Rembrandt van Rijn Man in Oriental Costume (The Noble Slav) 1632
JD Vance says that we are going to see “a lot of people get indicted” for the Grand Conspiracy evidence that Kash & Tulsi have recently presented to the public.
“I absolutely want to see indictments…
If you look at what Tulsi and Kash Patel have revealed in the last couple… pic.twitter.com/Z8UUBBQ3Wc
— TheStormHasArrived (@TheStormRedux) August 10, 2025
Everybody stop what you’re doing and watch this.
Vice President JD Vance just delivered a masterclass and exposed how Democrats rig elections.
He calls out the 2020 election having “major statistical errors” of red states being undercounted and blue states overcounted.
The… pic.twitter.com/UeXcMCSS4c
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) August 10, 2025
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1954220638174113931
I really, really don't think people understand this.
Bondi (AG) isn't with her. Kash Patel (FBI) and John Ratcliffe (CIA) are not with her. Susie Wiles (CoS) is not with her. Tulsi is all alone.
The Israel-First group is also aligned against her.
If you doubt me, show me a… https://t.co/bNVq9NLFDD
— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) August 10, 2025
Bolton
https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1954219434995851499
Biden
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1954224964057600133
90
Happy 90th birthday to @RonPaul: a perfect day to recount one of the most impressive moments in a GOP Presidential debate, when — in 2007 — Paul was the only candidate to condemn the Iraq War, and warned that endless war provokes attacks like 9/11, as GOP lobbyists booed: pic.twitter.com/AMTetkrpUN
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) August 10, 2025
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1954238912425284001
rudy
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1954736523758141502
Waiting for the week-long Alaska storm…
X thread.
• Trump Just Held His Largest White House Briefing Yet (Nas)
Trump just held his largest White House briefing yet. Angside Pam Bondi, he dropped a series of announcements and some strong hints about what’s next for America. President Trump is now more powerful than ever. Everyone should read these biggest changes. A thread.
1/ Federal judges can no longer block Trump nationwide. Before, 1 liberal judge in California could stop Trump’s policies for all 50 states. Now, that judge’s ruling only affects their local district. Trump called this “a monumental victory for the Constitution.”
2/ The shocking truth about who’s been blocking Trump. Pam Bondi revealed that of 40 nationwide injunctions against Trump, 35 came from just 5 districts: Maryland, DC, Massachusetts, California, Washington. 94 districts total. But 5 controlled everything.
3/ Parents can now opt kids out of transgender content. The Supreme Court ruled: Parents can pull their kids from classes with LGBTQ materials. Trump: “Parents lost control of their child. This gives it back.” What are your thoughts? Controversial or common sense?
4/ No more taxpayer-funded transgender surgeries. Trump can now stop federal money going towards gender transitions. Again, previously blocked by courts. Unlocked by Trump. Tax dollars won’t fund these procedures anymore. Sound fair?
5/ They’ve arrested 2,711 TDA gang members. TDA = one of the world’s most violent gangs. Biden let them walk into America freely. Trump has arrested 2,711 so far. Bondi: “You should all feel safer now.”
6/ Sanctuary cities lose ALL federal funding. Liberal judges previously blocked this… But now, Trump can cut every penny. For Example, California gets “nothing” if it keeps protecting illegal immigrants. The money tap just turned off.
7/ Trump secured US mineral rights through an African peace deal. He brokered peace between Rwanda and Congo after years of war. The price for US involvement? “We’re getting a lot of the mineral rights from the Congo.” Strategic resources secured.
8/ Iran faces Trump’s hardest line yet. Asked if he’d bomb Iran again: “Without question. Absolutely.” His demands?
• Surrender ALL nuclear materials • Zero uranium production • Full inspection access/ No wiggle room.9/ Birthright citizenship heads to the Supreme Court. “It was for babies of slaves, not people scamming the system on vacation.” The matter goes to Court in October. If Trump wins, millions lose their automatic citizenship. His most controversial move yet. Are you with him?
10/ The real bombshell: Trump can now do EVERYTHING at once. With nationwide injunctions gone, he can simultaneously:
• End birthright citizenship
• Restrict immigration
• Build the wall
No more delays. But the genius move?11/ Trump didn’t just win one case. He eliminated the single tool blocking his entire agenda. Liberal judges can’t stop him anymore. “Americans are finally getting what they voted for.”
What the world comes to: Europeans now depend on Trump to defend their basic rights and freedoms. Which are under attack from their own “leaders”.
• Last Line Of Defense: USA Intervenes Against EU Digital Surveillance (Kolbe)
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has launched a lobbying campaign against the EU’s Digital Services Act. With this step, Americans have become the last line of defense for the free speech rights of EU citizens. If, in the past, U.S. President Donald Trump often spoke of the European Union as “a tough nut to crack,” he couldn’t have been more accurate. Freedom-loving EU citizens know exactly what he meant. In Brussels, a bizarre melange of control fetishism, economic dirigisme, and isolation from the outside world has developed—a combination that is no longer tolerable. Not least, Brussels’s fight against free expression in the digital sphere has revealed the true intentions of the von der Leyen Commission: the recovery of narrative dominance and control over political dissidence—achieved by cold-bloodedly sacrificing citizens’ fundamental freedoms.
