Dec 142023
 


Edward Hopper Nighthawks 1942

 

SCOTUS Accepts Case That Could Demolish Entire Basis For Jan. 6 Prosecutions (ZH)
Judge Halts Trump’s 2020 Election Case Amid Pending Immunity Appeal (Sp.)
US House Votes to Authorize Formal Impeachment Inquiry Against Biden (Sp.)
Hunter Biden Defies Congressional Summons (RT)
Biden ‘Gave Federal Agencies Green Light’ to Target Elon Musk (Sp.)
Israel Now Admits to ‘Immense Amount of Friendly Fire’ on October 7th (21CW)
Neutron Bomb: New Evidence That Israel Is Using A New Uranium Weapon (Helmer)
Chechen Leader Kadyrov Eyes End Of Ukraine Conflict In Coming Months (RT)
Ukraine Was Never Going To Win – US Senator (RT)
US Lawmakers Demand Answers On Ukraine (RT)
Zelensky Gives US TV Viewers Fake Frontline Facts (RT)
‘No One Will Stop Us From Destroying Israel and The US’ (RT)
Germany May Declare Emergency Over Ukraine – Scholz (RT)
Economist: Biden Admin Pushing US Towards ‘Economic Suicide’ (Sp.)

 

 

 

 

Scott Adams: “Trump’s “I’ll only be a dictator for one day” is looking brilliant. Total nut-bait.”

 

 

 

 

Nap Macgregor

 

 

 

 

Tucker

 

 

 

 

“The justices could decide as soon as next week whether to expedite the review.”

SCOTUS Accepts Case That Could Demolish Entire Basis For Jan. 6 Prosecutions (ZH)

The US Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear an appeal from a Jan. 6 Capitol riot defendant which will highlight a law used to charge hundreds of people in connection with that fateful day. The case will decide whether defendant Joseph Fischer can be charged under a 2002 law which stemmed from the Enron collapse which makes it a crime to obstruct or impede an official proceeding (like pulling a fire alarm to delay a vote?). The law has been invoked against Trump, along with 327 Capitol riot defendants – which an appeals court said the government could continue to invoke. Under the Corporate Fraud Accountability Act of 2002, anyone who “corruptly— (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so” is subject to prosecution.

A key word in the provision, “otherwise,” has been key – as nearly every judge overseeing riot-related cases in DC federal court have agreed with government prosecutors that rioters who sought to prevent Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s 2020 victory were “otherwise” obstructing that proceeding. One judge, Carl J. Nichols, ruled that “otherwise” could apply to other kinds of document-tampering. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit disagreed in a split decision, which will now go to the Supreme Court for review. “We cannot assume, and think it unlikely, that Congress used expansive language to address such narrow concerns,” wrote Judge Florence Pan, calling Nichols’s ruling a “cramped, document-focused interpretation.” [..] “We must accept, and think it far more likely, that Congress said what it meant and meant what it said.”

Defense attorneys have argued that such a broad interpretation could put many otherwise law-abiding activists at risk of felony charges, which Judge Gregory Katsas agreed with. While the riot involved “extreme conduct” not protected by the First Amendment, Katsas wrote, under this interpretation of the law a “peaceful protestor in the Senate gallery” could be convicted of a felony for trespassing while exercising free speech rights. Katsas argued that the law can apply beyond documents but only to people who “hinder the flow of truthful evidence to a proceeding.” -WaPo. The decision to hear the case comes just two days after special counsel Jack Smith asked the Court to fast-track a decision on whether former President Trump is entitled to presidential immunity in his 2020 election interference case. The justices could decide as soon as next week whether to expedite the review.

Read more …

Looks like SCOTUS material to me.

Judge Halts Trump’s 2020 Election Case Amid Pending Immunity Appeal (Sp.)

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan has granted former President Donald Trump’s request to temporarily pause his 2020 election meddling case pending a decision of the appeals court on his presidential immunity, according to a Wednesday court order. “The court agrees with both parties that Defendant’s appeal automatically stays any further proceedings that would move this case towards trial or impose additional burdens of litigation on Defendant,” the order stated. “The court hereby STAYS the deadlines and proceedings scheduled by its Pretrial Order, as amended.” The order clarified though that the deadlines and proceedings in the 2020 election against Trump case are not permanently frozen but are rather “held in abeyance” until the appeals court makes its decision in the immunity case.

Should the appeals court reject Trump’s appeal, the US district court in the case will decide whether to keep the trial date as it is on March 4, or to move it further into the future, according to the order. Trump’s case stems from charges that were filed against in August and allege he orchestrated an effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election that saw US President Joe Biden come out as the victor. The former president has pleaded not guilty in the case and has repeatedly blasted the legal case as being politically motivated. The appeals court received the case following Chutkan’s decision to reject a motion from the Trump camp that claimed the former president was immune from prosecution. At the time, Chutkan argued Trump cannot be shielded from prosecutorial actions over his deeds while in the Oval Office.

The development comes as special counsel Jack Smith called on the US Supreme Court on Monday to weigh in on whether the former commander-in-chief is in fact “absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin.” The Supreme Court subsequently agreed to fast-track the matter and called on Trump to issue a response to Smith’s motion by December 20.

Read more …

“I think we have to go down that route. That doesn’t mean we have high crimes or misdemeanors — we may not ever. But let’s get the facts, and we’ll go from there.”

US House Votes to Authorize Formal Impeachment Inquiry Against Biden (Sp.)

House Republicans voted to formally authorize an impeachment inquiry into US President Joe Biden on Wednesday, a step lawmakers believe is needed to enforce subpoenas issued by the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees, which are heading the impeachment effort. The vote, along partisan lines, saw Democrats overwhelmingly vote against the inquiry and all Republicans in favor of the measure. It cleared the lower congressional chamber 221 to 212. Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, has so far defied a House subpoena to testify behind closed doors. He has offered to testify publicly, arguing that Republicans do not want transparency in the proceedings. After the younger Biden no-showed his deposition earlier Wednesday, Reps. Jim Jordan (R-OH) and James Comer (R-KY) said in a statement that Hunter “defied lawful subpoenas and we will now initiate contempt of Congress proceedings.”

The president’s son did appear in Washington, DC, but not behind closed doors as Republicans demanded. Instead, he held a news conference in front of the Capitol, where he again offered to testify in public and called the investigation “illegitimate.” “I’m here today to make sure that the House committee’s illegitimate investigations of my family did not proceed on distortions, manipulated evidence, and lies,” Hunter Biden said, reading from a prepared statement. The inquiry vote was made more difficult for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) because of the recent expulsion of former Rep. George Santos (R-NY), which sharply narrowed the Republican hold on the US House. The White House has defied Republican subpoenas and requests for more information, including transcribed interviews with White House staff and Biden family members and their associates. The White House argues the impeachment probe is illegitimate because it was not ratified with a formal vote in the House; Wednesday’s vote invalidates that argument.

Previously, several moderate Republicans expressed hesitancy in voting for a formal impeachment inquiry, especially those in swing states where an on-the-record vote for an impeachment may hurt them politically. However, several moderate Republicans came out in favor of the inquiry as it became more apparent that the White House planned to do what it could to block the investigation. “If [Joe Biden is] not providing the information because he says there’s no formal impeachment inquiry, that means we need a formal impeachment inquiry to get the information,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) said. “I think we have to go down that route. That doesn’t mean we have high crimes or misdemeanors — we may not ever. But let’s get the facts, and we’ll go from there.”

Read more …

Hunter’s team appear spooked. They would rather have him in contempt of Congress than testifying at a closed-door hearing. The reason is that in a public hearing, classified material is off limits.

Hunter Biden Defies Congressional Summons (RT)

US President Joe Biden’s son Hunter has refused to comply with a subpoena ordering him to testify before a Republican-led committee investigating his father’s involvement in his business dealings. House Republicans are expected to formalize impeachment proceedings against President Biden later on Wednesday. The House Oversight Committee issued a subpoena to Hunter Biden last month, ordering the president’s son to testify at a closed-door hearing on Wednesday. Along with the House Judiciary Committee, the Oversight Committee is leading an impeachment probe against President Biden and has released evidence suggesting that Hunter took tens of millions of dollars from foreign clients in exchange for access to his father while the latter was vice president of the US.

Hunter

Speaking at a press conference outside the US Capitol, Hunter Biden denounced the impeachment inquiry as “illegitimate” and said that he would only testify at a public hearing. Classified information usually cannot be discussed in such a public session. “Let me state as clearly as I can: My father was not involved in my business. There is no evidence to support the allegations my father was involved in my business, because it did not happen,” he told reporters. However, Joe Biden has been photographed with several of his son’s clients, and Hunter’s former business partner – Devon Archer – told the Oversight Committee in July that Hunter’s position on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy firm, was given to him solely to guarantee that the company would have influence over US policy.

