Apr 292025
 


Piet Mondriaan Trees by the Gein at Moonrise 1908

 

Stop the Digital Control Grid – Catherine Austin Fitts (USAW)
David Sacks Warns DOGE Will All Be For Nothing, Unless… (ZH)
Russians ‘Are Not Our Enemy’ – Trump Adviser David Sacks (RT)
Ukraine Won’t Win – J.D. Vance (RT)
Ukraine Eyes Teens And Women As Cannon Fodder (RT)
Forget Land – This Is Russia’s Main Demand From The West (Lukyanov)
Putin Announces 72-hour Victory Day Ceasefire (RT)
Ukraine Issues Ceasefire Demand To Russia (RT)
Ukraine Shows No Sign It Is Ready To Talk – Kremlin (RT)
Canadians Should Expect Disaster With Carney In Charge (ZH)
Federal District Courts Piling on Injunctions to Stop Trump (Turley)
Now You Know (James Howard Kunstler)
America Funded China’s Rise (Morrison)
Liberals Loathe Arrival of ‘MAGA Media’ Inside the White House (DS)
Make America Healthy Again Movement Extends Beyond RFK Jr (ET)
A HUGE Win for the Make America Healthy Again Movement (Margolis)
Robots Will Outperform Human Surgeons In Five Years – Musk (RT)

 

 

 

 

Don’t miss

Homan

Bessent
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1916879751240630535

Zel

19

 

 

 

 

She lost me a few years ago when she was endlessly talking about HUD. But this is good.

Two video’s. She was on Tucker Carlson too.

“Stop with the control grid, and we can do this. . . . If we can face it, God can fix it all.”

Stop the Digital Control Grid – Catherine Austin Fitts (USAW)

Catherine Austin Fitts (CAF), publisher of “The Solari Report,” is back to update us about the “Fast-Approaching Digital Control Grid.” (CAF) told us last time here on USAW, “There is no bigger ongoing battle for lovers of freedom than the battle taking place over the freedom killing idea of digital ID.” But it’s more that just ID, it’s an entire control grid that is being quietly built that is like a frog being put into pot and the water being brought to a boil. CAF explains, “You know our goal at Solari is each person has a free and inspired life. So, we have been working for several years to stop financial transaction control. If you get the ability to track each person and control their transactions, so if they don’t do what you say, they can turn off your money.

That is game over for the Constitution and for human liberty. If you look at how the control grid is coming together, there are many different pieces. There is digital ID, all digital currency or transaction system to a social credit system to the management to certain kinds of data and back-up energy. There are many different pieces. We look at the pieces, and we look at them as one-off things such as, oh, I don’t mind having a ‘Real ID’ because I can see why they might want a federal ID, or a passport or whatever. Each one of these things looks nonthreatening and even convenient, but when they snap together, they are in a control grid, and it’s completely something else. When Trump was elected, I was shocked to see, almost immediately, the President announce the Stargate AI initiative with the mRNA vaccines, which to me is the internet of bodies.”

CAF put together a long list of Trump Administration actions that are speeding up what looks like a control grid. It’s called “The Fast-Approaching Digital Control Grid.” It lists things such as crypto friendly currency actions, private Central Bank Digital Currency, shrinking banking sector, DOGE, undisclosed Epstein files and many more red flag items that could be used to allow crime to continue and build a digital prison for “We the People.” While the Trump Administration brings change at a record pace, not a single thing has been done to find out about the “$21 Trillion Missing Money” that has been well documented by CAF and Michigan State Professor Dr. Mark Skidmore. The money has been stolen from America, and the silence about this is deafening.

CAF says, “We know there has been tremendous fraud in the financials of the US government. We know that has happened. If you look at all the things that you or I would do to figure out what had happened, where the money went and how do we get it back, that’s not what they are doing. . . . If you look at how we would do a successful operation to reengineer government and identify the real fraud and stop it, I don’t see any indication that they are doing that. I do see some selected efforts that are probably sincere. . . . They are shutting things down lots of us would like to see shut down. . . . We know how to stop the death and disabilities that come from the Covid 19 vax injection, but you go the CDC website, and they are still recommending the Covid injections.”

The massive crime going on with government accounting makes it necessary for the control grid. CAF explains, “What happened in the last Trump Administration is they adopted FASAB 56. FASAB 56 basically said they could take the books of the US government dark. A secret group of people, by a secret process, could remove operations from the financial statement, and they don’t have to tell people what they removed. So, we have no idea what is in the financials. . . . This includes the big banks and contractors who do business with the government. So, looking at the US stock market and bond market, I have no idea what is true or not. . . . We are flying blind.”

CAF still likes gold for an investment. She is also very bullish on silver as it takes about 100 ounces of silver to buy a single ounce of gold. The gold/silver ratio is at record spreads. CAF says, “At some point, the gold/silver ratio will revert to something more sensible.” In closing, CAF says, “Everyone tell your Senator and Congressman and President Trump on X or Truth Social stop the control grid. Stop with the control grid, and we can do this. . . . If we can face it, God can fix it all.”

Tucker CAF

Read more …

Time for Congress to step up.

David Sacks Warns DOGE Will All Be For Nothing, Unless… (ZH)

AI & Crypto Czar David Sacks warns that Elon Musk’s efforts to expose waste and abuse at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) may be futile unless Congress significantly reduces federal spending. “What we really need is for Congress to now embrace all of the corruption that Elon has found and eliminate it from the budget, because at the end of the day, in order to capture the savings here, we do need those appropriations eliminated from the budget,” Sacks said on the All-In podcast. Sacks warned that the real danger isn’t Musk backing down, but Congress slipping back into its entrenched pattern of reckless spending. “These old bulls in Congress who control the appropriations process—are they going to basically backslide and just put the spending back in because it’s easier to engage in this logrolling, or do we take advantage of this?” he asked.

Sacks emphasized the immense personal cost Musk has borne to reveal systemic corruption, citing the widespread protests targeting Tesla properties. “This has cost him enormously. One of the reasons why Tesla is down is because you’ve had crazy leftists engaging in terrorism, firebombing Tesla dealerships,” the Trump official said. “We’ve basically learned that this whole NGO thing is a giant scam where the people in government give enormous amounts of money to their friends, probably with the expectation that when they leave government, they’re going to be next in line at the trough.” Since Musk took the helm at DOGE, Tesla has been under siege from a wave of protests and brazen acts of vandalism across the U.S. and beyond, with far-left activists resorting to arson, gunfire, and defacing dealerships, vehicles, and charging stations with hateful graffiti.

The so-called “Tesla Takedown” movement has orchestrated demonstrations at hundreds of Tesla locations, pushing an anti-DOGE agenda to tank Musk’s company by calling for mass sell-offs of Tesla stock and boycotts of the brand. Sacks then stressed that while Musk has laid bare the government’s dysfunction, without decisive action from Congress to slash spending, his efforts risk being squandered. “Elon’s done an enormous service exposing this. But it’s not entirely up to him. In order for us to realize the benefit, we need Congress now to act on that. I’m afraid that’s not going to happen,” he warned.

In March, President Donald Trump threw his support behind a rescission package to implement major spending cuts spearheaded by DOGE. “It would be great. I think we’re going to do that,” Trump told reporters. According to a memo from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) obtained by the New York Post, the administration is pushing two proposals to slash $9.3 billion. “The first includes a rescission of $8.3 billion in wasteful foreign aid spending (out of $22 billion) that does not expire in Fiscal Year (FY) 2025. The second is a separate rescission of all Federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) — which funds the politically biased public radio and public television system,” the Post said.

Read more …

“Russians are not our enemy. We shouldn’t be helping to kill them..”

Russians ‘Are Not Our Enemy’ – Trump Adviser David Sacks (RT)

The White House crypto csar has rejected the notion that Ukraine is aiding the United States against its enemies by fighting Russia. Kiev has consistently asserted that it is “defending” Western nations from Russia. Vladimir Zelensky reiterated the point in a recent interview with conservative journalist Ben Shapiro, where he urged the US to act as an arms supplier rather than a diplomatic mediator and stating that Ukrainians “are fighting against your enemies, the Russians.” “Russians are not our enemy. We shouldn’t be helping to kill them,” countered David Sacks, a venture entrepreneur and White House advisor on crypto and artificial intelligence, who responded on social media on Sunday to a clip from the interview.

Sacks has long criticized US support for Kiev, characterizing it as an attempt to transform the Ukraine conflict into a “forever war.” Zelensky has argued that modern Russia shares the same agenda as the former USSR and considers the US its “main enemy.” He accused Moscow of collaborating with Tehran and Pyongyang to undermine American interests. Conversely, he stated that Kiev views the US as a “strategic partner” and “friend.” However, he cautioned that any attempts to pressure Ukrainians could “turn them around very quickly.”

US President Donald Trump has claimed that Zelensky has undermined his efforts to negotiate a peace deal between Kiev and Moscow by publicly dismissing his proposals. In their latest meeting, held on the sidelines of Pope Francis’ funeral last Saturday, the Ukrainian leader requested more weapons, the US president told the media, adding that “he has been saying that for three years.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told CBS last week that Moscow is interested in a relationship with the US which is based on “an equal, mutually respectful dialogue heading to finding a balance of interest.” With that approach, “everything is possible,” he added.

Read more …

“You could have millions of more people killed if this thing goes on for another few years, and it could risk escalating into a nuclear war. It has to stop…”

Ukraine Won’t Win – J.D. Vance (RT)

Ukraine is not poised to win the conflict with Russia, US Vice President J.D. Vance has said. He added that it was naive to expect Russia’s collapse if the fighting continues for several more years. “If this doesn’t stop, the Ukrainians aren’t winning the war,” Vance said during an interview on conservative organizer Charlie Kirk’s podcast on Monday. “I think there’s this weird idea among the mainstream media that if this thing goes on for just another few years, the Russians will collapse, the Ukrainians will take their territory back, and everything will go back to the way that it was before the war. That is not the reality that we live in,” the vice president said.

“You could have millions of more people killed if this thing goes on for another few years, and it could risk escalating into a nuclear war. It has to stop,” Vance added. He also said that, despite the challenges of dealing with both sides, American negotiators were “making progress.” “Sometimes you’re incredibly frustrated with Ukrainians. Sometimes you’re incredibly frustrated with the Russians,” Vance said. “And sometimes you just want to throw your hands up, but that’s what President Trump doesn’t let us do.”

Vance’s remarks came as Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Russian troops would observe a three-day ceasefire starting on May 8, marking the celebrations of victory in World War II. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky responded by accusing Moscow of “manipulation” and called for an immediate 30-day ceasefire. According to Russia, Ukraine violated both the 30-day ‘energy truce’ brokered by the US last month and the 30-hour Easter truce, despite having promised to respect both arrangements. Putin has argued that, for a comprehensive ceasefire to succeed, Ukraine must halt its mobilization campaign and the West must stop delivering weapons to Kiev.

Read more …

This is what it’s come to. This is what we support. Since at least 2014. Trump can say it’s Obama/Biden’s war, but he’s not exactly fully innocent. Repair it now.

Ukraine Eyes Teens And Women As Cannon Fodder (RT)

As Ukraine’s manpower crisis deepens, Kiev is resorting to increasingly desperate measures to fill the thinning ranks of its army. With conscription drives failing and volunteer numbers dwindling, authorities are now preparing to force ever-broader sections of the population – including women and barely adult men – into the front lines. Despite brutal mobilization efforts, Ukraine’s Armed Forces (AFU) remain critically understaffed. Even aggressive recruitment campaigns and tightening draft laws have failed to produce the needed surge in enlistments. Now the government is moving toward slashing the minimum conscription age from 25 to just 18 – sending teenagers straight into a bloody and grinding conflict. At the same time, serious discussions are underway about mobilizing women en masse, a step that would mark a historic escalation in Kiev’s attempts to prolong the war.

