Menu Icon

Debt Rattle November 13 2024

Nov 132024
 
 November 13, 2024  Posted by at 9:45 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  92 Responses »


Wilhelm Trübner A Gorgon‘s head 1891

 

• Did US Deep State Allow Trump to Win? (Sp.)
• Trump Builds No-Nonsense Team (JTN)
• Musk And Vivek Ramaswamy To Head Department Of Government Efficiency (ZH)
• Can Trump Succeed? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Gorka Urges Trump To Intervene In Senate Leader Race, Endorse Rick Scott (JTN)
• Marco Rubio Emerges As Finalist For Trump’s Secretary Of State (JTN)
• Trump Names John Ratcliffe As CIA Director (ZH)
• Florida Surgeon General Ladapo Ready To Serve Trump Admin (Attkisson)
• Judge Merchan Delays Decision On Trump Guilty Verdict In Hush Money Case (JTN)
• MSNBC, CNN Ratings Collapse After Election While Fox News Flourishes (ZH)
• Zelensky Tries to Woo Trump With Revised ‘Victory Plan’ (Sp.)
• UK Could Send Troops To Ukraine – Boris Johnson (RT)
• Trump Will Abandon Two Key Principles Of US Foreign Policy (Gevorg Mirzayan)
• What Rough Beast? (Juan Cole)
• A 1984 Conference Forged Israel’s Influence Over US Media (Klarenberg)

 

 

 

 

Senate
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856400926937846131

Bannon

Sachs

Kamala broke

Voter ID
https://twitter.com/i/status/1855955650687246392

 

 

 

 

“They [the US establishment] need a charismatic, populist firebrand to boost recruitment and spearhead the rush to war..”

• Did US Deep State Allow Trump to Win? (Sp.)

On election day Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton suggested that the vote count might take days as in 2020, triggering election rigging suspicions among X users. However, Donald Trump was declared the winner the day after the election. Amid pre-election claims from conservative commentators that the US establishment would not allow Donald Trump to win, some American commentators have suggested that Trump voter enthusiasm was “too big to rig” while others speculated that the purported vote-rigging mechanisms in place had been stopped by the ruling elites. According to this argument, the elites reasoned that Trump could be maneuvered into pro-war positions and would be more successful in marshaling public support than Democratic candidate Kamala Harris and, as such, the deep state ‘allowed Trump to win.’

Some commentators presume that the US establishment sees Trump and his popularity as a convenient vehicle for new overseas campaigns as part of his efforts to “make America great again”. Patriots often think of greatness in terms of military dominance, they say. “They [the US establishment] need a charismatic, populist firebrand to boost recruitment and spearhead the rush to war. Harris can’t do that. Harris had trouble attracting even a hundred supporters to her rallies,” wrote US political commentator Mike Whitney, suggesting Iran could be the next target. The fact that Trump has appointed Elise Stefanik, a firebrand for Israel, as US ambassador to the UN lends credibility to Whitney’s suspicion. It would be easy to seduce Americans into a new military adventure if they are led by a popular leader, warned former Ronald Reagan official Dr. Paul Craig Roberts on his website.

“MAGA Americans are tired of losing wars,” wrote Dr. Roberts. “They want to win. The military/security complex will have Trump supporters in the streets waving the flag. They will wave the flag and expect Trump to win. It is all part of making America great again. It is a war recipe for disaster.” Transparency website OpenSecrets and financial tech startup Quiver Quantitative have shown that US defense contractors funded the Trump campaign generously. Similarly, during his first term, Trump supported what at the time was seen as the largest military budget in US history in 2018. In 2020, the US press called him one of the military-industrial complex’s “biggest boosters”. Likewise, the Big Three financial powers – Wall Street giants BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street – weren’t disturbed by Trump’s possible victory. Their post-election prognoses were largely positive, foreseeing a rise in the US market, growth for tech and crypto and the dollar strengthening under Trump.

“I’m tired of hearing this is the biggest election in your lifetime,” BlackRock CEO Larry Fink stated at an October 21 conference, as quoted by The Financial Times. “The reality is, over time it doesn’t matter.” He stressed that the world’s largest asset management firm “work[s] with both administrations and are having conversations with both candidates”, signaling that Trump will be fine for Wall Street. Moreover, there appeared to be one instance in which Trump surpassed his contender Harris in the eyes of BlackRock. The firm has been making headlines this year for its aggressive accumulation of crypto-currency assets. It launched its iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) on January 11, whose trust quickly grew into the world’s largest fund. Trump appears to be on the same page as BlackRock concerning crypto-currency even though he was previously skeptical about it.

