Menu Icon

Debt Rattle November 1 2026

Nov 012026
 
 November 1, 2026  Posted by at 9:48 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  No Responses »


Edward Hopper Sunday 1926


• Final 2026 Midterm Prediction: It’s Time to Die With Your Boots On! (Pinsker)
• Europe’s Riots are the Bill Coming Due for Socialism and Globalism (Fleitz)
• Queen Ursula Comes To Canada With Velvet Handcuffs (Rachel Marsden)
• Europe Has Blown Its Chance To Mediate Ukraine Conflict – Lavrov (RT)
• Poland Leftist Prime Minister Donald Tusk Leads a Judicial Coup d’Etat (CTH)
• Chaos Erupts At Poland’s Top Court Amid ‘Coup’ Accusations (RT)
• Alarming Update on Coup Effort From Polish Media (CTH)
• Democratic Leaders Call Voter Confusion Tactics Harmless, Humorous (Turley)
• Keir Starmer Says U.S. Will No Longer “Bankroll Europe’s Defense” (CTH)
• Left Party Candidate For Berlin Mayor ‘Fears’ Islamists (RMX)

 

 

 

 


Pollsters need to call 140 people just to get one answer.

“.. if only one out of 140 people is willing to answer a poll, it’s unclear if the “science” of polling is even salvageable.”

• Final 2026 Midterm Prediction: It’s Time to Die With Your Boots On! (Pinsker)

[..] The midterm election is in just three days! And the universe of persuadable undecideds is rapidly dwindling. At this point, there ain’t a ton of ‘em left. Which is why the emphasis is now on turnout — and getting enough likeminded, sympathetic voters off their [BLEEP] and out to vote.


That’s a critical, ride-or-die variable, but notoriously difficult to assess beforehand. Some Get Out the Vote (GOTV) plans look great on paper (and cost a fortune), but collapse on Election Day. Others fly completely under the radar, yet hit a bullseye.I’ll just say this: The GOP has been sitting on a sky-high mountain of money for months now, so there’s simply no excuse for not having a winning GOTV plan.

If we botch this, heads should roll. As for the Democrats’ GOTV plan, who knows? There’s overlap between voter intensity and turnout (which seems to favor the Dems), but it’s also true that DSA candidates have badly underperformed in elections. That seems to indicate holes in their GOTV game.

Probable advantage: Republicans.

(Or, instead of a bad GOTV plan, it could just be bad polls: Maybe the DSA’s popularity is, was, and continues to be wildly overreported. Can’t rule it out, since DSA success has mostly been limited to bright-blue districts and college towns. But we’ll return to polling problems in a sec.)

If you want to terrify your Republican guests at tonight’s Halloween party, the two most under-discussed, under-publicized reasons for GOP pessimism are Fox News’ ratings plummeting, and the near-total absence of mainstream media stories about Democratic operatives throwing each other — and/or the voters — under the bus.

Fox News still dominates the news ratings, but it suffered its largest year-to-year ratings drop in the month before an election in a decade: FNC’s primetime ratings fell by 28%. Meanwhile, CNN and MS NOW both had double-digit gains. That’s partly a commentary on FNC’s current lineup of primetime hosts. It’s partly because of cord-cutting. And it at least partially reflects the Democrats’ edge in enthusiasm.

Probable advantage: Democrats.

The lack of Democratic operatives throwing each other under the bus is awfully revealing, too. Back in 2024, mainstream media outlets were writing about “misogyny” costing Kamala Harris the election, and how the media set her up to fail more than a week before Halloween (!) — because the writing was on the wall. So the Dems got ahead of the story by blaming the American people for being bigoted. They blamed the media, too. And then the campaign staff blamed each other for being unprepared and wasting money.

This article from the Guardian — “Harris Campaign’s Record $1B Funds Fail to Translate Into Swing State Advantage” — from Oct. 10, 2024 (!) is a good example: [T]here are fears that Harris’s fundraising success may lead to cash drying up when it matters most, by dampening the enthusiasm of donors to give the extra funds that strategists believe might be necessary to get her over the line in a tightening race.

“There have never been so many electoral college votes in play so late in the cycle, which means that our strong fundraising and volunteer enthusiasm are not guaranteed to be enough to fully reach voters everywhere they are,” the Washington Post quoted an unnamed Harris campaign staff member as saying. Obama’s appearance on the campaign trail follows evidence that Harris is failing to connect with key components of the Democrats’ constituency, including Black men.

Politico reported that Democratic operatives were worried about apathy among Black men in Detroit, Michigan’s biggest city, even as Harris’s campaign has dispatched several high-profile African American surrogates to the state, including the basketball legend Magic Johnson and the party elder James Clyburn.

“I am worried about turnout in Detroit,” Jamal Simmons, a former communications director for Harris, told the site. “Do they have the machine to turn people out?” “We continue to have this widening apathy in cities like Detroit … [Harris] hasn’t done anything to change that,” added Scott Holiday, executive director of Detroit Action, a voter mobilisation group. That’s five negative leaks in six paragraphs! The good ship Harris was leaking like a sieve!

