announced with respect to the provision of intelligence information, this has confirmed what we have always said, our president has repeatedly noted that without the direct participation of the West, the US, the UK, France, Germany, and other countries that provide intelligence data and help use the technologies for using this data to launch long-range missiles at our territory, the Ukrainians could not do this,” Lavrov said. The suspension of military aid to Ukraine from the United States may help to quickly end the Ukrainian conflict, Sergey Lavrov said.

“It has been said many times that former EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell was right when he said, in his usual manner, that the conflict in Ukraine could be stopped very quickly, within two weeks, if military aid to the Ukrainian government was halted. This is the answer to your question. We agree with this assessment. Another thing that Josep Borrell added was that this should never be done, because first you need to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, and then dictate the terms of peace to it,” Lavrov told reporters. The Russian foreign minister noted that Russia is ready for a frank dialogue on the settlement of the Ukraine conflict.

“We are ready for an honest conversation, taking into account all the root causes of this conflict, including, of course, the main one – Russia’s security and guarantees against NATO’s continued expansion into Ukraine, which would then be used to create constant threats to Russia,” Lavrov said. In addition, the Russian official said that French President Emmanuel Macron’s statement about Russia and Ukraine was nervous and very verbose. “Macron, as I understand it, said in his lengthy, rather nervous statement yesterday [March 5] that the war should not be allowed to end with the surrender of Ukraine,” Lavrov said.

Read more …

“Following the 2022 escalation, both politicians admitted that the purpose of the accord from the West’s perspective had merely been to buy time for Kiev to strengthen its military..”

Macron said that Russia cannot be trusted because it violated the Minsk agreements. 4 days before the Russian invasion (February 20, 2022), Macron told Putin that the Minsk agreements have no legal force and are worthless!

Kremlin Reacts To Macron’s ‘War’ Speech (RT)

https://twitter.com/i/status/1897386604404306352

French President Emmanuel Macron’s speech focusing on Russia earlier this week was “highly confrontational,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday, arguing that it signals an intent to further escalate tensions. In his address to the nation on Wednesday, Macron labeled Russia “a threat” to the EU and called for a significant increase in defense spending to counter the perceived danger posed by Moscow. He also said that France would be prepared to deploy troops to Ukraine should a truce be reached in the conflict. Commenting on the remarks during a regular press briefing, Peskov stressed that it hardly conveyed a message of peace: “France apparently is contemplating war, a continuation of war.” This stance naturally elicits a negative reaction in Moscow, he suggested.

Macron’s address adhered to the conventional Western narrative portraying Russia as the unprovoked aggressor in the Ukraine conflict and claimed that Moscow has ambitions of conquest in Ukraine and beyond. However, according to Peskov, the French leader selectively ignored crucial events and circumstances that contributed to the current Ukraine crisis. Among these, he pointed to NATO military infrastructure “encroaching, or rather making seven-mile strides” towards Russia’s borders, creating significant security concerns for Moscow. Peskov stated that Russia had no choice but to respond to this growing threat. He also refuted Macron’s claims that Russia violated the Minsk Agreements, citing former French President Francois Hollande’s acknowledgment that the West never genuinely intended for them to succeed.

In 2015, Hollande and then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel co-mediated a roadmap purportedly aimed at peacefully reintegrating the then-breakaway regions in Donbass back into Ukraine. Following the 2022 escalation, both politicians admitted that the purpose of the accord from the West’s perspective had merely been to buy time for Kiev to strengthen its military with NATO support. Peskov also remarked that in 2014 France and other European nations “deceived” then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich by endorsing his power-sharing agreement with Western-backed militants, who violated the deal within hours and forcibly removed the democratically elected leader, all without any protest from Paris.

The EU is currently promoting a substantial military buildup that would cost some $840 billion and be funded through debt. Brussels asserts that European security risks have been intensified by the shift in Washington’s policy under President Donald Trump, who is seeking a resolution to the Ukraine conflict while urging Europe to assume responsibility for future security guarantees for Kiev. Peskov observed that while this does not make the US a friend of Russia, it at least opens avenues for normalizing bilateral relations.

Read more …

“The war, the geopolitical uncertainty and the new arms race started by Putin..”

EU Must Win Arms Race – Poland (RT)

The EU must escalate its military buildup and win the arms race against Russia, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has said. This comes amid growing efforts by EU leaders to increase defense spending, citing what they describe as a threat from Moscow, which Russia has repeatedly denied. Tusk’s remarks also come as US President Donald Trump and his administration increasingly push European NATO members to take greater responsibility for their own defense. Washington has suggested that Europe should rely less on US military aid, particularly regarding Ukraine, and instead ramp up its own military spending. In a message posted on social media on Thursday, Tusk accused Moscow of starting a new arms race and insisted that Europe must respond.

“The war, the geopolitical uncertainty and the new arms race started by Putin have left Europe with no choice. Europe must be ready for this race, and Russia will lose it like the Soviet Union 40 years ago,” Tusk wrote, adding that from today, Europe will arm itself faster than Russia. His comments follow recent statements by French President Emmanuel Macron, who has claimed that Russia poses a threat to the EU. Macron has urged the bloc to increase defense spending and has also proposed expanding Europe’s nuclear deterrence, potentially extending France’s nuclear umbrella to other EU countries in response to the perceived risks from Moscow.

Moscow has dismissed the accusations that it poses a military threat to Europe and has condemned Macron’s latest statement as “highly confrontational.” Russian President Vladimir Putin called Western claims of an impending Russian attack “nonsense.” He has also accused European leaders of stoking tensions and using the perceived Russian threat as a pretext to justify increased military spending. In December, Putin also stressed that Russia does not want to be bogged down in an arms race, which would be detrimental to the social and economic development of the country. He warned, however, that Russia will take all necessary measures to ensure the security of itself and its allies.

Read more …

“Macron should invite his predecessor… Hollande, to the Élysée Palace to have a heart-to-heart talk with him… Then he’ll probably hear from Hollande… that he had no intention of implementing the Minsk agreements..”

Macron Should Apologize – Moscow (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron should apologize for making “misleading” claims about the origins of the Ukraine conflict, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has told RT. In particular, Zakharova criticized Macron for alleging that Russia was to blame for the failure of the Minsk Accords. The agreements were brokered in 2014 and 2015 to halt fighting between Ukraine and the now-Russian Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, with France and Germany as guarantors. They were ultimately not implemented, and Moscow later accused Kiev and the West of using them to strengthen Ukraine’s military instead of securing peace. In a televised address on Wednesday,

Macron, however, blamed Russia of violating the accords and cited them as proof that the West “can no longer take Russia at its word” when it comes to resolving the conflict. “We cannot forget that Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in 2014 and that we negotiated a ceasefire in Minsk at that time. And Russia did not respect this ceasefire,” the French president alleged, claiming that Moscow poses a direct threat to France and the entire EU. Zakharova condemned Macron’s comments as “aggressive and destructive” and pointed out that former French President François Hollande and former German Chancellor Angela Merkel have “openly confessed, and not under torture or pressure” back in 2022 they never intended to enforce the accords.

“Macron should invite his predecessor… Hollande, to the Élysée Palace to have a heart-to-heart talk with him… Then he’ll probably hear from Hollande… that he had no intention of implementing the Minsk agreements while representing France,” Zakharova stated, suggesting that after speaking to Hollande, Macron would “have to apologize to his own population for misleading them.” Macron has been a vocal advocate of strengthening Europe’s defenses against Russia and reiterated this position in his latest address. Moscow, however, has repeatedly denied having any plans to attack either the EU or NATO, with President Vladimir Putin dismissing such speculation as “nonsense” on multiple occasions.

Read more …

“..effectively granted Ratcliffe the authority to remove any CIA employee for any reason without the right to appeal.”

Trump Begins CIA Cuts – NYT (RT)

The administration of US President Donald Trump has begun cutting CIA staff as part of a broader effort to downsize government agencies, the New York Times reported on Thursday, citing sources. The first dismissals reportedly targeted officers hired within the past two years, many of whom were still on probationary contracts. According to sources familiar with the situation, several recently hired CIA employees were summoned to a location away from the agency’s headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where they were asked to surrender their credentials without prior notice. The firings have reportedly led to anxiety among remaining CIA staff, with some employees allegedly avoiding calls from security out of fear they may be next.

A CIA spokeswoman confirmed to the New York Times that certain recently hired officers had been let go but did not specify how many. She signaled that the dismissals were performance-based, as did several unnamed officials who spoke to the outlet. The reported firings come amid Trump’s efforts to cut government ranks as part of a drive to eliminate wasteful state spending, bureaucracy, and corruption – a campaign spearheaded by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under billionaire Elon Musk. During the first cabinet meeting of his second term, Trump pledged to “cut down the size of government,” arguing that federal agencies had become “bloated” and “sloppy.” On February 11, he signed an executive order on workforce optimization, mandating large-scale reductions across government agencies and limiting hiring to essential positions.

The report also follows a federal judge’s ruling that cleared the way for CIA Director John Ratcliffe to fire employees at will. In late February, Judge Anthony J. Trenga ruled on a lawsuit brought by officers dismissed after Trump’s order to cut diversity programs in government agencies. That decision effectively granted Ratcliffe the authority to remove any CIA employee for any reason without the right to appeal. The Trump administration has previously cracked down on the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington’s primary mechanism for funding political projects abroad, firing some 2,000 employees and putting nearly all remaining staff on leave. According to a recent Wall Street Journal report, Trump is also preparing an executive order aimed at dismantling the Department of Education, which he has repeatedly criticized as a “big con job.”