U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance already issued multiple warnings in the spring about a European censorship empire. In a speech in the U.S. Senate, he denounced European digital legislation as an attack on Western liberties. In his address at the Munich Security Conference, he went so far as to suggest cutting ties with the Europeans if they did not reverse their illiberal, dictatorial trajectory. As usual, American criticism fell on deaf ears in Brussels. Although Brussels swallowed the bitter pill of an asymmetrical trade deal with the U.S. two weeks ago, both the hidden protectionism disguised as climate regulation and harmonization standards, as well as the repressive digital laws, remain intact. This is detrimental not only to free speech among Europeans but also for American companies—undoubtedly a key target of the EU censors.
The EU’s discriminatory ambitions through the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the corresponding Digital Markets Act (DMA) primarily target U.S. communication platforms like X, Telegram, and Meta. If these platforms don’t conform to EU rules—granting access to internal communications and aiding Brussels’s surveillance efforts—they face billions in fines. Much like Britain’s digital ID program, Brussels now masks its shamelessly invasive censorship with claims of youth protection and anti-hate measures. It’s tiresome to hear—but, as always, it’s about “their democracy,” or, to put it more accurately, a massive concrete barrier constructed to shield against the audacious citizen seeking to preserve privacy from an unbounded EU bureaucracy.
It seems Americans, even before EU citizens, have finally lost patience with Brussels. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is next in line to confront the EU Commission, stepping into attack mode. This week, Rubio instructed all U.S. embassies across the EU to initiate a coordinated lobbying blitz against Brussels’s censorship package surrounding the DSA. The allegation: Under the guise of security and responsibility, the EU is deliberately suppressing free speech in digital spaces and targeting U.S.-based platforms and communication companies. Rubio has tasked his diplomats with urging governments and regulators to amend the DSA. At the same time, they are to record and report censorship incidents involving U.S. citizens and companies to ramp up pressure for reform.
This marks another daring challenge from Washington to the EU’s expansive control apparatus. The trade war between the U.S. and the EU has now shifted fully into the digital realm. Brussels’s response to Rubio’s initiative was swift. In an official statement, the EU Commission flatly dismissed the censorship allegations: “The claims of censorship connected to the DSA are entirely baseless. Freedom of expression is a core right in the EU.” They added coldly: “Our EU regulations and standards were never up for discussion—and they will not be.” In other words, Brussels refuses to be swayed in building its digital citadel of narrative control—least of all by Washington.
The U.S. attempt to protect its businesses from EU overreach draws them into a broader clash between EU citizens and Brussels’s increasingly omnipotent central authority. Brussels senses growing public pressure and feels exposed amid a deepening economic crisis. Grand narratives—like human-caused climate change and the need for open borders to avert a demographic crisis—are eroding public consensus and exposing Brussels’s failed centralization of Europe’s economy. We are witnessing Brussels’s last desperate stand to defend its narrative monopoly against a rising opposition that is increasingly reclaiming public and media spaces. What happens in the U.S. now matters fundamentally for EU citizens. Under President Trump’s administration, Europe-inspired climate agendas are being reversed, and funding for public media and NGOs is being rolled back.
“some sprouts of common sense are appearing in the dialogue with the US, which have been sorely lacking in recent months and years.”
“disappearance of conditions for maintaining the unilateral moratorium”
• Russia and US ‘Very Far From Detente’ – Moscow (RT)
While Washington has recently moved toward fixing relations with Moscow, celebrations would be premature, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has said. The diplomat added that Russia had earlier this month stopped abiding by a self-imposed moratorium on the deployment of intermediate-range missiles to “cool hotheads in certain NATO capitals.” While the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty between Moscow and Washington collapsed in 2019, Russia had nonetheless continued observing the restrictions. During his first term in office, President Donald Trump pulled the US out of the accord, citing supposed Russian violations – a claim the Kremlin has denied.
In an interview with broadcaster Rossiya-1 on Sunday, Ryabkov observed that “some sprouts of common sense are appearing in the dialogue with the US, which have been sorely lacking in recent months and years.” However, the use of the term “detente” would be wholly unwarranted at this point, the deputy minister stressed. Speaking of Russia’s decision to lift a self-imposed moratorium on the deployment of intermediate-range missiles, Ryabkov argued that Moscow had no other choice in light of what the “Americans and their allies, especially the European warmongers, are undertaking.” The Russian Foreign Ministry cited the “disappearance of conditions for maintaining the unilateral moratorium” in explaining the decision earlier this month.