Archer also alleged that Joe Biden dined multiple times with Hunter’s clients, and that Hunter received money transfers immediately after at least two of these meetings. According to files retrieved from Hunter’ Biden’s laptop and published by the GOP, his family received around $24 million in payments through shell companies from business figures and politicians in China, Kazakhstan, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine. Some 150 of these transactions were flagged as “suspicious” by the US Treasury Department, according to the committees. Hunter Biden’s decision to skip the closed-door deposition was expected. In a letter to Oversight Committee Chair James Comer last month, Hunter’s lawyer stated that he would only testify in public, for fear that the GOP would use his private sworn testimony to “distort the facts and misinform the public.”

Earlier this month, Comer and Judiciary Committee Jim Jordan warned Hunter’s lawyer that they would “initiate contempt of Congress proceedings” if the president’s son failed to comply with the subpoena. “We expect to depose the president’s son, and then we will be more than happy to have a public hearing,” Comer told reporters on Wednesday. In a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Wednesday morning, House Speaker Mike Johnson said that he would hold a vote later that day to formalize the ongoing impeachment inquiry. With Republicans holding a slim majority in the House of Representatives, the measure is expected to pass.

Read more …

“That’s a decision to leave families waiting on the wrong side of the digital divide when we have the technology to get them high-speed service today.”

Biden ‘Gave Federal Agencies Green Light’ to Target Elon Musk (Sp.)

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced on Tuesday that it denied the Elon Musk-owned Starlink’s appeal and will not award the company a $866 million subsidy from the Universal Service Fund meant to expand broadband access to rural areas. Writing in fiery dissent, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr accused the agency of targeting Elon Musk and his businesses at the behest of the Biden administration. Carr began his dissent by pointing out that US President Joe Biden told reporters in early November that Musk “is worth being looked at” after his purchase of Twitter, since renamed X. It notes that when Biden was pressed by a reporter on what ways the government would look into at Musk, the president responded “there’s a lot of ways.” “President Biden gave federal agencies a green light to go after him [Musk],” Carr wrote.

Carr then notes that the Department of Justice, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, the National Labor Relation Board, the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York and the US Fish and Wildlife Service have all opened investigations into Musk or his businesses since Biden made those comments. The subsidy was planned to fund Starlink and help bring broadband internet to 640,000 rural homes in 38 states. In his dissent, Carr stated the FCC applied a novel new standard specifically for Starlink, ostensibly over concerns about how its low-Earth-orbit satellites (LEOs) made it impossible to pass and then applied that standard only to Starlink. He contends the decision by the FCC “cannot be explained by any objective application of laws, facts, or policy.” According to Carr, the FCC required that Starlink show it is currently providing the required 100 megabits per second (Mbps) download and 20 Mbps upload speed to the 640,000 homes, rather than the previous standard of providing that service to at least 40% of those homes by December 31, 2025.

The commissioner noted that none of the other companies awarded contracts by the FCC in 2020 are required to meet that standard and that if they were, none of them would pass it. He further argued that looking at what Starlink is currently providing in those areas “would be like watching the pace lap of a NASCAR race and then predicting that the cars will never exceed 50 MPH.” Had the FCC looked at more relevant data sets, Carr argued, it would have seen that Starlink is certainly capable of meeting the speed benchmark by 2025, noting Starlink now has a median download speed greater than 100 Mbps in 14 European countries. That, along with the number of new satellites in orbit and Starlink’s “detailed descriptions of its plan” would provide a “much richer and probative set of data” that would “confirm that Starlink is on track to meet its FCC obligations.”

The decision to deny Starlink, Carr argued, will hurt the rural communities it planned to serve. “By reversing course, the FCC has chosen to vaporize that commitment and replace it with . . . nothing,” Carr wrote. “That’s a decision to leave families waiting on the wrong side of the digital divide when we have the technology to get them high-speed service today.” Carr also argued that if the government ever decides to provide those areas with high-speed internet access, it will cost taxpayers significantly more. “[I]t will cost us orders of magnitude more money to do so […] extending high-speed fiber lines to these same areas will likely cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $3 billion based on past bidding patterns and analysis – more once you start accounting for inflation.”

Read more …

“The Jerusalem Post reported recently that cars containing the blood stains or ashes of Israelis who died on 7 October would be crushed and – in what the paper said was a first – buried in a cemetery.”

Israel Now Admits to ‘Immense Amount of Friendly Fire’ on October 7th (21CW)

For those who are paying attention to the actual evidence (or lack thereof) of “Hamas mass atrocities” on October 7th will have already known that an Israeli police investigation has already shown how Israeli Apache helicopters opened fire on the attendees of the Nova Music Festival that day. If widely disseminated, it would be a game changer, and would trigger a reversal on blind, unfettered US and UK support for Israel’s unprecedented massacre of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. So it’s hardly surprising that the mainstream media have completely blacked-out these explosive revelations. Initial Nova music festival revelations were mentioned in a Haaretz reported on November 18th, where an Israeli police source confirmed how an Israeli combat helicopter that arrived on the scene from the Ramat David base, and proceeded to fire on music festival attendees, estimating that some 364 people were ‘mowed-down’ there. And there’s more details coming out by the day…

Asa Winstanley from Electronic Intifada reports… Israel’s army on Tuesday admitted that an “immense and complex quantity” of what it calls “friendly fire” incidents took place on 7 October. The key declaration was buried in the penultimate paragraph of an article by Yoav Zitun, the military correspondent of Israeli outlet Ynet. It is the first known official army admission that a significant number of the hundreds of Israelis who died on 7 October were killed by Israel itself, and not by Hamas or other Palestinian resistance factions. An Israeli police source last month appeared to admit that some of the Israelis at the Supernova rave taking place near Gaza that day were hit by Israeli helicopters. A second police source later partially walked back the admission. Citing new data released by the Israeli military, Zeitun wrote that: “Casualties fell as a result of friendly fire on October 7, but the IDF [Israeli military] believes that … it would not be morally sound to investigate” them. He reported that this was “due to the immense and complex quantity of them that took place in the kibbutzim and southern Israeli communities.” The Ynet article also reported that “at least” one fifth of the Israeli army deaths in Gaza since the ground invasion began were also due to “friendly fire” incidents.


Drone footage released by the Israeli military last month shows the extent of the destruction of the cars fleeing the Supernova rave on 7 October, likely inflicted by Israeli drones and helicopters (RT/Israeli military)

Israel has in recent weeks faced increased internal pressure to investigate the failings of 7 October. On Monday in Tel Aviv, family members of those Israelis who died on 7 October established a new group calling for an official Israeli government investigation into the events of that day. One of the speakers accused the government of a “cover-up.” Israel does indeed appear to be covering up a lot of the evidence. The Jerusalem Post reported recently that cars containing the blood stains or ashes of Israelis who died on 7 October would be crushed and – in what the paper said was a first – buried in a cemetery. The paper provided a religious pretext for all this. Nonetheless, this is a worrying development which amounts to a state-sanctioned coverup of what could potentially be some of the most important forensic evidence from 7 October.

Since that day, there has been a steadily growing mountain of evidence that many – if not most – Israelis killed that day were killed by Israel itself. This evidence has been reported in English almost entirely by independent media, including The Electronic Intifada, The Grayzone, The Cradle and Mondoweiss. In one of the most recent revelations, an Israeli air force colonel admitted to a Hebrew podcast that they blew up Israeli homes in the settlements but insisted they never did so “without permission.” Colonel Nof Erez also said that 7 October was a “mass Hannibal” event – a reference to a controversial Israeli military doctrine. Named after an ancient Carthaginian general who poisoned himself rather than be captured alive, the Hannibal Directive allows Israeli forces to take any means necessary to stop Israelis being captured alive – even at the cost of killing the captives.

Read more …

Long read. In part 1 John Helmer provides the “history”, in part 2, Christopher Busby makes the case that Israel is using this today.

Neutron Bomb: New Evidence That Israel Is Using A New Uranium Weapon (Helmer)

The neutron bomb was invented in 1958 by Samuel Cohen of the Livermore Laboratory of California and then RAND. In 1984 he proposed that Israel construct a neutron radiation wall around the country. “What I am suggesting is the construction of a border barrier whose most effective component is an extremely intense field of nuclear radiation (produced by the operation of underground nuclear reactors), sharply confined to the barrier zone, which practically guarantees the death of anyone attempting to breach the barrier. Establishing such a ‘nuclear wall’ at the borders of a threatened country can make virtually impossible any successful penetration by ground forces – as well as a preemptive ground attack by the threatened country.” Cohen, who described himself as an “unbelieving Jew”, believed that by creating this radiation barrier around Israel, no Arab state army would attack.

He also believed that by deterring that form of escalation, Cohen’s neutron wall would be protecting the US because, in the end, Cohen believed the US would abandon Israel to its fate if the US were threatened directly. “If the Soviets intrude again in an Arab-Israeli war, “ Cohen wrote, “this time with vastly improved nuclear capabilities to back up their actions, the survival of the United States would be at stake. Clearly this is a situation where it would be irrational—indeed, intolerable—for us to remain committed to Israel. Clearly, the most responsible thing the United States can do, to ensure its own security, is to make drastic changes in its military assistance to Israel (and to other Mideast countries as well) to prevent such a situation from ever arising. Otherwise, based on the wretched history of this turbulent arena, there is every reason to expect that one of these days a nuclear showdown will arise.” What Cohen was proposing was a neutron bomb to be deployed by Israel except that, because there was no detonation, no explosion, he claimed there was no neutron bomb.