Read more …

And “around 530,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans..”

US Ready To Change Legal Status Of 240,000 Ukrainian Migrants (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s administration is preparing to revoke the temporary legal status for all refugees, including around 240,000 Ukrainians – a move that could speed up their path to deportation, Reuters reported on Thursday, citing a senior administration official and three sources familiar with the matter. Expected to come into force in April, the decision is part of a broader crackdown on immigration which Trump launched since assuming office and marks a dramatic shift from the reception Ukrainians received under the previous administration of Joe Biden. The outlet noted that the effort to revoke protections for Ukrainians was already in progress before a verbal altercation between Trump and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky in the Oval Office last week.

According to sources, the move is part of a broader Trump administration initiative to eliminate the legal status of over 1.8 million migrants who entered the US through temporary humanitarian parole programs introduced under the Biden administration. In addition to the 240,000 Ukrainians, the administration plans to revoke parole for around 530,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans this month, the administration official and one of the anonymous sources told the outlet. Shortly after assuming office on January 20, Trump signed a number of executive orders introducing tougher immigration controls, including a decree instructing the Department of Homeland Security to “terminate all categorical parole programs.”

An internal US Immigration and Customs Enforcement email reviewed by Reuters indicated that migrants losing their parole status could face fast-track deportation proceedings. Other executive orders also included enhancing vetting for visa applicants, limiting birthright citizenship, directing the armed forces to guard the southern border with Mexico, and erecting additional barriers. Trump also repealed 78 executive orders signed by Biden, including directives related to immigration.

The development comes amid a deepening rift in US-Ukraine relations. Tensions have escalated in recent weeks following Zelensky’s ill-tempered meeting with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent over a minerals deal, culminating in a tense public argument between Trump and Zelensky in the White House last week. Zelensky was accused of “disrespecting” the US, with Trump insisting that the Ukrainian leader does not want peace. A proposed minerals deal between the US and Ukraine was left unsigned as a result.

Read more …

“Without the direct involvement of the West [..] Ukraine would not be able to use these technologies and data to launch long-range missiles at our territory. This is a very important acknowledgment,”

Lavrov Weighs In On US Decision To Halt Intel Sharing With Ukraine (RT)

Ukraine is entirely incapable of launching long-range missile strikes on Russia without direct support from Western nations, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said, citing the recent US decision to pause intelligence sharing with Kiev as proof. On Wednesday, CIA Director John Ratcliffe confirmed that the US had halted intelligence sharing with Kiev, adding that the restrictions could be lifted if Ukraine demonstrated a commitment to peace negotiations with Russia. Washington has also frozen military assistance to Kiev, with both moves following a public spat between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky during an Oval Office meeting last week. The talks ended with Trump accusing Zelensky of “disrespect” and reluctance to seek peace with Moscow.

Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Lavrov highlighted the consequences of the US decision on intel sharing. “Without the direct involvement of the West – namely the United States, Britain, France, Germany, and other countries – Ukraine would not be able to use these technologies and data to launch long-range missiles at our territory. This is a very important acknowledgment,” the minister said. At the same time, Lavrov declined to speculate on how long the freeze would last, stressing that Russia is focused on eliminating the root causes of the conflict, including securing guarantees that NATO “will not continue to absorb Ukraine as a territory that could later be used to create permanent threats against the Russian Federation.”

Ukraine has long used advanced Western-made weapons, including US-supplied HIMARS and ATACMS, and British Storm Shadow missiles, to target Russian facilities, including civilian ones. In the fall of 2024, the administration of then-US President Joe Biden authorized Ukraine to use American long-range missiles for strikes deep into Russian territory despite Moscow’s warnings that this would escalate the conflict. In response to Ukrainian long-range strikes using Western weapons, Russia deployed its newest intermediate-range ballistic missile system, the Oreshnik, to target Ukraine’s Yuzhmash military-industrial facility in the city of Dnepr. Russian President Vladimir Putin described the Oreshnik as impossible to intercept, noting its warheads travel at ten times the speed of sound. Putin has said that Ukraine could launch missile strikes deep into Russia only if it receives reconnaissance data from satellites operated either by the EU or the US.

Read more …

“..Senate Democrats seem to have thrown in the towel on defending their own COVID record and heroes including Dr. Anthony Fauci..”

‘Science Should Be An Engine For Freedom’: NIH Nominee Bhattacharya (JTN)

Senate Democrats and some Republicans liked the status quo at the National Institutes of Health before the second Trump administration and Department of Government Efficiency started closely scrutinizing its grant decisions, headcount and wildly generous reimbursement for “indirect costs” to institutions at the expense of money for their researchers. That seemed apparent at Wednesday’s Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee confirmation hearing for NIH director-nominee Jay Bhattacharya, who faced repeated bipartisan demands to oppose President Trump who nominated him and immediately undo decisions made by agency leaders and the president’s Department of Government Efficiency, especially mass terminations and funding freezes.

Best known for his pioneering research on widespread COVID-19 immunity by April 2020 and vocal opposition to prolonged school closures and vaccine mandates, the Stanford medical professor and health economist barely drew criticism for his own record. He mentioned just a single vaccine whose safety record troubled him when asked by Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J.: “COVID vaccines for young men causing myocarditis,” which is inflammation of heart muscle. Like their House colleagues a month earlier, Senate Democrats seem to have thrown in the towel on defending their own COVID record and heroes including Dr. Anthony Fauci, the four-decade director of NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Instead they assailed Trump and DOGE boss Elon Musk, with ranking member Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, telling Bhattacharya he’d be subservient to the unofficial leader of DOGE and asking Chair Bill Cassidy, R-La., to haul billionaire Musk before the committee. Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., asked Bhattacharya whether he’d follow the law when Trump gave him an illegal directive. When he rejected the plausibility of the hypothetical, she responded “that strains credulity” and denounced his “disappointing answer.”

Sanders repeatedly cut off Bhattacharya as he tried to answer leading questions about unilaterally capping high prices for drugs developed through NIH research and using his “bully pulpit” to pressure TV stations to ban ads for “unhealthy foods.” The nominee barely got to answer that the U.S. could have saved untold spending on drugs by treating serious COVID infections with the “cheap steroid” dexamethasone, as documented in a July 2020 New England Journal of Medicine study. “A lot can be done through executive orders,” Sanders answered, referring to Trump’s first-month deluge, when Bhattacharya told him that previous NIH directors said only Congress can impose price caps. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., called bullplop on Democrats for not cosponsoring his bill to remove junk food from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which he said would disproportionately improve health for poor people.

The ophthalmologist cheered Bhattacharya’s tout of steroids that cost “pennies” to treat serious COVID, which he said Fauci rejected in March 2020. Paul called it “the best cure and the cheapest,” and Bhattacharya frowned that the U.K. did that research instead of NIH. Just as Democrats pivoted to praising COVID vaccines as “life-saving” after the novel therapeutics were found unable to stop transmission, to make infection more likely via the antibody “class switch” and to cause heart inflammation in young people, several used the compound adjective to describe research subject to NIH’s funding pause. So did Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who also joined Democrats in branding NIH’s new 15% cap on indirect cost recovery – in line with private foundations’ reimbursement ratios – a violation of congressional directives. She called the cap “ill-conceived and completely arbitrary” and a “one-size-fits-all approach,” a jab often applied to federal COVID guidance.

Bhattacharya reminded senators his own research received NIH grants and he served on a standing NIH grant committee for a decade, but said the agency must recover from the cratering public trust in public health leaders due to their pandemic management. His NIH will “vigorously regulate” research that could cause another pandemic, he said, referring to the theory favored by the FBI, CIA and Department of Energy that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from a Chinese lab conducting gain-of-function experiments, indirectly funded by Fauci’s agency. Bhattacharya promised Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., he’d work with Congress to keep taxpayer money out of foreign biolabs such as Ukraine’s, publish records with “limited obfuscation” and require funding recipients to report “politically inconvenient” results.

Tuberville had asked about an NIH-funded study on youth gender transitions and mental health whose negative findings were intentionally withheld for seven years, helping create a false medical consensus on so-called gender affirming care for young people. He urged Bhattacharya to be “very visual on television” with his transparency message. Bhattacharya said he’ll prioritize research on chronic diseases including obesity and diabetes and reversing the slide in life expectancy, which has not returned to pre-pandemic levels, and make it “replicable, reproducible and generalizable,” a weakness for the agency. He noted NIH’s “research integrity scandal” on Alzheimer’s disease, which he has studied, and its devotion to the “amyloid hypothesis,” an explanation for Alzheimer’s that may be based on falsified data and which he said crowded out study of other hypotheses.

Read more …

“..the Court finds that the public interest lies in maintaining the status quo and enjoining any categorical funding freeze.”