Yet we’re not seeing these stories in the run-up to the 2026 midterms. (Except in Michigan, where Democratic dysfunction is a legitimate problem.) Instead, CNN is writing puff pieces about the Democrats’ ambitious plans after winning the midterms — and the telltale signs the Dems will win in a landslide. Far-left publications such as the Daily Beast are throwing about the “landslide” word, too.

This doesn’t mean a Republican defeat is inevitable. But it reveals the Democrats’ staggering level of confidence — which is lightyears ahead of where it was in 2024.

And a big reason for their confidence is the polls. Over and over again, the polls have projected a Democratic tsunami so ginormous, it will even swallow ruby-red strongholds such as Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, South Carolina, Texas, and Iowa. Which we see it in the predictive markets: According to Kalshi, there’s now a 94% chance the Dems will win the House; a 72% chance the Dems win the Senate.

Probable advantage: Democrats.

It’s “probable” because the polls have been wrong more than right. According to CNN’s Harry Enten, during the Trump era, polls in swing states have exaggerated Democratic support by an average of 4.1 points. If the polls are off by 4.1 points in 2026, the Republicans will keep the Senate, pick up a few blue seats, and the House will be close.

Of course, there’s a chance the polls have recalibrated, self-corrected, and won’t make the same mistake again. The pollsters, after all, claim they’ve reweighted their polls to ensure greater accuracy. If so, the GOP is in deep, deep doo-doo.

But there’s also a chance that the underlying mechanisms that produce these polling errors still haven’t been addressed — and if anything, they’ve probably accelerated. Hey, when pollsters must call 140 people to get a single response, they’re not getting a realistic snapshot of public sentiment.

Because they’re talking near-exclusively with lonely weirdos with nothing better to do than yak with pollsters. And even without the weirdo-factor, Democrats respond to polls at a much higher rate than Republicans anyway. Polls tell us what people who take polls think. Anything beyond that is a mystery. Furthermore, if only one out of 140 people is willing to answer a poll, it’s unclear if the “science” of polling is even salvageable.

Probable advantage: Republicans.

Read more …

“Europe is in deep trouble because socialist and globalist policies are destroying European civilization.”

• Europe’s Riots are the Bill Coming Due for Socialism and Globalism (Fleitz)

I recently spoke at Chatham House in London, one of Europe’s leading globalist think tanks – and hostile territory for American conservatives. While there, I heard firsthand some of the factors and the stark denialism behind the horrific riots that erupted in France and other European countries this month.


What began in late September as student blockades of overcrowded, understaffed high schools in the Paris suburbs exploded on October 17 and 18 into some of the worst violence France has seen in decades. More than half a million people marched against rising living costs and failing public services.

Rioters, many carrying Palestinian flags, torched cars and a town hall, damaged or looted at least 3,000 businesses, and injured about 1,000 police officers, gendarmes and firefighters, according to the interior ministry. Nearly 2,400 people were arrested, and the government imposed curfews in parts of Paris and other cities. Similar protests spread to Belgium and Italy.

Amid a steady stream of bashing on foreign policy, domestic security, and the president personally, a U.S. academic on one Chatham panel stunned me with her counter-reality view of President Trump’s border policies.

On border security, she claimed that the real goal of last year’s U.S. National Security Strategy and President Trump’s efforts to stop illegal immigration is to promote Christian white nationalism. I replied that this is false: President Trump has never called for any such thing, and it is nowhere in the National Security Strategy. When she insisted that this is what the document “really” means, I pointed out that she had just conceded it does not say this – she was reading her own views into it. I also noted that the Trump administration is fully supportive of immigration as long as immigrants come to our country legally.

She countered that talk by Trump officials of saving Western civilization from uncontrolled immigration amounts to a plan for a white Christian nation. It does not. The strategy warns that Europe faces “civilizational erasure” – a warning about uncontrolled migration and falling birth rates, not race. My final response was that this was a typical liberal distortion: equating conservative efforts to secure borders and protect our nation with racism.

I should add that the audience offered no pushback to the academic’s comments but plenty to mine. Video of the panel is available here.

A panelist made an equally absurd claim at a second closed Chatham House panel, held under the Chatham House Rule, asserting that Europe is far freer and offers a much higher quality of life than America, with far more opportunities for young people. I was dumbfounded, even more so because no one in the room pushed back. These claims are clearly contradicted by America’s lower taxes, greater economic opportunities, easier path to starting businesses, lower unemployment, and numerous other well-documented advantages.

As for freedom, it is Europe, not America, where citizens are arrested and prosecuted for social media posts. The panelist later explained that Europe is better because of all the “free stuff” – free health care, free college, generous social benefits, government pensions, and so on. This explanation wasn’t very convincing. These claims in fact reflect the global elite’s view of Europe as a paradise and of Trump’s America as a primitive backwater.

The reality is that nothing is free. Europeans pay for these benefits through some of the highest taxes in the developed world, and governments that cannot cover the bill borrow the rest. France’s public debt now exceeds 110 percent of GDP, and its borrowing costs have hit their highest level in more than two decades. The recent disastrous and violent demonstrations in France and other European nations made clear that Europe is neither superior to America nor a paradise for most young Europeans.