“During peacetime, the reactors (employed underground, for protection and safety) are operated on a continual basis, as are our power reactors. The neutrons produced by the fission reactions escape into a solution containing an element that, upon absorbing the neutrons, becomes highly radioactive and emits gamma rays (very high energy X-rays) at extremely high intensity. The radioactive solution is then passed into a series of pipes running along the barrier length in conjunction with conventional obstacle components—mines, Dragon’s Teeth, tank traps, barbed wire, etc. To the rear of the pipes and obstacle belts is a system of conventional defensive fortifications. (The obstacles, the firepower from the fortifications, and tactical air power all serve to impede the rate of advance of the attacker, increasing the attacker’s exposure to the gamma radiation. Vice versa, by quickly incapacitating the attacker, the radiation serves to make it difficult, or even impossible, for the attacker to remove the obstacles and assault the fortifications.) The width of the entire defensive system need be no more than a few miles.”

Since it was Cohen’s idea that the Palestinians and the Arabs were neither defending their lands or themselves, but were the “aggressors” against Israel, Cohen argued it was perfectly moral for the Israelis to use their neutron weapon “defensively”. “Regarding the morality (or immorality) of such defensive use of nuclear radiation, one should keep in mind that the gamma rays themselves can, of course, have no intentions; nor is there necessarily any intent by those who produce them to kill anyone. The intent to kill has to lie with the aggressor—to kill himself. This contrasts sharply with the employment of conventional weapons, where there is every intent to kill the enemy. The basic purpose of the radiation is to deter the would-be aggressor from attacking; that is, to prevent war.”

Read more …

“But the president has no interest in destroying Ukraine as a state.”

Chechen Leader Kadyrov Eyes End Of Ukraine Conflict In Coming Months (RT)

The Ukraine conflict will likely be over by the spring or the summer of 2024, since Kiev is running out of all necessary resources, Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov predicted during a televised phone-in session on Wednesday. Soldiers recruited from Chechnya have played a significant role in what Moscow calls the special military operation; the head of the southern Russian republic is paying close attention to its progress. He said he expects the shortage of manpower, weapons and money to fully erode Kiev’s military capabilities by June or July at the latest. Speaking in Chechen, he mused that Russia could have crushed Ukraine in three months, if it were willing to fight the way Israel is waging war in Gaza at the moment.

“President [Vladimir Putin] ordered us to keep the infrastructure and cities as intact as possible, or we would have taken Kiev. We were seven kilometers away,” Kadyrov was quoted by the Russian media as saying. “But the president has no interest in destroying Ukraine as a state.” Russian troops approached the Ukrainian capital during the early phase of the hostilities. The Defense Ministry announced, however, that it was withdrawing troops after a breakthrough was announced during the Türkiye-mediated peace talks in Istanbul in March 2022, where delegations signed the draft version of a truce. Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky later aborted the negotiations, claiming that they were no longer possible due to the alleged discovery of evidence of war crimes in the town of Bucha, which Russian troops had abandoned. Moscow responded by denying the allegations and has called Kiev’s claims a pretext for the continuation of hostilities.

Ukrainian and international media have reported that then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson torpedoed the nascent peace deal, telling the Ukrainian government that Western nations would not endorse it. This was recently confirmed by Ukrainian MP David Arakhamia, who headed his country’s delegation. Johnson told Kiev to “just make war,” the lawmaker said in an interview. Kiev and its foreign backers had counted on scoring battlefield successes during a counteroffensive this year, for which the Ukrainian army was provided Western-made heavy weapons, including main battle tanks. The six-month-long push failed to produce any major territorial gains and came at a steep price for Ukraine. The Russian military has estimated the losses of its opponent at over 125,000 troops. Kiev’s ability to secure continued Western assistance is currently in doubt, as opposition to the spending grows both in the US and in Europe.

Read more …

“..everyone is tired of the Kievan beggarman.”

Ukraine Was Never Going To Win – US Senator (RT)

Ukraine always faced the prospect of losing the conflict with Russia in the event that Washington cut off its aid, US Republican Senator Tommy Tuberville has said. The comments came after the US Senate last week blocked a bill by President Joe Biden that intended to provide Kiev with a further $60 billion in funding. Republicans opposed to the spending package have demanded tougher immigration control on the US-Mexico border in exchange for approving the bill. Speaking to CNN on Tuesday, Tuberville was asked whether cutting off funding to Kiev could result in its defeat. The senator replied that he personally “never thought they can win to begin with,” especially with the way the US “eased into” the conflict.

Tuberville also dismissed concerns by supporters of continued aid to Kiev, who have claimed that Russia will advance elsewhere in Europe once it defeats Ukrainian forces. The Republican argued that Moscow “can’t beat Ukraine on the eastern side,” and questioned how it was expected to push further across Europe. “I’ve never believed that scenario. I think it’s a good selling point to send more money,” Tuberville suggested. The US has so far provided Ukraine with an estimated $111 billion in military and economic assistance since the outbreak of its conflict with Russia in February 2022. While Washington has increasingly warned that funds are beginning to run out, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has nevertheless continued to insist on receiving more money. The Ukrainian leader traveled to Washington on Tuesday to hold a series of meetings with top US officials, in an attempt to save Biden’s $60 billion aid package.

However, Zelensky appears to have failed to convince key Republicans to change their mind about opposing the bill. Instead, some senators left the meeting while describing it as “the same old stuff” and “very scripted.” Biden has continued to urge Congress to approve the funding package and has also pledged an additional $200 million in emergency military aid for Kiev through the Presidential Drawdown Authority, which allows him to send weapons from US stocks without congressional approval. Meanwhile, Moscow has brushed off Zelensky’s latest visit to Washington as inconsequential for the outcome of the conflict. Russia’s ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, claimed that “everyone is tired of the Kievan beggarman.” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has also stressed that no amount of money would change the situation on the front lines.

Read more …

“I said you need to thank Mike Johnson for being willing to pass a package if border security is in it, because half his conference probably doesn’t agree with that..”

US Lawmakers Demand Answers On Ukraine (RT)

Ukraine’s President Vladimir Zelensky has failed to provide any new arguments in defense of his cause during his talks in Washington with American lawmakers, several senators and representatives, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, have told the media in the wake of the meeting on Tuesday. Zelensky arrived in the capital to hold a series of meetings with top US officials to save a $61-billion aid package for Kiev that remains in limbo. Last week, GOP senators blocked the Biden administration’s major $111-billion supplemental funding request, which included aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, citing the Democrats’ reluctance to address the tense situation on the US-Mexico border. Some Republicans have also repeatedly pointed to the lack of accountability in terms of the funds Washington had spent on helping Ukraine.

According to senior GOP senator Lindsey Graham, Tuesday’s meeting has failed to bring about any changes in the lawmakers’ stance. “Nothing has changed,” he told journalists. The South Carolina senator, who emerged as a staunch supporter of Kiev amid its conflict with Moscow, explained that, although he would like to aid Ukraine, border security comes first. “I admire him, but he didn’t change my mind at all about what we need to do,” Graham said, referring to Zelensky and adding that the Democrats were supposedly trying to “use” the Ukrainian leader “in a way that I think wasn’t helpful.” “I want to secure the border,” the senator said, adding that the number of people supposedly linked to various terrorist groups that were crossing America’s southern border was “just chilling.” Another Republican Senator, Missouri’s Eric Schmitt, also said that the meeting was effectively reduced to “the same old stuff.” “There’s nothing new,” he told journalists, adding that the questions for the Ukrainian president “were very scripted.”

Louisiana Republican Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who also met Zelensky on Tuesday, pointed to the fact that the White House and Kiev were asking for billions of dollars with no oversight and no clear strategy that would allow Ukraine to prevail in the ongoing conflict. “Their responses have been insufficient,” Johnson said, referring to the Biden administration and adding that he had been requesting details on Washington’s strategy for Ukraine “over and over since literally 24 hours after I was handed the gavel as Speaker of the House.” Lindsey Graham also told journalists that he’d told Zelensky to be thankful to the House Speaker for even being willing to place military aid for Ukraine on the agenda. “I said you need to thank Mike Johnson for being willing to pass a package if border security is in it, because half his conference probably doesn’t agree with that,” the senator said.

The US has already provided Kiev with $111 billion in military and economic assistance since military confrontation between Moscow and Kiev began in February 2022. Washington has recently warned that funds for the government of Vladimir Zelensky have almost run out. Last week, US National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said that Kiev can’t expect additional funding until the gridlock in Congress is resolved. Zelensky’s chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, then warned that delays in US assistance could lead to Ukraine’s defeat by Russia. The Kremlin said on Tuesday that any further assistance Washington decides to provide to Kiev is doomed to fail from the start. No amount of money can change the situation on the front lines, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists.