The statement said the West was creating a “direct threat” to Russian security, with the recent Talisman Sabre exercise in Australia being an example. The drills in mid-July featured the US Typhon mobile ground-based launcher, designed for firing Tomahawk cruise missiles, which have a range up to 1,800km, and SM-6 multipurpose missiles, with a range up to 500km.vKremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated around the same time that Moscow reserves the right to deploy its own intermediate-range missiles “when deemed necessary,” and would not announce it. Speaking last month, Trump hinted that he would like to resume negotiations with Russia to maintain the existing restrictions on nuclear weapons.
“One White House official also told CNN that “anything involving Zelensky” would likely take place after the Trump-Putin meeting..”
• Zelensky Not Invited To Putin-Trump Summit – WaPo (RT)
Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has not been invited to attend next week’s summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump in the US, the Washington Post has reported, citing an official briefed on the negotiations. On Friday, Trump announced he would meet Putin on August 15 in Alaska. In the hours after the announcement, several outlets reported that Zelensky might take part in some form, with a senior White House official telling CBS News the planning was “still fluid” and that Zelensky could be involved. However, the Washington Post has reported that no invitation has been extended to Zelensky so far. Reuters has also said, citing sources, that the White House is still considering inviting him, but is currently focused on organizing a bilateral meeting, at Russia’s request.
CNN sources, however, said that the Trump administration hasn’t ruled out Zelensky being in Alaska during the summit. One White House official also told CNN that “anything involving Zelensky” would likely take place after the Trump-Putin meeting. Putin has said he will not rule out a meeting with Zelensky, but the Kremlin has stressed that the conditions for such talks have not been met. Trump has suggested that upcoming negotiations could involve “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.” However, on Saturday, Zelensky rejected any land-swap proposals, citing limitations imposed by Ukraine’s constitution.
The Washington Post has noted that, given the strained relationship between Trump and Zelensky after their tense Oval Office meeting earlier this year, Zelensky’s refusal to consider territorial concessions could risk potential blowback from Trump, who has previously described him as difficult to negotiate with. Russian officials have repeatedly said that any peace deal must address the root causes of the conflict and reflect the realities on the ground, including the status of Crimea as well as the Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, which joined Russia after referendums in 2022.
Defining where that is could be a fight in itself.
• US Backing Ukraine Settlement Based On Current Front Line – Vance (RT)
A resolution of the Ukraine conflict should be based on the existing conflict front lines, US Vice President J.D. Vance has said. He described it as a realistic if imperfect foundation for a negotiated peace. Speaking to Fox News, Vance credited President Donald Trump with securing a breakthrough that could bring Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to the table. “If you take where the current line of contact between Russia and Ukraine is, we’re going to try to find some negotiated settlement that the Ukrainians and the Russians can live with… where the killing stops,” Vance said, admitting that “it’s not going to make anybody super happy.”
Vance claimed Trump had convinced Putin to walk back his refusal to meet with Zelensky, and that scheduling talks between the three leaders was now under discussion. Asked if Putin and Zelensky should meet before involving Trump, Vance replied, “I actually don’t think it would be that productive,” arguing that the US president must be the one to “bring these two together” for meaningful progress.Russia has long said it is interested in a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict, but has insisted on one that brings about a permanent and stable peace.
Trump and Putin are set to meet next Friday in Alaska, with a possible deal on the conflict between Kiev and Moscow at the top of the agenda. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has already rejected any truce that would involve territorial concessions, despite Trump saying they would be part of the proposed agreement. Moscow has called Zelensky’s continued claim to the presidency unconstitutional since his term expired last year. Putin has said he is willing to meet the Ukrainian leader to finalize – but not negotiate – a truce. He also suggested that the question of Zelensky’s disputed status needs to be addressed to ensure the legality of any future treaty.
“Ukraine’s European backers can buy weapons from American producers if they want to continue supporting Kiev, and the US will be “okay with that”…
I know, I know, money is money, and the industry is lobbying hard. But you shouldn’t be “okay with that”. Stop the war!
• US Is ‘Done’ Funding Ukraine – Vance (RT)
Washington is not going to fund Ukraine anymore, US Vice President J.D. Vance told Fox News on Sunday. Ukraine’s European backers can buy weapons from American producers if they want to continue supporting Kiev, and the US will be “okay with that,” Vance added. “But we’re not going to fund it ourselves anymore,” he said. The interview was published after Vance met with several Western European and Ukrainian officials in London, including UK Foreign Minister David Lammy. According to media reports, Vance’s trip was intended to pave the way for a summit between the Russian and US presidents in Alaska on Friday, where resolving the conflict between Kiev and Moscow is expected to be at the top of the agenda. Vance suggested that Kiev’s European backers should play a bigger role providing funding if they “care so much about this conflict.”