Interest in military service is declining sharply, especially among the youth. In mid-April, Pavel Palisa, deputy head of Vladimir Zelensky’s office, revealed that fewer than 500 volunteers between the ages of 18 and 24 had enlisted – and currently, those under 25 are not subject to mandatory mobilization. Two months earlier, Ukraine had launched a new initiative offering 18 to 24-year-olds the option of contract service. Rolled out on February 11, this program offered recruits a contract bonus of one million hryvnias (around $24,000), monthly salaries up to 120,000 hryvnias, and other perks in a desperate bid to bolster AFU numbers. Since then, other military branches – including the navy, airborne forces, National Guard, and border troops – have opened their ranks to young contractors. Yet even with financial incentives on the table, recruitment remains sluggish.

Palisa admitted that the current conscription system is outdated and hinders mobilization efforts. He stressed that Ukraine has “a huge mobilization resource” but that the system in place prevents it from being effectively tapped. “In my opinion, we have more people available than we need for specific tasks at the front. The mechanism simply isn’t efficient,” he said, calling for sweeping reforms in recruitment and organization. However, as Vladimir Zharikhin, deputy director of the Institute of CIS Countries, pointed out in a conversation with RT, such optimistic estimates are little more than wishful thinking. In reality, Ukraine’s main mobilization base has long since fled the country. Official figures show over six million Ukrainian refugees registered across the European Union and more than two million in Russia. But according to Zharikhin, the true numbers are likely even higher.

“Roughly eight million have gone to Europe, about three million to Russia – that’s close to a quarter of Ukraine’s prewar population,” he explained. “In other words, Kiev isn’t drafting from the 50-plus million people who lived in Ukraine around the time of the Soviet collapse. It’s choosing from the 20-odd million who remain today. That’s why we’re seeing serious discussions about mobilizing yesterday’s schoolboys, women, and anyone else they can find.” Speaking about the dismal turnout among 18 to 25-year-olds, Palisa said that while many initially expressed interest, very few ultimately signed contracts. “People agreed in principle, but when it came to signing, they backed out,” he said. “Sometimes it was their parents’ influence; sometimes they believed peace was just around the corner. There are a lot of reasons.”

Former Ukrainian MP Vladimir Oleinik told RT that aggressive recruitment campaigns painted an overly rosy picture, falsely suggesting that enlistees would quickly become millionaires. Reality, however, tells a different story. Recruits receive 200,000 hryvnias, upfront, another 300,000 after completing training, and the remaining 500,000 only after their contracts end. “Parents would often take their sons to cemeteries, showing them the flags on soldiers’ graves,” Oleinik said. “Under these contracts, recruits must serve at least six months on the front lines – and everyone knows what the survival rate is.”

Nuland

Read more …

Military security. Leave us alone.

Forget Land – This Is Russia’s Main Demand From The West (Lukyanov)

Everyone is expecting news on a Ukrainian settlement this week. The diplomatic activity is real and intense, and the visible signs suggest something significant is underway. There is little point in trying to guess which of the leaked plans are genuine and which are misinformation. What is clear is that Russia is being offered a choice between “a bird in the hand and two in the bush.” The trouble is, the elements necessary for any sustainable agreement are still scattered among the various birds. Currently, discussions naturally revolve around territory. This is a sensitive subject, particularly since the territories under consideration are already under Russian control. The bird’s wings are clipped, however: legal recognition of Russia’s sovereignty over these lands seems unrealistic, at least in the near term. De facto recognition, with a pledge not to attempt to return them by force, could be the achievable result. In today’s global atmosphere, it is naive to view any legal agreement as genuinely final.

Yet territory was not the true cause of this conflict. The deeper issue was decades of unresolved security contradictions. ‘Demilitarization’ – so prominently featured in Russia’s original demands – encompasses both Ukraine’s neutral status and the broader limitation of its military capabilities, whether through curtailing domestic production, cutting off external supplies, or reducing existing forces. This demand is far from cosmetic. Fulfillment would overturn the international order that has reigned since the end of the Cold War – an order based on NATO’s unchecked expansion across Europe and Eurasia, without regard for Moscow’s objections. The military campaign thus became a way of exercising a “veto” that the West had long denied Russia. True demilitarization of Ukraine would, in effect, force international recognition of that veto. But many in the West remain unwilling to accept such a precedent.

As discussions have moved toward territorial issues, the central problem of military security seems to have been relegated to the background. Perhaps US President DonaldTrump’s administration – more skeptical of NATO itself – views it as less fundamental. Or perhaps it simply finds it easier to force Ukraine to cede territory than to make Western Europe recognize Russia’s security rights. Nevertheless, for Moscow, military security remains a matter of principle. Even if Washington offers major concessions – lifting sanctions, formalizing territorial changes – Russia cannot abandon this core demand. This creates a divergence in diplomatic tempo. Washington wants a quick deal; the Kremlin believes that haste will not produce a reliable settlement. Yet Moscow also knows that the political stars – especially in Washington – have aligned in a uniquely favorable way, and it does not want to miss the moment.

The outcome will be known soon enough. However, some important lessons from history should be remembered. First, achieving political goals often takes more than one campaign. A pause in fighting is not necessarily a resolution.Second, there is no such thing as an open-ended, unchangeable agreement. If a deal does not truly satisfy all parties, it will eventually collapse. The struggle will resume – though not necessarily through military means.Third, Ukraine is only one piece of a much larger process of global transformation in which Russia intends to play a central role. These changes are already underway, and will continue to deepen. Reaching some degree of understanding with the United States is important. Interestingly, the NATO issue might resolve itself over time, not because of Russian pressure but due to the alliance’s own growing irrelevance. But for now, that remains a matter for the future. In the immediate term, Russia faces a choice between the imperfect birds on offer – and must weigh carefully which to catch and which to let fly.

Read more …

Maybe the West should recognize what Victory Day means to Russia. Instead of erasing 26 million dead from history.

Putin Announces 72-hour Victory Day Ceasefire (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has declared a ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict for three days in honor of the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. The truce will last from May 8 to May 10th, the Kremlin has said. Putin is said to have announced the ceasefire based on “humanitarian considerations” and has ordered the suspension of all military action against Ukraine’s forces from midnight on May 7-8 to midnight on May 10-11. The Kremlin noted that Moscow expects the Ukrainian side to abide by the truce and warned that if Kiev’s forces violate it, the Russian military will give an “adequate and effective response.” “The Russian side once again declares its readiness for peace talks without preconditions, aimed at eliminating the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis, and for constructive interaction with international partners,” the Kremlin’s message concluded.

Putin previously declared a truce for Easter that started at 6pm on April 19 and lasted throughout April 20. The Russian Defense Ministry later said that while the Ukrainian side had violated the ceasefire several thousand times, the general level of military activity had significantly decreased across the front line. During a meeting with US special envoy Steve Witkoff last week, the Russian president also reaffirmed that Moscow is ready to hold unconditional peace talks with Kiev. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump has reportedly promised not to walk away from the Ukraine peace process. He had previously warned that Washington could abandon its efforts to mediate if it did not see progress in negotiations.

Read more …

The western press claims Russia violated its own last ceasefire. The Russian press does not. “Oh, that’s just propaganda!” Really? Which one?

Ukraine Issues Ceasefire Demand To Russia (RT)

Ukraine has criticized Russia’s announcement of a three-day ceasefire in May timed to coincide with the celebration of the 80th anniversary of victory over Nazism. Earlier on Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a 72-hour ceasefire which will last from midnight on May 7-8 to midnight on May 10-11. It follows a similar unilateral pause during the Easter weekend. “If Russia truly wants peace, it must cease fire immediately,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga responded on X. He claimed that the Russian move was not “real” but rather “just for a parade.” “Ukraine is ready to support a lasting, durable, and full ceasefire. And this is what we are constantly proposing, for at least 30 days,” he added. The Russian military previously observed a 30-day moratorium on strikes against Ukrainian energy infrastructure, which US President Donald Trump had proposed to Putin. According to Moscow, Kiev did not reciprocate despite publicly claiming support for the initiative.

The Easter ceasefire announced by Moscow was only partially successful, according to the Russian Defense Ministry, which said there was a decrease in the intensity of Ukrainian attacks but not a full lull. When Putin ordered the measure, he instructed Russian forces only to engage Ukrainian troops in retaliation. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has claimed that Russia’s failure to meet his demand for an unconditional 30-day truce proves that it does not want peace. Putin has pointed out that Kiev could use such a pause for rearmament and reinforcement rather than to engage in serious negotiations. Earlier on Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that direct talks between Moscow and Kiev currently remain impossible due to a legal ban on such engagements issued by Zelensky in 2022.

Read more …

By their law, Zelensky still can’t talk to Putin.

Ukraine Shows No Sign It Is Ready To Talk – Kremlin (RT)

Ukraine is failing to take the necessary steps to initiate direct negotiations with Russia, while Moscow remains ready to engage at any time, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Vladimir Zelensky prohibited direct bilateral talks in October 2022 for as long as Russian President Vladimir Putin remains in office, asserting that the moratorium was necessary to “stop separatism” purportedly stemming from backchannel communications with Moscow not controlled by his administration. ”At the very least, Kiev needs to act, given its judicial ban” on talks, Peskov reminded journalists during a briefing on Monday.

Putin has repeatedly stated that Russia is prepared to commence negotiations with Ukraine “without any preconditions, aiming to pave the way for peace,” the official added. Indirect contacts between Kiev and Moscow have continued on some issues, such as prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of fallen soldiers. US President Donald Trump has criticized Zelensky for undermining his mediation efforts by publicly opposing ideas, reportedly included in a Washington-proposed peace plan. The two leaders had a face-to-face meeting on the sidelines of Pope Francis’ funeral in the Vatican on Saturday.

“He told me that he needs more weapons, but he has been saying that for three years,” Trump said, recounting the engagement. “I want them to stop shooting, sit down and sign a deal.” While Moscow has questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy since the conclusion of his presidential term last year, it does not view his removal from power as a goal in the conflict. However, Russia has concerns that “if an agreement were signed with Zelensky today, people could come forward later in Ukraine and legally challenge,” Peskov told the French media last week. Zelensky claims presidential powers, citing martial law that he first imposed in 2022.

Read more …

Mere weeks ago, the liberals polled just 10-20%. Then Canadian politics and media hit on Trump. Carney is a WEF globalist., worse than Trudy.

Canadians Should Expect Disaster With Carney In Charge (ZH)

Justin Trudeau’s far-left regime in Canada has finally come to an end as the politician exits leadership in disgrace. His legacy includes authoritarian governance during the pandemic, whereby he threw Christian church goers and pastors in prison for refusing to stop congregations. He called for mass forced vaccinations, and he locked the bank accounts of protesters speaking out against the covid mandates. His admin compared people donating to the cause to “terrorists”. His socialist economic policies helped to exacerbate Canada’s inflation crisis and his open immigration policies greatly expanded the the flood of third-world foreigners, driving up housing prices, crushing the labor market and straining social services. By most accounts, the majority of Canadians were ecstatic to see Trudeau exit the stage. But what if they still haven’t learned their lesson? How is that even possible?

According to recent polls for the 2025 election set for April 28th, it is likely that Canadians have very short memories or they’re gluttons for punishment. Why? Because Mark Carney and the Liberal Party are projected to make considerable gains. Carney has rebranded himself as a “centrist” in order to win public favor, but nothing could be further from the truth. Mark Carney is, in fact, worse than Trudeau on every level. What should Canadians expect under a Carney regime? More mass immigration, not less. Higher inflation and a suffocating housing market. Increasing political and economic tensions with the US, which Canada is dependent on for 75% of its export market (and there is no replacement). Policies pressuring Canadians into a cashless system. The detrimental institution of carbon controls and climate change rules for industry and energy. And, even less national sovereignty as Canada is made more beholden to the EU.