Read more …

“immovable, verging on the messianic..”

Zelensky Gives US TV Viewers Fake Frontline Facts (RT)

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has contradicted frontline developments by claiming that Russian troops have failed to capture a single village from Kiev’s forces this year. The Ukrainian leader talked up his country’s supposed military achievements in an interview with Fox News anchor Bret Baier on Tuesday. Zelensky is visiting Washington this week to urge continued military assistance for Kiev in 2024. Political clashes on Capitol Hill have caused a White House request for more than $110 billion in foreign security spending, including over $60 billion for Ukraine, to be blocked. Speaking in English, Zelensky claimed that Ukrainian forces had “destroyed mostly [the] Russian fleet that was situated in our waters and near… occupied Crimea.” Kiev has launched several successful attacks on Russia’s Black Sea Fleet using Western-provided cruise missiles, although Moscow’s forces have repelled numerous other assaults.

Zelensky further claimed that Ukraine had killed 20,000 members of the now-disbanded Wagner private military company, and that “Russia did not occupied [sic] any Ukrainian village during this year.” The Ukrainian leader made the assertions despite evidence to the contrary on the battlefield, with Wagner fighters playing an important role in the fighting for the Donbass city of Artyomovsk (known as Bakhmut in Ukraine). The Zelensky government had declared the city an invincible “fortress” and reportedly ignored repeated US calls to pull troops out. After losing control of the city in May, Zelensky downplayed the significance of the settlement, declaring that it no longer existed and remained “only in our hearts.” In early 2023, Kiev also lost control of Soledar in Donbass. Fox News host Baier did not dispute Zelensky’s claims that Russia had enjoyed no success in the conflict.

According to Western media, Kiev’s bid to retain Artyomovsk significantly impacted its summer counteroffensive, having needlessly drained Ukrainian manpower and resources. The push to break through Russian defensive lines, which started in June and according to Russia estimates cost Ukraine over 125,000 casualties, failed to yield significant territorial gains for Kiev. Zelensky and his aides publicly clashed with Ukraine’s top general, Valery Zaluzhny, after he described the frontline situation as a “stalemate” in early November. The president’s office finally acknowledged that no progress was being made by the end of the month. A profile of Zelensky published by Time magazine in late October said his close associates believe him to be delusional. His belief in a Ukrainian victory over Russia is “immovable, verging on the messianic,” according to the outlet.

Read more …

“..if right now you asked me to take part in a demonstration, for example, I would tell you that I have a sick mother and money problems, and I’d rather take care of my family.”

‘No One Will Stop Us From Destroying Israel and The US’ (RT)

One cannot say that the city of Sidon, located in southern Lebanon, is a more dangerous place than Beirut. Even further south, in Tyre, everything is relatively calm, except that one may hear distant sounds of explosions. Frankly, I thought I would see a more depressing picture. However, after driving through several Lebanese towns, I can say that life there continues peacefully. “Ninety percent of Lebanese people see no reason to fight against Israel and are not ready for war,” said Lebanese journalist Wafiq al-Hiwari, whom I met through friends in Sidon. This elderly Lebanese man has been covering the political situation in his country for many years and does not like to talk about global politics. Wafiq is a fierce opponent of dividing Lebanon into sections based on religious beliefs. He complains that today, there is no unity in Lebanon – the country is broken into pieces and divided between the Shiites, Sunnis, Druze, and Christians.

— This conflict has already caused us many problems. About 60,000 Lebanese people living on the border with Israel had to leave their homes. About 70% of them came to live with relatives and friends. And this happened in extremely difficult times from an economic point of view. — And what do you personally think about the situation in Gaza? — Of course, I condemn Israel. And it hurts me to see innocent people die. But if right now you asked me to take part in a demonstration, for example, I would tell you that I have a sick mother and money problems, and I’d rather take care of my family. — And most people think like that? — In general, yes. The crisis has paralyzed Lebanese society. There’s no strength left for either political or social activism. Moreover, religious division also polarizes society.

If you ask Christians – for example, members of the Free Patriotic Movement – they will tell you that this situation does not concern them. They’ll say that Hezbollah has started another conflict and poses a threat to the security of Lebanon. If you ask the Druze, they’ll tell you to wait and see how things end. That has been their philosophy throughout history. If you ask the Sunnis, they will say that they are against Israel, but they hate Hezbollah even more and believe that it has conspired with Israel and is plotting against them. And the Shiites will declare that they are the only ones who are ready to fight against Israel and will continue to fight the occupiers until Jerusalem is completely liberated. In other words, there is no unity in Lebanon either on the Palestinian issue or on any other issue, for that matter.

Read more …

How much longer can the Scholz government last?

Germany May Declare Emergency Over Ukraine – Scholz (RT)

Germany may have to declare an emergency at home in order to provide additional assistance to Kiev next year if the situation in Ukraine gets any worse, Chancellor Olaf Scholz warned in a government statement to the parliament on Wednesday. The opposition has branded his plan “financial trickery” and vowed to never let it happen. Scholz’s coalition government has just reached a deal on its 2024 budget following weeks of tense negotiations. The cabinet agreed to keep existing debt restrictions while cutting the operational costs of various departments and slashing certain climate-related subsidies. Further military and financial aid to Kiev was still named as one of Berlin’s top priorities, alongside Germany’s green-economy transformation and the strengthening of social cohesion.

“I will advocate sustainable, reliable support for Ukraine, because it is about the security of Europe,” Scholz told the Lower House of parliament, the Bundestag. According to the chancellor, Berlin plans to spend €8 billion ($8.63 billion) on arms for Kiev next year, along with an unspecified amount of money allocated for financial aid to the Ukrainian budget, and another €6 billion ($6.47 billion) to support Ukrainian refugees living in Germany. He also admitted that international support for Kiev was waning and might force Berlin to spend even more of its funds to aid Ukraine. Russia is supposedly counting on Kiev’s Western backers abandoning Ukraine, he added, and “the danger that calculation could work cannot be dismissed.”

“It is… clear that, if the situation worsens… because other supporters withdraw their aid, then we have to react to it,” Scholz explained, adding that doing so might require the government to trigger a special emergency clause and circumvent legislation on the national debt. “We have already decided to propose a debt-brake exception resolution in the Bundestag” in case of such a development, the chancellor said. Enacted in 2009, a fiscal rule known as the ‘debt brake’ in Germany limits the national budget deficit to 0.35% of the GDP and restricts the issuance of new government bonds. A special clause still allows the government to bypass these restrictions in case of an “unforeseen emergency.”

Scholz’s cabinet already faced what was called a “no-debt crisis” in November when the German constitutional court ruled its 2024 budget to be illegal due to violating this debt-brake rule and banned the government from repurposing unused Covid-19 funds. The chancellor’s plan was blasted by the opposition as “financial trickery” as lawmakers accused him of essentially abusing the legal loopholes to push for more aid for Kiev. “What you have presented as an orderly procedure has been a tangible government crisis,” Friedrich Merz, the leader of the biggest opposition party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), said in response to Scholz. “We won’t let this trick go through,” he added. The CDU chief also said that the situation in Ukraine was becoming increasingly “more dramatic.” “You know that, under the current circumstances, this country has no chance at all of winning this war,” he told Scholz.

Read more …

“..we are going to have 40-50 million Americans that are going to land really hard and probably 10 million of them are just going to splatter on the concrete.”

Economist: Biden Admin Pushing US Towards ‘Economic Suicide’ (Sp.)

On Wednesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky left the United States without securing a significant military aid package for his country, having to instead be satisfied with $200 million worth of old equipment from the Defense Department’s stocks. Speaking to Sputnik’s Fault Lines, economist Mark Frost explained how the economic situation in the United States is making further aid to Ukraine untenable politically. “I’m an economist. I’m not known for analyzing political sentiment but just anecdotally […] people who used to be hawks are now doing a second take, saying ‘wait a minute, what are we getting for this?’” Frost explained. “It seems to me this administration is alienating the very demographics that got them elected in the first place […] folks are saying “okay, we’re citizens, why don’t we matter?’”

Frost also told hosts Jamarl Thomas and Melik Abdul that if US President Joe Biden gets the $60 billion or more that he requested from Congress for Ukraine, “it would be the largest transfer of wealth to a country since World War II.” The United States has squandered the opportunity it had to focus on internal issues after the Cold War, Frost added. “I’m waiting for my peace dividends,” Frost explained. “Folks old enough to remember what it was like when the wall came down on the Soviet Union, we all were happy, at least most of us were. […] ‘Finally, this stupid Cold War that wastes so many resources [is over], we can reduce our military expenditures now, we can keep a credible nuclear threat, keep a reasonable Army, Air Force and Navy and now we can concentrate on our internal problems, we don’t have the boogie man of the USSR anymore to worry about.’ And it never, ever happened.”