The core reason is that Europe’s massively expensive socialist welfare state does not work. The French riots began in high schools so overcrowded and understaffed that students blockaded them in protest. A state that spends lavishly on pensions and benefits cannot even keep its classrooms staffed. Meanwhile, European economies and security are under siege from a huge influx of migrants from the Middle East and Africa, which has imposed enormous costs in government benefits while contributing to surges in crime and radical Islam.

The denialism I heard in London is everywhere. Consider a recent New York Times opinion writer who drew the implausible conclusion that the French riots were part of a student revolution to build a better France. Or the BBC calling the Paris riots “mostly peaceful.” Or a panelist on MS NOW who made the absurd claim that although we don’t know who is behind the riots or their motivations, we know Trump is responsible.

What these elites refuse to admit is that Europe is in deep trouble because socialist and globalist policies are destroying European civilization – and that radical change is needed to save it.

Read more …

“Trade, resources and digital ‘cooperation’ sound harmless – until you look at the fine print.”

• Queen Ursula Comes To Canada With Velvet Handcuffs (Rachel Marsden)

I’m trying to spend a few weeks back in Canada for some peace and quiet from the usual European drama. Just my luck that Queen Ursula would follow me here, circus and all.


She hadn’t even landed in Montreal for the EU-Canada Summit, and already everyone around me was saying that Canada’s “associate membership” had been canceled. They’d heard that countries like France and Germany objected to the idea, even as Von der Leyen was saddling up her broom for a trip across the Atlantic.

Someone even asked me if that meant that we’re now kicked out of Eurovision. I had to explain that the title never existed in the first place. EU treaties refer only to association agreements. It’s just the usual sort of branding that von der Leyen, the unelected EU chief executive, likes to roll out, much like her endless riffs about unity, as though dissent weren’t an actual virtue in a functioning democracy.

Or like the way she talks a good game about sticking it to Russia while simultaneously celebrating the €977 million spent this winter alone on gas purchases for Ukraine – much of which comes from Russia via Hungary and Slovakia. The EU writes cheques to Kiev. Kiev pays Hungary and Slovakia, who then pay Moscow.

Those middlemen exist mainly so that Queen Ursula can maintain a certain public image while engaging in more practical considerations behind the scenes, albeit at considerably greater expense to the Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney got a taste of the spectacle when Ursula’s marketing campaign became the focus of the event. He was forced to acknowledge that he honestly didn’t give a damn what they called this new cooperation, so long as it was good for Canadians. Meanwhile, other EU leaders, like German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, had started referring to it instead as an “alliance for the future.”

But von der Leyen had already landed in Canada and continued promoting the “associate membership” label, smiling as Carney, sitting beside her, subsequently echoed the term. Of course, all that the mental midgets are going to take away from this whole event is the intrigue over whether or not Canada is joining the EU. Spoiler alert: it isn’t. And never will. It’s not even legally possible. But this idiotic intrigue is distracting from the details of what lurks underneath, which could amount to a whole lot of iron-fisting through velvet gloves.

Turns out someone had already leaked a draft statement on these future relations to Politico, dated September 22, 2026. Cut out the diplomatic fluff and here’s what you’re left with.

Both sides are clearly looking for new markets as they diversify trade away from the US. Great. But it seems rather stupid for the EU to be begging Canada for its natural resources – gas, metals and minerals – while simultaneously slapping on carbon tariffs that get downloaded onto European citizens and companies. What’s the point of trying to bring prices down by increasing supply if you’re just going to top up the cost anyway.

You jokers also killed off your own nuclear industries, only to realize (a bit late) that perhaps it was preferable to having to resort to coal, before subsequently reviving it as the future of clean energy. So maybe you’re not exactly the best people to be doing commie-style central planning.

Technology is already advancing in favor of the environment, with those improvements increasingly built into the conditions for funding and financing. Just let it breathe already. Not every industry needs a Brussels bureaucrat hovering over it.

It also sounds like they’ve roped Canada into their scheme to skim Russian cash from its Western-held assets to pimp themselves out under the pretext of Ukraine’s defence and their own, then just hope that Russia’s ultimately cool with that so they don’t have to stick their own taxpayers either the final bill.

Perhaps the most troubling part is the Orwellian digital cooperation section of the agreement, which aims to “advance cooperation on artificial intelligence security and sovereignty, trusted data flows and digital governance and to align emerging AI and digital regulatory frameworks through associated country status for Canada.”

Does this mean Canadians get to have Queen Ursula block their bank accounts now, too, since we’ll all be connected and harmonized inside one giant digital panopticon? Or worse, some AI bot? It’s hardly reassuring that Carney’s government has just appealed the federal court decision condemning his predecessor Justin Trudeau’s government for unconstitutionally invoking the Emergencies Act, which allowed it to block the bank accounts of Covid-era anti-mandate Freedom Convoy participants without a court order – all for the crime of honking too loudly.