While on the campaign trail, Trump promised to turn the US into “the crypto capital of the world”. He also announced plans to change some areas of government about crypto and suggested creating a strategic Bitcoin stockpile. In contrast, his contender Harris sounded less enthusiastic about crypto and advocated a “regulatory framework” for it, much in the vein of Joe Biden’s financial oversight approach which placed certain limits on their use. It’s hardly surprising, then, that crypto-currencies, especially Bitcoin, shot up in value on the news that Trump won. Needless to say, BlackRock benefitted from the development. The deep state is entrenched and institutionalized and has many ways to maneuver Trump to its purpose or block his efforts altogether, according to Dr. Roberts. During Trump’s first term, dissent from the intelligence community, the military, the State Department and media disrupted his plans.

The American media is already working hand-in-glove with the ruling establishment to position Trump contrary to his intentions, both in his appointments and in foreign policy. Trump has had to deny that he is going to appoint former colleagues Mike Pompeo and Nikki Haley to his administration in order to assure his supporters that the mistakes of his first term will not be repeated. However, other reports that Trump allies Elon Musk and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. are being pushed aside into advisory positions without executive authority lead some to wonder if the Trump administration is over before it begins. The deep state’s policy of revolving doors connects the government, intelligence agencies, academia, Wall Street and big industries. A majority of Republican members of Congress are themselves part of the establishment.

Meanwhile, Trump supporters, including General Michael Flynn and Infowars host Alex Jones, warn about a possible new attempt on the president-elect’s life. In some sense, one could say that the deep state is now holding a metaphorical gun to Trump’s head. Time will tell whether Trump will manage to outplay the establishment.

Read more …

“Trump has already filled early positions on his team with get-it-done leaders who are more interested in execution than limelight.”

• Trump Builds No-Nonsense Team (JTN)

Donald Trump sent an unmistakable message with his first few personnel choices for his second term, dispatching to the halls of power players like Elise Stefanik, Tom Homan, Lee Zeldin and Stephen Miller who take a no-nonsense approach to their jobs and will focus on everyday Americans’ wants and needs rather than those of global elitists and Washington special interests. And if the president-elect’s new team can stay focused on making America affordable again by defeating inflation, making the country secure again by fixing the border and rounding up criminals and restoring common sense to public policies from energy to transgenderism, one of the nation’s top pollsters believes he can cement a lofty place in history. “Donald Trump now has the opportunity to become the most influential president since Ronald Reagan,” pollster Scott Rasmussen wrote Monday in a private report to clients of his Napolitan Institute.

“If over the next four years he and the Republican Congress can achieve the three main priorities established by the American people, he will have presided over a fundamental political realignment and paved the way for ongoing GOP success.” [..] Rasmussen cautioned, however, that Trump’s legacy of impact will be determined by how well he can align a Congress that often finds excuses not to act behind executing his agenda. “Trump’s lasting influence and the potential realignment are far from assured,” Rasmussen wrote. “They depend entirely upon whether or not the incoming administration can do what voters are hoping for: making the economy work, securing the border, and returning to common sense about gender identity. If they fail, voters will move on, and the Trump era will be just a blip in the nation’s history.”

The need for a GOP Congress to act in convincing ways in 2025 led one of Trump’s former advisers to urge the president-elect to intervene in Wednesday’s battle for Senate majority leader, which pits establishment Sens. John Thune and John Cornyn against Florida’s Rick Scott, who has increasingly become a MAGA favorite. “I would like to see President Trump full throatedly say who he wants,” former White House aide Seb Gorka told the Just the News, No Noise television show Monday night. “And I would like that to be Scott because otherwise the swamp has that magnetic, huge, sucking vacuum power, and they’ll do what they normally do. So a public, you know, pro Scott action from the president is what we’ve got to see. That’s my humble request, Mr. President.” No matter how the Senate leader race ends, Trump has already filled early positions on his team with get-it-done leaders who are more interested in execution than limelight.

Read more …

“75% headcount reduction across the board in the federal bureaucracy, send them home packing, shut down agencies that shouldn’t exist..”

• Musk And Vivek Ramaswamy To Head Department Of Government Efficiency (ZH)

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have been selected by President-elect Donald Trump to head the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), where they will “slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies,” according to an official release from the Trump-Vance transition team, which called this “potentially, the “Manhattan Project” of our time.” According to the statement, “Their work will conclude no later than July 4, 2026” – the nation’s 250th anniversary. Musk previously predicted he could cut at least $2 trillion from the US federal budget, while Ramaswamy suggested firing federal workers based on their social security numbers. “Here’s how: if your [Social Security number] ends in an odd number, you’re fired,” he wrote on X.