Lets start with immigration… While Carney claims he wants caps on immigration, his advisor choices suggest Canadians will get more of the same. The central banker has tapped Mark Wiseman, co-founder of the Century Initiative lobby group as part of his policy council. The Century Initiative under the former BlackRock executive publicly endorsed the Trudeau government’s moves to take in 500,000 new immigrants per year by 2025. It should be noted that as Canada increased immigration their economy suffered exponential decline. Between 2015 and 2024, Canada’s ranking in the Human Development Index plummeted from 9th to 18th, while the country fell behind Italy in the average growth of real GDP per capita. Canada’s housing market and social services are essentially broken. And how about individual freedom?

It’s no secret that the Liberal Party widely supported the lockdowns and mandatory vaccinations. However, where did Carney stand on the issue? Carney acted as an “informal adviser” to Trudeau throughout the covid event and supported the mandates wholeheartedly. In an opinion article for The Globe And Mail titled ‘It’s Time To End The Sedition In Ottawa By Enforcing The Law And Following The Money’, Carney wrote in reference to the Trucker Protests against the mandates: “No one should have any doubt…This is sedition. That’s a word I never thought I’d use in Canada. It means incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.” “The constant blaring of horns at all hours, the harassment of people, the culture of fear have been making residents’ lives hell, will bankrupt our businesses and if left unchecked would help achieve the Convoy’s goal of undermining our democracy…Anyone sending money to the Convoy should be in no doubt: you are funding sedition. Foreign funders of an insurrection interfered in our domestic affairs.”

These are the words of an authoritarian, using “democracy” as a cover to institute a sweeping crackdown on public freedoms. Where does Carney stand on the economy? Mark Carney is a long time Davo elitist, and as such he is an adherent of Klaus Schwab’s “4th Industrial Revolution” theory and the concept of the “Great Reset”. Specifically, Carney is an avid champion of the WEF’s climate change agenda and their efforts to make “climate consciousness” inseparable from business culture. Meaning, Carney will undoubtedly bury Canada in climate controls and carbon taxes, snuffing out their industry and energy base just as the globalists have been doing in Europe. Furthermore, Carney is deeply involved in the push for national and global Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).

In his 2021 book ‘Values”, Carney calls for revolutionary centralization of the global monetary system and the launch of CBDCs as the new standard. He has actively campaigned against cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and any form of decentralized money, claiming instead that the future requires a global digital currency to replace the dollar system (NOTE: Carney did not come up with this idea, this has been a ongoing plan within the BIS and IMF for decades). “If properly designed, a CBDC could serve all the functions to which private cryptocurrencies and stablecoins aspire while addressing the fundamental legal and governance issues that will, in time, undermine those alternatives…” At bottom, Carney is calling for a cashless society controlled by the banking oligarchy. Without cash or an independent form of trade, all personal economic freedom dies. Carney licks his chops over this prospect when he states (in reference to the covid crisis):

“With fear on the march, people were willing to surrender to Hobbes’ ‘Leviathan’ such basic rights as the freedom to leave their homes. And so it is with money. People will support the delegation to independent central banks of the tough decisions that are necessary to maintain the value of money provided the authorities deliver monetary and financial stability…” This is not the man Canadians should be voting for if they have any interest in changing the current Orwellian path their country is on. Critics claim that it’s Donald Trump’s tariffs that are to blame for the shift in the polls in Carney’s favor. Yet, if Carney is elected he would be the most disastrous choice in negotiating a settlement with the US. The situation will only become more ugly for Canada in every way. This is not a “new boss, same as the old boss” scenario. Carney is far higher up on the totem pole of degradation than Trudeau and much more devious.

Read more …

Turley no longer states that the system is working so great.

Federal District Courts Piling on Injunctions to Stop Trump (Turley)

“Here we are again.” Those words of Senior U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick may be the only uncontested line in his opinion this week, enjoining the Trump Administration from withholding federal funds to “sanctuary jurisdictions.” In President Trump’s first term, efforts to implement sweeping changes on immigration and other issues were met by a slew of injunctions. In 2017, one of those orders was from Judge Orrick, an Obama appointee in San Francisco. Trump has already faced a record number of national injunctions by district courts. His administration has objected to forum- and judge-shopping by political opponents by bringing the majority of such challenges in overwhelmingly Democratic states like California. Such injunctions did not exist at the founding, and only relatively recently became the rage among district court judges.

Under President George W. Bush, there were only six such injunctions, which increased to 12 under Obama. Both Democratic and Republican presidents have complained about district judges tying down presidents like so many judicial Lilliputians. However, when Trump came to office, the taste for national injunctions became a full-fledged addiction. Trump faced 64 such orders in his first term. When Biden and the Democrats returned to office, it fell back to 14. That was not due to more modest measures. Biden did precisely what Trump did in seeking to negate virtually all of his predecessors’ orders and then seek sweeping new legal reforms. He was repeatedly found to have violated the Constitution, but there was no torrent of preliminary injunctions at the start of his term. Now, however, with less than 100 days in office, Trump 2.0 has already surpassed that number for the entirety of Biden’s term.

The Supreme Court bears some of the blame for this. Although a majority of justices, including liberal Justice Elena Kagan, have complained about district courts’ issuance of national injunctions, the high court has done little to rein in district court judges. On May 15, the justices are poised to consider the issue in a case involving birthright citizenship. Many hope that the justices will bring what they have consistently failed to supply to lower courts: clarity and finality. Some judges have already seen their stays lifted by appellate courts. However, in just one day this week, three more major injunctions were issued on sanctuary cities, voter registration, and deportations. Some of these orders appear premature and overbroad. Take Judge Orrick’s order. Again, Trump is targeting cities offering sanctuary to unlawful immigrants as imposing high costs on the country, including increasing burdens for federal programs and grants to these cities.

Orrick previously stopped that effort in the first Trump term, and he was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. However, the orders are not identical, and so far no action has been taken against these cities. Under one of the orders, titled “Protecting the American People against Invasion,” Trump has ordered the attorney general and the secretary of Homeland Security to “evaluate and undertake any lawful actions to ensure that so-called “sanctuary” jurisdictions, which seek to interfere with the lawful exercise of Federal law enforcement operations, do not receive access to Federal funds.” Orrick noted that the term “sanctuary jurisdiction” was not defined and dismissed the express reservation that such actions can only proceed to the extent that they are allowed under law.

The irony is that the opinion itself is overly broad and imprecise. There are indeed cases limiting the ability of the federal government to “commandeer” states and cities into carrying out federal functions. However, there are also cases upholding the right to withhold federal funds that contravene federal laws and policies. The operative language in the order is the focus on sanctuary policies that “interfere” or prevent federal enforcement. There must be some accommodation for the federal government in refusing to pay for the rope that it will hang by.

Read more …

“Being mean or telling the truth is indistinguishable to far too many people.” —Mike Thompson on X

Now You Know (James Howard Kunstler)

Woke liberalism is exactly what Christopher Lasch predicted in The Revolt of the Elites, published in 1995 the year after his early death at 61. Lasch saw how the juvenile idealism of Boomer hippiedom would slide into the narcissistic, sado-masochistic degeneracy of open borders, drag queen story hours, Covid-19 despotism, DEI racism, showbiz Satanism, censorship, forever wars, and now, the legal insurrection of lawfare. In doing so, Lasch also predicted the “mass formation psychosis” described by Belgian psychologist Mattias Desmet, spawned by a crisis of meaning and purpose in the thinking classes of Western Civ. And now you know exactly how come a place like Boston, with its concentration of “elites” in universities, computer tech, and medical research displays a batshit-crazy dedication to ideas bent on destroying our political culture: the American republic.

The word republic derives from the Latin, res publica: the public thing, the idea of a state dedicated to the common good. By “state” you can infer both a group of people in a certain place, but also the set of conditions they dwell in. You can’t have a common good without a common culture, which means a general agreement among citizens on values in that certain place — which is our country, the USA. You can’t overstate the importance of shared ideas and values in that enterprise of being a nation, we-the-people in our particular place. The juvenile idealism of Boomer hippiedom wrecked the crucial idea of a common culture, and I will tell you exactly how that happened. Two crusades: first, the civil rights campaign, and second, stopping the War in Vietnam, defined the era.

The first of these climaxed in twin landmark legislative acts designed to abolish Jim Crow racism: the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibiting discrimination in public places, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibited unfair obstacles to voting. The idealism in that moment of history was extreme. The dominant old-school Liberal ethos displayed a sense of triumph. Its cardinal belief in human progress was validated in the new law-of-the-land. We were supposedly entering a utopia of racial harmony. It proved to be a huge disappointment, a failure. In some fundamental ways, black and white America could not agree on certain values, especially language and behavior. These matters were so hypersensitive that discussing them became taboo, and when someone dared to — such as the rogue journalist Tom Wolfe in his book Radical Chic, which made fun of the cultural elites trying to socialize with the Black Panthers — he was buried in the most extreme censorious opprobrium by the elite good-thinkers of politics, academia, and the cultural media. They couldn’t believe old Tom dove clear through the Overton Window the way he did, head first.

In fact, a big segment of black America after 1965 became much more overtly separatist and oppositional, while white America became more frantically confounded and depressed by it. The result was the elite’s solution to that quandary: multiculturalism! Which basically meant: we don’t need a common culture in the USA. (We don’t need an agreement about values, language, and behavior.) Each group in America can have its own menu of these things. This accomplished two ends: it allowed criminal behavior to explode; and it allowed the elites to excuse themselves from any serious further attempts to manage the res publica. The people of the ghettos were free to do their thing; while the elites turned their full attention to Boomer careerism and Gordon Gecko style financial moneygrubbing.

Read more …

“..If we use the low estimate and do not adjust for inflation, the value of stolen technology would be at least $5.4 trillion.”

America Funded China’s Rise (Morrison)

The free trade brigade obsesses over economic minutiae—they cry that tariffs will raise the cost of plastic spatulas by 50 cents! What a disaster! Who cares? The reality is that trade with China is not in America’s interests because it funds our greatest rival. Here’s how America funded China’s rise, and why tariffs will help keep America safe and free. A Dragon Fed: How America Funded China’s Rise. Economists say freer trade benefits everyone—even trade with China. America gets cheap goods and China gets money. Win-win. Even if we assume America benefits, which is a false assumption as proven in my book Reshore, China has clearly benefited more. For example, China’s economy has grown by an average of 8.12% since joining the World Trade Organization in 2001—about four times greater than America’s. China and America benefited asymmetrically from trade.

Asymmetry may not be a problem economically, but it is a problem politically. Why? Power is zero-sum. The stronger China grows, the weaker America becomes relative to China. As such, trade with China is also a political issue. The question we should be asking ourselves is whether cheap goods are worth surrendering America’s political dominance. To be clear, trade is not the only way that America has funded China’s rise. There are three primary ways that America enriches and empowers China: investment, trade, and theft. First, America invested directly in China by building factories—offshoring 60,000 factories does not come cheap. The total value of American investment in China is unknown. According to China’s Ministry of Commerce, cumulative foreign direct investment (“FDI”) totalled $2.7 trillion in 2023. Just 2.1% of this investment was categorized as American.

The reason that this amount is so low is because American investment is usually routed through intermediaries, mostly Hong Kong, Singapore, and the British Virgin Islands. This is why Hong Kong—a city smaller than Shanghai—owns 68% of FDI in China. Not coincidentally, Hong Kong is a major recipient of FDI from the U.S. and from the British Virgin Islands—a tiny banking archipelago that is itself capitalized by the U.S. and the City of London. Because of this shell game, we cannot know the actual amount American companies have invested in China, but if we assume that FDI correlates with the relative size of China’s trade surpluses, then America’s investments total $972 billion. This estimate is probably low. Why? China runs trade surpluses with countries that clearly contributed no investment, such as most countries in Africa and the Middle East. Given the level of economic integration, I would hazard an estimate that most FDI ultimately originated in America or the City of London, funneled through their banking havens.