Nor is it reassuring that Canada and the EU have already signed an agreement on digital “trust services” involving things like government-controlled digital identity wallets. One honk too many, one wrong opinion on some social media platform linked to the online ID system that they’re all ushering in – ostensibly under the pretext of adults needing to prove that they aren’t children requiring protection from online pedos – and there goes your whole life with the flip of a switch.

It’s not like Queen Ursula’s European Commission isn’t already doing that with sanctions and asset freezes, in the absence of due process, for those whose views it qualifies as “propaganda.” And if this is what they mean by an alliance for the future, then Canadians – the average citizens of this country – need full and open debate over the fine print before anyone signs us up.

Read more …

“The Russian foreign minister said European governments’ poor track record on previous peace agreements undermines their credibility as negotiators”..

• Europe Has Blown Its Chance To Mediate Ukraine Conflict – Lavrov (RT)


Ukrainian National Guard recruits undergo training near Kharkov

European countries have repeatedly failed to uphold agreements intended to resolve the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, undermining their credibility as potential peace guarantors, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.


Moscow has previously stated that European officials would not participate in the upcoming US-brokered peace talks in Abu Dhabi.Speaking at a press conference on the sidelines of a G20 meeting in Atlanta, US, on Friday, Lavrov said “the Europeans want to insert themselves into the negotiation process.” “What matters is not what the Europeans want, but what added value they can actually bring to the table,” he said.

Lavrov accused European governments of failing to uphold agreements intended to resolve the crisis, beginning with the February 2014 deal between then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich and opposition leaders. France, Germany and Poland helped broker the agreement, which was intended to end months of protests and deadly clashes in Kiev. Yanukovich was ousted shortly afterward, an event Moscow maintains prompted Crimea to secede from Ukraine and join Russia, while also triggering a revolt in the largely Russian-speaking Donbass.

According to Lavrov, France and Germany also failed to ensure Ukraine implemented political reforms and granted special status to Donbass under the 2014–2015 Minsk agreements which they helped broker. Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and former French President Francois Hollande acknowledged in separate interviews in December 2022 that the agreements had given Ukraine time to strengthen its military. Moscow has cited their remarks as evidence that Western governments never intended to implement the accords in good faith.

Lavrov also cited the December 2019 summit in Paris, where the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany reaffirmed their commitment to implementing the Minsk agreements. The diplomatic process ultimately failed to produce a lasting settlement. “Over the past 12 years, they have had more than enough opportunities. Through their actions, they have demonstrated that their track record cannot be ignored the next time they seek to act as ‘guarantors,’” Lavrov stated.

His remarks followed a rare telephone conversation on Tuesday between Russian President Vladimir Putin, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store. The 90-minute call, which focused on the Ukraine conflict and upcoming peace negotiations, drew criticism from several European leaders. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said the initiative had not been coordinated with other European countries, while Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said he had not been informed in advance.

Putin, however, welcomed the contact, describing the decision to call as a step towards establishing “some kind of constructive dialogue.” Lavrov attended the G20 foreign ministers’ meeting in Atlanta at the invitation of the US, despite objections from some European governments to Russia’s participation. President Donald Trump has also invited Putin to the G20 leaders’ summit scheduled for December in Miami.

European opposition to Russia’s participation was evident on Friday when the traditional G20 group photograph was canceled after several European diplomats objected to posing alongside Lavrov.

Read more …

Three entries for the same topic seems a lot. But this is a real Coup d’Etat in the heart of Europe.

The Polish President is a nationalist. Its PM is a globalist, heavily linked to the EU.

The President, Nawrocki, was in a plane on the way to Senegal when he turned around upon hearing what was going on in Warsaw (a coup). The plane could not get permission to land (with the President, in his own country). It landed regardless. Nawrocki went to the Constitutional Tribunal in Warsaw where he got involved in a physical tussle to keep him out. He managed to get in.

Where does that leave the PM? And the EU? Ursula?

• Poland Leftist Prime Minister Donald Tusk Leads a Judicial Coup d’Etat (CTH)

Things were simmering just below the surface due to pro-EU globalist Prime Minister Donald Tusk and a pro-nationalist President Karol Nawrocki both occupying leading roles in government, with a conflicted judiciary stuck between them making decisions about efforts to change the Polish constitution.


Tusk supports globalism, Nawrocki supports nationalism, the constitutional judiciary, a tribunal assembly essentially equivalent to the U.S. supreme court, held more nationalist judges than globalist judges – including the tribunal court president Bogdan Swieczkowski (essentially the Chief Justice).

LAST NIGHT – Prime Minister Tusk waited until President Nawrocki left the country, then together with aligned ideological judge Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, they declared the court President, Bogdan Swieczkowski, as null and void, while presenting herself as the replacement. Judge Korwin-Piotrowska attempted to become the self-appointed judicial president with the support of Tusk.