“Americans, I think, are sick of continuing to send their money, their tax dollars, to this particular conflict. But if the Europeans want to step up and buy the weapons from American producers, we’re okay with that. But we’re not going to fund it ourselves anymore,” he said. The US president had said earlier that the ideas under discussion include “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both” sides, adding that Vladimir Zelensky would need to find a way to approve such a deal under Ukrainian law. Zelensky has rejected any such agreement, claiming that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue. “The Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupiers,” he proclaimed. Moscow’s senior negotiator Kirill Dmitriev has warned that countries trying to prolong the Ukraine conflict will likely go to great lengths to derail the planned meeting between Putin and Trump.
No arms from the US and no military from Europe (let alone the US). Soon, it’ll hardly be a war anymore…
• Ukraine’s Backers Won’t Provide Military Personnel – Sunday Times (RT)
Members of the so-called “Coalition of the Willing,” comprised of Kiev’s European backers, will not be sending troops to Ukraine despite previously floating the idea, The Sunday Times has claimed, citing an anonymous source. Back in March, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that London was prepared to deploy “boots on the ground and planes in the air, together with others.” Earlier this year, French President Emmanuel Macron had made a similar statement. The hypothetical contingent would be acting in a “peacekeeping” capacity if and when Kiev and Moscow agree to a ceasefire. However, Germany, Poland, Spain, and Italy have all expressed reluctance or refusal to commit troops for the potential mission.
Russia has strongly opposed the stationing of NATO military personnel in the neighboring country under any pretext. In an article on Saturday, the Sunday Times predicted that should the upcoming meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, result in a cessation of hostilities in Ukraine, Kiev would likely want to see “international monitors on the ground.” However, according to the British newspaper, “it is unlikely that the answer here will be the ‘coalition of the willing’.” The publication quoted an unnamed UK defense official as acknowledging that “no one wants to send their troops to die in Ukraine.”
Back in May, the Financial Times, citing an anonymous source, reported that the coalition’s plans for a deployment in Ukraine were “dead” now that the US had refused to provide backing. A little earlier, The Times similarly claimed that the plan was unrealistic due to personnel shortages faced by European militaries. Last month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov accused European NATO member states of pursuing a “militaristic [and] confrontational” course. Back in April, Secretary of Russia’s National Security Council Sergey Shoigu, who previously served as the country’s defense minister, warned that the arrival of NATO troops in Ukraine could lead to a third world war. The Kremlin has repeatedly described the Ukraine conflict as a proxy war being waged against Russia by the West, with Kiev being used as an expendable battering ram.
Work together. Much preferred.
• Trump and Putin Could Discuss More Than Just Ukraine in Alaska (Sp.)
The location of the Putin-Trump summit represents the “closest proximity” of the United States to Russia, argues Earl Rasmussen, a retired lieutenant colonel with over 20 years in the US Army who is currently an international consultant. “This makes it a very symbolic area. Furthermore, the Arctic is a key region for development, offering economic opportunities and presenting certain security considerations,” he tells Sputnik. “While the choice was surprising, considering the cultural and economic potential, Alaska may indeed be an appropriate place for this meeting.” While the Ukrainian conflict and “broader European security” are going to be discussed at the meeting, “a key area of focus is expected to be economic and trade development, along with its potential.”
“Russia possesses the longest Arctic coastline, which will be relevant in discussions. Canada also has significant Arctic exposure. Consequently, these factors will play a role from both security and economic perspectives, encompassing economic development and trade,” Rasmussen notes. While there is potential for a breakthrough – in the Ukrainian conflict, in trade and in overall US-Russia relations – there are powers in Europe (Britain in particular) who could “disrupt any agreements,” Rasmussen warns.
The fact that Putin and Trump are meeting in person is a positive development, and “the potential for Trump to visit Russia later also bodes well.” “Continuous dialogue, regardless of disagreements or resolutions, is positive, unlike the previous administration’s approach of attempting to isolate Russia, which proved ineffective,” Rasmussen remarks. “Facing major future economic challenges, especially for Europeans, and an ongoing global trade war, any positive developments from this meeting could be beneficial, not only for peace but also for economic and trade relations, and global security.”
“Until 1867, Alaska was Russian territory before the US purchased it from Tsar Alexander II for $7.2 million — after Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War left its treasury depleted.”
• Peace Talks And Power Plays On Former Russian Soil (Kolbe)
Donald Trump stays true to his line and asserts dominance over the geopolitical chessboard — symbolically as well. Following the announcement of a trade deal with the EU at his golf resort in Turnberry, Scotland, peace talks in the Ukraine conflict with Russian President Vladimir Putin are now scheduled in Alaska. The venue of a negotiation often predefines the balance of power between opponents. In that sense, it must be read as a clear show of force that both European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer — notably without military fanfare — traveled to Trump’s private resort in Turnberry to be politically “placed” by the American president. Judging by the outcome of those talks, one conclusion is unavoidable: the European Union no longer plays in the league of the great powers. Washington’s interest in intra-European affairs has noticeably cooled, focusing essentially on two things: an orderly withdrawal from military entanglements, and the defense of US corporate interests in the EU single market.