Second, America indirectly funded China’s rise through the trade deficit, buying more Chinese goods than we sold. The cumulative trade deficit with China since 2001 is roughly $6 trillion, after accounting for inflation. Not only were the Chinese able to spend these profits, but they were also able to borrow against the revenue, greatly multiplying their access to capital. Third, China has stolen an almost unquantifiable amount of American technology. In 2017, the Office of the United States Trade Representative estimated that China steals intellectual property worth between $225 and $600 billion per year, more than the value of the annual trade deficit. If we use the low estimate and do not adjust for inflation, the value of stolen technology would be at least $5.4 trillion.

Interestingly, the above numbers actually undervalue the quantity of this theft. Why? Because most of the technological and IP outflows are not stolen in a traditional sense. For example, the main vector of technological transfer is via Chinese companies using their profits from the trade deficit to buy shares in American companies, at which point they own the technology. Currently, foreigners own 17% of American equities, and the number is growing. The other vector is through Sino-American corporate partnerships. Basically, American companies that build factories in China are forced to partner with a local Chinese company, a corporate clone. The plant is staffed by Chinese workers, who are taught America’s industrial processes and how to replicate American technology.

Providing China access to American technology is actually the price to enter China’s market—American companies cannot operate in China without giving up their technological and industrial secrets. Yet they do it anyways because the Chinese make it worth their while. In my view, the value of America’s stolen technology was priceless. Remember, mainland China’s economy was largely preindustrial—about as productive and technologically advanced as the Thirteen Colonies during the American Revolution. Now, China has reached technological parity with the U.S. Theft allowed China to skip 200 years of technological and economic development. America funded China’s rise. This has not only impoverished America, but it has also ended America’s superpower era. We now live in a multipolar world, bought and paid for by America’s corrupt politicians and Wall Street.

Read more …

“..the divide between the MAGA-friendly media and their more mainstream counterparts.” The extreme hatred of Trump is “more mainstream.”

Liberals Loathe Arrival of ‘MAGA Media’ Inside the White House (DS)

The New York Times recently published a hissy fit about the White House allowing reporters into the Briefing Room who didn’t vote for Kamala Harris. Here was the amazing protest sentence: “Longtime White House reporters say the result has been an erosion of their independence.” The presence of a reporter who didn’t vote Democrat doesn’t “erode” the anti-Trump animus (“independence”) of liberal activist journalists. It might balance it, suggesting journalism and liberalism are not exactly the same thing. This spurred a trend. Politico’s Ian Ward profiled these invaders under the headline “Meet the 8 MAGA Outlets Disrupting the White House Briefing Room.” It carried the usual labeling about “the divide between the MAGA-friendly media and their more mainstream counterparts.” The extreme hatred of Trump is “more mainstream.”

Then came CNN’s Donie O’Sullivan, who loves to wade into MAGA crowds, trying to find the dumbest-sounding Trump supporter he can find. In this case, he went looking for the dumbest-sounding White House reporter. The headline over the video was “‘Do you consider yourself a journalist?’ CNN meets MAGA media at White House.” O’Sullivan showed clips of these pro-Trump reporters admitting their bias, and he proclaimed, “These are White House correspondents like you’ve never seen before.” Really? He spotlighted Cara Castronuova of Lindell TV asking if they’ll release Trump’s fitness routine, since he “actually looks healthier than ever before.” In 2009, a Washington Post reporter touted Barack Obama’s “chiseled pectorals.” Then O’Sullivan replayed Real America’s Voice reporter Brian Glenn asking Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, “Why don’t you wear a suit?” He suggested to Glenn he was “trolling,” but it’s a question lots of Americans would ask.

Natalie Winters from Steve Bannon’s “War Room” podcast said, “If it were up to me, I’d kick a lot of these outlets out.” In other words, she has the same opinion as CNN, only reversed. O’Sullivan asked Winters, “Do you consider yourself a journalist?” He said many say, “You don’t deserve to be here because you’re not a real journalist.” She attacked the pro-Joe Biden media: “I’m pretty sure the people in there spent four years covering for someone who was essentially dead, and that’s being charitable. … You guys failed, and that’s why we’re here.” CNN exemplified the point last year when anchor Dana Bash was deeply troubled over bumbling-Biden videos. They were “amplified on conservative media that in some cases are just not right and in other cases are highly, highly misleading of President Biden.”

O’Sullivan lectured about the “new media” people: “A lot of them are more cheerleading President Trump than challenging him.” He ended by quoting White House Correspondents’ Association leader Eugene Daniels: The public “needs news produced by experienced, professional journalists who ask tough questions and produce fair coverage.” Under Biden, Daniels wasn’t known for asking “tough questions.” At the 2024 Kamala cuddlefest before the National Association of Black Journalists, Daniels began by gently asking if the American people were better off after four years. Daniels went on shows such as “Washington Week” on PBS and denied Kamala was ever “border czar” and insisted she was a victim: “We’ve already seen a lot of racism and sexism, and that’s going to be a huge part of this campaign.”

Then there’s CNN itself. One of the most memorable tongue-bath questions came in 2009, when then-New York Times reporter Jeff Zeleny asked Obama what “enchanted” him about being president. Then-CNN anchor John Roberts praised the softball and Obama’s “thoughtful” answer. Zeleny was later hired by CNN. Reporters asking softballs at the White House is nothing new. It’s OK when the “mainstream” does it for Democrats.

Read more …

It’s nice that people start growing their own food. But the real big impact is in the supermarkets. The artificial dyes are just the start.

Make America Healthy Again Movement Extends Beyond RFK Jr (ET)

For avid supporters, the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement itself is not new. It began long before Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign and subsequent confirmation as health secretary. “The principles of the MAHA movement were once a way of life all over the country decades ago,” Samantha Rayburn, a 40-year-old mother of two teenage sons, told The Epoch Times. “It’s encouraging to see more people adopting those beliefs and understanding that God gave us what we need to feed our bodies and heal our bodies. With how sick and unhealthy we are as a society, this return to the basics is needed.” Rayburn developed an interest in foraging for herbs and plants when she was a little girl and was inspired to make her first tincture when her oldest son caught whooping cough when he was 2. She describes the MAHA movement as “a return to the basics.”

“It’s getting back to when we knew what was in our food because we grew it and got what we didn’t have from local farmers,” said Rayburn, who lives in southern Ohio. “RFK Jr. and MAHA have made what many of us believe in more mainstream. People are now contacting me and wanting to learn more about herbs. I don’t seem so crazy anymore.” She was referring to her business, Hadassah’s Herbs for Health and Healing. When Kennedy delivered a speech in August 2024 announcing that he was suspending his campaign and backing then-former President Donald Trump, he said that Trump was giving him the opportunity to help make America healthy again. What followed was a social media frenzy with “Make America Healthy Again” and “MAHA” hashtags. MAHA the acronym was born. Samantha Rayburn has treated her sons, Holden and Wyatt, with herbal remedies since they were infants and believes in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again platform.

She now heads the Victory Garden Alliance, which encourages people, communities, and organizations to grow their own food. “There is a revival in growing our own food, supporting local farms, and knowing what’s in our food. Bobby and the MAHA movement have catapulted that interest,” Capriotti told The Epoch Times. “We need this. Our kids need this. It’s important they understand how food is grown and where it comes from. That will inspire healthier new generations because they will become smarter consumers.” She calls what is happening with the MAHA movement a “health revolution.” She is working to educate elected officials and political candidates. “Many of us who worked on the presidential campaign didn’t stop our objectives when it ended. That’s an example of how MAHA is a movement not tied to one person,” Capriotti said.

As health secretary, Kennedy has a mandate to fight chronic disease, improve children’s health, and address corporate influence on government agencies. He has pledged to remove toxic chemicals from the nation’s food supply, increase transparency, improve vaccine safety, and make significant changes to the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—operating divisions within Health and Human Services. These plans, along with encouraging Americans to grow their own food and buy meat and produce from farmers who do not use pesticides and toxins, are among the initiatives of the MAHA movement.

Read more …

PepsiCo cares only about the bottom line.

A HUGE Win for the Make America Healthy Again Movement (Margolis)

Score one for the Make America Healthy Again movement. After Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. called for a crackdown on artificial ingredients, PepsiCo wasted no time getting the message. On an April 24 conference call, PepsiCo Chairman and CEO Ramon Laguarta announced that the company has already begun reducing artificial ingredients across its products. “We’ve been leading the transformation of the industry now for a long time on sodium reduction, sugar reduction, and better fats,” Laguarta said. Now, under pressure from a public fed up with chemicals in their food, PepsiCo is finally moving faster toward cleaning up its act — a clear sign that the Make America Healthy Again movement is already having a powerful impact. “Sixty percent-plus of our (portfolio) today doesn’t have any artificial colors,” Laguarta added, indicating that the company is “undergoing that transition.”

Fox News Digital has more. “Laguarta cited examples such as Lay’s and Tostitos, which “will be out of artificial colors by the end of this year.” He added, “So, we’re well underway.” RFK Jr. and Dr. Martin Makary, U.S. Food and Drug Administration commissioner, announced a ban on petroleum-based synthetic dyes from America’s food supply last Tuesday. As the HHS noted in its news release, among the steps to be taken are “establishing a national standard and timeline for the food industry to transition from petrochemical-based dyes to natural alternatives.” “Initiating the process to revoke authorization for two synthetic food colorings — Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B — within the coming months; and working with industry to eliminate six remaining synthetic dyes — FD&C Green No. 3, FD&C Red No. 40, FD&C Yellow No. 5, FD&C Yellow No. 6, FD&C Blue No. 1, and FD&C Blue No. 2 — from the food supply by the end of next year.”

Certified nutritionist and Make America Healthy Again supporter Liana Werner-Gray celebrated PepsiCo’s move as a major step forward. “This is a huge win for public health and long overdue,” she told Fox News Digital. Werner-Gray, author of “The Earth Diet,” explained her philosophy as “all about going back to nature and eating foods from nature, eating real nutrition, eating foods that God provides us with naturally.” She also shared that she has long avoided artificial dyes, saying, “I’ve personally eliminated artificial dyes like Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, Blue 1 and others from my diet over 16 years ago when I started The Earth Diet, living a natural lifestyle.” She added, “Once I removed these dyes and switched to natural, whole-food-based alternatives, those symptoms [frequent major mood swings, anxiety, skin breakouts, and energy crashes] went away, too.”

Werner-Gray believes the manipulation of food has gone unchecked for far too long, and it’s finally time for a course correction. “This move by the FDA under Secretary Kennedy and Commissioner Makary’s leadership is a pivotal step toward restoring integrity in our food system,” she told Fox News Digital. “It’s time we raise the standard. Clean, natural and nourishing food should be the norm, not a luxury.” During the April 24 conference call, PepsiCo’s CEO emphasized that the company’s chips, puffs, and other snacks are still considered safe to consume and reaffirmed that PepsiCo stands by the existing science, according to reports. Still, there’s no denying the impact President Trump is already having in his second term. With leaders like RFK Jr. at the helm, the Make America Healthy Again movement isn’t just a slogan; it’s delivering real results and forcing even major corporations to change course.

Read more …

“.. in just a “few years,” robots will surpass “good human surgeons” and will beat the best doctors within about five years..”

“..the required speed and precision is “impossible for a human to achieve.”

Robots Will Outperform Human Surgeons In Five Years – Musk (RT)

Robots will soon replace human surgeons and are already capable of carrying out operations that are considered impossible for ordinary people to perform, Elon Musk has predicted. In a post on X on Saturday, the billionaire tech entrepreneur suggested that in just a “few years,” robots will surpass “good human surgeons” and will beat the best doctors within about five years. He noted that his Neuralink biotech company has already had to rely on robot surgeons to carry out the brain-computer electrode insertion of brain chips because the required speed and precision is “impossible for a human to achieve.” Musk’s comments came in response to a post by popular X influencer Mario Nawfal, who quoted an article about the rising success of robot surgeons such as the Medtronic ‘Hugo’.