As best it can be determined, Prime Minister Tusk simultaneously ordered the police to surround the judicial court complex and block any attempts to stop what was happening inside the tribunal area. Justice Minister Waldemar Zurek, who is also the attorney general, told journalists he requested the lifting of legal immunity for Judicial President Swieczkowski and his deputy Bartlomiej Sochanski in order to carry out their replacement.

This was, by all reasonable interpretations, a stunning and planned judicial coup d’etat carried out by globalist Donald Tusk, an aligned judge Korwin-Piotrowska and an internal network of leftist government allies. However, President Karol Nawrocki, a close ally of Donald Trump, turned his plane around en route to Senegal and quickly returned to Warsaw so that he could intervene and stop the judicial overthrow.

Via Daily Mail – Riot police have been deployed to Poland‘s top court amid claims of a ‘coup’ after its chief judge was suspended in an escalating battle between Donald Tusk’s government and the nationalist right. Dozens of officers guarded the entrance to the Constitutional Court in Warsaw on Friday as protesters gathered outside, with some chanting ‘Tusk traitor’.

The extraordinary stand-off prompted President Karol Nawrocki to abandon an official trip to Senegal mid-flight and order his plane back to the Polish capital. Three people were arrested after trying to enter the court complex, police said, as supporters of the opposition Law and Justice party (PiS) protested the ousting of court president Bogdan Swieczkowski.

Some said prayers while holding Roman Catholic rosaries and religious images. The court’s official X account denounced the intervention as a ‘coup d’etat’ and insisted Swieczkowski remained in office.The confrontation marks a dramatic escalation in the struggle between Tusk’s centrist government and the nationalist opposition over control of Poland’s judiciary.

Swieczkowski’s suspension was announced by fellow judge Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, who said the move was needed to restore the rule of law. Justice Minister Waldemar Zurek, who is also the attorney general, told journalists he had requested the lifting of the legal immunity of Swieczkowski and his deputy Bartlomiej Sochanski.


Statement of the President of the Republic of Poland Karol Nawrocki

“This night, a violation of the constitutional order of the Republic of Poland occurred, along with the forcible takeover of a constitutional state organ. I have held consultations with the First President of the Supreme Court, Zbigniew Kapinski, who also does not recognize as legal the actions taken by individuals usurping power in the Constitutional Tribunal.

I call for the restoration of legal order and the departure from the Tribunal premises by the enforcement forces dispatched to the site by the government. To the Constitutional Tribunal, I have enabled the entry of the legally serving Vice-President of the Constitutional Tribunal, Judge Bartolomiej Sochanski.

In connection with the threat to the internal security of the Republic of Poland, I am convening urgent consultations today with the participation of representatives of parliamentary forces in order to achieve stabilization of the political situation and restoration of the constitutional order.

I thank all those who are at the Constitutional Tribunal, standing in defense of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. ”

Read more …

“The power struggle between the president and government escalated as riot police surrounded the Constitutional Tribunal in Warsaw..”

• Chaos Erupts At Poland’s Top Court Amid ‘Coup’ Accusations (RT)

The longstanding struggle between Poland’s right-wing president and centrist government over control of the country’s top court dramatically escalated on Friday night as riot police surrounded the Constitutional Tribunal in Warsaw.


Police were deployed as an announcement appeared on the court’s website stating that its president, Bogdan Swieczkowski, and vice-president, Bartlomiej Sochanski, had been suspended from their duties. Their profiles were reportedly removed from the website.

Shortly afterward, the tribunal’s official X account claimed that its website had been subjected to an “unlawful takeover” and insisted that both officials remained in their posts. “All persons participating in these actions are committing the crime of a coup d’état,” the account stated.

Protesters gathered outside the court building. According to the Polish Press Agency (PAP), Swieczkowski entered the tribunal’s grounds after his supporters cut through a gate lock with a circular saw. He subsequently left the grounds and called for calm, PAP reported.

Police said their deployment followed a warning from Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, whose status as a Constitutional Tribunal judge is disputed by the court’s existing leadership, about possible threats to judges and staff and the risk of public disorder. Officers denied entering the court building.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk defended what he described as efforts to restore the rule of law following the previous government led by the conservative Law and Justice (PiS) party. “After years of lawlessness under PiS, this is a difficult, sometimes painful process that requires decisive action. There is no other way,” he wrote on X.

President Karol Nawrocki cut short a planned trip to Senegal and turned his plane around to return to Poland amid the escalating crisis.

Tusk has been locked in a prolonged battle with Nawrocki and the PiS over judicial appointments. Nawrocki has refused to administer the oath to five judges elected by parliament, while the tribunal’s existing leadership has challenged their authority to take up their posts.

Tusk’s liberal Civic Coalition leads Poland’s governing coalition, while Nawrocki holds the presidency. The Constitutional Tribunal remains dominated by judges appointed by PiS before Tusk took power in 2023. During PiS’s eight years in power, the EU repeatedly criticized the party’s judicial reforms, accusing it of undermining judicial independence.