Obama Judge Indefinitely Blocks Trump Admin Funding Freeze (ZH)

A Rhode Island US District Judge has indefinitely blocked President Trump’s freeze on federal grants and loans, arguing in his ruling that the White House had “put itself above Congress” and undermined democracy. In a Thursday ruling, Judge John McConnell Jr., an Obama appointee – prohibited the Trump administration from freezing or otherwise impeding the disbursement of appropriated federal funds, WSJ reports. The decision is a victory for Trump critics who say he has trampled on Congress’s authority in his effort to cut federal spending and overhaul agencies. McConnell’s order follows a similar one issued by a different federal judge in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 25. The judge had previously issued a temporary restraining order, which on Thursday he converted into an injunction, a more permanent form of relief.

“The Executive’s categorical freeze of appropriated and obligated funds fundamentally undermines the distinct constitutional roles of each branch of our government,” wrote McConnell. “Here, the Executive put itself above Congress,” he continued. “It imposed a categorical mandate on the spending of congressionally appropriated and obligated funds without regard to Congress’s authority to control spending.” Of note – McConnell was very active in Democratic politics before becoming a judge – serving 14 years as treasurer of the Rhode Island Democratic State Committee, and donating heavily to Democratic political candidates. McConnell’s ruling came after 22 Democrat states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit which challenged a directive from the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) directing them to pause funding while it assessed whether various government programs complied with executive orders issued by Trump which target foreign aid, DEI, and green energy projects.

While OMB then rescinded that directive, the states say that come Congressionally-approved funds were still being improperly withheld – and that the initial OMB policy rollout sowed confusion among state governments, nonprofits, and lawmakers. McConnell issued an earlier temporary restraining order (TRO), in which he said that the administration couldn’t “pause, freeze, impede, block, cancel, or terminate” its federal financial-assistance obligations to the states. According to the judge, state governments face “significant disruption in health, education, and other public services” due to the funding freeze, and as such, “the Court finds that the public interest lies in maintaining the status quo and enjoining any categorical funding freeze.”

Read more …

“In February, [..] VA said it was continuing to hire for more than 300,000 mission-critical positions that are exempt from the federal hiring freeze..”

DOGE Looking To Cut More Than 80,000 Employees At Veterans Affairs (JTN)

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is planning to cut 80,000 positions as part of an “aggressive” overhaul of the agency that runs programs for veterans and members of their families. The VA’s chief of staff, Christopher Syrek, told top VA officials on Tuesday that it would to return to 2019 staffing levels of just under 400,000 employees. That would require dismissing about 83,000 employees after the VA expanded during the Biden administration. It will work with the Department of Government Efficiency to create a workforce optimization plan, Syrek said in an internal memo obtained by multiple news outlets, including Government Executive, which first reported on the memo. He said VA will “move aggressively” to reduce bureaucracy, cut the department’s footprint and “increase workforce efficiency,” the outlet reported. House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Democrats said the move could hurt veterans.

“83,000 VA employees are set to be fired,” the committee wrote on X. “These cuts won’t just impact those seeking health care. They will create chaos across every aspect of VA – delaying benefits, straining claims processing, and making it nearly impossible for student veterans and schools to get the assistance they need. Veterans will suffer the consequences.” The VA added staff quickly during the Biden administration as it staffed up to address increased coverage under the PACT Act, a law that expanded VA health care and benefits for veterans exposed to burn pits, Agent Orange, and other toxic substances. News of the overhaul comes after relatively minor cuts at the agency. Earlier this week, Veterans Affairs started cancelling close to 600 “non-mission critical” and “duplicative” contracts valued at about $1.8 billion – and this is just the beginning, according to the department.

The cancellations result from the early stages of a “deliberative, multi-level review” by some of the people responsible for the contracts, VA senior leaders and contracting officials and will allow Veterans Affairs to redirect about $900 million back to veteran benefits and services, the agency said. The 585 contracts the department has begun canceling “represent less than 1% of the roughly 90,000 contracts VA currently has in place,” and the department plans to perform a thorough review of all of them. In February, VA dismissed more than 1,400 probationary employees in non-mission critical positions. At that time, VA said it was continuing to hire for more than 300,000 mission-critical positions that are exempt from the federal hiring freeze. Earlier that same month, VA announced it dismissed more than 1,000 of its 43,000 probationary employees in a move expected to save $98 million a year. The agency said those let go included non-union probationary employees who have served less than a year in a competitive service appointment or who have served less than two years in an excepted service appointment.

Read more …

“This will ensure that the IRS is not going after the wealthy and is only an agency that’s really focused on the low income,” he said. “It’s a travesty.”

IRS Reportedly Plans To Cut Half of Its 90,000 Workforce (JTN)

The Internal Revenue Service reportedly plans to cut its roughly 90,000-employee workforce by as much as half, as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to shrink the size of the federal workforce. The cuts will be made through a mix of attrition, layoffs and incentivized buyouts, two people familiar with the situation told the Associated Press. The reduction of the federal workforce is being led by the administration’s Department of Government Efficiency, which is being led by billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk. Those being laid off are mostly probationary employees who have not yet gained civil service protection.

The agency has already cut roughly 6,000 employees, or bout 6% of its workforce, Reuters reported in late February. Philip Hackney, a University of Pittsburgh tax law professor and Former IRS lawyer, warned such cuts could unfairly target the country’s underclass. “This will ensure that the IRS is not going after the wealthy and is only an agency that’s really focused on the low income,” he said. “It’s a travesty.”

Read more …

“I think logically, we should privatize anything that can reasonably be privatized..”

Elon Musk Says Amtrak, US Postal Service Should Be Privatized (ET)

Elon Musk, who is advising President Donald Trump on reducing government waste and downsizing the federal workforce, has called for privatizing the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) and passenger rail operator Amtrak. “I think logically, we should privatize anything that can reasonably be privatized,” Musk said at a March 5 Morgan Stanley conference. “I think we should privatize the Post Office and Amtrak for example.” Amtrak, a government-owned company created in 1970, reported an adjusted operating loss of $705 million in the prior fiscal year. USPS, also government-owned, has accumulated over $100 billion in losses since 2007, including $9.5 billion in the 12 months ending Sept. 30, 2024. Neither Amtrak nor USPS responded to requests for comment on Musk’s remarks by publication time. The National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) voiced opposition to Musk’s idea of privatizing USPS, emphasizing the service’s public mission.

“A friendly reminder on behalf of every American who depends on USPS (including 51.5 million rural addresses): It’s called universal service, not ‘as much as possible’ service,” NALC wrote in a post on X. “And we’ll #FightLikeHell to protect it.” Trump has previously suggested that the USPS could be privatized, a move that would allow for more flexibility in pricing and labor negotiations. During Trump’s first term, his administration proposed a restructuring plan for USPS, citing “extremely high” fixed costs and an inability to support its financial obligations. The plan highlighted over $100 billion in unfunded liabilities, a decade of consecutive losses, and a growing capital investment backlog. “A privatized Postal Service would have a substantially lower cost structure, be able to adapt to changing customer needs and make business decisions free from political interference, and have access to private capital markets to fund operational improvements without burdening taxpayers,” the proposal stated.

Last month, Trump said he was considering merging USPS with the Commerce Department, a move that Democrats said would violate federal law. Calling USPS “a tremendous loser for the country,” Trump said the objective of such a move would be to have a “post office that works well and doesn’t lose massive amounts of money.” Democrats have consistently opposed privatization efforts, warning that changes to USPS operations could disproportionately impact rural communities and those dependent on postal services for essential goods and medication. Trump has also repeatedly pushed to cut Amtrak’s federal funding, which totaled approximately $2.4 billion last year. His past budget proposals sought to reduce Amtrak’s funding by 40–50 percent and eliminate long-distance routes, arguing that resources should be redirected to higher-traffic corridors. Musk, comparing U.S. rail service to China’s high-speed system, criticized Amtrak as a “sad situation,” saying, “It will leave you with a very bad impression of America.”

Read more …

Trump questions Article 5.

Trump Planning Major NATO Shakeup – NBC (RT)

The US could decide to only defend those NATO countries that actually meet the bloc’s spending requirements, four former and current officials have told NBC. Such a policy would mark a major departure from a core article of the military bloc, which states that an attack on any NATO member is to be treated as an attack on all of them. A similar principle would apply to joint military exercises and American overseas deployments, the report said. Washington could choose to prioritize drills with those NATO partners that meet the defense spending targets and also reposition its forces in Europe according to the same criteria.

The administration of President Donald Trump has previously signaled that it was planning to reduce its military presence in Europe. The president also recently urged the EU to take the lead in its own defense and to bear the brunt of any future security guarantees for Kiev. Last month, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said that Washington intended to refocus its military priorities on countering China. He also warned the EU nations that they should not assume the presence of US troops on the continent will be indefinite. Some senior US officials contacted by NBC denied that the mutual defense clause – Article 5 – could be affected by any policy changes. Senator Chris Coons, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee for Defense, said that Trump’s nominee for the NATO ambassador’s position, Matthew Whitaker, “gave very reassuring answers” on the administration’s commitments to Article 5.

Trump has repeatedly criticized NATO members that fail to meet the bloc’s current defense spending threshold of 2% of GDP. The president floated the idea of raising mandatory defense spending by members to 5% of GDP, though none – including the US – currently meet that threshold. According to NATO estimates, 23 bloc members met the 2% threshold as of 2024, with just five, including the US, coming in above 3%. Poland was the only member to spend more than 4% of GDP on defense.