It is reported that the robot has already been tested in 137 real surgeries such as fixing prostates, kidneys, and bladders. “The results were better than doctors expected,” Nawfal said, noting that the complication rates were 3.7% for prostate surgeries, 1.9% for kidney operations, and 17.9% for bladder procedures. “The robots got a 98.5% success rate, way above the 85% goal,” the post claimed, adding that out of the 137 surgeries, only two needed to be taken back over by real doctors due to a glitch and because of a “tricky patient case.” Previously, Musk suggested that brain-computer interfaces like those being developed by Neuralink would replace technologies such as cell phones.

Neuralink has already successfully implanted its brain chip – about the size of a coin – in three patients. After the procedure, they were able to control a computer cursor and play video games like chess and Counter-Strike using only their thoughts. One of the patients, who is non-verbal, was also able to use the device to communicate through an AI-generated voice clone. Musk has since announced plans to expand Neuralink’s clinical trials with the goal of implanting the brain chip in 20 to 30 more patients in 2025.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Dim sun
https://twitter.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1916602036361056379

Baby

Eyes
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1916830062021648669
https://twitter.com/amzingnature1/status/1916669281288311066

Imagine

Gong
https://twitter.com/XPHOENIXDRAGON/status/1916504825019130021

13 years ago

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 062024
 


Gerard Dou A woman playing a clavichord 1665

 

Trump Has Two Years To Push His Biggest Policies Through – Gingrich (JTN)
What the Trump Nominees Have Not Done—And Will Not Do (Victor Davis Hanson)
Trump Sticks With Hegseth As Ernst, Others Reportedly Eye Pentagon Post (JTN)
Trump Appoints David Sacks As New ‘White House AI & Crypto Czar’ (JTN)
Tulsi Gabbard A ‘Regular Reader’ of RT – ABC News (RT)
Impoundment, For Lack Of A Better Word, Is Good (I&I)
Democrat Calls For Biden ‘Blanket Pardon’ For Those Trump Could Target (JTN)
Lavrov-Tucker Interview: ‘For The Sake Of The Universe’ (ZH)
Lavrov Slams ‘Fantasies’ About Western Troops In Ukraine (RT)
Ukraine Preparing For End To Conflict (RT)
Zelensky Aide Visits US To Charm Trump Team – WSJ (RT)
Trump Team Cold With Ukrainians Over NATO – WSJ (RT)
Hungary Comments On Trump’s Desire To End Ukraine Conflict (RT)
Not Talking With Putin ‘Absurd’ – Scholz (RT)
West Backing Terrorists In Syria – Russia (RT)
The Syria Riddle: How It May Turn Into The First BRICS War (Pepe Escobar)
The Great Game in the Arctic (Anil Chopra)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1864708358894506175


https://twitter.com/i/status/1864406863980450163

Alex Jones

 

 

 

 

“Now we have to dance and that that’s really the key, and that the 2026 election is actually the key moment.”

Trump Has Two Years To Push His Biggest Policies Through – Gingrich (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump has a two-year window to push through some of his most contentious proposals, before midterm elections potentially see the Democrats return to legislative power and divide the government. Trump is set to return to the White House with a majority in both chambers of Congress and a generally sympathetic Supreme Court. The rapid-fire turnaround of his cabinet nominees, moreover, suggests a greater sense of urgency within the incoming White House than in the first administration. Democrats took the House during the 2018 midterms, effectively ending Trump’s hopes of securing major legislative wins. Republicans, for their part, managed to wrest the chamber from the Democrats in 2010 and largely stonewall further key agenda items. Now, some Republicans are mindful that their trifecta victory in 2024 likely only represents a brief opportunity to make a lasting impact and have warned that Republicans will only maintain control by successfully delivering on their promises.

The first time around, Trump’s major legislative victory was the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which slashed the corporate tax rate and doubled the standard deduction. He punted on key budget items, such as funding for a border wall, in favor of an omnibus spending package and ultimately failed to negotiate with House Democrats when they took over the lower chamber to secure it. That episode even saw the government go into a protracted shutdown. “I mean, we’re all here happy, but my primary message is that all we won was a ticket to the dance,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said this week at the American Legislative Exchange Council. “Now we have to dance and that that’s really the key, and that the 2026 election is actually the key moment.” The Georgia Republican was the 50th speaker of the United States House of Representatives from 1995 through 1999 and was a leading figure in securing a Republican House for the first time in 40 years.

“If, like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, we can keep the House and maybe pick up a few seats, we are probably on the way to really creating a new stable majority,” he added. “If, like most times, the American people end up disappointed, our side doesn’t turn out and the Democrats pick up the house, then we’re back to politics as usual. So, what the brilliant nine-year effort of Donald Trump has done is given us a chance to truly change things.” Some incoming pro-Trump lawmakers are evidently aware of the potential for a political whiplash should Republicans fail to deliver and have hinted that Republicans will pursue the MAGA agenda with a close eye on 2026. “I’m confident Congress is going to back up President Trump 100% because we know, if we don’t secure our border, when we have this opportunity with [a] unified republican government, then what, at what point do we deserve re-election?” Rep.-elect Abe Hamadeh, R-Ariz., said in late November on the “John Solomon Reports” podcast.

“We’re able to collect, get the government that we wanted, and now we have to implement the change that the American people are demanding,” Hamadeh went on. “So that’s why I’m optimistic, not just, you know, for this next year or two, but even for a re-election in 2026 we are going to deliver the results that the American people demand.” The incoming Republican majorities, moreover, will feature many new faces in their leadership and include more Trump-aligned figures than in 2016. House Speaker Mike Johnson is expected to keep his post, which he secured late last year after former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., led an effort to boot Kevin McCarthy from the job. Trump’s first House Speaker was Paul Ryan, who left leadership after the GOP lost the House in 2018 and has since been a leading critic of the president-elect on the right.

In the Senate, moreover, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., will not lead the Republicans for the first time since 2007, though Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., was one of his top deputies. McConnell publicly feuded with Trump during and after his administration over a litany of issues, notably on foreign policy, Senate norms, presidential conduct, and budget matters. While he will likely remain an influential voice in the upper chamber, his departure from the top post potentially signals that the upper chamber may be poised for a shift in approach.

Generally regarded as a more centrist Republican, Thune ran between the conservative Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., and the more old-school Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, for leadership. Thune, for his part, has also pointed to 2026, but suggested that the prospect of looming midterms could prove advantageous to Republicans in a different manner. “I would think that the the election results were incredible repudiation of where they’ve been taking the country,” he said in mid-November. “And so it strikes me at least that Democrats, particularly if they have to run in 2026, might be inclined to help us on some of these issues. I think there’s that’s possibility always hope, hope that’s the case. We’ll find out soon enough.”

Read more …

“The current crew, not their proposed Trump replacements, prompted the sick and tired American people to demand different people..”

What the Trump Nominees Have Not Done—And Will Not Do (Victor Davis Hanson)

Deflated by the resounding November defeat, the left now believes it can magically rebound by destroying Donald Trump’s cabinet nominees. Many of Trump’s picks are well outside the usual Washington, DC/New York political, media, and corporate nexus. But that is precisely the point—to insert reformers into a bloated, incompetent, and weaponized government who are not part of it. Trump’s nominee for FBI director, Kash Patel, is already drawing severe criticism. His furious enemies cannot go after his resume, since he has spent a lifetime in private, congressional, and executive billets, both in investigations and intelligence. Instead, they claim he is too vindictive and does not reflect the ethos of the FBI. But what will Patel not do as the new director?

He will not serially lie under oath to federal investigators as did interim FBI Director Andrew McCabe, a current Patel critic. He will not forge an FBI court affidavit, as did convicted felon and agency lawyer Kevin Clinesmith. He will not claim amnesia 245 times under congressional oath to evade embarrassing admissions as did former Director James Comey. He will not partner with a foreign national to collect dirt and subvert a presidential campaign as the FBI did with Christopher Steele in 2016. He will not use the FBI to draft social media to suppress news unfavorable to a presidential candidate on the eve of an election. He would not have suppressed FBI knowledge that Hunter Biden’s laptop was genuine—to allow the lie to spread that it was “Russian disinformation” on the eve of the 2020 election. He will not raid the home of an ex-president with SWAT teams, surveil Catholics, monitor parents at school board meetings, or go after pro-life peaceful protestors.

Decorated combat veteran Pete Hegseth is another controversial nominee for secretary of defense. What will Hegseth likely not do? Go AWOL without notifying the president of a serious medical procedure as did current Secretary Lloyd Austin? Install race and gender criteria for promotion and mandate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training? Insinuate falsely that cabals of white supremacists had infiltrated the military—only to alienate that entire demographic and thus ensure the Pentagon came up 40,000 recruits short? Oversee the scramble from Kabul that saw $50 billion in U.S. military equipment abandoned to Taliban terrorists? Watch passively as a Chinese spy balloon traversed the continental United States for a week? Allow the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to promise his Chinese communist counterpart that the People’s Liberation Army would first be informed if the President of the United States was felt to issue a dangerous order?

Rotate into the Pentagon from a defense contractor boardship and then leave office to rotate back there to leverage procurement decisions? Oversee the Pentagon’s serial flunking of fiscal audits? Health and Human Services nominee Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is certainly a maverick. He may earn the most Democratic hits, given his former liberal credentials. But what will RFK also not do as HHS secretary? Oversee his agencies circumventing U.S. law by transferring money to communist China to help it produce lethal gain-of-function viruses of the COVID-19 sort—in the manner of Dr. Fauci? Organize scientists to go after critics of mandatory masking and defame them? Give pharmaceutical companies near-lifetime exemptions from legal jeopardy for rushing into production mRNA vaccines not traditionally vetted and tested? Leave office to monetize his HHS expertise and thus make millions from the pharmaceutical companies?

Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence, former congressional representative and military veteran Tulsi Gabbard, will soon be defamed in congressional hearings. But what has Gabbard not done? Joined “51 former intelligence authorities” to lie on the eve of the 2020 election that the Hunter Biden laptop “had all the hallmarks” of a Russian information/disinformation operation”—in an effort to swing the election to incumbent Joe Biden? Lied under congressional oath like former DNI James Clapper, who claimed he only gave the “least untruthful answer” in congressional testimony? Encourage the FBI to monitor a presidential campaign in efforts to discredit it—in the manner of former CIA Director John Brennan, who lied not once but twice under oath? Fail to foresee the American meltdown in Kabul, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel, or the Houthis takeover of the Red Sea?

We are going to hear some outrageous things in the upcoming congressional confirmation hearings. But one thing we will not hear about are the crimes, deceptions, and utter incompetence of prior and current government grandees. The current crew, not their proposed Trump replacements, prompted the sick and tired American people to demand different people. Voters want novel approaches to reform a government that they not only no longer trust but also now deeply fear.

Read more …

“..they believe I threaten their institutional insanity. That is the only thing they are right about.”

Trump Sticks With Hegseth As Ernst, Others Reportedly Eye Pentagon Post (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump is standing by Pete Hegseth as he pushes back against allegations of sexual misconduct and appears to be locking up support among Senate Republicans for the Secretary of Defense post, but one upper chamber lawmaker is reportedly after the same job and pressuring Trump to back her instead. Trump has expressed his continued support for Hegseth multiple times this week, telling him to “keep fighting” for the nomination, even as Senate lawmakers openly discuss alternative candidates. “I spoke to Trump this morning,” Hegseth told reporters on Wednesday. “He supports us fully.” Hegseth’s nomination preceded that of former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., to serve as Attorney General. Gaetz’s nomination drew considerable attention away from Hegseth for its short duration. The Florida lawmaker pulled out of contention in the face of stiff Senate opposition and his own alleged misconduct.