We are witnessing a shift of power from the Atlantic to the Pacific. It’s hardly a secret: China and the United States will be setting the standards of international politics in the future. Russia, the world’s most resource-rich country, may be labeled by Europeans as a pariah state and a malicious hub of all evil — but that does not change the fact that the age of postcolonial European dominance is ending, and Moscow will have no trouble playing its resource-market cards outside the shrinking European sphere of influence. nIn this spirit, Russian President Vladimir Putin will travel on August 15 to “away territory” in Alaska — once part of Russia — to preliminarily negotiate peace terms in Ukraine with President Trump. Trump sees progress in the stalemated conflict and stresses that the talks will likely lead to a land-swap arrangement “to the benefit of both sides.”
While the Russian government has not issued an official statement, much suggests Moscow will not return the occupied territories in Donbas, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, nor Crimea. Russia currently holds the military initiative and is increasing pressure on Ukraine and its allies to force a resolution. To avoid overshadowing the personal meeting, the White House postponed a tariff ultimatum — originally set for August 9 — that would have imposed 100% duties on Russian goods if the war continued, pushing it back to August 27. We will have to see what unfolds in the meantime and whether potential disruptions derail this cautious rapprochement once more. One recalls the much-discussed visit of former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who, two months after the outbreak of war, acted as a kind of shadow diplomat to reject a Russian-proposed peace deal.
What is now on the table again — a land swap and Ukraine’s exclusion from NATO — was flatly rejected back then. Hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded later, there appears to be a renewed turn toward diplomacy in light of the bleak military situation. This time, however, it is the Americans applying pressure on the warring sides. From Europe, little is heard apart from intense rearmament efforts and a declared will to “re-militarize” the population, as the German government has repeatedly emphasized. The diplomatic thread is now to be picked up again in Alaska. Until 1867, Alaska was Russian territory before the US purchased it from Tsar Alexander II for $7.2 million — after Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War left its treasury depleted.
The geography here speaks volumes: Alaska lies between Russia and the US, separated only by the Bering Strait, symbolizing the direct neighborhood of two great powers that may now be entering a new phase of rapprochement in a rapidly changing world order. For the Ukraine talks, the location signals that even deeply rooted geopolitical divides can be bridged through pragmatic agreements. At the same time, Alaska has strategic importance for the Arctic, whose trade routes and resources will likely be integrated into the future architecture of global power. By hosting the Russian president at such a neuralgic spot, Trump fuses historical reconciliation with present-day power politics, creating a symbolic setting that suggests readiness for compromise without conceding sovereignty.
Why you don’t want the Europeans at the table.
• European Leaders Call for Protection of Ukraine as Trump Set to Meet Putin (ET)
A coalition of European leaders released a joint statement on Aug. 9 welcoming the news of President Donald Trump’s upcoming meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, and stressing the need to ensure that European and Ukrainian interests are protected as the two leaders talk about ending the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Trump and Putin are scheduled to meet in Alaska on Aug. 15. The joint statement included French, Italian, German, Polish, British, and Finnish leaders, as well as the president of the European Commission. “We share the conviction that a diplomatic solution must protect Ukraine’s and Europe’s vital security interests,” the leaders said, adding that they “agree that these vital interests include the need for robust and credible security guarantees that enable Ukraine to effectively defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
They also expressed support for the principle that “international borders must not be changed by force.” “The current line of contact should be the starting point of negotiations,” the statement said. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a statement on Aug. 9 that “the Ukrainian people deserve peace.” “But all partners must understand what a dignified peace is,” he said, adding that Ukraine “will not reward Russia for what it has perpetrated.” On Aug. 10, Zelenskyy said he “values and fully supports” the joint statement by the European leaders. “The end of the war must be fair, and I am grateful to everyone who stands with Ukraine and our people today for the sake of peace in Ukraine, which is defending the vital security interests of our European nations,” Zelenskyy wrote on X.
Trump has said a deal could involve “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both” parties. After speaking with Zelenskyy, as well as German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron took to X. “Ukraine’s future cannot be decided without the Ukrainians, who have been fighting for their freedom and security for over three years now,” he wrote. “Europeans will also necessarily be part of the solution, as their own security is at stake.”
The Trump–Putin meeting will follow White House special envoy Steve Witkoff’s visit to Moscow on Aug. 6, during which time Witkoff met with Putin for three hours of talks. Details of their discussion have not been disclosed. It also follows a meeting between Vice President JD Vance and British Foreign Secretary David Lammy, as well as representatives of European allies and Ukraine, on Aug. 9 at Chevening House, a mansion outside of London, to discuss Trump’s peace push. “President Putin, I believe, wants to see peace. And Zelenskyy wants to see peace,” Trump said on Aug. 8. “Now President Zelenskyy has to get … everything he needs because he is going to have to get ready to sign something, and I think he is working hard to get that done.”
Kasparov: a chess genius lost in the real world.