Read more …

“..too divided and insufficiently nimble to respond to the scale of the storm that Trump is whipping up over Ukraine,”

Trump Wants To Sideline EU – Politico (RT)

US President Donald Trump wants to sideline and destroy the European Union, an entity that he has long disliked, Politico has claimed in an article published on Thursday. The outlet argued that Trump is taking advantage of the cracks within the bloc caused by the Ukraine conflict. The administration in Washington has recently launched negotiations with Russia to broker peace in the Ukraine conflict and has excluded the EU from the process, which has elicited condemnation from Brussels. Trump has also halted American military aid to Ukraine, leaving the bloc jostling for funds to support Kiev. Washington’s anti-EU push “is triggering a crisis in Brussels institutions. The EU as a bloc is scrambling to prove its relevance,” Politico wrote. The Ukraine conflict has exposed differences among EU members in defense priorities, economic interests, and diplomatic approaches.

While countries such as Poland and the Baltic states have advocated for stronger military backing of Kiev, others, particularly Hungary and Slovakia, have pushed back, calling for a negotiated settlement with Russia. The financial burden of military aid and energy security concerns have also fueled tensions. Right-wing movements in several EU nations have questioned the bloc’s commitment to Kiev. “Trump will sideline the EU and play divide-and-rule with national leaders,” the publication wrote. While European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen met with US Vice President J.D. Vance in Munich last month, neither she nor European Council President Antonio Costa has had a face-to-face meeting with Trump, it noted.

The European Council, the body made up of the heads of state or government of all EU member states, “is being agonizingly exposed as too divided and insufficiently nimble to respond to the scale of the storm that Trump is whipping up over Ukraine,” Politico added. With Washington halting over $1 billion in arms shipments, Kiev faces potential shortages of ammunition and equipment. The EU is exploring alternatives to continue backing Ukraine militarily, despite the peace process initiated by the US and Russia. Von der Leyen on Tuesday unveiled a €800 billion plan aimed at bolstering the EU’s defense. In recent weeks, Trump has also targeted the bloc’s trade practices, describing them as “an atrocity” and announcing plans to impose a 25% tariff on EU goods. He also claimed that the bloc was “formed to screw the United States.”

Read more …

Trump wants to sideline EU, and the EU wants to sideline its own members.

“They created a wasteland and called it democracy.”

EU Seeking To Bypass Opponents of Ukraine Aid – Kallas (RT)

The EU is working on a new mechanism whereby a “coalition of the willing” would continue providing military aid to Kiev despite opposition by Hungary, according to Kaja Kallas, the bloc’s foreign policy chief. Kallas made the announcement on Thursday after arriving in Brussels for an emergency summit of the bloc’s 27 countries to discuss boosting defense and Ukraine aid amid waning US support.Asked by reporters about Hungary’s attempt to block aid to Ukraine, Kallas acknowledged the issue is “increasingly difficult” and explained that Brussels is considering a new initiative called a “coalition of the willing,” so that “one country cannot block everybody else.” She did not provide any details about how the mechanism would work in practice. Hungary has already rejected an EU draft text on Ukraine that included security guarantees for Kiev and a new military aid package. Budapest has also called on the EU to begin negotiations with Russia.

The idea of creating a “coalition of the willing” – a group of countries ready to support Kiev militarily – was first proposed by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer at an emergency summit in London this past Sunday. The meeting in London was summoned shortly after Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s ill-fated trip to Washington. The term “coalition of the willing” is most closely associated with the designation given to the countries supporting the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 on the ultimately disproven allegations of possession of weapons of mass destruction.“We are still striving for having the unity of 27 members,” Kallas said, but added that if unanimity cannot be reached, Hungary will have to “speak for themselves.” The military aid package for Ukraine reportedly being prepared by the EU is worth at least $6.2 billion, making it one of the bloc’s largest arms commitments since 2022. However, Hungary has indicated that it will veto the initiative.

Earlier this week, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen unveiled the so-called ReArm Europe initiative, an €800 billion plan aimed at bolstering the EU’s defense capabilities. The proposal was prompted by US President Donald Trump’s freezing of military aid to Ukraine while urging the EU to take greater responsibility for its own defense. Moscow has long warned against Western arms shipments to Ukraine, arguing that they only prolong the conflict without altering the outcome, while increasing the risk of a direct Russia-NATO clash. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko has suggested that the EU could contribute to resolving the crisis by halting military and logistical support to Kiev.

Read more …

Without a past of nazis and holocaust, the country would not exist. It has one of the prime secret services in the world. But no idea what happens in Kiev.

Israeli FM ‘Didn’t Know’ Kiev Glorifies Holocaust Perpetrators (RT)

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar has claimed ignorance of the well-documented fact that Ukrainian nationalists responsible for atrocities against Jewish people are venerated as heroes by Kiev. Moscow, in response, has offered to enlighten the Israeli official on the matter. On Monday, Sa’ar held a press briefing to mark Israel’s presidency of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). West Jerusalem emphasized that anti-Semitism, which fueled Nazi crimes during World War II, “has not been eradicated from the world.” The minister seemed taken aback when a reporter asked for his thoughts on the modern-day glorification in Ukraine of Nazi-allied historical nationalist figures such as Stepan Bandera. In 2016, the Kiev city council renamed a large street in honor of Bandera, located just 3 km from Babi Yar, where an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 Jews and thousands of others were exterminated under Nazi occupation.

“First of all, I didn’t know about it. I will check it,” the official responded, pledging to issue a statement of condemnation “if there is a necessity.” Bandera and other nationalists, including those directly implicated in wartime atrocities, have been celebrated in modern Ukraine for years – something the reporter described as “common knowledge.” The Russian government expressed bewilderment at the exchange, with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova sarcastically questioning the competence of Israel’s diplomatic staff. “How so? What is the Israeli embassy in Kiev doing then? And in Moscow too?” she wrote on social media, offering a collection of relevant documents in English for the minister’s convenience.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry and its embassy in Kiev have in fact issued multiple statements denouncing the veneration of such figures. In January 2022, the diplomatic mission described that year’s annual torch march commemorating Bandera’s birthday as “desecrating the memory of the victims of the Holocaust in Ukraine.” No such condemnation was issued the following year, however. The embassy explained to Haarez that “we’ve made our position clear many times, but apparently there is nothing we can do, at least at the moment.” Moscow views the current government in Kiev as dominated by neo-Nazis and radical nationalists and insists that any potential peace deal with Ukraine must include a reversal of policies discriminating against ethnic Russians.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Elon

 

 

Nap
https://twitter.com/i/status/1897477371051360561

 

 

Feeders

 

 

Cheetah
https://twitter.com/i/status/1897665976646373393

 

 

Secret

 

 

Jekyll island

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 062025
 
 February 6, 2025  Posted by at 10:30 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  108 Responses »


Raphael The school of Athens 1509-11

 

CIA Facing Major Trump Shake-Up (RT)
USAID Worldwide Staff Placed On Leave (RT)
USAID Will Continue Regime Change Ops on Behalf of CIA – Former US Marine (Sp.)
Why Was USAID Kicked Out of Russia? (Sp.)
“This Is Where The Big Money Fraud Is Happening”: DOGE and Medicare (ZH)
Trump Administration Agrees To Restrict DOGE Access To Treasury (RT)
Trump Repeats Call For Complete Ethnic Cleansing Of Gaza (Cradle)
Saudi Arabia Reacts To Trump’s Gaza ‘Takeover’ Plan (RT)
Donald Trump’s Gaza Mirage (Larry Johnson)
Kremlin Comments On Talks With ‘Illegitimate’ Zelensky (RT)
Zelensky Accuses Tucker Carlson Of Working For Vladimir Putin (JTN)
Why China Would Win A War With The United States (Unz/Whitney)
Pam Bondi Is Your New Attorney General (Victoria Taft)
Court Denies Apple’s Request to Intervene in Google Search Monopoly Case (ET)
Why Has Hillary Clinton Declared War on Elon Musk? (Sp.)
How the CIA Spawned Google (Sp.)
Did Closest US Intelligence Allies Spy on Trump? (Sp.)
EU States ‘Fed Up’ With Von Der Leyen – Politico (RT)

 

 

 

 

CNN

Stephen Miller
https://twitter.com/i/status/1886861956205961532

Benz

Train

Gaza

Bondi
https://twitter.com/i/status/1887120253005537576

Leavitt


https://twitter.com/i/status/1887208773699395661

 

 

 

 

“..Ratcliffe is seeking to establish a “more aggressive spy agency..”

CIA Facing Major Trump Shake-Up (RT)

The CIA has offered so-called buyouts to its agents as part of US President Donald Trump’s effort to downsize the federal government, CNN and the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday. The idea behind the proposal is reportedly to hone the agency into a “more aggressive” tool better suited to exerting influence on the country’s immediate neighbors. According to both outlets, the buyout program – officially called ‘Deferred Retirement’ – will allow employees to resign with about eight months of pay and benefits. The overall initiative, which could potentially be applicable to 2.4 million federal employees, is designed to streamline government operations, promote efficiency, and save tens of billions of dollars in public spending. CIA Director John Ratcliffe personally decided the agency should participate in the program, according to a CNN source.