Read more …

“..military pilots of the airplane carrying President Nawrocki refused to follow the orders from the air traffic controllers and landed the President back in Warsaw. ”

• Alarming Update on Coup Effort From Polish Media (CTH)

In the update to the attempted judicial coup d’etat carried out by globalist Prime Minister Donald Tusk last night, Polish media are now reporting the plane carrying Poland’s President Karol Nawrocki was denied landing permission as the President was urgently returning to deal with the leftist government effort.


The media are reporting that military pilots of the airplane carrying President Nawrocki refused to follow the orders from the air traffic controllers and landed the President back in Warsaw.

If these reports are accurate, Prime Minister Donald Tusk has no plausible deniability to distance himself from the grossly unconstitutional effort. Calls are now being made to cancel the Parliamentary assembly and hold new elections to restabilize the government.

Marcin Przydacz – “Poland is facing a serious constitutional crisis following events at the Constitutional Tribunal in Warsaw on Friday, 30 October, and during the following night.

For those unfamiliar with the Polish legal system, the Constitutional Tribunal is an independent constitutional body responsible for reviewing the constitutionality of legislation, but it also has other very important competences concerning the constitutional status of the President of the Republic and the President of the National Bank of Poland. Its independence and the legal status of its judges are protected by the Polish Constitution.

Since this spring, Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s government has been taking steps aimed at gaining control over the Tribunal, most recently by attempting to install a former minister from his own cabinet as a new “judge” of the Tribunal. The government presents these actions as an effort to restore the rule of law. However, the methods employed raise fundamental questions about respect for the Constitution itself.

On Friday, 30 October, approximately 3,000 police officers were reportedly deployed in connection with the situation at the Constitutional Tribunal, following a notification from Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, who claimed the authority to assume the Tribunal’s leadership. Claiming that the President and Vice-President of the Tribunal were absent, she issued decisions announcing their suspension from official duties. The legal basis for these decisions is strongly disputed, including by the First President of Poland’s Supreme Court, Zbigniew Kapinski, and the Constitutional Tribunal’s President, Bogdan Swiegzkowski.

During the night, President Nawrocki travelled to the Constitutional Tribunal together with the First President of the Supreme Court. Despite the police presence and attempts by Anna Korwin-Piotrowska and other individuals at the entrance to physically prevent the President from entering the building, he entered the Tribunal and challenged the authority of those claiming to have assumed its leadership.

The confrontation at the entrance was physical, with individuals blocking the President’s passage. The Presidential Chancellery rejects allegations that the President was the aggressor. President Nawrocki subsequently stated that the constitutional order of the Republic of Poland had been violated and that a constitutional state institution had been taken over by force.

He called for the withdrawal of police forces from the Tribunal’s premises and the restoration of the legal order. He also enabled the Tribunal’s lawfully serving Vice-President, Judge Bartlomiej Sochanski, to enter the building and convened urgent consultations with representatives of parliamentary parties to stabilise the political situation and restore constitutional order.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk, meanwhile, defended the government’s decisive action as necessary to “restore the rule of law”. The President’s position is that restoring the rule of law cannot justify disregarding constitutional safeguards, bypassing statutory procedures or using police forces in a dispute over the leadership of an independent constitutional institution.

The European Commission, which was highly active in commenting on disputes concerning judicial independence under previous Polish governments, has so far not issued a comparable public assessment of these events. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has likewise remained silent.

The question is whether the same standards of constitutional legality, separation of powers and judicial independence will be applied to the current Polish government as were demanded of its predecessors. The rule of law cannot depend on which political party is in power. Nor can the independence of constitutional institutions be protected by disregarding the constitutional rules that guarantee it.”

Read more …

“That’s Part of the Process”

“Notably, the decoy, when asked by the Division of Elections how his name should appear on the ballot, reportedly asked to use “S” as a middle initial (like the senator) as opposed to his own initial of “J.”

• Democratic Leaders Call Voter Confusion Tactics Harmless, Humorous (Turley)

In his work “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell explains that “In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.” If so, the news this week took a truly Orwellian turn as Democrats rationalized or even praised the effort in Alaska to put a decoy “Dan Sullivan” on the ballot to confuse Alaskans and cause mistaken votes.


Other Democratic politicians are entirely silent on the allegation that the campaign of Democratic candidate Mary Peltola engineered this grossly unethical tactic. The very same people running on “saving Democracy” are, once again, defending ballot manipulation designed to negate the votes of citizens. It is the ultimate expression of rage politics, excusing any act needed to achieve power.

On NewsNation Now, Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA) went beyond many of his colleagues in saying that the Alaskan scandal shows precisely where all states, including Virginia, should go. When asked about the scandal, Subramanyam insisted that it showed how all states should embrace the widely criticized ranked-choice voting system. (Alaskans may finally reject the system this year). While asked about the use of a decoy candidate, Subramanyam bizarrely spun the question as third-party candidates — a bizarre claim since the fake Dan Sullivan has not campaigned, has never run for office, and is obviously on the ballot solely to confuse voters.

Nevertheless, Subramanyam insisted, while he would not run a decoy, “I also don’t have a ranked-choice voting system in Virginia. I wish I did, honestly. But, in Alaska, they have ranked-choice voting, and third-party candidates are very relevant. And so, if you recruited a third-party candidate who can take votes away from your opponent, that’s part of the process, and that’s just how it works in Alaska.” Previously, Subramanyam also supported the most radical gerrymandering effort in the nation (which was later struck down as unlawful).