• A Rare Glimpse Into The Sick Minds Behind The EU’s Warmongering (Amar)
In the world of Western mainstream media political commentary, not everything is fun. In fact, mostly, things are grimly serious, the sort of seriousness that comes with solid, never-questioned self-importance. But sometimes that professional pomposity reaches a tipping point when strenuous efforts to be very earnest involuntarily produce priceless outcomes. That is the case with a recent elephantine op-ed that has surfaced in Politico under the illustrious names of Gabrielius Landsbergis and Garry Kasparov. Its one, relentlessly reiterated argument is touchingly simple as well as out of touch with the world we really live in: The EU, this fantasy goes, is too consensual, peaceful, and nice (tell the migrants drowning in the Mediterranean or traded as slaves in Libya with de facto EU support).
It must become tough, decisive, and fierce, with plenty of arms and gritty oomph. Because otherwise it won’t survive in a world shaped by the big bad “global network of authoritarians” (I won’t enumerate them here; it’s just the usual suspects of every Centrist’s fever dream) and, for good measure, terrorists, too. (Surely, the latter, at least, do no longer include Mr. Jolani, the former leader of the Al Qaeda franchise in Syria who has recently been reborn miraculously as an avatar of diversity now going by Al Sharaa?) Landsbergis is a political nepo baby, enthusiastic NATO sectarian, and the former foreign minister of Lithuania. While popular at international meet-ups of adult – so they say at least – Europeans calling US presidents “daddy,” a 2023 poll back home in Lithuania saw him fail to breach the 2-percent threshold.
If that sounds like perfect material for a blind date with Kamala Harris, Landsbergis certainly has time on his hands after losing his constituency last year and announcing he wanted to take a break from politics. No less, it seems, than his voters clearly needed a break from him. Kasparov is, by comparison with Landsbergis, at least an original phenomenon, the idiot savant of chess. A former world champion, he has now spent decades proving that one can be a chess genius and a perfect dunce in every other respect, especially politics. Since he has combined this obstinate – and almost brave, if that is the word – playing to his worst weaknesses with an equally stubborn obsession with going after Russia and its leadership he still has his fans, in the West.
Together, Landsbergis and Kasparov have signed off on a gargantuan effort to produce another Long Telegram. Clearly, they are driven by a comically misplaced ambition to best American diplomat and Ur-Cold Warrior’ George Kennan – a complex, dour, and vain man, but certainly no fool, as his later fall from official grace and opposition to daft Western expansionism showed – who issued the renowned call to arms against the Soviet Union in 1946/47. What early Cold War Kennan did for the US – and by extension, its postwar empire – Kasparov and Landsbergis would very much, desperately like to be able to do for the EU. And they have striven mightily. Yet they have strutted into the classical trap of the epigone: think of their imitation clarion call as a mix between embarrassingly poor-but-eager fan fiction, a bizarre alternative history of the EU, and a rambling and rather dull party speech masquerading as an op-ed.
Yes, that is how bad it is. Indeed, the screed by the Lithuanian has-been and the chess master who went full blockhead is so self-defeatingly shoddy that it’s difficult to know where to begin. So, for starters, just for a rough sense of what we are dealing with, this is a text asserting the EU systematically promotes politicians who are “excellent negotiators.” Such as Ursula von der Leyen, we must assume? The one really in charge (although no one can coherently explain why) in the EU who has just “negotiated” a grotesquely disadvantageous anti-”deal” – really an unconditional surrender without a fight – with the US, built on the elegantly simple principle “You get everything, we get nothing, and we’ll pay you for that as well.”
“You don’t just indict people to indict people. You indict people because they broke the law…”
• JD Vance Drops a Russiagate Truth Bomb (Margolis)
Vice President JD Vance just dropped a bombshell that’s should have D.C. swamp creatures shaking in their boots. During a pre-taped interview on Fox News’s “Sunday Morning Futures,” Vance boldly predicted a forthcoming wave of indictments tied to the Russiagate scandal, asserting that parts of the intelligence community were weaponized to serve political agendas instead of safeguarding national security. Speaking with host Maria Bartiromo, Vance made it clear he wants accountability—but only where the law is truly broken. His remarks come amid growing evidence of serious abuses of power during the lead-up to and early days of the Trump administration.
“I absolutely want to see indictments, Maria. Look, of course, you’ve got to have the law follow the facts here. You don’t just indict people to indict people. You indict people because they broke the law,” Vance said. He acknowledged that legal standards must be upheld, but emphasized that the revelations brought forward by Tulsi Gabbard and Kash Patel in recent weeks leave little doubt about widespread misconduct. Vance accused key figures within the intelligence agencies of essentially “defrauding the American people” by converting Hillary Clinton’s campaign talking points into “intelligence.” He described how those operatives manipulated and distorted information to fit a predetermined narrative aimed at undermining Donald Trump. “They basically did is they defrauded the American people in order to take Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign talking points and turn them into intelligence by defrauding the American people, defrauding the intelligence agencies, lying about what the intel said.”