A CIA spokesperson told the outlet that the decision will “help infuse the agency with renewed energy.” The WSJ reported that the CIA has also frozen hiring for applicants who had already received conditional job offers. An aide to Ratcliffe told the paper that some of them could be pulled back if candidates are deemed unqualified to advance the agency’s new agenda. The source said that Ratcliffe is seeking to establish a “more aggressive spy agency,” adding that the CIA from now on will be more focused on the Western Hemisphere. The new efforts will reportedly include espionage to gain leverage in trade negotiations, particularly when it comes to a trade dispute with Mexico. The agency will also prioritize fighting Mexican drug cartels, which the Trump administration has designated terrorist.

However, according to the WSJ, the interest in the proposal is relatively low, with questions looming over whether the soon-to-be ex-agents are legally allowed to take another job during the payout period or whether they can return to government in the future. The buyout program has been applied to most government agencies, except for the military and Postal Service. As part of the overhaul, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) – which Trump labeled “radical lunatics” – has been significantly downsized, with its main office reportedly closed. The White House has accused the agency of mismanaging funds and failing to advance US foreign policy goals. According to Axios, only about 20,000 federal employees have agreed to take part in the blanket buyout program, which accounts for roughly 1% of the federal workforce, despite the administration’s plans to cut between 5% and 10% of all federal employees.

CIA

Read more …

Medvedev: “Smart move by @elonmusk, trying to plug USAID’s Deep Throat.”

USAID Worldwide Staff Placed On Leave (RT)

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) will place nearly all of its employees on administrative leave, it announced on Tuesday. According to a notice on the USAID website, the change concerns all directly hired employees, with the exception of “essential personnel.” Established in 1961, USAID is Washington’s primary agency for funding political projects abroad, responsible for administering billions of dollars in so-called ‘foreign aid and development programs’ to promote American interests under the premise of humanitarian development. However, under US President Donald Trump’s new administration, the agency’s operations have come under review as part of a broader reassessment of US foreign policy.

Shortly after being sworn in last month, Trump issued a sweeping executive order pausing all foreign aid for 90 days, leading to widespread confusion, layoffs, and program shutdowns. The website notice reads that “On Friday, February 7, all USAID direct hire personnel will be placed on administrative leave globally, with the exception of designated personnel responsible for mission-critical functions, core leadership, and specially designated programs.” Employees who are expected to continue working will be reportedly notified individually later in the week. The notice gives affected employees 30 days to return to the US. Around two-thirds of the 10,000 people USAID employs work in any of 60 countries the agency has a presence in.

The State Department will fund the return of employees to the US and will consider exceptions and extensions for personal reasons and safety concerns. The notice concluded with a brief message to staff: “Thank you for your service.” The development comes after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on Monday he was assuming the role of acting administrator of the agency. Speaking to journalists during a visit to El Salvador, Rubio pledged to make a program-by-program review of the agency in order to put everything that USAID does “in alignment with the national interest and the foreign policy of the US.” USAID’s main office in Washington, DC was closed on Monday, with staff instructed to keep out.

Trump earlier accused the agency’s leadership of being “radical lunatics” and proposed major changes to the organization. Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Trump said he plans to make a decision on USAID’s future after clearing it out. USAID has also come under the scrutiny of the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by tech billionaire Elon Musk. Musk has been a fierce critic of the agency, describing it as a “criminal organization.” During a live session on X Spaces on Monday, Musk, who is now among Trump’s key advisers, said the president “agreed” that USAID should be shut down. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev praised Musk’s actions against the aid agency in a post on X on Monday: “Smart move by @elonmusk, trying to plug USAID’s Deep Throat.”

Read more …

You got this global organization built up over 60 years, all this knowledge and people and connections, someone will want to use it…

USAID Will Continue Regime Change Ops on Behalf of CIA – Former US Marine (Sp.)

USAID’s controversial activities – along with its partnerships with George Soros’ Open Society and similar entities – have been exposed in recent years by alternative journalists, making them increasingly difficult for the public to ignore, former US Marine Brian Berletic tells Sputnik. Berletic suggests that has created the need for a rebranding aimed at protecting and streamlining the organization’s work. He believes the ongoing reform seeks to “create a left-right and liberal-conservative divide in response to growing bipartisan opposition to US interference abroad.” “By claiming these organizations are ‘bad’ because they are ‘liberal,’ the Trump administration can rebrand it as ‘conservative’ an ‘America first,’ bringing at least part of the American population back on board to support it and its activities,” Berletic explains.

The pundit emphasizes that the USAID’s coup-plotting will continue, either under the auspices of other agencies or Geroge Soros’ global network of NGOs. “Whether this regime change takes place under USAID, is transferred back to the CIA – which originally carried out the activities USAID assumed upon its creation – or the US begins depending more on private foundations including Open Society, the main point to understand is that it will continue nonetheless,” Berletic says. He notes the US makes no secret of its plans to continue regime change operations against Iran, Venezuela and possibly even Panama. The White House “isn’t even talking about the actual subject of foreign interference as an issue of USAID’s activities, and instead is complaining about wasteful programs connected to political wedge issues like ‘DEI’ [diversity, equity, and inclusion],” he says.

Read more …

2012. We can guess why.

Why Was USAID Kicked Out of Russia? (Sp.)

President Trump has promised to “make a decision” on USAID’s future after getting rid of the “radical lunatics” running it after DOGE chief Elon Musk said it was time for the “criminal” agency “to die.” Russia banned Washington’s long-favored soft power tool in 2012. Here’s why. Russia knew about the US Agency for International Development’s “criminal” nature long before Elon Musk’s epiphany. USAID was expelled from the country after post-election street protests in Moscow verging on an attempted color revolution, with the agency accused of using its grant network to try to influence politics and civil society after the 2011-2012 Russian parliamentary and presidential elections.

20 Years of ‘Democracy Promotion’
USAID’s mission in Russia was narrowed to political influence operations in the 2000s, including funding for civil society groups like the Golos* election watchdog, the Memorial* and Moscow Helsinki Group* rights organizations, and others. These organizations engaged in increasingly sharp criticism of the Russian government prior to the US aid agency’s ouster, helping to radicalize a portion of the population toward more pro-Western opposition views through the popularization of their positions. USAID first entered Russia in 1992, immediately after the USSR’s collapse, and spent nearly $3 bln over 20 years on ‘democracy, human rights and civil society promotion’ programs.

In reality, USAID’s work in the 90s was aimed at cheerleading the gutting of Russia’s social and economic system during the painful transition to a market economy, and meddling in politics in support of liberal, pro-West politicians against conservative, populist and neo-communist forces. Nowhere was this more evident than during the 1993 constitutional crisis and the 1996 elections, which saw radical opposition to liberal reforms crushed and the voting rigged, with USAID-backed “independent media,” publishing houses and NGOs cheering on the processes. The US amassed a literal journalistic empire during its stay in Russia. Up to the year 2000 alone, its National Press Institute held 2,300 briefings and seminars attended by over 57,000 journalists, provided training for 2,700 media specialists, management and consulting services for 84 newspapers, and support for other print, TV and internet media.

On the economic front, USAID provided “technical advisory services and material support” for the infamous voucher privatization scheme. This program cemented immense wealth transfers worth hundreds of billions of dollars from the state to private and foreign coffers. In the 90s, USAID ambitiously outlined 14 “strategic objectives” for Russia, from fiscal, monetary, social service and energy reforms to US “joint ventures,” civil and legal training, environmental programs and even women’s reproductive health. Political stabilization and the maturing of the modern post-Soviet Russian state ultimately sealed USAID’s fate. But perhaps the greatest damage done by USAID to Russia has been in its backyard, where billions of dollars spent over the past 35 years helped to put neighbors on a path to NATO and EU membership, and literally rewrite history books to cast Russia as an enemy. Nowhere has this effort paid off more than in Ukraine.

Read more …

“..the current level of access is “read-only,” preventing Musk’s team from making modifications to the systems.”

“This Is Where The Big Money Fraud Is Happening”: DOGE and Medicare (ZH)

Representatives of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) – who just obtained security clearances, have been embedded at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) this week, gaining access to critical payment and contracting systems, according to the Wall Street Journal, citing multiple individuals familiar with the situation. The DOGE representatives have been on site at the agency’s offices this week, the people said, and they are looking at the systems’ technology as well as the spending that flows through them, with a focus on pinpointing what they consider fraud or waste. DOGE representatives are also examining the agency’s organizational design and how it is staffed, the people added. Musk confirmed his interest in CMS oversight in a social media post, writing on X: “Yeah, this is where the big money fraud is happening.”

The White House and DOGE officials declined to comment on the matter. In the last week, Musk’s DOGE team has been moving swiftly to gain access across multiple federal agencies, including the Treasury Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to uncover fraud, abuse, and excessive spending. A CMS official told the Journal that the agency has assigned “two senior agency veterans who are leading the coordination with DOGE,” and that leaders are “taking a thoughtful approach to see where there may be opportunities for more effective and efficient spending in line with meeting the goals of President Trump.”

CMS sits at the heart of the nation’s healthcare economy, managing a budget of approximately $1.5 trillion in fiscal 2024 – roughly 22 percent of total federal spending. The agency employs around 6,710 people and administers Medicare, Medicaid, and other healthcare programs vital to millions of Americans. Many of its employees have spent decades navigating the complex regulatory and operational framework underpinning the healthcare system. Among the systems DOGE representatives have accessed is CALM, the CMS Acquisition Lifecycle Management system, which contains contract data, sources said. However, they noted that DOGE personnel have not yet gained entry to databases containing personally identifiable health information of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.