The money spent on Ukraine and its coming collapse will be a “driving issue” in the 2024 Presidential election, Frost added. He then noted that in addition to hard economic indicators that are pointing downwards, the behaviors of the people on the street are even more troubling. “I run the local Humane Society here and pet abandonments are at an all-time high. People show up and say ‘I can’t afford my cats and dogs, can you take them?’ and that tells me, combined with all the macroeconomic leading indicators that we’re heading into a severe recession, to the point where you might even use the depression word, and if that happens[…] no one is going to care about Iran.”

Frost, who said that he has voted for more Democrats in his life than Republicans, explained that what the Biden administration has done since taking office makes no sense from a macroeconomic perspective. “This administration gets an ‘F’ in macroeconomics. I’m trying to think of anything they’ve done that has made economic sense with respect to doing what’s best for the country. I cannot think of another administration that has been worse,” Frost said. Thomas asked Frost about US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen’s comments that the US economy was coming in for a “soft landing” after two years of historic inflation.

“I have no doubt that Janet Yellen’s people are going to land soft. I have zero doubt I’m going to land soft,” Frost explained. “The problem is, we are going to have 40-50 million Americans that are going to land really hard and probably 10 million of them are just going to splatter on the concrete.” “What are they trying to do, what is the endgame here?” Frost asked. “I cannot understand it because everything we are doing, to me, is economic suicide.” He added that he does not believe the official rate of inflation, which has fallen to 3%. “Remember when the government is measuring this, they use economic tricks, and they weigh certain variables,” Frost explained. “If they determine something is ‘volatile’ then they weigh that lower in the averaging process than they do something that they say is stable, but if you look at regular people’s expenditures on bacon, eggs, stuff like that, the prices are still going up.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Efficacy

 

 

 

 

Roar

 

 


In 1983 Steve Jobs replied to a letter saying he didn’t sign autographs. It sold at auction in 2021 for $500k.

 

 

Humpback

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 072023
 


Vincent van Gogh Self-Portrait with Straw Hat Aug-Sep 1887

 

Amid Fear of Trump ‘Dictatorship’, Some See Assassination (Robert Bridge)
The ‘Jan. 6 Jurisprudence’ About to Be Unleashed on Trump (Julie Kelly)
Israel Headed for Strategic Defeat in Gaza (Scott Ritter)
Erdogan Sees Netanyahu Balancing On Brink Of Collapse (TASS)
Putin Visits to UAE, Saudi Arabia Prompted by Global Dynamics of Gaza War (Sp.)
Russia Will Attack NATO – Biden (RT)
US Is Withholding Aid To Push Ukraine Towards Negotiations With Russia (MoA)
Is Ukraine Aid ‘Dead’? (Sp.)
Yellen Says Ukraine’s Defeat Would Be Fault of the US (Sp.)
US Aid To Ukraine Laundered Back To Military-Industrial Complex – Massie (RT)
Ukraine Won’t Get Operational Pause in Winter – Scott Ritter (Sp.)
Ramaswamy in GOP Presidential Debate Says Ukraine Conflict ‘Pointless’ (Sp.)
Hunter Biden Threatened With Contempt Of Congress If He Bails On Testimony
US State Dept Sued For Conspiring To Censor American Media Companies (ZH)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UNDER THE CLOUDS OF WAR, IT IS HUMANITY HANGING ON THE CROSS OF IRON

 

 

Nap/Ritter

 

 

 

 

Ireland

 

 

Escobar

 

 

 

 

First thing they did was try to undo everything Trump did.

“..by the end of his ninth day at the White House, Biden had signed 40 executive orders, actions, and presidential memorandum – an all-time record..”

Amid Fear of Trump ‘Dictatorship’, Some See Assassination (Robert Bridge)

As polls show Donald Trump has taken a broad lead over U.S. President Joe Biden in five battleground states, the Liberal media has shifted into full-panic mode, while making some not-so-subtle calls for the Orange Man’s ‘elimination.’ Whether real or imagined, Washington, D.C. appears to be heading for its own ‘Caesarian moment’ as the mainstream media is talking up the prospects of a dictatorship descending upon the fair land should a Trump restoration come to pass. “Are you afraid of a Donald Trump dictatorship,” asked Greg Sargent in an opinion piece in The Washington Post. “Well, know this: The only thing you have to fear is fear of Tyrannus Trumpus itself.”

Brace yourself, dear reader, for the remainder of the hit piece is littered with no less preposterous forms of government rule to describe Donald Trump, without ever providing an iota of proof to support the claims: “authoritarian rule,” “full-blown autocracy,” Trumpian tyranny,” “dictatorial intentions,” “despotism,” “threat to democracy,” “antidemocratic menace,” violent coup.” and “autocratic threat.” It’s just a little ironic that for all the Liberal handwringing over the possibility of The Donald seizing “autocratic powers” come November, there was no such consternation when Joe Biden behaved worse than any Caligula just hours after being elected in 2020.

The septuagenarian leader, alone at his desk and donning a black mask, signed off on dozens of executive orders that served as a death sentence for: a viable U.S.-Mexico border wall; the $9 billion, 1,200-mile Keystone XL pipeline from Canada that would have made America energy independent; biological males from using the female bathrooms and changing rooms, and a raft of other issues that were resolved without an ounce of congressional debate. Incredibly, by the end of his ninth day at the White House, Biden had signed 40 executive orders, actions, and presidential memorandum – an all-time record. Despite all of this, Biden is now acting like he is the Maginot Line against the possibility of all-out tyranny/ authoritarianism/ dictatorship/ autocracy, take your pick.

“If Trump wasn’t running, I’m not sure I’d be running. But we cannot let him win,” the 81-year-old Democrat told a fundraiser event in Massachusetts. In a cloud of self-righteousness and grand delusion, the Liberals sincerely believe that Trump is about to enjoy, in the words of Robert Kagan, the premier neocon who co-wrote the infamous tract Project for a New American Century, “a clear path to dictatorship in the United States, and it is getting shorter every day.” Unfortunately, Kagan didn’t think to apply the brakes there, but went on to provide an apocalyptic-sounding fender-bender that many people took as the latest call to ‘take out’ Trump, the upcoming “president for life.”

“Are we going to do anything about it? To shift metaphors, if we thought there was a 50 percent chance of an asteroid crashing into North America a year from now, would we be content to hope that it wouldn’t? Or would we be taking every conceivable measure to try to stop it, including many things that might not work but that, given the magnitude of the crisis, must be tried anyway?” [..] Maybe Trump, should he be re-elected, will focus his attention on media harassment. In the meantime, however, he seems to be having fun trolling his opponents. Trump mocked questions about ‘dictatorial rule’ this week, saying he would be a dictator only on “day one,” and then he’s going to shut down the border and get to drilling for oil. “After that, I’m not a dictator, OK?” It’s tempting to ask how the ancient Romans would have responded to such a deal.

Read more …

“..Washington “is the worst possible place for any Jan. 6 defendant, but especially Donald Trump, to have a trial.”

The ‘Jan. 6 Jurisprudence’ About to Be Unleashed on Trump (Julie Kelly)

Defense attorneys have coined the term “January 6 Jurisprudence” to describe the treatment received by the more than 1,200 defendants arrested so far in connection with the events of Jan. 6, 2021. This carve-out legal system involves the unprecedented and possibly unlawful use of a corporate evidence-tampering statute; excessive prison sentences and indefinite periods of pretrial incarceration; and the designation of nonviolent offenses as federal crimes of terrorism. A universal feature is the requirement that a Jan. 6 defendant, usually a supporter of Donald Trump, face trial in Washington, D.C., a city overwhelmingly populated by Democrats. Federal judges have denied every change of venue motion filed in Jan. 6 cases, arguing those who protested at the Capitol can get a fair trial in the nation’s capital. The results so far appear to contradict the court’s collective conclusion.

Court records show the jury selection process has repeatedly revealed a strong degree of bias against anyone tied to Jan. 6. At least 130 defendants have been convicted at trial – not one has been acquitted by a jury – and hundreds have been sentenced to prison time ranging from seven days to 22 years. Defense lawyers say this track record helps explain why the vast majority of defendants have opted for a plea deal rather than go to trial. This is the same environment that now awaits the former president as he prepares to stand trial in Washington on March 4, 2024 for election interference, in addition to an array of criminal and civil cases against him elsewhere. While Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team and Trump’s counsel spar over a number of issues, perhaps the biggest dispute will concern whether it will be possible to seat an impartial jury for the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee in a city that voted 92% for Joe Biden in 2020.