.@VP on the explosive new revelations of the Russia collusion hoax origins: "I don't know how anybody can look at that and say that there wasn't aggressive violations of the law… We have got to have consequences for it, or we're just going to see the same play repeated again." pic.twitter.com/fiXzhwK4tu
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) August 10, 2025
As Vance notes, this was not a matter of minor exaggeration but a systematic effort to selectively inflate certain pieces of information that supported Clinton’s narrative while burying or ignoring anything that contradicted it. “They would take something that supported a Hillary Clinton campaign talking point and they would overemphasize it and exaggerate it,” Vance said. “They took anything that actually contradicted that narrative and they buried it deep.” This distortion, Vance argued, amounted to a laundering of political propaganda through official government channels—a betrayal not only of the intelligence community’s mission but of the American public’s trust. “That’s a violation of the people’s trust. That’s a violation of what our intelligence services should be doing,” he said.
“I absolutely think they broke the law, and you’re gonna see a lot of people get indicted for that,” he added. I hope he’s right. The vice president made a pointed distinction between the intelligence community’s proper role and what actually transpired. “What do you want our intelligence community to be doing? I want them to be catching bad guys. I want them to be making sure that terrorists aren’t going to kill innocent American civilians.” Instead, he said, these agencies served as tools to legitimize a political narrative in the media. “It is sick and it’s disgusting. It hurt the intelligence community, it hurt the American people, and it hurt the first Trump administration,” Vance charged. The scandal, he warned, cannot be allowed to stand without consequence. “We’ve got to have consequences for it or we’re just going to see the same play repeated again and again.”
Vance’s remarks expose a dangerous truth: The left weaponized the intelligence community to undermine a free and fair election through blatant deception. What happens in the coming months will determine whether justice is served or if these agencies will keep slipping through oversight and accountability. His warning is unmistakable—if America lets its intelligence services become tools of political warfare, the damage inflicted won’t just fade away; it will scar the foundations of our democracy for years to come.
“.. the Constitution says: ‘If he approves, he shall sign it.’ So it says, ‘sign it.’ Sign it. So an autopen would raise a real problem if he signed it by autopen, which is not a real signature,”
• House Oversight Seeks To Overturn Biden’s Pardons, Executive Orders (JTN)
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer says his investigation into Joe Biden’s mental decline as president could be used as evidence to overturn some of his pardons or executive orders because his senior staff have failed to prove he knew what he was signing amid accusations of mental decline. “It’s questionable whether or not it’s legal to use an autopen on a legal document, but what’s not questionable is if the President of the United States had no idea what was being signed with using the autopen in his name,” Comer told the Just the News, No Noise TV show on Friday. “Then, you know, that’s not legal.” Comer, a Kentucky Republican, said he believes the evidence his investigation uncovers can be used to also call into question the validity of some of the former president’s clemency acts, especially after the disastrous summer 2024 presidential debate in which Biden’s poor performance gave rise to questions about his mental capacity.
“I think at the end of the day, our investigation … could be used as evidence in trying to overturn some of those pardons and some of the executive orders, because the autopen was used so frequently … after that debate,” said Comer. Former Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz told Just the News in March that challenges to Biden’s autopen use would certainly end up before the courts. “They will end up in court, and there are going to be two issues. One, the nature of what was signed – was it a pardon, or was it a bill from Congress, for example. And second, the nature of the autopen,” he said. “First, the nature of what’s signed. If it was a bill, here’s what the Constitution says: ‘If he approves, he shall sign it.’ So it says, ‘sign it.’ Sign it. So an autopen would raise a real problem if he signed it by autopen, which is not a real signature,” Dershowitz said of bill signed by the president.
Of pardons, the legal scholar said the Constitution does not require a signature, but “it will still raise the issue: Did he actually pardon? Or did somebody else just write the signature without really getting approval from President Biden? You know, we know there were mental health issues there. So there the issue will be: Did he approve the pardon?”
[..] After Biden left office, Comer launched an investigation into the former administration, to uncover how senior officials worked to cover up the president’s mental condition and into the use of an autopen to sign various presidential documents, from executive orders to pardons, during his final months in office. Comer said what his committee has uncovered so far may be enough to call into question the executive orders and pardons that Biden issued in those final months. “The evidence, it shows at the least, that Joe Biden really didn’t know what was being done with those executive orders. He admitted to the New York Times that he didn’t look, himself, at all those pardons, that he delegated that to staff. Well, that implicated himself,” Comer told Just the News.
“And I think that you know, at the end of the day, these Biden inner circle people haven’t been able to prove that Joe Biden knew what was being signed with his autopen,” he continued. Neera Tanden, the former director of Biden’s Domestic Policy Council, told the committee that she directed the use of the autopen, but without knowing who in the president’s inner circle was giving ultimate approval for the acts. “Ms. Tanden testified that she had minimal interaction with President Biden, despite wielding tremendous authority,” Comer said of the interview, which took place in late June.