But Trump seems more willing to let Hegseth make his case and to push back against hesitant Republicans, some of whom seem to be flipping his way. The New York Post on Wednesday reported that no Senate Republicans were outright against Hegseth’s confirmation. “There are zero ‘nos’ right now,” a GOP source told the outlet. But while no Senate Republican has openly opposed Hegseth for defense secretary, at least one seems to be eyeing the job for herself and some lawmakers are openly discussing the prospect of his replacement with Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla. The confirmation process will not formally begin until the Senate convenes in early January, giving Hegseth, awarded the Bronze Star for combat, roughly one month to make his case. In the meantime, the drama around his confirmation seems to have taken some of the pressure off of some of Trump’s other controversial nominees, like Tulsi Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Kash Patel.

Trump and his team have thus far, resolutely supported Hegseth, with the president himself personally urging him to maintain his pursuit of the post. The Trump-Vance Transition Team, moreover, circulated a Wall Street Journal op-ed from Hegseth on Wednesday in which he pushed back on his media opponents and anonymous accusers. “The press is peddling anonymous story after anonymous story, all meant to smear me and tear me down,” Hegseth wrote in the op-ed. “It’s a textbook manufactured media takedown. They provide no evidence, no names, and they ignore the legions of people who speak on my behalf. They need to create a bogeyman, because they believe I threaten their institutional insanity. That is the only thing they are right about.” Hegseth himself has shown no signs of slowing down, posting an image of soldiers resting a helmet atop an upright rifle, apparently to honor a fallen comrade.

“Maybe it’s time for a [Secretary of Defense] who has… Led in combat. Been on patrol for days. Pulled a trigger. Heard bullets whiz by. Called in close air support. Led medevacs. Dodged IEDs. And understands—to his core—the power of this photo…because he’s been on that knee before,” Hegseth posted. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, made multiple calls to Trump before meeting Hegseth asking him to jettison the nominee before her meeting with him, The Federalist reported. One unnamed source told the outlet that “[s]he’s waging a campaign to replace Pete with herself.” “She’s constantly calling and nagging him,” another said. “It wasn’t just one time.” A representative for Ernst spoke to the outlet, calling the allegations of Ernst’s interference “Washington whispers” and highlighting her meeting with Hegseth.

“I am told that Joni Ernst is the ringleader seeking to derail Pete Hegseth’s nomination by President Trump for Defense Secretary,” conservative commentator Mark Levin posted on Wednesday.“ She has worked to organize Republican opposition in the Senate and deny Hegseth a roll call vote on his nomination. All she needs is 4 or 5 Republicans to go along with her. She has also been involved in a press campaign against Hegseth.” Ernst has not publicly indicated she would oppose Hegseth’s confirmation, but has not committed to supporting him either. She met with the Defense Secretary designate on Wednesday, after which she posted a statement that left her options open. “I appreciate Pete Hegseth’s service to our country, something we both share. Today, as part of the confirmation process, we had a frank and thorough conversation,” Ernst posted on X. Trump backers online are livid with Ernst over the alleged effort to thwart Hegseth and are considering the prospect of a primary challenge to her in 2026.

“We are learning a lot about Joni Ernst and the Senate establishment right now. Trump faithful are talking about finding a primary challenger. This is getting very serious,” Charlie Kirk wrote. “We’re going to primary you and you’ll get this result. Stop the nonsense. Confirm or get a primary,” wrote pro-Trump account “Catturd”, along with a picture of the primary results in which a Trump-backed primary challenger defeated former Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo. “Trump won Iowa with almost 56% of the vote. This is the kind of state where a primary makes sense and doesn’t put the majority in jeopardy. Ernst is up for re-election in 2026,” wrote commentator Lisa Boothe. Conservative heavyweight commentator Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service Special Agent, has amplified calls for a primary challenger to Ernst if she does not confirm Hegseth. He has further supported his confirmation and is rumored to be Trump’s pick to lead the Secret Service himself.

Read more …

“..Artificial Intelligence and Cryptocurrency, two areas critical to the future of American competitiveness..”

Trump Appoints David Sacks As New ‘White House AI & Crypto Czar’ (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump on Thursday announced that former PayPal Chief Operating Officer David Sacks would be in charge of artificial intelligence (AI) and cryptocurrency policy for the White House. Trump has been filling out critical roles in his next administration since he won reelection last month, including nominating his presidential Cabinet picks. Cabinet officials must be confirmed by the Senate. Sacks, who founded the enterprise social media company Yammer, will be in charge of safeguarding online “free speech,” and helping to crackdown on technological censorship, Trump said. “In this important role, David will guide policy for the Administration in Artificial Intelligence and Cryptocurrency, two areas critical to the future of American competitiveness,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

“He will work on a legal framework so the Crypto industry has the clarity it has been asking for, and can thrive in the U.S.” The incoming president also announced that Sacks will lead the Presidential Council of Advisors for Science and Technology. “David has the knowledge, business experience, intelligence, and pragmatism to MAKE AMERICA GREAT in these two critical technologies,” Trump wrote in a subsequent post. “Congratulations, David.” Trump previously expressed doubts about cryptocurrency, even labeling it as a scam, according to Reuters, but embraced the technology during his presidential campaign.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1864845849551106261

Read more …

The director of national intelligence is supposed to go with what other people say instead of making up her own mind?!

Tulsi Gabbard A ‘Regular Reader’ of RT – ABC News (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to be director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has been an avid reader of RT news and continued to follow the Russian site long after the Washington banned the network, ABC News reported on Thursday. The article claimed that reading RT makes Gabbard unsuitable for the role in Trump’s forthcoming administration. The president-elect announced in mid-November that he wants Gabbard to take the top intelligence position, causing outrage among establishment officials, who branded the pick a major security threat. Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz called Gabbard a “likely a Russian asset,” mirroring smears that the former Democratic Party member has endured for years.

Hillary Clinton infamously claimed in 2019 that Moscow “groomed” Gabard to run in the 2020 primary election, predicting that she would run as an independent later in that cycle. However, Gabbard endorsed Joe Biden, and dropped out of the race. ABC News suggested that Gabbard’s foreign policy positions “have been shaped not by some covert intelligence recruitment… but instead by her unorthodox media consumption habits.” Anonymous aides told the outlet that their former boss “regularly read and shared articles from the Russian news site RT” and disregarded the fact that in 2017 the US branded it “the Kremlin’s principal international propaganda outlet.” ABC News added that “it was not clear to those former staffers whether or when she stopped frequenting the site.”

Gabbard, who served in the National Guard and is currently in the Army Reserve, has criticized the ‘forever wars’ that the US has been embroiled in over the years. She has argued that such conflicts do not serve American interests. While initially supporting Joe Biden’s handling of the Ukraine conflict, she later grew sceptical of the policy. That shift “has most galvanized her critics in the national security sphere,” ABC News said. The politician left the Democratic Party in 2022 and remained independent for two years. In October, she announced that she had joined the Republican Party, at a rally for Trump’s presidential campaign.

Read more …

Interesting.

Impoundment, For Lack Of A Better Word, Is Good (I&I)

If you’ve never heard the word “impoundment” before, you will – often – next year. And for good reason. Because this battle will determine whether government spending can ever be brought under control. Last year, President-elect Donald Trump said that “For 200 years under our system of government, it was undisputed that the president had the constitutional power to stop unnecessary spending through what is known as impoundment.” Since he’s been elected, he’s given every indication that he intends to reclaim this power. Indeed, the success of his “Department of Government Efficiency” run by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy depends heavily on Trump being able to spend less than Congress appropriates. This, of course, has the left freaking out. The grumblers say that Trump’s refusing to spend money Congress has authorized would be “unprecedented” and “a devastating power grab” that would “flip the power of the purse” and give Trump “authoritarian control” over the government.

There are just two big problems with these assertions. The first is that presidential impoundment dates back to the very beginnings of the nation. The second is that letting presidents impound funds appears to have been an effective tool for keeping federal spending under control. Impoundment is just a jargony word for instances where Congress appropriates a certain amount of money for a program in a given year, and the president refuses to spend all of it. A research paper published by the Center for Renewing America (CRA) provides a long and detailed historical account of impoundment, including its roots in English law and its use by presidents – Democrats and Republicans – throughout the nation’s history. Thomas Jefferson impounded funds. So did Madison, Buchanan, and Grant. Herbert Hoover, the CRA paper notes, “vigorously employed the impoundment power to decrease government spending in the midst of the Great Depression.”

FDR “refused to spend more than $500 million in public works funds on policy grounds.” Lyndon Johnson would “withhold appropriations that exceeded the president’s budget.” Even Trump-hating CNN admits that impoundment “occurred frequently in U.S. history, beginning in 1803 when Thomas Jefferson declined to buy gunboats to patrol the Mississippi as he negotiated the Louisiana Purchase with France.” While the Constitution forbids the president from spending more money than Congress has appropriated, there’s nothing in the Constitution that forbids the president from spending less. And lo and behold, the nation survived and thrived for nearly 200 years while the president had this authority. It wasn’t until 1974 that Congress stripped the president’s ability to impound funds. That year, lawmakers used the Watergate scandal and President Richard Nixon’s aggressive use of impoundment as an excuse to pass the Impoundment Control Act.

The law also created the Congressional Budget Office and the budget committees in the House and Senate, and “reasserted Congress’ power of the purse,” according to Democrats on the House Budget Committee. Well, what happened after Congress reasserted its power? Look at the two charts below. The first shows annual budget deficits as a share of GDP. The second shows the national debt as a share of GDP.

What do you see? In 1974, significant annual deficits became the norm. From 1947 to 1974, the federal deficit averaged 0.4% of GDP. Since 1974, deficits have averaged 3.8% of GDP. They’ve been close to 6% for President Joe Biden’s entire time in office. (Negative numbers in the chart are years when the government ran a surplus.) The nation’s debt, which had been trending downward as World War II debts were paid off, suddenly stopped declining in 1974. It’s been climbing fairly steadily ever since.

Trump is likely to challenge the Impoundment Control Act as unconstitutional. We hope he does, and that he succeeds, or at the very least forces Congress to fix that law. Because letting Congress have unlimited authority to set a floor on spending has been a fiscal disaster.

Read more …

Pandora’s box.

Democrat Calls For Biden ‘Blanket Pardon’ For Those Trump Could Target (JTN)

Democratic Pennsylvania Rep. Brendan Boyle on Wednesday asked President Joe Biden to issue a blanket pardon for law enforcement officials, military personnel, and other people President-elect Donald Trump could target in his next term. Biden issued a broad pardon for his son Hunter Biden on Sunday, which excused any crimes the younger Biden committed over a 10-year span that encompassed 2014 through 2024. The pardon means the first son cannot be prosecuted or sentenced for his tax charges, his federal gun charge, or any possible crime he committed while on the board of Burisma. Boyle claimed that Trump’s selection of Kash Patel as his next director of the FBI meant that he was looking to settle “personal scores,” instead of protecting Americans. Trump nominated Patel for the position last month.

“These patriots shouldn’t have to live in fear of political retribution for doing what’s right,” Boyle wrote in a statement. “That’s why I’m urging President Biden to issue a blanket pardon for anyone unjustly targeted by this vindictive scheme.” Patel, who has no current ties to the FBI, reportedly has plans to fire some high-ranking Justice Department officials and demote others, according to The Hill. “If we’re serious about stopping Trump’s authoritarian ambitions, we need to act decisively and use every tool at our disposal,” Boyle wrote. “Norms and traditions alone won’t stop him—Trump has shown time and again that he’s willing to ignore them to consolidate power and punish his opponents.” Boyle concluded that the “time for cautious restraint is over,” and pushed Biden to act quickly to “prevent Trump from abusing his power.”