Sen. Chris Murphy (D., Conn.) seemed to snowball as he tried to rationalize the move. He first attempted to blame it on one woman who was a “disgruntled former employee.” When CNN host Kaitlan Collins noted that The New York Times was relying on a large number of sources in the Peltola campaign, Murphy said it wouldn’t bother him at all to have decoys on his ballot because no one would be confused when voting. Of course, the entire reason you put another Dan Sullivan on the ballot is to confuse voters and cause citizens to throw away their votes on the wrong man. In a close election, that can easily make the difference in the outcome of the election.

Murphy also praised the Peltola campaign and said he “trusts” them, despite the New York Times saying they actively sought to cause such voting errors. In 2025, Murphy appeared on any cable show that would have him to declare that “those of us who believe that the threat to democracy is urgent” need to “act like it.” Most Democratic leaders refused to say anything at all in the face of an open effort to nullify votes through candidate confusion.

Pundits and party officials have dismissed the scandal as brass-knuckles politics or even as humorous. The head of Alaska’s Democratic Party, Eric Croft, insisted that the sole consideration is whether it is a crime, not whether it is unethical: “I reread all of Alaska’s statutes. I’m kind of a recovering attorney up here. And there is nothing, there’s no legal issue to it. On your, you know, sort of dirty tricks thing, I think Alaskans have a different take there too.” When pressed whether it is a good thing to try to confuse Alaskan voters and nullify their votes, Croft responded “No, I think it’s funny.”

That knee-slapper involves a politician and campaign that allegedly lied to the public about their involvement. It involves a decoy who is also accused of lying when he said he had no interaction with third parties and did not enter the race to confuse voters. (Notably, the decoy, when asked by the Division of Elections how his name should appear on the ballot, reportedly asked to use “S” as a middle initial (like the senator) as opposed to his own initial of “J.” ).

One would think that this would be an easy question for candidates who insist that they are defenders of democracy. However, in 2024, Democrats moved to remove Trump and other Republicans from ballots while claiming to be protecting voters by denying them the choice of candidates. The fact that the voters gave Trump the popular vote and swept every swing state only magnified the hypocrisy of these Democratic leaders. Yet, some of the same figures are back at it again with efforts to manipulate balloting to confuse or nullify votes in the name of protecting democracy.

Some of the same figures, such as Marc Elias, have reappeared in yet another election scandal. The Elias Law Group was named by the New York Times as involved in the controversy. Elias was a central figure in the Russian hoax as the campaign lawyer for Hillary Clinton. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) fined the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign for violating election rules in hiding the funding for the infamous Steele dossier. Before the election, Clinton officials denied any such involvement.

In an age of rage, consistency, like decency, is a stranger to politics. We are left again in that moment with lawyer Joseph Welch in the Army-McCarthy hearings in 1954: “Have you no shame, sir, at long last? Have you no shame?” The answer today is clear: No, but I have the votes.

Read more …

UK and EU cannot afford their own defense. Whether Trump is in office or not.

“Where are they going to come up with the funds to pay for a military investment they have declined to make for the past 50+ years?”

• Keir Starmer Says U.S. Will No Longer “Bankroll Europe’s Defense” (CTH)

Remember when former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told President Trump the Canadian government could not continue its economic policy if the United States demanded they become self-sufficient.


One of the key reasons cited by Trudeau was the Canadian dependence on the USA for defense. Canada simply could not spend the amount of money needed to create their own military at a level required for independent defense and simultaneously follow their govt spending plan. Canada relied on the U.S. military as their defense strategy.

Yesterday, former British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the same thing; only this time Starmer was saying the United States is no longer willing to “bankroll” Europe’s defense and both the U.K and European Union were going to need to find money to build their own military.

(VIA BBC) – Sir Keir Starmer has said Europe should build a common security framework, warning the change in its defence relationship with the US is permanent rather than “an aberration of the Trump presidency”.The former prime minister was speaking at a British Irish Chamber of Commerce (BICC) dinner in Dublin on Friday evening. Sir Keir said a “common security framework” for Europe was needed as much as a common market, with the UK at its centre.

He warned that “things will not go back to the way they were,” adding that the US had made clear it will no longer “bankroll” its European allies. (read more) This public statement and admission by Keir Starmer follow remarks by current Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney to Politico on the heels of the Canadian-EU summit, also yesterday.

“If you’re connected to a satellite system that a billionaire, almost trillionaire, decides to turn off at one moment or not, that’s not a good idea,” Carney said. Think about this for a few moments. Canada, the U.K and Europe are all facing the same problem…. MONEY! Where are they going to come up with the funds to pay for a military investment they have declined to make for the past 50+ years?