They also have not accessed HIGLAS, the Healthcare Integrated General Ledger Accounting System, a key accounting platform for CMS payments. One person familiar with DOGE’s work at CMS emphasized that the current level of access is “read-only,” preventing Musk’s team from making modifications to the systems. The intervention has raised concerns among CMS veterans and healthcare policy experts. The agency’s payment structures are notoriously complex, involving multiple layers of contractors and private insurers, especially within Medicare. Medicaid, jointly administered by federal and state governments, follows different financial pathways, with federal funding typically flowing to state agencies.

Read more …

“..such access to payment records will be ‘read only’.“ “..until the legal hearing on February 24..”

Trump Administration Agrees To Restrict DOGE Access To Treasury (RT)

Lawyers with the US Justice Department have agreed to a proposed order that would temporarily restrict Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing sensitive financial data at the Treasury Department. The move by the administration of US President Donald Trump late on Wednesday comes in response to a lawsuit by a group of union members and retirees accusing the Treasury of engaging in “unlawful action” by providing information on payments and private data to DOGE. “The Defendants will not provide access to any payment record or payment system of records maintained by or within the Bureau of the Fiscal Service,” the proposed order read.

An exception would only be made for two special government employees at the Treasury associated with Musk — Tom Krause and Marko Elez. According to the document, the duo would be permitted access “as needed” to perform their duties, “provided that such access to payment records will be ‘read only’.” Krause is the former CEO of Cloud Software Group, while Elez, 25, has worked as an engineer at Musk’s X and SpaceX. Once approved by US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who is overseeing the case, the restrictions on DOGE’s access to Treasury data will remain in place until the legal hearing on February 24.

Read more …

Trump said it’ll take 5 years to clean up Gaza, with all the tunnels and munitions. Hamas/Palestinians won’t be allowed to move back in as is.

Trump Repeats Call For Complete Ethnic Cleansing Of Gaza (Cradle)

US President Donald Trump once again called for the complete ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip following a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House on 4 February. “It could be Jordan, and it could be Egypt, and it could be other countries,” Trump said, adding that Palestinians in Gaza have “a guarantee they’re going to end up dying. The same thing is going to happen again, over and over again.” “I think that Gaza is a demolition site right now … You can’t live in Gaza right now. I think we need another location, a location that’s going to make people happy,” the US President told reporters before saying that “it’s all death in Gaza.” “I believe we can do it in areas where leaders currently say no,” he said, adding that funding for the forced displacement of over two million Palestinians will come from “other people, really rich nations, and they’re willing to supply it.”

Tuesday’s statements from the US president marked the fourth time he has called for the complete ethnic cleansing of Gaza and claimed that allies Egypt and Jordan would take in displaced Palestinians. In response, Cairo and Amman have issued repeated rejections while making overtures to their ally. On Tuesday, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Jordanian King Abdullah II held a phone call to discuss the need to adopt a “united position” to maintain “regional peace.” In response to Trump’s latest statements, Hamas leader Dr Sami Abu Zuhri called them “a recipe for creating chaos and tension in the region.” “Our people in the Gaza Strip will not allow these plans to pass, and what is required is to end the occupation and aggression against our people, not to expel them from their land,” said Zuhri.

Palestinian UN representative Riyad Mansour replied to Trump’s demands by saying that instead of ethnically cleansing Palestinians, survivors of the US–Israeli genocide should be able to return to their family’s original homes “in what is today Israel.” “For those who want to send the Palestinian people to a ‘nice place,’ allow them to go back to their original homes in what is now Israel,” said Mansour. “The Palestinian people want to rebuild Gaza because this is where we belong,” he added. Trump’s meeting with Netanyahu came hours after Hamas announced that talks for the second phase of the ceasefire agreement sealed in January. Hundreds of Palestinian detainees and over a dozen Israeli captives have been released in four prisoner exchanges over the past few weeks.

“Everyone’s demanding one thing. You know what that is? Peace,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office before turning to Netanyahu and claiming the premier “wants peace also.” “We’re dealing with a very complex group of people, situation and people, but we have the right man. We have the right leader of Israel. He’s done a great job, and we’ve been friends for a long time.” For his part, Netanyahu said he still plans on “meeting all our war goals.” “That includes destroying Hamas’s military and governing capabilities and making sure that Gaza never poses a threat to Israel,” he added. Asked about whether Saudi Arabia is demanding the establishment of a Palestinian state to normalize ties with Israel, Trump replied with a definitive “no.” Before he met with Netanyahu, the US president signed an executive order withdrawing the country from the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and from participating in UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees.

Read more …

“Permanent peace” cannot be achieved without Palestinians securing their “legitimate rights” to statehood..”

Saudi Arabia Reacts To Trump’s Gaza ‘Takeover’ Plan (RT)

Saudi Arabia rejects any attempts to displace the Palestinians from their land, the country’s Foreign Ministry stated on Wednesday, reiterating its “firm and unwavering” commitment to the establishment of a Palestinian state. The comment followed US President Donald Trump’s proposal for an American takeover of Gaza. Speaking at a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House on Tuesday, Trump said the US could assume control of the enclave, clear the remains of damaged buildings, and transform Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East.” He also reiterated his position that Palestinians should be permanently resettled outside of Gaza. While not directly addressing Trump’s remarks, the Saudi Foreign Ministry released a statement that appeared to be a response to his proposal.

The ministry said it was reaffirming its “unequivocal rejection of any infringement on the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, whether through Israeli settlement policies, annexation of Palestinian lands or attempts to displace the Palestinian people from their land.” “Permanent peace” cannot be achieved without Palestinians securing their “legitimate rights” to statehood, the statement added, urging more “peace-loving countries to recognize the State of Palestine” based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. The ministry stressed that Riyadh would not establish ties with Israel unless this key condition is met, insisting that its stance towards the Palestinians is “non-negotiable.”

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has praised Trump for thinking “outside the box” with his proposal for a US takeover of Gaza. A key element of the proposal involves relocating Gaza’s roughly two million population to neighboring countries such as Egypt and Jordan. Trump asserted that regional leaders supported his plan but did not provide specifics on how the relocation would be carried out. The idea has drawn widespread criticism in the Middle East and beyond, with human rights organizations describing it as a form of ethnic cleansing. The Palestinian ambassador to the UN, Riyad Mansour, stated on Wednesday that rather than being relocated to other countries, Palestinians in Gaza should be allowed to reclaim their former homes in what is now Israel.

“For those who want to send” Gazans “to a happy ‘nice place,’” Mansour said, “let them go back, you know, to their original homes inside Israel. There are nice places there, and they will be happy to return to these places.” Around 47,500 Palestinians have been killed and over 111,500 wounded during the 15 months of Israeli attacks on Gaza, according to the latest data from the enclave’s Health Ministry. UN data suggests that 90% of Gaza’s population has been displaced by the fighting. Israel launched its military operation in Gaza after a Hamas cross-border raid killed about 1,200 people and 250 others were taken hostage. A US-brokered ceasefire is in place with ongoing prisoner exchanges. Israeli authorities report 79 hostages remain in Gaza, 35 of whom are presumed dead.

Read more …

” I continue to believe that one of Trump’s emissaries is working out a deal for Trump to meet with Iran’s president.”

Donald Trump’s Gaza Mirage (Larry Johnson)

I owe Danny Davis an apology. I speculated during our conversation today that one possible explanation for Trump’s recent rant declaring that the Palestinians of Gaza would be relocated to Egypt, Jordan or some other countries was simply a negotiating ploy. I opined that Trump would be able to tell Netanyahu, “Look, I proposed the idea but the Egyptians, Jordanians and Saudis turned me down.” With that no longer an option, Trump would be in a position to put some pressure on Netanyahu for a political settlement. I was wrong. Trump announced tonight he wants to take over Gaza:

“The US will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it, too. We’ll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous, unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site, level the site, and get rid of the destroyed buildings, level it out, create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area. Do a real job, do something different. Just can’t go back. If you go back, it’s going to end up the same way it has for 100 years. Trump also insisted that the Palestinians will be relocated to a third country (unspecified) and will not have a right to return. This was scripted. You can see Trump is reading from a note card. Trump claims he has talked this over with Arab leaders in the region and that they are in favor of the deal. That is a lie.

“Powerful Arab nations rejected President Trump’s suggestion to relocate Palestinians from Gaza to neighboring Egypt and Jordan. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League released a joint statement rejecting any plans to move Palestinians out of their territories in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.” One of the executive orders Trump signed today eliminates US funds for the UN that support UNRWA, which means other countries will have to step in and make up the difference. Any hope that Trump will help the Palestinians was dashed today. However, maybe Trump’s public comments about taking over Gaza were intended to keep Netanyahu from ending the ceasefire unilaterally. Now that Trump has pledged to put additional troops on the ground, it will make it more difficult for Netanyahu to resume military operations.