In September, Ramaswamy told podcaster Lex Fridman: “Get in there on day one, say that anybody in the federal bureaucracy who is not elected, elected representatives obviously were elected by the people, but the people who are not elected, if your social security number ends in an odd number, you’re out, if it ends in an even number, you’re in. There’s a 50% cut right there. Of those who remain, if your social security number starts in an even number, you’re in and if it starts with an odd number, you’re out. Boom. That’s a 75% reduction done. Literally, stochastically, okay, one of the virtues of that, it’s a thought experiment, not a policy prescription, but one of the virtues of that thought experiment is that you don’t have a bunch of lawsuits you’re dealing with about gender discrimination or racial discrimination or political viewpoint discrimination.”

He also said: So the way I would do it, 75% headcount reduction across the board in the federal bureaucracy, send them home packing, shut down agencies that shouldn’t exist, rescind every unconstitutional regulation that Congress never passed. In a true self-governing democracy, it should be our elected representatives that make the laws and the rules not unelected bureaucrats. And that is the single greatest form of economic stimulus we could have in this country, but it is also the single most effective way to restore self-governance in our country as well. And it is the blueprint for, I think, how we save this country.[..] …most people who have run a company, especially larger companies know this, it’s 25% of the people who do 80 to 90% of the useful work, these government agencies are no different. And how many government workers do we have?

“This will send shockwaves through the system, and anyone involved in Government waste, which is a lot of people,” Musk said on Tuesday in a statement provided by the Trump transition team. Earlier in the day, Trump said the new government efficiency effort would develop a plan to eliminate “fraud and improper payments,” conducting a “complete financial and performance audit” of the federal government. Trump also said that the panel would partner with the White House’s Office of Management and Budget. In the last fiscal year, the federal government spent more than $6.75 trillion – of which more than $5.3 trillion was spent on Social Security, health care, defense and veterans’ benefits.

Read more …

“A weak appointment as Attorney General and the Trump administration is finished before it begins..”

• Can Trump Succeed? (Paul Craig Roberts)

I have been speaking with MAGA Americans and, as I suspected, there is little comprehension of the vast impediments to renewal. The swamp that Trump is to drain is entrenched and institutionalized, but Trump supporters think that with Trump elected and the Senate and House in Republican hands the job is done. Nothing could be further from the truth. The majority of Republicans in the Senate and House are RINOs, not Trump supporters. They are part of the establishment and comfortable in it. Mitch McConnell is forever as he is in the process of demonstrating. This Wednesday McConnell is holding the election of the Senate Majority Leader. His two candidates, chosen without any input from Trump, are John Thune and John Cornyn, neither being MAGAs. Senator Rick Scott, more likely to be helpful to Trump, is running against the establishment’s candidates.

If the establishment prevails, Trump’s strong appointments are likely to be blocked or to languish unconfirmed. The prospect of being blocked can discourage an appointee from accepting the appointment. The establishment can also hamstring Trump by rushing through many unfriendly judicial appointments. Trump Americans need to understand that the enemy has not folded its tents and left the field. Here is Trump himself warning: President-elect Donald Trump on Nov. 10 publicly mentioned one condition for the next leader of the Senate Republican Conference: He or she must clear the way for recess appointments for Trump administration officials. “Any Republican Senator seeking the coveted LEADERSHIP position in the United States Senate must agree to Recess Appointments (in the Senate!), without which we will not be able to get people confirmed in a timely manner,” Trump wrote on social media platform Truth Social on Nov. 10, addressing the upcoming Senate leadership vote.

He noted that such votes can take “two years or more,” which is “what they did four years ago, and we cannot let it happen again.” “We need positions filled IMMEDIATELY!” he wrote. Aside from the request, Trump also said that Republicans should not confirm any judges in the coming months before his inauguration “because the Democrats are looking to ram through their Judges as the Republicans fight over Leadership,” adding, “THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.” I know from experience that there are many ways in which things can go wrong. [..] The euphoria that Trump and his supporters are experiencing can easily lead to deadly mistakes. Appointments that face confirmation challenges can be avoided in the interest of not having a defeat before the new administration is underway. Consequently, when the new administration is underway, it will lack the strength it needs to succeed.