Read more …

Just so everyone knows what a real diplomat is.

Lavrov-Tucker Interview: ‘For The Sake Of The Universe’ (ZH)

Tucker Carlson first unveiled Wednesday that he had traveled to Moscow to interview Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and the full interview has subsequently been published Thursday night. Among the most important messages conveyed was directed by Lavrov toward Washington and its allies, which “must understand that we would be ready to use any means not to allow them to succeed in what they call strategic defeat of Russia.” And referencing Russia’s recent use of its Oreshnik hypersonic missile, Lavrov expressed hope that Kiev’s backers took “seriously” the new weapon, for which Russia says there is no defense, as Moscow remains ready to use “any means” to defend itself. “We are sending signals and we hope that the last one, a couple of weeks ago, the signal with the new weapons system called Oreshnik… was taken seriously,” Lavrov emphasized. The very opening question posed by Tucker got straight to the main point which is surely on the minds of many viewers:

Tucker Carlson: Minister Lavrov, thank you for doing this. Do you believe the United States and Russia are at war with each other right now?

Sergey Lavrov: I wouldn’t say so. And in any case, this is not what we want. We would like to have normal relations with all our neighbors, of course, but generally with all countries especially with the great country like the United States. And President Vladimir Putin repeatedly expressed his respect for the American people, for the American history, for the American achievements in the world, and we don’t see any reason why Russia and the United States cannot cooperate for the sake of the universe.

Tucker Carlson: But the United States is funding a conflict that you’re involved in, of course, and now is allowing attacks on Russia itself. So that doesn’t constitute war?

Sergey Lavrov: Well, we officially are not at war. But what is going on in Ukraine is that some people call it hybrid war. I would call it hybrid war as well, but it is obvious that the Ukrainians would not be able to do what they’re doing with long-range modern weapons without direct participation of the American servicemen. And this is dangerous, no doubt about this. We don’t want to aggravate the situation, but since ATACMS and other long-range weapons are being used against mainland Russia as it were, we are sending signals. We hope that the last one, a couple of weeks ago, the signal with the new weapon system called Oreshnik was taken seriously.

Read more …

“The remarks come amid a string of media reports that suggested France and the UK have been considering deploying their troops to Ukraine.”

Lavrov Slams ‘Fantasies’ About Western Troops In Ukraine (RT)

The ongoing speculation about the potential deployment of troops to Ukraine by Western nations are “fantasies” that “only make the situation worse,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. The top diplomat delivered the remarks on Thursday during a press conference of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) ministerial meeting in Malta. “I believe that all these fantasies only make the situation worse and show that the people who are running around with such ideas stubbornly prefer not to hear the very clear warnings that [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin has repeatedly made publicly,” Lavrov stated. The remarks come amid a string of media reports that suggested France and the UK have been considering deploying their troops to Ukraine.

The force is reportedly supposed to act as peacekeepers to observe a ceasefire in the event of Moscow and Kiev engaging in talks. The topic has been also invoked by the German leadership, yet Chancellor Olaf Scholz has said the deployment of the country’s troops to Ukraine was “out of the question” before a “real ceasefire” was achieved. Lavrov also reiterated that Moscow welcomes any constructive initiatives to bring the Ukraine conflict to an end. However, Russia does not believe any Western-based organizations will be of any help, and is seeking to strengthen security for everyone in “our whole continent” of Eurasia, he said.

“All those initiatives floated by our partners on different continents, which are aimed at finding a political solution, they, of course, must take into account the issue of ensuring the security interests of each country and, of course, the issue of respecting human rights,” the top diplomat stressed. Relations between Russia and the collective West have changed and will not return to the situation prior to the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in early 2022, Lavrov warned. “All the previous years after the end of the Cold War, the West agreed on some right things, rhetorically praised these right things, but in reality grossly violated all the agreements and did everything to suppress the legitimate interests of Russia,” Lavrov said.

Read more …

“..Blinken argued that Kiev had “hard decisions” to make about further mobilization.”

Ukraine Preparing For End To Conflict (RT)

Kiev’s public opposition to Western calls that it draft 18-year-olds for military service is part of a strategy for winning an election if the conflict with Moscow ends next spring, the Ukrainian outlet Strana has claimed. Washington and its allies have publicly demanded the expansion of the draft to mobilize the 18-to-25 demographic, most recently on Wednesday, when US Secretary of State Antony Blinken made the argument in Brussels. According to sources in the Ukrainian presidency, however, Kiev has opposed this as part of “a strategy to prepare for the scenario of a quick end to the war and the election afterward,” Strana reported on Thursday. One possibility considered by Vladimir Zelensky is a negotiated end to the hostilities shortly after the inauguration of US President Donald Trump on January 20, the outlet said. The other option is that the talks will fail and the fighting will go on “for a long time.”

Public statements about lowering the mobilization age “are being made in case the war ends soon and there are elections, so that they can talk about how they saved the gene pool of the nation,” Strana’s source in Kiev said. In case the talks fail and the fighting continues, the mobilization will have to be expanded sooner or later, “and Bankovaya will go for it, finding hundreds of reasons to explain the change in position,” the outlet’s source added, referring to the address of the Ukrainian president’s office. Speaking to Reuters on Wednesday, Blinken argued that Kiev had “hard decisions” to make about further mobilization. Even if Ukraine got all the money and the ammunition it wanted from the West, Blinken said at a NATO press conference, “there have to be people on the front lines,” he said.

“Getting younger people into the fight, we think, many of us think, is necessary,” the US diplomat told Reuters. “Right now, 18- to 25-year-olds are not in the fight.” The Russian Defense Ministry has estimated Ukraine’s losses at more than 500,000 since February 2022, though Zelensky has publicly admitted to less than a tenth of that. Kiev has sought to mobilize another 160,000 fighters in the coming months, to replenish depleted frontline units, as Russian forces gain ground.

Read more …

“..Kiev could endorse his peace plans rather than being an obstacle..”

Zelensky Aide Visits US To Charm Trump Team – WSJ (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s right-hand man Andrey Yermak is trying to convince people close to US President-elect Donald Trump that Kiev could endorse his peace plans rather than being an obstacle, The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday. The Republican has claimed that he can resolve the Ukraine conflict in 24 hours after he returns to the Oval Office in January. Yermak, the chief of staff to the Ukrainian leader, is visiting the US to meet key figures picked by Donald Trump for his future administration, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and multiple news outlets have said. According to the WSJ, Kiev has arranged contacts with Susie Wiles, the co-chair of Trump’s election campaign who has been tapped to become White House chief of staff, Keith Kellogg, who Trump has picked to be a special envoy to Ukraine, and Mike Waltz, the incoming national security adviser.

Prior to the November presidential election, Zelensky caused a GOP outlash by visiting an arms factory in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, where he was received by Democrats. Republicans have accused the Ukrainian leader of campaigning for their rivals, with House Speaker Mike Johnson demanding that Kiev sack its ambassador to Washington, who organized the trip. The lobbying attempt by Yermak comes as Ukrainian forces are suffering from battlefield defeats and a shortage of reinforcements. In recent remarks, Zelensky has acknowledged that his country cannot beat Russia militarily and expressed a desire to restore control over all territories Kiev claims through diplomatic efforts.

According to CNN, Kiev has ordered the troops which occupy part of Kursk Region in Russia to hold on at all costs until Trump’s January 20 inauguration. The operation, which has resulted in almost 38,000 Ukrainian casualties, according to Kremlin estimates, was meant to secure a bargaining chip in future talks. Trump’s transition team has reportedly proposed freezing hostilities along the current front line and suspending Ukraine’s bid to join NATO for at least a decade. Moscow has said that no peace negotiations will happen as long as Ukrainian forces remain in Kursk Region. NATO’s intention to welcome Ukraine was a key cause of the conflict, Russian officials have maintained.

Read more …

“..the chances for compromise with Ukraine are currently “zero” and that this won’t change until “people in Kiev begin to understand there’s no way Russia will go the way they’ve suggested.”

Trump Team Cold With Ukrainians Over NATO – WSJ (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team is holding high-level talks with Ukrainian officials in Washington but NATO membership for Kiev is unlikely to be on the table, the Wall Street Journal has reported. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s closest adviser Andrey Yermak met on Wednesday with Trump’s choice as special envoy for Russia and Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, as well as incoming national security adviser Mike Waltz. While Kellogg has publicly expressed support for the Biden administration’s move to rush more weapons to Ukraine, believing it will give Trump “leverage” in future talks with Moscow, there has been little appetite among the president-elect’s team to offer Ukraine NATO membership, the paper said. “The Trump team has shown little interest in offering Ukraine membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,” the outlet wrote, noting that Zelensky still considers this a “vital security guarantee.”

Last week, a statement from the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry insisted that membership in the military bloc was “the only real security guarantee” for the country and that Kiev would not accept “any alternatives, surrogates or substitutes” for full membership. During his election campaign, Trump frequently promised he would end the Ukraine conflict within “24 hours,” but offered few details on how he would accomplish this. This week, however, Reuters reported that his advisers have now mapped out three possible plans to end the conflict, and all of them include Kiev ceding territory to Moscow and giving up on its aspiration to join NATO. According to WSJ’s report, Yermak traveled to Washington ready to communicate Ukraine’s “readiness for peace.” However, one person familiar with Kiev’s position told the outlet that it must be a “sustainable peace” and that a “temporary” arrangement will not serve US or Ukrainian interests.

Lucian Kim, a Ukraine analyst at International Crisis Group, told the outlet that Kiev might already recognize that NATO membership is not “right around the corner” but suggested that it may not make sense for them to concede this “before negotiations have even started.” On Thursday, the Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia Sergey Ryabkov told CNN that Moscow remains open to hearing Trump’s plans, but has not received any concrete proposals. He warned, however, that under no circumstances would Russia compromise on its core national interests. He also cautioned that the chances for compromise with Ukraine are currently “zero” and that this won’t change until “people in Kiev begin to understand there’s no way Russia will go the way they’ve suggested.”

Read more …

“..Hungary is “pressing hard so that Donald Trump’s goal of ending this war quickly becomes a reality..”

Hungary Comments On Trump’s Desire To End Ukraine Conflict (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s plans to resolve the Ukraine conflict could soon become a reality and Budapest intends to help the Republicans achieve that goal, Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Peter Szijjarto has said. Following a meeting in Washington on Wednesday with Trump’s candidate for National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, Szijjarto noted that the current US administration under President Joe Biden appears to only wish to prolong the Ukraine conflict and is trying to make it harder to establish peace after Trump takes office in January. Szijjarto stated that in the US, the Democrats appear to be “on the side of war” while the Republican party is “on the side of peace.” Because of this, the issue of establishing peace in Ukraine became one of the key topics in his conversations with Waltz, the Hungarian diplomat said.

”The American Republicans and we, Hungarian patriots, think similarly, and even in some cases completely identically, about the most important things in the world,” Szijjarto said, noting that this provides a “very stable basis” for future bilateral relations between the two countries. The diplomat added that Hungary is “pressing hard so that Donald Trump’s goal of ending this war quickly becomes a reality,” and warned that failure to achieve peace in Ukraine would increase the risk of escalation on a daily basis. “We can only hope that nothing will happen in Ukraine before January 20 that will irreversibly change the situation and significantly complicate efforts to achieve peace,” the Hungarian minister said.

Meanwhile, Moscow has said that it has yet to receive a detailed plan from Trump or his team regarding a potential resolution of the conflict. However, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has stated in an interview with CNN that Russia would carefully examine such a plan when it is submitted, but noted that it would not agree to any concessions that compromise its national security interests. Ryabkov also issued a warning to the outgoing Biden administration that Russia would respond to any provocations and urged the West not to underestimate Moscow’s resolve to defend its core interests using all means necessary.