After Smith indicted Trump in August, a Jan. 6 defense attorney who is not representing the former president, J. Daniel Hull, told the New York Times that Washington “is the worst possible place for any Jan. 6 defendant, but especially Donald Trump, to have a trial.” U.S. District Court Judge Tanya S. Chutkan recently set a jury selection schedule for Smith’s four-count indictment against Trump for the events of Jan. 6. She ordered both parties to begin developing a questionnaire, due Jan. 9, 2024, that hundreds of D.C. residents will be asked to complete so the court can begin the initial step of weeding out unqualified jurors. Stakes are high for both sides. Trump’s lawyers must navigate constraints on how many jurors can be stricken from consideration to ensure their client gets a fair trial. The Department of Justice must convince the American people that a case brought by a Democratic administration and handled by a Democratic-appointed judge with a record of inflammatory statements about the former president will be heard by unbiased jurors.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees, among other rights, “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” In extreme cases, criminal defendants can petition to move their trial out of the prosecuting jurisdiction for a number of reasons, not the least of which is sustained, negative press coverage that taints the jury pool. Trump’s lawyers are not discussing their strategy publicly, but sources have indicated to RealClearInvestigations that the defense will file a change of venue motion in the next month or two. Given the partisan composition of Washington, saturation coverage of the former president’s ongoing legal woes, and the city’s relatively small population, Trump will have a strong argument in favor of moving the trial outside of the nation’s capital. Yet a review of Jan. 6 cases to date suggests the odds are against that. Not a single judge on the D.C. District Court has granted a change of venue motion even for high-profile trials such as those for members of the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, the so-called “militia” groups involved in the Capitol protest

Read more …

“War, the Prussian strategist Carl von Clausewitz famously noted, is politics by other means. Hamas has proven the maxim to its fullest extent, accomplishing politically that which could only be initiated by Israel’s criminal use of force against the Palestinian people.”

Israel Headed for Strategic Defeat in Gaza (Scott Ritter)

The attack carried out by Hamas on October 7 against Israeli military positions and settlements which, collectively, formed what is known as the “Gaza barrier system”, triggered a massive Israeli military response. There are two aspects of this cause-and-effect relationship that stand out. First, and perhaps most importantly, it was the goal and objective of Hamas to have Israel respond impulsively. Hamas did not have to think out of the box, so to speak, to imagine such a reaction—since 2006, it has been established and well-known Israeli policy to conduct military campaign based upon the premise of collective punishment of a civilian population. Moreover, given the Israeli predilection for revenge that dates to the massacre of Israeli athletes during the 1972 Munich summer Olympics, a massive military incursion into Gaza to hold to account those responsible for the October 7 attacks was likewise as predictable as snow falling in Siberia in the wintertime.

Second, and less predictable than the first, was the poor performance of the Israeli security establishment, including the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) and Israeli intelligence. Not only did the Israeli security forces fail to act on what appears to have been ample evidence pointing to a Hamas attack along the lines of that executed on October 7, but once the Hamas attack began, the failure of the IDF to defend against the attack, and the plodding, indiscriminate nature of the Israeli counterattack, which appears to have inflicted significant casualties on Israeli civilians that the Israeli authorities have attributed to the Hamas attackers, seriously eroded the notion of the invincibility and infallibility of the Israeli military and security establishment. But this was only the beginning of what would amount to a strategic Israeli defeat at the hands of Hamas. The Israelis proceeded to mobilize some 300,000 reservists, most of whom were sent to the Gaza front.

While these forces were assembled, the Israeli Air Force began a bombing campaign against the civilian infrastructure of Gaza, including hospitals, mosques, schools, and refugee camps, which shocked the world in terms of its lethality. By ignoring the fundamental precepts of international humanitarian law, Israel allowed itself to be characterized as a practitioner of genocide, and its actions against Gaza as war crimes. This is the core of the Hamas victory—the political defeat of Israel on the global stage, where international sympathies rapidly aligned with the people of Gaza and Palestine, and away from Israel. War, the Prussian strategist Carl von Clausewitz famously noted, is politics by other means. Hamas has proven the maxim to its fullest extent, accomplishing politically that which could only be initiated by Israel’s criminal use of force against the Palestinian people.

But even as international pressure began to accumulate for Israel to halt its offensive, Hamas was able to achieve what many outside observers had believed to be unthinkable—it fought the IDF to a standstill in Gaza itself, inflicting significant human and material losses on the IDF. After declaring that Israel would never agree to a ceasefire or an exchange of prisoners with Hamas, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suddenly caved into international pressure to sign up for what became a six-day “pause” where humanitarian goods were delivered to the Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and Palestinian prisoners held by Israel were exchanged for hostages seized by Hamas on October 7.

One of the major reasons for this decision lay not in the extreme pressure being put on Israel by the United States and its European allies for such an outcome, but the fact that the IDF was suffering serious losses on the battlefield in Gaza and along Israel’s northern border with Lebanon, where Hezbollah was engaged in military operations in support of Hamas. The casualties among Israeli main battle tanks were unsustainable, and the morale of the IDF soldiers was collapsing—indeed, Israel had to courts-martial two IDF officers who withdrew their battalion from the Gaza battlefield under pressure from Hamas.

Ritter

Read more …

“This coalition is breaking apart. Don’t think that they are strong, they will quit [politics]. We already said 50 to 60 days ago that Netanyahu is going away..”

Erdogan Sees Netanyahu Balancing On Brink Of Collapse (TASS)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is balancing on the verge of collapse, something that he may indicate any time soon, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said. “Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu is on the brink of collapse or bankruptcy right now. And he may make such an announcement at any moment,” the state-run Anadolu agency quoted the Turkish president as saying upon returning from Qatar. “And then there is the West which connives with the wrongdoings of both Netanyahu and his administration. Fortunately, the West has largely reconsidered its view of Israel since October 7,” Erdogan told Turkish journalists.

Erdogan described the ruling coalition in Israel as unhealthy. “This coalition is breaking apart. Don’t think that they are strong, they will quit [politics]. We already said 50 to 60 days ago that Netanyahu is going away,” the Turkish leader said. “Now, certain people emerge who are telling Israel: ‘We are tired of feeding you’,” he maintained. “Look at France that in the early days was making statements of support [for Israel]. Now French President [Emmanuel] Macron is making completely different statements,” the Turkish president said. “Many other Western countries, too, are no longer making the statements of the kind they were making in the first days [of the conflict],” Erdogan noted as he urged patience before the world revisits its attitude toward Israel’s actions.

Read more …

“For the Gulf States, relations with Russia are seen as an essential leverage in adapting to their changing relationship with the US..”

Putin Visits to UAE, Saudi Arabia Prompted by Global Dynamics of Gaza War (Sp.)

Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in the United Arab Emirates on Wednesday to meet with UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and discuss bilateral, regional, and international affairs. As part of his brief Middle East tour, the Russian leader is also visiting Saudi Arabia, while later hosting Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in Moscow. Vladimir Putin’s visit to the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia could be used by the Arab countries “as a signal, perhaps to the West,” to show that “we have other options and we’re not really happy with your policy towards Gaza,” Abdulaziz Algashian, a Saudi political analyst, told Sputnik. The Russian President’s trip to the Middle East comes amid turbulent developments in the region, with the Russian leader acutely aware of the “international dynamics of the Gaza war,” pointed out Algashian. He added that the Arab countries might seek to “leverage this visit and relations with Russia” relative to the Palestinian issue.

“For the Gulf States, relations with Russia are seen as an essential leverage in adapting to their changing relationship with the US,” agreed Sami Hamdi, Saudi political analyst and head of the International Interest, a risk analysis group. “There are concerns in the Gulf capitals that the US is no longer committed to their security or their interests, and there is therefore a belief that relations with Russia are essential in order to both advance their interests by pursuing alternative alliance structures and simultaneously strongarm Washington into upholding its commitment to them,” he pointed out. Looking ahead, “the extent of future cooperation with Russia as it stands remains dependent on the nature of the US-Gulf relationship. Although Gulf States will preserve their ties, the eagerness to expand those ties will correlate and fluctuate in accordance with the nature of their relationship with the US,” the Saudi political analyst speculated.

On a broader scale, there are a wide swathe of reasons for why Vladimir Putin chose this moment to embark upon his first foray to the region since 2019, underscored Algashian, a research fellow with SEPAD international research network and collaborative project based at Lancaster University’s Richardson Institute. These range from the Middle East’s resentment over the West’s stance on Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza to a need for further “entrenching” of economic relations, the pundit stressed.

Read more …

“Washington’s speculations about a potential stand-off show that “[US] authorities have finally lost touch with reality..”

Russia Will Attack NATO – Biden (RT)

If Russia prevails in the Ukraine conflict, it may find itself in a position to launch an attack on NATO that could trigger a global conflict involving American troops, US President Joe Biden said on Wednesday, when he urged Congress to pass a $111 billion national security package. The bill, which was backed by Democrats, included aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. He also lashed out at Republicans – who have been reluctant to support the measure due to disputes over security at the southern US border, saying that by doing so, they “are willing to give [Russian President Vladimir] Putin the greatest gift he could hope for.” “If Putin takes Ukraine, he won’t stop there,” Biden argued. “If Putin attacks a NATO ally…, well, we’ve committed as a NATO member that we’d defend every inch of NATO territory,” he stated, adding that Washington would like to avert this kind of a stand-off because it could result in “American troops fighting Russian troops.”