The Biden regime can enter into Ukraine and Middle East agreements that lock-in the Trump administration. A weak appointment as Attorney General and the Trump administration is finished before it begins. In order to succeed, Trump will have to bring the power of the people against the establishment. This means he will have to fight. With the wrong appointments the fight will never begin. Compromise for the sake of unity will be the weapon of the establishment and the presstitutes. Trump said he was going to unify the country. How does one unify with enemies who tried to kill you and who are opposed to the Constitution of the United States? Perhaps Trump should have thought about this before he handed the unity weapon to his enemies. Trump and his supporters must not forget that Trump is leading an insurrection against the establishment.

Read more …

“Hours after Donald Trump wins the most conclusive mandate in 40 years, Mitch McConnell engineers a coup against his agenda by calling early leadership elections in the senate. Two of the three candidates hate Trump and what he ran on.”

• Gorka Urges Trump To Intervene In Senate Leader Race, Endorse Rick Scott (JTN)

One of Donald Trump’s former first-term advisers urged the President-elect on Monday night to directly intervene in the race for the next Senate Majority Leader by endorsing Florida Sen. Rick Scott. Sebastian Gorka, who currently has a popular show on Salem Radio Network after serving as a deputy assistant to the president for security affairs in 2017, became the latest prominent conservative to throw his weight behind Scott’s bid. But Gorka went further by personally appeals for Trump to get involved in the race. “I would like to see President Trump full throatedly say who he wants,” Gorka told the Just the News, No Noise television show Monday night. “And I would like that to be Scott because otherwise the swamp has that magnetic, huge, sucking vacuum power, and they’ll do what they normally do. “So a public, you know, pro-Scott action from the president is what we got to see. That’s my humble request, Mr. President,” Gorka added.

The Senate GOP Leader’s job, which is being vacated at the end of the year by Sen. Mitch McConnell after two decades, is expected to be decided Wednesday by a secret ballot. The race pits establishment Sens. John Thune and John Cornyn against Scott, who has increasingly become a MAGA favorite and easily won re-election to his Florida seat last week. Leaked “whip” head counts of senators’ preferences have shown Thune in the lead, followed by Cornyn and Scott. That has kicked many Trump supporters into action in a bid to increase Scott’s chances. “I will be supporting Rick Scott for Senate Majority Leader,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., wrote on X. “The status quo of $2 Trillion annual deficits is unsustainable.” Billionaire Elon Musk joined the chorus over the weekend, endorsing Scott. Many others have followed suit.

“The people who just gave Donald Trump a sweeping mandate do not want Thune or Cornyn to lead the US Senate,” Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA and conservative grassroots leader who helped the Trump campaign win all seven swing states, wrote on X. “They want Rick Scott. It’s very clear.” Talk show host Tucker Carlson made a blisering attack on Thune and Cornyn. “What the hell is going on in the US Senate?” Carlson wrote on X. “Hours after Donald Trump wins the most conclusive mandate in 40 years, Mitch McConnell engineers a coup against his agenda by calling early leadership elections in the senate. Two of the three candidates hate Trump and what he ran on.

“One of them, John Cornyn, is an angry liberal whose politics are indistinguishable from Liz Cheney’s. The election is Wednesday, it’s by secret ballot, and it will determine whether or not the new administration succeeds. “Rick Scott of Florida is the only candidate who agrees with Donald Trump,” Carlson added. “Call your senator and demand a public endorsement of Rick Scott. Don’t let McConnell get away with it again.” Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a lifelong Democrat who turned Trump supporter this election, also expressed support for Scott, who is viewed as more conservative than Cornyn and Thune. “Without Rick Scott, the entire Trump reform agenda wobbly,” Kennedy wrote on X.

Read more …

“Little Marco.”

• Marco Rubio Emerges As Finalist For Trump’s Secretary Of State (JTN)

Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a hawk on China and Iraq, has emerged as the finalist to be President-elect Donald Trump’s Secretary of State in his second term and his nomination could be announced as early as Tuesday, according directly familiar with the deliberations The New York Times, CNN and other legacy news outlets first reported Monday night that Trump had settled on Rubio. Just the News independently confirmed Trump had settled on the Florida senator. Rubio, a Cuban-American, would be the first Latino to serve as the nation’s top diplomat if nominated and confimed by the Senate. He has large experience on the foreign stage and ran unsuccessfully against Trump during the 2016 primaries, where his future boss humorously named him “Little Marco.”