Trump’s grandstanding on Iran during the Netanyahu visit has to be taken with a big grain of salt. Trump vowed that Iran will never be allowed to get a nuclear weapon. However, Iran has made no declaration that it was trying to build one. Iran’s chief spiritual leader, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenie, apparently remains committed to eschewing a nuclear weapon — it is forbidden under Islamic law: “Despite having nuclear technology, Iran has never pursued building or using nuclear weapons, which its religion forbids, the country’s highest political authority, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on Wednesday. “Building and stockpiling nuclear bombs is wrong and using it is haram (religiously forbidden) … Although we have nuclear technology, Iran has firmly avoided it,” State TV quoted him as saying. Iran has repeatedly denied ever having sought to build a nuclear bomb.” I think Trump’s statement was intended to prevent Israel from launching any attacks on Iran. I continue to believe that one of Trump’s emissaries is working out a deal for Trump to meet with Iran’s president.

Read more …

Way past his best before date. It’s all rot from here on in.

Kremlin Comments On Talks With ‘Illegitimate’ Zelensky (RT)

Moscow is ready for talks with Kiev even though Vladimir Zelensky currently has no legal right to lead Ukraine, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. On Tuesday, Zelensky told British journalist Piers Morgan that he could hold talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The comments marked a significant shift from the stance Zelensky adopted in the autumn of 2022, when he signed a decree banning any negotiations with the Russian leadership. “If that is the only setup in which we can bring peace to the citizens of Ukraine and not lose people, definitely we will go for this setup, for this meeting,” Zelensky told Morgan. Asked to comment on Zelensky’s remarks on Wednesday, Peskov said there is “no place for emotions” when it comes to the settlement of the Ukraine conflict.

“What is needed here is legal analysis and absolute pragmatism… Zelensky has significant de jure legitimacy issues within his own country,” the spokesman pointed out. Peskov referred to the Ukrainian leader’s refusal to hold a presidential election and the fact that his term expired last May. Moscow maintains that the legitimate power in Ukraine now lies with the parliament and its speaker. “Despite this, the Russian side remains open to negotiations,” Peskov stressed, arguing that Moscow’s successes on the battlefield “clearly suggest that Kiev should be the one to demonstrate openness and interest in such negotiations.” Peskov also weighed in on Zelensky’s suggestion that the West could give Ukraine nuclear weapons as a substitute for NATO membership to guarantee its protection.

“In general, such statements are borderline madness. There is a nuclear non-proliferation regime,” the spokesman said. Peskov suggested that EU politicians, despite their flaws, should understand the “absurdity and potential danger of discussing such a topic.”Ukraine agreed to relinquish its nuclear arsenal inherited from the Soviet Union in exchange for security guarantees from Russia, the US, and the UK as part of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. Ukraine has repeatedly accused Moscow of violating the deal after Crimea voted to join Russia following the 2014 Western-backed coup in Kiev. Russia has argued that the deal was fundamentally undermined by NATO’s expansion towards its borders. Putin has said that Russia would not allow Kiev to create or obtain nuclear weapons “under any circumstances.”

Read more …

Everyone’s against the poor little man..

Zelensky Accuses Tucker Carlson Of Working For Vladimir Putin (JTN)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday accused former Fox News host Tucker Carlson of working for Russian President Vladimir Putin, after he supposedly parroted the Kremlin’s talking points.Carlson, who published an extensive exclusive interview with Putin last year, appeared to defend Russia in an appearance on Piers Morgan’s show “Piers Morgan Uncensored” last week, where he claimed Zelensky was a dictator and that Russia had a right to try and control the Crimea. Zelensky claimed that Carlson merely repeated Putin’s words, even though he allegedly knew better, according to Mediaite. Carlson had recently appeared on Piers Morgan Uncensored, during which he criticized Zelensky for what he called his persecution of political opponents and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, according to the outlet.

“Regrettably, this blogger or journalist, whatever he wants to call him, he unfortunately fully repeats words of the Putin,” Zelensky said. “He works for the Putin because he wants to lower me to the level of Putin. This is what he wants. He wants us to be equals.” The Ukrainian president stated that Carlson needed to “stop working” for Putin and learn more about what was happening in Ukraine. “Honestly, it seems to me very important. It seems to me that the person, no matter where he lives, must understand things,” Zelensky continued. “When he simply says something, you know, just throwing the words. Has he for one time in his lifetime lost his close ones?

Read more …

Read the whole thing.

Why China Would Win A War With The United States (Unz/Whitney)

Is the western media even-handed in its coverage of China? And how has this impacted public perception of China in America?

Ron Unz — I think the Western media has been overwhelmingly biased against China, a bias that stretches back for decades but has steadily grown worse during the 2010s and especially the last few years. Coverage has recently become so extremely dishonest and distorted that it reminds me of how the old Soviet media portrayed the West even as the USSR went into severe decline and eventually collapsed, and I think that unfortunate analogy is a very relevant one. Furthermore, much of our academic world has followed this same pattern of totally distorting the reality of China and its relationship with the U.S. Some of the worst examples of these media falsehoods only came to my attention during the last decade.

For more than 35 years the American media has annually denounced the Chinese government for its supposed 1989 massacre of protesting students at Tiananmen Square, but there seems overwhelming evidence that incident never happened, and was just a Western propaganda-hoax, endlessly repeated by our media. For example, the former Beijing bureau chief of the Washington Post personally covered those events at the time, and he later published a long article setting the record straight, but his account has always been ignored. Articles published in the New York Times by its own Beijing bureau chief said much the same thing, but these also had no impact. Numerous other sources, including secret American diplomatic cables disclosed by Wikileaks have confirmed these facts, but our biased, lazy, or ignorant journalists have never paid any attention and for decades continued to promote the myth of the Tiananmen Square Massacre.

Last year I published a long article summarizing all of this evidence. Another egregious example was the 1999 American bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, an illegal attack that killed or wounded nearly two dozen Chinese. Our government and media have always described this as a tragic accident, while denouncing and ridiculing China for claiming that the bombing was deliberate. But once again, there is overwhelming evidence that the Chinese government was entirely correct and our own government was lying, with our dishonest media endorsing and amplifying those lies. Indeed, a NATO officer was even quoted in a leading British newspaper as bragging that the guided bomb had struck exactly the intended room in the embassy.

Read more …

One of the first things Bondi did was freezing funding for sanctuary cities.

Pam Bondi Is Your New Attorney General (Victoria Taft)

Former Florida attorney general and former attorney for Donald Trump, Pam Bondi, sailed through her confirmation hearings. Then, all of a sudden, Democrats dammed up the vote. Upset over President Trump doing what he promised to do as president, they decided to hold Bondi’s AG appointment hostage until he did their bidding. But the floodgates opened up on Tuesday night when Bondi won Senate confirmation 54-46. Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman was the only Democrat to cross the aisle to vote for Bondi. I don’t know if anyone has noticed, but the Democrats’ limp-wristed take-their-ball-home strategy isn’t working. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) promised Democrats that if they didn’t allow a vote, he’d make sure their next few nights and weekends would be spent cooling their heels and knocking back cold-brew crack coffee.

After senators inexplicably took the weekend off, on Monday night, Bondi’s nomination was sent to the Senate floor after a vote to limit further debate, setting the stage for Tuesday night’s vote. Before Bondi was even AG, there were high-level (and some not-so-high-level) firings at the Department of Justice. At the FBI, Kash Patel hasn’t even been confirmed, and all of a sudden, the 7th-floor executive wing has taken on the look of a ghost town. That’s all happened without Bondi, who is now the boss of both after the Senate vote on Tuesday night. Imagine what will happen when she takes the helm. Bondi has never described herself as the president’s “wingman,” as terrorist defense attorney Eric Holder described his role as Barack Obama’s AG. But her proximity to Trump World was a sore spot for Democrats, who presumably preferred to have an attorney general who hated the president as one of his top legal advisors.

That’s apparently what Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) had in mind when he pretended to be upset about Bondi being too “faithful” to Donald Trump. “I fear Ms. Bondi will only protect and remain faithful to one person throughout this whole experience, and that’s the president who’s given her this opportunity,” said the oily Durbin, who’d apparently forgotten Bondi’s successful public legal career long before she’d ever met Donald Trump. Is there a misogyny hotline where we can report the Illinois Democrat? Durbin said with a straight face that he worried somehow Trump’s AG office would fail to be a “nonpartisan” department, like, you know, Merrick Garland’s weaponized law enforcement arm that spied on Catholics, parents at school board meetings, and—hey, are all the January 6 trespassers out of the Gulag yet?

Shockingly, no Republican senators laughed in his face, but Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) came close. The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman pinned the Democrats’ ears back on this point when he noted, “Some of my colleagues also suggest that Miss Bondi’s loyalty to President Trump is somehow disqualifying. It is not persuasive in any way.” Grassley explained, “There’s nothing wrong with President Trump appointing someone who seriously defended him to a high position.” He told Democrats, as if they didn’t know, “Ms. Bondi publicly supported President Trump, just like 77 million Americans who voted him back into office in November. So this, too, is not a disqualifying attribute.” Bondi cleared the Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote last week. Now that Bondi’s been confirmed, let’s get going—we’ve got a country to save.

Read more …

Apple’s trying to safeguard its money maker: “In 2022, Google’s revenue share payment to Apple was an estimated $20 billion…” About 20% of Apple’s operating profit.

Court Denies Apple’s Request to Intervene in Google Search Monopoly Case (ET)

Apple’s attempt to intervene in litigation related to Google’s search engine monopoly was denied by a district court on Sunday when a judge refused to stay the remedial proceedings in the case.Back in October 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and a coalition of state attorneys filed a case against Google, accusing the tech company of engaging in anti-competitive practices.Google was accused of establishing exclusive agreements with browser developers, mobile device manufacturers, and wireless carriers which prohibited them from pre-installing rival search engines. This resulted in most U.S. devices coming preloaded with Google search, negatively affecting competitors in the market.