“She explained that to obtain approval for autopen signatures, she would send decision memos to members of the president’s inner circle and had no visibility of what occurred between sending the memo and receiving it back with approval. Her testimony raises serious questions about who was really calling the shots in the Biden White House amid the president’s obvious decline,” Comer continued.
Basement material.
• The Left Won’t Like What Trump Just Did to Obama’s Portrait (Margolis)
Donald Trump has sent an unmistakable message—Barack Obama’s White House portrait has once again been moved. It’s been tucked away where visitors won’t see the grinning image of a president whose tenure was marked by scandal, deception, and failed policies. Unfortunately, it’s not in the garbage. CNN reports the portrait now sits in an out-of-the-way corner, away from guests who don’t need a reminder of Obama’s disastrous legacy and his effort to frame Trump with collusion charges. This is more than redecorating — it’s a statement about accountability and honesty in presidential legacies. By moving the portrait, Trump delivers a quiet but clear verdict on one of the most corrupt administrations in modern history. It’s a refreshing change, signaling that the Trump administration refuses to glorify a man who left America weaker, more divided, and less respected abroad.
Displaying presidential portraits carries symbolic weight, representing the continuity of democracy and respect for the office. But that respect depends on presidents upholding their constitutional duties—something Obama’s eight years failed to do. Under Obama, federal agencies were weaponized: The IRS targeting scandal should have ended careers and triggered prosecutions, yet his Justice Department protected perpetrators while conservatives suffered harassment. The Fast and Furious gun-running scandal led to the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, yet Obama used executive privilege to shield his lackeys from accountability. Most egregiously, Obama’s administration orchestrated the Russia collusion hoax. As PJ Media has previously reported, the FBI, CIA, and DOJ were weaponized to push a fabricated narrative, even as Obama was briefed on Hillary Clinton’s plan to link Trump to Russia during the 2016 campaign.
“Trump directed staff to move the Obama portrait to the top of the Grand Staircase, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN, where it will now be out of view from thousands of visitors who tour the White House each day. One of the sources added that the portraits of both Bushes are also now in the staircase area. Multiple sources have said that the president is directly involved with nearly everything that is done to the aesthetic of the White House, big or small.CNN obtained a photo of the Obama portrait hanging at the top of the stairwell in a corner, at the landing of the entrance to the private residence. That area is heavily restricted to members of the first family, US Secret Service agents, and a limited number of White House and executive residence staff. It is firmly out of view for any visitor hoping to see the photorealistic Robert McCurdy painting of the former president, a source familiar with the matter confirmed.”
It is unclear from the report who would want to see the portrait of Obama. The portrait relocation sends exactly the right message about presidential accountability. Obama’s legacy shouldn’t be celebrated in America’s most sacred political space—it should serve as a cautionary tale about what happens when constitutional guardrails fail and partisan operatives masquerade as public servants. Trump’s decision reflects a deeper understanding of presidential responsibility. Unlike his predecessor, Trump faced relentless investigation, impeachment attempts, and media hostility, yet he never weaponized federal agencies against political opponents.
He never orchestrated surveillance operations against rival campaigns. He never used the justice system as a political weapon. By moving Obama’s portrait, Trump demonstrates that actions have consequences and that the White House should honor presidents who actually honored their oath of office. Obama’s scandals aren’t partisan talking points—they were fundamental betrayals of American democracy that should disqualify him from the honor of prominent display in the people’s house.
Sharyl
Real journalist Sharyl Attkisson reads a passage from her bestselling book, Follow the Science:
"[In 2021], to make the Covid shot seem successful… the CDC unilaterally redefined 200 years of the world's understanding of what constitutes a vaccine without so much as an… pic.twitter.com/924nWKufWs
— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) August 9, 2025
mRNA
BHATTACHARYA: “It's very important for people to understand that … as far as public health goes for vaccines, the mRNA platform is no longer viable … And what you're seeing with Colbert … is frustration because they're no longer getting their way.” pic.twitter.com/ltPFGs570O
— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) August 10, 2025
Yellow-Legged Frogs
A State Department of Fish and Wildlife sends a letter to a home/landowner asking for permission to access a creek on his property to document the decline in a certain species of unheard of frogs.
The property owners' response in the second letter is EPIC.
Letter from Dept. Of… pic.twitter.com/4dSPcVrdiX
— Mike Netter (@nettermike) August 9, 2025
Castles
Concentration of castles in Europe.
The country with the most castles is Germany. It’s estimated the country has around 25,000 castles within its borders.
Wales is the country with the most castles per square mile. Despite its small size, Wales had over 600 castles.
The French… pic.twitter.com/tPtvCW9jeQ
— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) August 10, 2025
Sinise
Actor Gary Sinise took over 1,000 children of fallen soldiers to Disneyland, free of charge pic.twitter.com/BPqEZ6pkMF
— Dudes Posting Their W’s (@DudespostingWs) August 10, 2025
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