It’s not just an issue of finding funds for a standing military, hardware, ships, submarines, aircraft, tanks, heavy and light artillery, missiles and drones etc., they also have to fund the technological capabilities to use and deploy modern weapons. They also need advanced manufacturing, steel works, technological guidance systems, large numbers of strategically placed satellites, a space program that includes rockets to put them into orbit, and much, much more.

At scale this is multiple trillions, and that doesn’t include the baseline manufacturing systems needed to create all this independent infrastructure. It’s one thing to say, ‘we will build out our military capacity‘, and it’s another thing entirely to actually build it. Does Canada or Europe even have the human resources within the engineering sector to create all this infrastructure? Think about it.

When you really stand back and look at the required level of investment needed, in addition to the time it takes to build all of the ancillary processes that are required to meet such an expressed objective, it really puts the context of the Canadian, British and European opposition to President Trump into context.

What is more feasible? Doing what is required to build-out your own military defense systems; or is it simply easier to get rid of the person who stops you from using the USA as your standing army?…

Read more …

Scandal after Left Party candidate for mayor admits she ‘fears’ Islamists and Hamas-linked milieu.

“If even a top politician no longer feels safe, what are ordinary Berliners supposed to say, who in an emergency have no personal protection standing by?”

• Left Party Candidate For Berlin Mayor ‘Fears’ Islamists (RMX)


Elif Eralp speaks at the Extraordinary party congress of The Left Party in Berlin.

Berlin’s Left Party lead candidate for governing mayor, Elif Eralp, privately expressed fear of Hamas-linked figures tied to her party’s orbit in internal notes accidentally returned to Der Spiegel, raising sharp questions about her ability to lead the capital’s security structure.


The notes, part of an authorized interview draft sent back with visible internal comments this week, show Eralp writing that she and her husband have “fear of these people.” She asked her team to strike a question and her own answer about the activist Ibrahim Ibrahim, explaining: “I cannot put myself and my family in danger for Der Spiegel. What do we do now? Can we cancel the whole interview?” She added that she “should never have agreed to this interview.”

Eralp cited past advice from Berlin’s State Criminal Police Office (LKA) not to name specific individuals, noting that earlier guidance concerned organized crime and “now it’s about people with contacts to Hamas.” Ibrahim, a longtime activist linked to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) — a group designated as a terrorist organization by the EU and United States — appeared at the Left Party’s election victory party in Berlin-Neukölln after the Sept. 20 state election.

He has been described as praising Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar as a “martyr hero” and has roles in the United Palestinian National Committee, which Berlin’s domestic intelligence service has classified as extremist for supporting Hamas. Parts of the Left Party’s Neukölln base and some politicians have maintained contacts with this milieu; Ibrahim later traveled to Turkey for a gathering involving Hamas-linked figures.

The Left Party emerged as the strongest force with 25.7 percent of the vote in the latest Berlin election. Eralp has sought a coalition with the Social Democrats (SPD) and Greens. Her office has said she faces daily threats and insults, and security authorities advised against naming specific individuals in certain contexts.

Opposition parties seized on the disclosure. Kristin Brinker, chair of the AfD’s Berlin parliamentary group and the party’s lead candidate, said: “That Elif Eralp, albeit involuntarily, admits her fear of the criminal clans throws a glaring light on the state of internal security in our city. If even a top politician no longer feels safe, what are ordinary Berliners supposed to say, who in an emergency have no personal protection standing by?”

She added that the notes from Erlap illuminate the party’s condition, linking it to clan connections beyond known cases involving a Bundestag member and “rampant antisemitism.” Brinker concluded that the Left is “far from any governing capability.”

Brinker urged the Greens and SPD to end talks immediately with the Left to form a ruling government in Berlin. “This party and this woman must under no circumstances be entrusted with our city,” warned Brinker.

At a press appearance Thursday, Eralp declined to address the Spiegel notes directly, calling them private and internal. She stated she would not be intimidated and pledged to ensure both social and individual security for all Berliners, declaring she would act “with all means against organized crime, against terror, against everything,” including those who glorify violence.

In an interview with German newspaper Junge Freiheit, deputy chairman of the AfD parliamentary group, Sebastian Münzenmaier, said: “The revolution is devouring its children. For years, the left has defamed criticism of clan crime, mass migration, and Islamic glorification of terror as racist. Now, she is suddenly afraid of the ghosts she summoned.”

CDU Berlin leader Stefan Evers asked: “How is Elif Eralp supposed to ensure the security of millions of people as governing mayor if she herself is afraid of the Islamist environment of her party?”

He said the revelations heighten concern about a Left-led government and urged “the reasonable ones among the Greens and SPD” to “finally pull the emergency brake,” warning that fear of Islamists must not influence political decisions. Referring to clans and organized crime, outgoing Governing Mayor Kai Wegner (CDU) stated that a government “must never make its actions dependent on these structures — certainly it must not fear them.”

SPD figures also responded critically. Neukölln district mayor Martin Hikel said the episode shows “how strongly these terror-glorifying, antisemitic forces are anchored in the Left and want to come to power with the help of the Left.” SPD lead candidate Steffen Krach described the situation as shocking and stated there must be no Hamas sympathizers free to move in the city.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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