However, Republicans remained unconvinced, blocking the spending package in the Senate, with the final vote being 49 in favor and 51 against. The measure was opposed by all GOP lawmakers, as well as independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who normally votes with Democrats, but this time expressed concerns about Israel’s military strategy in the conflict with Hamas. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also voted “no” in order to have a chance to reintroduce the package later. Moscow’s ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov, commenting on Biden’s remarks about a potential clash between Russia and NATO, suggested that “such bogeyman stories are fabricated in order to justify to taxpayers and sober-minded political forces the huge expenses for ‘containing’ the Russian Federation.” Washington’s speculations about a potential stand-off show that “[US] authorities have finally lost touch with reality,” he added. “This kind of provocative rhetoric is unacceptable for a responsible nuclear state.”

Biden

Read more …

“..the Republicans as well as the Democrats, likely in consent with the White House, have so far blocked all further aid.”

US Is Withholding Aid To Push Ukraine Towards Negotiations With Russia (MoA)

It would have been easy for the Democrats to commit a few billions for border security. But Biden wants to end the war in Ukraine. Starving it of money is the easiest way to push it towards negotiations. All this was planned by the Pentagon think tank RAND which, early this year, published a study about how to end the war in Ukraine: “Avoiding a Long War – U.S. Policy and the Trajectory of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict” (A 2019 study by RAND, Extending Russia – Competing from Advantageous Ground, had recommended to openly arm Ukraine to keep Russia busy. It has been the basis of U.S. Ukraine policy ever since.)

But in early 2023 RAND had turned a corner and argued that a prolonged war in Ukraine will be too costly for the U.S. to sustain: “The biggest Ukraine problem the White House currently has is President Vladimir Zelenski who has rejected any and all negotiations with Russia.” The RAND study had foreseen such a situation and had found ways to push Ukraine towards talks with Russia: “[T]he United States could decide to condition future military aid on a Ukrainian commitment to negotiations. Setting conditions on aid to Ukraine would address a primary source of Kyiv’s optimism that may be prolonging the war: a belief that Western aid will continue indefinitely or grow in quality and quantity. At the same time, the United States could also promise more aid for the postwar period to address Ukraine’s fears about the durability of peace. Washington has done so in other cases, …”

Linking aid to Ukrainian willingness to negotiate has been anathema in Western policy discussions and for good reason: Ukraine is defending itself against unprovoked Russian aggression. However, the U.S. calculus may change as the costs and risks of the war mount. And the use of this U.S. lever can be calibrated. For example, the United States could level off aid, not dramatically reduce it, if Ukraine does not negotiate. And, again, a decision to level off wartime support pending negotiations can be made in tandem with promises about postwar sustained increases in assistance over the long term. That was a nice plan. But how well the aid lever can be calibrated depends of course on Congress, not on the president’s say so.

There are also downsides to withholding or giving aid promises: “Clarifying the future of U.S. aid to Ukraine could create perverse incentives depending on how the policy is implemented. Committing to increased wartime assistance to Ukraine to reduce Russian optimism could embolden the Ukrainians to obstruct negotiations, blame failure on Moscow, and gain more Western support. Announcing a decrease or leveling off in assistance to Ukraine to reduce Kyiv’s optimism about the war could lead Russia to see the move as a signal of waning U.S. support for Ukraine. If it took this view, Russia might keep fighting in the hope that the United States would give up on Ukraine entirely. Although recognizing that Ukraine is fighting a defensive war for survival and Russia an aggressive war of aggrandizement, the United States would nonetheless have to carefully and dispassionately monitor events and target its efforts to create the intended effect on whichever side’s optimism is determined to be the key impediment to starting talks.

This would probably have been a good way to go if Biden had control over dispensing or withholding funds to Kiev. But the Republicans as well as the Democrats, likely in consent with the White House, have so far blocked all further aid. Their current path then seems to be a different one towards negotiations with Russia – regime change in Kiev. President Zelenski is unwilling to take up peace talks. If he can be pushed out of office during the next few months his likely replacement, General Zaluzny, will probably be more inclined to seek an end of the war. Thus the current tactic is to pressure Zelenski into leaving by withholding all future funds. If another Ukrainian leader comes in, aid might again flow to prevent a total takeover of the country by Russia. Still – the aid calibration would be a problem. So maybe giving up and leave, as Biden did in Afghanistan, might be the preferred option.

Read more …

“We remember the old quotes about the money being carted around in Iraq on palettes and not even weighed or metered… I think that that’s what’s happening again in Ukraine.”

Is Ukraine Aid ‘Dead’? (Sp.)

Investigative journalist Christopher Helali joined Sputnik’s Political Misfits program Wednesday to discuss the growing opposition within the United States towards continued funding for Ukraine’s proxy conflict against Russia. The reported size of the latest proposed foreign aid package – some $110.5 billion – provoked incredulity from host John Kiriakou. “What has the United States not given Ukraine that would have such an enormous price tag?” asked Kirkiakou. Helali said that the “aid package is not only military assistance but also funding for rebuilding, for infrastructure… it’s funding for Ukraine, it’s funding for Israel, it’s also… a very small amount for the Palestinians.”
However Helali clarified that “Ukraine is at the forefront,” noting that the lion’s share of funding in the bill was earmarked for the Kiev regime.

“This is funding for rearmament, for new weapons systems, and things like that,” the analyst stressed. Rampant corruption in Ukraine has repeatedly stymied aspirations to join the European Union and other international bodies. Some Western politicians also point out the very high level of corruption in Ukraine. The business dealings of Hunter Biden in Ukraine, the son of US President Joe Biden, have also come under harsh criticism. President Biden has claimed he had no involvement in his son’s business ventures. “But of course there’s no real oversight,” added Helali, “there’s been a lot of reporting – I’m sure you’ve all been seeing it – about the rampant corruption, some officials have been buying yachts and houses and all sorts of fine luxury items. I think it’s going to be held up because there’s a lot of questions around this amount of money.”

Helali noted the large amounts of money that have gone unaccounted for in previous US-backed military operations, saying, “We remember the old quotes about the money being carted around in Iraq on palettes and not even weighed or metered… I think that that’s what’s happening again in Ukraine.” Funding for Ukraine did in fact fail in the US Senate on Wednesday when the legislative body refused to advance a supplemental foreign aid bill. Republican legislators, led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Mike Johnson, have used the opportunity to call for increased funding for US border security to secure GOP support.

Helali said that increased border funding is a nonstarter for segments of the Democratic Party base, claiming they see US border policy as an ““instrument of oppression” and a “remnant of colonialism and US empire.” The journalist nevertheless believes the Biden administration will be forced to compromise on the issue, claiming, “I think eventually Democrats will have to cave because they need this funding.”

Read more …

Meet the new war expert.

Yellen Says Ukraine’s Defeat Would Be Fault of the US (Sp.)

US lawmakers are debating a $111 billion supplemental spending package, of which $61 billion would be included for Ukraine. The spending package would also include funding for Israel, Taiwan, and US border security. During a trip to Mexico City on Tuesday, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the US would be responsible for Ukraine’s defeat should Congress fail to approve US President Joe Biden’s latest supplemental spending package, according to media reports. “I’ve talked to members of Congress, my colleagues have. I think they understand this, that this is a dire situation and we can hold ourselves responsible for Ukraine’s defeat if we don’t manage to get this funding to Ukraine that’s needed, and I’m including direct budget support here because that’s utterly essential,” Yellen told the media.

At the US Institute of Peace this week, Andrey Yermak, President Vladimir Zelensky’s chief of staff, said not receiving this most recent spending package from the US exposes Ukraine to a “big risk” in losing its war. The package would include $61 billion to Ukraine, which is nearly as much as the US has already spent on helping to weaponize the country. The US government has spent more than $75 billion on Ukraine thus far, a figure that does not include all war-related spending which is estimated to be about $113 billion. “Ukraine is just running out of money,” Yellen said. “They’re spending more than every penny they’re taking in, in tax revenue, on military salaries and defense, and they wouldn’t have any schools or hospital or first responders if not for the money we’re sending to them to support them,” added the US Treasury Secretary.

[..] US House Speaker Mike Johnson said Republican support for the Biden Administration latest supplemental spending package will have to include permanent changes to the US border policy. Before any further spending, wrote Johnson, funding is first dependent upon “enactment of transformative change to our nation’s border security laws”. “Second,” Johnson wrote in a letter to Young, “Congress and the American people must be provided with answers to our repeated questions concerning: the Administration’s strategy to prevail in Ukraine; clearly defined and obtainable objectives; transparency and accountability for U.S. taxpayer dollars invested there; and what specific resources are required to achieve victory and a sustainable peace.”

Read more …

“But no one mentions that we have abetted the killing of an entire generation of Ukrainian men that will not be replaced. To fight a war that they cannot win..”

US Aid To Ukraine Laundered Back To Military-Industrial Complex – Massie (RT)

The US Congress is continuing to vote in favor of sending billions of dollars to Ukraine because a lot of those funds end up being laundered back to the US military-industrial complex, Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie has said. In an interview with Tucker Carlson on X (formerly Twitter) published on Wednesday, the politician was asked to explain why Washington continued to push for more funding for Ukraine despite it becoming obvious that Kiev’s forces “cannot win.” Massie, who has repeatedly voted against sending money to fund Kiev’s operations, alleged that a lot of the funds that are sent to Ukraine ultimately end up “enriching” people within specific US districts and “stockholders, some of whom are congressmen.”