Read more …

“Everybody knows that it would be absurd and a sign of unbelievable political weakness, if we in Germany and in Europe now waited for others to conduct these phone conversations, and we sort of commented on the news shown on TV.”

Not Talking With Putin ‘Absurd’ – Scholz (RT)

It would be absurd not to communicate with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine conflict, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has said. By failing to do so, Germany and other EU states would be consigning themselves to irrelevance, he argued to lawmakers in Berlin. Scholz held a phone conversation with Putin in mid-November, which was their first in almost two years. The German head of government urged the Kremlin to withdraw its troops from territories claimed by Ukraine, reiterating his determination to support Kiev for “as long as necessary.” The Russian president, in turn, attributed the escalation of hostilities in 2022 to NATO’s “long-standing aggressive policy aimed at creating an anti-Russian bridgehead on Ukrainian territory.”

According to a readout published by the Kremlin, Putin also expressed readiness to engage in talks with Ukraine, stressing, however, that new territorial realities should be taken into account and the “root causes of the conflict” eliminated. During a Q&A session in the German parliament on Wednesday, an opposition MP from the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) voiced skepticism over last month’s call. Scholz responded by stating: “Everybody knows that it would be absurd and a sign of unbelievable political weakness, if we in Germany and in Europe now waited for others to conduct these phone conversations, and we sort of commented on the news shown on TV.” Scholz further insisted that Western European nations must talk to Moscow, despite a difference of opinion.

Previously commenting on the conversation, the German chancellor similarly dismissed criticisms that his outreach could undermine Western unity, arguing that diplomatic channels should remain open and saying that he expected to talk to Putin again. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has criticized the phone call between Scholz and Putin, claiming that it could weaken the Kremlin’s “isolation.” Putin said in late November that “there was nothing unusual” about his call with Scholz, with both officials laying out their positions on the Ukraine conflict. The Russian president added that some other Western leaders were “willing to resume” dialogue, stressing that he remained open to such overtures.

The phone conversation between Scholz and Putin received mixed reactions in the West. In a post on X, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk claimed that “no-one will stop Putin with phone calls.” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau emphasized the importance of maintaining a “level of engagement with counterparts who in many cases we disagree with.”

Read more …

“We would like to discuss with all our partners in this process the way to cut the channels of financing and arming” the terrorists..”

West Backing Terrorists In Syria – Russia (RT)

Russia has reports that the US and the UK might be implicated in supporting the al-Qaeda-affiliated militants currently on the offensive in Syria, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Hayat Tahrir-al-Sham (HTS) terrorist group, previously known as Jabhat al-Nusra, launched a surprise attack from Idlib last week and has since taken Aleppo and Hama. US journalist Tucker Carlson asked Lavrov who was supporting the terrorists in Syria, during the interview that aired on Thursday. ”Well, we have some information,” Lavrov said. “The information which is being floated and it’s in the public domain, mentions, among others, the Americans, the Brits. Some people say that Israel is interested in making this situation aggravated so that Gaza is not under very close scrutiny.” “It’s a complicated game. Many actors are involved,” the Russian diplomat added.

Lavrov explained to Carlson that Russia, Iran, and Türkiye brokered a ceasefire in Syria in 2017 and again in 2020, calling this Astana Format “a useful combination of players.” “The rules of the game are to help Syrians to come to terms with each other and to prevent separatist threats from getting strong,” the diplomat said. “That’s what the Americans are doing in the east of Syria when they groom some Kurdish separatists using the profits from oil and grain sold, the resources which they occupy.” “We would like to discuss with all our partners in this process the way to cut the channels of financing and arming” the terrorists, he added. Lavrov has already spoken with his Turkish and Iranian colleagues, he told Carlson, and intends to meet with them again on Friday at a conference in Qatar.

Russia will push for “strict implementation” of the deal concerning Idlib because that province of Syria is where the terrorists emerged from.“The arrangements reached in 2019 and 2020 provided for our Turkish friends to control the situation in the Idlib de-escalation zone and to separate the HTS from the opposition, which is non-terrorist and which cooperates with Türkiye,” Lavrov said. Military and security leaders of all three countries are also in contact with each other, Russia’s top diplomat added. Carlson sought a meeting with Lavrov, saying he was appalled that the US and Russia are inching closer to an open war over Ukraine. He also tried to get an interview with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky but this was blocked, reportedly by the US government.

Read more …

Complex. Pepe has a hard time too.

The Syria Riddle: How It May Turn Into The First BRICS War (Pepe Escobar)

The timeline tells the story. November 18: Ronen Bar, Israel’s Shin Bet chief, meets with heads of MIT, Turkey’s intel. November 25: NATO Chief Mark Rutte meets with Turkey’s Sultan Erdogan. November 26: Salafi-jihadis assembled by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), formerly Nusa Front, supported by Turkish intel, plus a hefty Rent-a-Jihadi coalition, launch a lightning-fast attack against Aleppo. The Rent-a-Jihadi offensive originated in Greater Idlibistan. That’s where tens of thousands of jihadis were holed up, according to the – now proven failed – 2020 Damascus-Moscow strategy, which Turkey had to grudgingly accept. The Rent-a-Jihadi mob comprises scores of mercenaries who crossed over from – where else – Turkey: Uighurs, Uzbeks, Tajiks, Ukrainians, even ISIS-K imports.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei, earlier their week, confirmed the Salafi-jihadi offensive was coordinated by US/Israel. Baghaei did not mention Turkey, even as he stressed the terror attack happened immediately after Israel accepted a ceasefire with Hezbollah – already broken by Tel Aviv dozens of times – and after Netanyahu publicly accused Syrian President Bashar al-Assad of “playing with fire” by allowing the transit of modern Iranian missiles and military equipment via Syria to Hezbollah. Right before the ceasefire, Tel Aviv smashed virtually all communication routes between Syria and Lebanon. Netanyahu subsequently stressed that the focus now is on “the Iranian threat”, essential to smash the Axis of Resistance. According to a Syrian special services source, talking to RIA Novosti, Ukrainian advisers played the key role in the capture of Aleppo – providing drones and American satellite navigation and electronic warfare systems, and teaching Syrian collaborators and Islamic Party of Turkestan operatives how to use them.

Syrian Arab Army (SAA) communications were completely jammed by these electronic warfare systems: “The assault groups and drones were equipped with encrypted GPS devices and extensive use of AI, so that the use and navigation of attack UAVs and kamikaze drones took place from a long distance.” The mechanism was set in place months ago. Kiev made a straightforward deal with Salafi-jihadis: drones in exchange for batches of takfiris to be weaponized against Russia in the US/NATO proxy war in Ukraine. What is Turkey really up to? The practical role of Turkey in the Salafi-jihadi Greater Idlibistan offensive is as murky as it gets. Over the past weekend, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, significantly also a former intel chief, denied any Turkish role. No one – apart from the NATO sphere – believes it. No Salafi-jihadi in northwest Syria can as much as strike a match without a Turkish intel green light – as the Ankara system funds and weaponizes them.

The official Turkey line is to support the Syrian – Salafi-jihadi – “opposition” as a whole while slightly deploring the Greater Idlibistan offensive. Once again, classic hedging. Yet the logical conclusion is that Ankara may have just buried the Astana process – by betraying their political partners Russia and Iran. Erdogan and Hakan Fidan, so far, have failed to explain to the whole of West Asia – as well as the Global South – how this sophisticated Rent-a-Jihadi op could have been set up by US/Israel without any knowledge whatsoever by Turkey. And in case this would have been a trap, Ankara simply has no sovereign power to denounce it.

Read more …

Air Marshal Anil Chopra (Retired), an Indian Air Force veteran fighter test pilot and is the former Director-General of the Center for Air Power Studies in New Delhi.

The Great Game in the Arctic (Anil Chopra)

The Arctic region, still relatively unexplored, is recognized as a rich repository of untapped natural resources, particularly oil, gas, and marine life. It is also historically viewed as a potential flashpoint for great-power conflict. Russia has long maintained a dominant presence in the area. However, NATO’s expansion northward has compelled Moscow to significantly increase its military footprint. Growing superpower China has shown an escalating interest in Arctic affairs, while India, despite its geographical distance, has also established a foothold in the region. With increased US confrontation with both China and Russia, these two powers have fostered greater cooperation and coordination in Arctic matters. Covering over one sixth of the Earth’s landmass, the Arctic region encompasses the North Pole and is characterized by vast expanses of floating ice, with ridges that can reach up to 20 meters thick.

It is estimated to hold nearly 22% of the world’s undiscovered oil and natural gas reserves, with Russia accounting for 52% of the Arctic’s total energy resources and Norway holding 12%. Global industrialization and rising emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have resulted in increased temperatures, leading to rapid glacial melting. In 2024, the minimum extent of Arctic sea ice was recorded at 4.28 million square kilometers – approximately 1.8 million square kilometers below the long-term average. The rate of sea ice reduction is nearly 13% per decade, suggesting that the Arctic could become ice-free during the summer by 2040. The consequences of melting ice are profound, potentially raising sea levels and threatening many island territories and coastal cities. Climate change and global warming have garnered international attention, highlighted by discussions at recent forums such as COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan.

Unlike Antarctica, which is governed by a 1959 treaty allowing only peaceful activities, no analogous treaty exists for the Arctic. Established in 1996, the Arctic Council addresses issues pertinent to Arctic nations, comprising the United States, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia. Observer countries must acknowledge the sovereignty and jurisdiction of Arctic states while recognizing the extensive legal framework governing the Arctic Ocean. In May 2013, India became the 11th country to gain permanent observer status at the Arctic Council. Both Russia and the United States have long maintained military bases and surveillance systems in the Arctic, including nuclear deterrent capabilities.

Russia has operated nuclear-powered icebreakers in the region for some time. Although the Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation (AMEC) agreement between Russia, the US, and Norway facilitated the decommissioning of certain Soviet and US assets, the increasing interest from additional nations has sparked a new Cold War dynamics between the two primary powers. The cooperative atmosphere that once prevailed has deteriorated, particularly in light of geopolitical tensions stemming from the situation in Ukraine since 2014. Increased ice melting has begun opening the Arctic region for longer periods of time in summer months. There are three main routes that could revolutionise the international commercial shipping industry in the 21st century.

The Northern Sea Route (NSR) lies along the arctic coast of Russia. Ice clears up here first and therefore is available for longer. It also has the highest commercial potential: the route reduces the maritime distance between East Asia and Europe from 21,000 kilometres via the Suez Canal to 12,800 km. It implies a transit time saving of 10-15 days. NSR was used extensively for natural resource extraction and transportation during the Soviet Era. In 2009, two German ships led by a Russian icebreaker made the first commercial journey across the NSR from Busan in South Korea, to Rotterdam in Netherlands, establishing good commercial prospects.

The North West Passage (NWP) is another route between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, crossing Canada’s Arctic Archipelago that was first used in 2007. It may open for more regular use soon. While Canada claims it as an internal waterway, the US and others insist it is an international transit passage, and must allow free and unencumbered movement. This route could reduce shipping time between the Middle East and Western Europe to around 13,600 km compared to 24,000 km via the Panama Canal, however parts of the route are just 15 metres deep, thus reducing its viability. China seems to be interested in using this passage to eastern parts of US, as the Panama Canal too has ship size and tonnage restrictions. The third one is a potential Transpolar Sea Route (TSR) which could use the central part of the Arctic to directly link the Bering Strait and the Atlantic Ocean port of Murmansk. This route is hypothetical for now and may appear as climate change progresses.

Read more …

 

 

 

Rogan

 

 

Nodules
https://twitter.com/i/status/1864667844610244990

 

 

Dog&crow

 

 

Dog street
https://twitter.com/i/status/1864732510669713795

 

 

Dogball

 

 

Dog snow
https://twitter.com/i/status/1864386165266055356

 

 

Food

 

 

 

 

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