In August 2024, Judge Amit Mehta from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia sided with the plaintiffs, ruling that Google violated antitrust laws. “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” he wrote, saying that the default search engine setting “is extremely valuable real estate.” A hearing on remedies in the case was scheduled for April 2025. In December, Apple filed a motion to intervene as a defendant in the case, aiming to take part in the remedial phase of the litigation. However, the motion was denied by Mehta, who called the request “untimely.”Apple then filed an emergency motion seeking to stay the remedial proceedings pending its appeal of Mehta’s order denying the intervention request. On Feb. 2, Mehta denied the stay request as well.

“First, Apple has not established a likelihood of success on the merits” for the stay, Mehta wrote. The company also failed to show it stands to suffer “irreparable harm absent a stay,” he said. “Because Apple has not satisfied the ‘stringent requirements’ for obtaining the ‘extraordinary relief’ of a stay pending appeal, its motion is denied.” Apple claims the December motion was filed to protect the company’s existing contract with Google and its ability to enter into future contracts with the search engine giant. Google pays the company to keep its search engine default on Apple’s Safari mobile and desktop browsers, according to a court document from the August 2024 monopoly decision.
“In 2022, Google’s revenue share payment to Apple was an estimated $20 billion,” said the document. “This is nearly double the payment made in 2020, which was then equivalent to 17.5 percent of Apple’s operating profit.”

Meanwhile, a potential breakup of Google’s business could be on the cards during the remedy phase of the litigation. In November, the DOJ together with 38 states and territories outlined a proposed remedy that would force Google to divest its Chrome browser. Regulators argued that Google uses the browser to reinforce its monopoly. At the time, the government was reportedly looking at potential divestiture of Google’s Android operating system. Google opposed these suggestions, saying the forced sale of Chrome and Android would “endanger the security and privacy of millions of Americans, and undermine the quality of products people love.” The move may end up chilling the company’s investment in artificial intelligence, it said.

Read more …

“..her current bleating is hardly surprising – that’s what stuck pigs do!”

Why Has Hillary Clinton Declared War on Elon Musk? (Sp.)

Hillary Clinton’s outrage over Elon Musk’s overhaul of USAID and other government agencies stems from her fear of being exposed for multimillion-dollar fraud, according to Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel, speaking to Sputnik. “Hillary and her family could face jail time and massive financial penalties, so her current bleating is hardly surprising – that’s what stuck pigs do!” Charles Ortel says. Clinton has accused Musk of orchestrating a “blitzkrieg-style administrative coup of the US government” and expressed concern over his access to “everything from Social Security payments to private taxpayer information.” The Clinton Foundation became the largest single example – counting all of its known affiliates – of charity fraud, particularly involving illegal personal enrichment,” Ortel emphasizes.

Hillary Clinton’s attempt to rally public support against Donald Trump and Elon Musk will ultimately backfire on her and the Democratic Party, as many Americans are fed up with wealthy liberal grifters, according to the Wall Street analyst. “Average Americans who work in the private sector don’t own three mansions, secure off-market book and speech deals, or fund their personal lifestyles by using ‘charities’ to cover support staff, luxury offices, and extravagant travel,” Ortel says, referencing the bonanza Clinton has long enjoyed. Clinton-backed protests under the slogan “Nobody elected Elon” will instead push young voters toward Team MAGA, he argues. Clinton seems to have forgotten that “nobody elected Hillary” either, he stresses.

Will Hillary Clinton tell Musk Where Ukraine’s Money Went? Hillary Clinton and Olena Zelenskaya, the wife of Volodymyr Zelensky, positioned themselves to profit from Western aid to Ukraine, the analyst notes. “Perhaps ‘Saint’ Hillary could explain what happened to the funds that Zelensky recently claimed never reached Kiev?” Ortel asks, referencing Clinton’s 2023 deal with the Zelenska Foundation.

Read more …

“The design of the search engine and algorithms that ultimately evolved into Google was funded by CIA grants through a program aimed at enhancing mass surveillance capabilities.”

How the CIA Spawned Google (Sp.)

American tech giant Google has faced regulatory scrutiny on numerous occasions amid accusations of antitrust violations. Google’s relationship with the CIA, ranging from early financial support to collaborative efforts have been decried as undermining privacy rights and free speech in the digital landscape. Google’s creation played a crucial role in the US intelligence community’s scheme to attain global dominance by controlling information.

How it Started
The Pentagon founded its private sector project the Highlands Forum during the Clinton administration in 1994, according to the INSURGE INTELLIGENCE project. Together with defense contractors, the group hammered out a strategy for “network-centric warfare.” The 9/11 terrorist attacks were seized upon by US spy agencies to justify not only military invasions across the Muslim world, but also mass surveillance of civilian populations.

CIA Steps In
The CIA’s Massive Digital Data Systems (MDDS) program, which originated in the 1990s, was designed to enhance query techniques and track users’ digital footprints. To better serve its goals, in 1999, the CIA established its own venture capital firm, In-Q-Tel, to invest in potentially useful technologies. Ph.D. students at Stanford University, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, were working on precisely such a tech start-up. The design of the search engine and algorithms that ultimately evolved into Google was funded by CIA grants through a program aimed at enhancing mass surveillance capabilities.

PRISM
Whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed in 2013 that the NSA had direct access to Google’s systems through its secret PRISM program, enabling the agency to harvest vast amounts of data on American citizens, Washington’s allies, and foreign nationals. Ex-CIA spooks are employed in almost every department at Google, according to a 2022 report based on the analysis of employment websites. Google has been slapped with multiple lawsuits stemming from its history of data misuse and privacy violations.

Read more …

“..evade their own governments’ restrictions on domestic spying upon their citizens by tasking foreign partners to carry out such missions..”

Did Closest US Intelligence Allies Spy on Trump? (Sp.)

Washington’s Five Eyes allies may have guilty secrets about the Russia collusion hoax – and fear US President Donald Trump’s government will find out, Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel tells Sputnik.”Years ago, Judge Andrew Napolitano revealed on Fox TV that he believed the US and the UK – possibly with other Five Eyes nations – had an understanding that members would cooperate to evade their own governments’ restrictions on domestic spying upon their citizens by tasking foreign partners to carry out such missions,” Ortel says. In March 2017, the White House accused British eavesdropping center GCHQ of spying on Trump. Napolitano claimed Obama used GCHQ to snoop on Trump, exploiting the Five Eyes partnership to flout domestic spying rules.

GCHQ’s NSA access could have enabled operatives to obtain transcripts of Trump’s conversations.”We do not yet know most of the truth, but it certainly seems to me that the US government and partisan operatives in media, academia and the corporate world are centrally involved in attempting to rig elections inside and outside America,” Ortel says.”We also know that UK elements have never stopped meddling in US affairs, likely from 1782 onwards. By comparison, Russian meddling in US politics, if any, seems minute.”

Read more …

Too late?!

EU States ‘Fed Up’ With Von Der Leyen – Politico (RT)

EU member states are growing frustrated with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen over her unilateral approach to foreign policy, Politico reported on Wednesday, citing diplomats. The latest criticism reportedly comes after von der Leyen announced a partnership agreement with Jordan.The deal was inked last week following talks between von der Leyen and King Abdullah II. It aims to assist Jordan in facing the socio-economic impact of the Syrian crisis and broaden avenues for investments and business opportunities in the Arab country. The deal will be complemented by €3 billion ($3.1 billion) in financial resources, comprising grants, investments, and macro-financial assistance.However, according to two sources who spoke to Politico, von der Leyen made the decision to allocate the funds to Jordan without consulting EU member nations.

“We were confronted with a fait accompli while we’re the ones footing the bill,” an EU diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity told the news outlet. “It’s not the first time von der Leyen pulls a stunt like this because she wants to make nice with world leaders. [Member countries] are increasingly fed up with it,” he added. The source did not mention other instances when the commission chief had failed to discuss her decisions with EU members. According to the report, there has been much discontent over von der Leyen’s power-grabbing tactics, especially in foreign policy – an area traditionally managed by the European Council and the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs.

“Ursula von der Leyen has been grabbing the [smallest] crumb of foreign power on every occasion,” MEP Nacho Sanchez Amor told the news outlet. He argued that the growing concentration of foreign policy decisions within the European Commission runs counter to the bloc’s foundational treaties, according to which foreign policy should remain under the purview of member states. “We have assumed uncritically that foreign policy is bending towards the commission, and this is not the treaties’ framework,” he said, calling for a formal debate on the issue.

Von der Leyen’s centralized approach has reportedly been a point of contention since her first term, resulting in strained relationships with former European Council President Charles Michel and the bloc’s former top diplomat, Josep Borrell. Prior to von der Leyen’s reelection for the top job last year, there were also reports that many EU states were dissatisfied with her excessive focus on climate and the weakening economy, along with nepotism and non-transparency of her policies. Von der Leyen has changed her agenda since being reelected in June, placing more emphasis on the bloc’s competitiveness and defense.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Pfizer

 

 

Asli Ana

 

 

Horses

 

 

Frens

 

 

Me too!
https://twitter.com/i/status/1887242183431905351

 

 

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