“You know, people are getting rich, so let’s do it. It’s an immoral argument, but it is one. But that’s not the argument they’re making in public,” he said, noting that those supporting the funding of Ukraine with US tax dollars are instead arguing that it is a “moral obligation” to do so. “You’re a bad person if you’re against this,” he complained, referring to a statement recently made by US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, who suggested that failing to support “the fight for freedom in Ukraine” meant letting Russian President Vladimir Putin “prevail.” “But no one mentions that we have abetted the killing of an entire generation of Ukrainian men that will not be replaced. To fight a war that they cannot win,” Massie noted.

The congressman surmised that, in order to support the US government’s proposals on Ukraine aid, a person has to be “economically illiterate and morally deficient.” Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden has hit out against Republicans like Massie, who have refused to aid packages to Ukraine, calling the failure to support Kiev “absolutely crazy” and “against US interests.” The US leader has repeatedly pledged that Washington would support Kiev for “as long as it takes” in its conflict with Russia.

Read more …

“..The goal and objective of Russia is demilitarization. Demilitarization could have been done peacefully. Right now it’s being done violently. And it means the absolute destruction of the Ukrainian military. And that is going to happen this winter. It will be destroyed in its totality.”

Ukraine Won’t Get Operational Pause in Winter – Scott Ritter (Sp.)

It was expected that Zelensky would inform American congressmen about the latest developments on the ground in Ukraine and urge them to disburse over $60 billion for Ukraine.On the same day, the upper chamber failed to vote on a Ukraine aid bill because Democrats threw out GOP border reforms from it. In response, Republicans made it clear that they will not support any further assistance to Kiev unless border measures are included in the legislation. Meanwhile, the current Ukraine military package has almost been exhausted. There are also rumors in the Western press that NATO allies want Zelensky either to hold the talks or to freeze the conflict along the line of contact. Will the Kiev regime be forced to take a pause during the winter season?

“Well, what we won’t see is a pause,” Scott Ritter, former Marine intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector, told Sputnik. “I mean, the Ukrainians and even the collective West, they’re throwing terms out there like: ‘You know, it’s a frozen conflict. We fought them to a standstill.’ No, it’s not a frozen conflict and they haven’t fought the Russians to a standstill. Last winter, you know, the Ukrainians had their victory in Kharkov and Kherson. The Russians were consolidating their defenses, they had mobilized 300,000 men, and they were building the defenses. And so there was a pause that allowed [Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Gen. Valery] Zaluzhny to plan an operation. They had the luxury of time to build the nine, I think they actually built 12 brigades, equipped them, prepared them for this counteroffensive, etc.”

“Right now, we have a situation where the Russians are ready. Those 300,000 are fully trained. The majority of them have not been committed to the battlefield. In addition to that, over 450,000 volunteers and contract soldiers were absorbed. The Russians are at full strength with all the equipment, all the wherewithal. There will be no operational pause. The Ukrainians, on the other hand, have nothing to replace what’s happening. They’re now literally grabbing teenagers and pregnant women and putting them on the battlefield to fill the holes in the lines. There’s nothing coming behind, and the West is out of money. There’s no equipment. The Russians are not going to hit the pause button to give Ukraine a chance to catch their breath. The entire purpose of the Russian approach has been to grind the Ukrainians down to the point of exhaustion. And now we’re there.” [..] nobody is going to give Ukraine a pause, according to Ritter. While Moscow has repeatedly made it clear that it is open to constructive peace negotiations, the absence of Kiev’s initiative would mean the prolongation of the conflict, the former Marine officer believes.

“We’re going to see increasingly the elimination of cohesion on the battlefield as Ukrainians will retreat, as holes will be punched in the line. The Ukrainians are, I believe, in a very short period of time, going to be compelled to make a precipitous retreat back to more defensive positions. And that in itself is a very difficult military maneuver, one which Russia could exploit. You know, if they’re prepared to push them back even further, but this winter will be a winter of continued death and destruction for the Ukrainians. And the Russians will continue to put the pedal to the metal and keep putting the pressure on the Ukrainians. The goal and objective of Russia is demilitarization. Demilitarization could have been done peacefully. Right now it’s being done violently. And it means the absolute destruction of the Ukrainian military. And that is going to happen this winter. It will be destroyed in its totality.”

Read more …

Nikki=Corrupt

Ramaswamy in GOP Presidential Debate Says Ukraine Conflict ‘Pointless’ (Sp.)

US entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy during the fourth Republican primary presidential debate said the Ukraine conflict is pointless and slammed former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley for not backing efforts to reach a peace deal. “I was the first person to say we need a reasonable peace deal in Ukraine. Now a lot of the neocons are quietly coming along to that position, with the exceptions of Nikki Haley and [President] Joe Biden, who still support what I believe is a pointless war in Ukraine,” Ramaswamy said on Tuesday during the debate in Alabama. Ramaswamy and Haley were joined on stage by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie in what some expect to be the final debate of the 2024 primary. Haley maintains 9% support in the Republican Party primary, trailing former US President Donald Trump’s 64% support and DeSantis’ 16% support, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released in November.

Vivek Nikki
https://twitter.com/i/status/1732592114603794574

Read more …

“Hunter Biden is trying to play by his own rules instead of following the rules required of everyone else..”

Hunter Biden Threatened With Contempt Of Congress If He Bails On Testimony

Hunter Biden will be slapped with contempt of congress if he skips out on his Dec. 13 closed-door deposition, according to a Wednesday letter from House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to Hunter’s defense attorney, Abbe D. Lowell. “Contrary to the assertions in your letter, there is no ‘choice’ for Mr. Biden to make; the subpoenas compel him to appear for a deposition on December 13. If Mr. Biden does not appear for his deposition on December 13, 2023, the Committees will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings,” reads the letter, issued a week after Lowell suggested that Hunter should instead be allowed to testify publicly.

Hunter was subpoenaed on Nov. 8 to appear for a deposition before the committee. In response, Comer said: “Hunter Biden is trying to play by his own rules instead of following the rules required of everyone else,” adding “Our lawfully issued subpoena to Hunter Biden requires him to appear for a deposition on December 13.” Comer and Jordan are investigating extensive evidence that the Biden family was running an international influence peddling scheme, raking in tens of millions of dollars from foreign business partners despite no obvious product or service in exchange. House lawmakers are also seeking testimony from Hunter’s uncle James Biden, as well as multiple former business associates.

Read more …

“”The State Department is tasked with foreign relations and has no authority over domestic affairs..”

US State Dept Sued For Conspiring To Censor American Media Companies (ZH)

Following bombshell censorship revelations exposed over the last year, beginning with the Twitter Files, the state of Texas, The Daily Wire, and The Federalist have filed a lawsuit against the US State Department on Tuesday, alleging that the government agency funded censorship technology designed to bankrupt domestic media outlets which have disfavored political opinions. According to the Daily Wire’s Luke Rosiak; “The State Department is tasked with foreign relations and has no authority over domestic affairs, yet it took a government office designed for countering foreign terrorist propaganda, the Global Engagement Center (GEC), and unleashed it against Americans engaged in what it claimed was “disinformation,” according to the lawsuit, filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas on Tuesday night by the New Civil Liberties Alliance. It was “one of the most audacious, manipulative, secretive, and gravest abuses of power and infringements of First Amendment rights by the federal government in American history,” said the suit, which also names Secretary of State Antony Blinken and five other officials as defendants.”

Of note, the GEC, founded in 2011 under a different name to combat foreign propaganda in a counterterrorism capacity. In establishing the entity, Congress made clear that “none of the funds authorized” for the program “shall be used for purposes other than countering foreign propaganda.” They of course ignored all that, and turned its focus on Americans according to the complaint, using taxpayer funds to finance and promote censorship shops such as NewsGuard and the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), which target conservative outlets – ZeroHege included – with the stated goal of killing ad revenue. “Through its Global Engagement Center, the State Department actively intervened in the news-media market to limit the reach and business viability of domestic news organizations by funding censorship technology and private censorship enterprises,” reads a Wednesday press release from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. “The State Department’s mission to obliterate the First Amendment is completely un-American. This agency will not get away with their illegal campaign to silence citizens and publications they disagree with.”

As the lawsuit explains, The Daily Wire, The Federalist, and other conservative news organizations were “branded ‘unreliable’ or ‘risky’ by the government-funded and government-promoted censorship enterprises… starving them of advertising revenue and reducing the circulation of their reporting and speech—all as a direct result of [the State Department’s] unlawful censorship scheme.” The outlets are being represented by The New Civil Liberties Alliance’s Mark Chenoweth, who said that “the federal government cannot do indirectly what the First Amendment forbids it from doing directly.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Piers Corbyn

 

 

Robert Frost

 

 

Cat paws

 

 

 

 

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