But Rubio was an ally as Trump began his remarkable comeback to win the presidency in 2024. Trump has been filling out his national security team, on Monday formally naming Rep. Elise Stefanik as UN ambassador and Rep. Mike Waltz of Florida as his national security adviser. Advisors told Just the News on Monday night that Trump also was closing in on naming Scott Bessent as his Treasury Secretary nominee. Bessent, a 62-year-old hedge fund manager who once worked with liberal philanthropist George Soros, emerged in recent years as a top Trump adviser on the economy.

Read more …

Can you spell hornet’s nest?

Kash Patel was supposed to get this.

• Trump Names John Ratcliffe As CIA Director (ZH)

President-elect Donald Trump has announced he has selected John Ratcliffe as director of the CIA. “John Ratcliffe has always been a warrior for Truth and Honesty with the American Public,” Trump wrote in a message sent on the evening of Nov. 12, the latest in a flurry of Tuesday evening appointments. “I look forward to John being the first person ever to serve in both of our Nation’s highest Intelligence positions. He will be a fearless fighter for the Constitutional Rights of all Americans, while ensuring the Highest Levels of National Security, and PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.” Ratcliffe, an attorney, served as director of national intelligence during the first Trump term. As Nathan Worcester reports, via The Epoch Times, Ratcliffe was previously a Republican congressman from Texas and an anti-terrorism and national security chief for Eastern Texas.

Originally from Illinois, Ratcliffe earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Notre Dame before obtaining a law degree from Southern Methodist University. He was later U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas and, from 2004 until 2012, mayor of Heath, Texas, a community in metro Dallas-Fort Worth. While in Congress, he was a member of the House Intelligence Committee and the House Judiciary Committee. During Trump’s first term, Ratcliffe made a name for himself as a staunch Trump loyalist. Trump dropped an early attempt to elevate Ratcliffe to the director of national intelligence position in 2019. But the following year, he renewed the effort, nominating him in May against the backdrop of the COVID-19 response.

Read more …

Kennedy, Malhotra, Bhattacharya, Ladapo. Not a bad start.

• Florida Surgeon General Ladapo Ready To Serve Trump Admin (Attkisson)

The 2024 campaign is the first since the end of the COVID-19 emergency. And important figures who turned from mainstream to maverick as a result may play crucial roles in an effort to transform the medical establishment. One key player is Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo, who spoke with me a few weeks before the Nov. 5 election about what he’d like to do in the next Trump administration. “I actually would like to be secretary of HHS,” he said. “And the reason I would like to do that is because I’m in it for impact. Like, if I can’t have impact, I’m not in it.” Dr. Ladapo’s desire to have impact became clear during the pandemic. When Covid hit, he was a professor of medicine at the University of California, researching heart health. He became one of the mainstream figures to break away and speak out early against what they considered the disastrous shutdowns, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mandates and government misinformation.

“The pandemic was really just something remarkable,” he said, “because … somehow you got so many people with good intentions to engage and really enroll in things that are obviously very clearly immoral and badly intended. And so that’s a remarkable thing.” Born in Nigeria, Ladapo earned his medical degree and a doctorate in health policy at Harvard University. In September 2021, he was tapped by Florida GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis to be his state’s surgeon general. “I felt very clearly that my objective, my role, was to reset the tone,” he said. “And the tone was ‘fear, fear, fear, fear, fear.’ You know, ‘Must do this, must do this, must do this. Everyone get in line, everyone get in line, everyone get in line,’ And I just wanted to rip that all apart and remind people that people and individuals are what matter, and their will matters and their preferences matter and good health matters.”

That includes, he says, safety of the controversial Covid vaccines. In January, he said the Food and Drug Administration had failed to examine unique risks, and he concluded that “these vaccines are not appropriate for use in human beings.” Dr. Ladapo isn’t the only esteemed medical figure who bucked the establishment over Covid and is now allied with now President -elect Donald Trump. Others who’ve been speaking with Trump officials about taking a role in the new administration include Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. He was among the first to formally organize opposition to the shutdowns. He also co-authored The Great Barrington Declaration, a petition that raised concerns about establishment Covid response strategies and was signed by over 63,000 scientists and medical practitioners.

Also, Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a top British cardiologist. He became an activist on Covid vaccine safety after he says his father, also a cardiologist, died from the vaccine. Another person who stands to factor in, in a big way, is attorney and children’s health advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He joined the Trump campaign with a “Make America Healthy Again” mantra. He may take on a new role to oversee an end to corruption in public health agencies.

Read more …

“.. the hush money trial was “tainted” by evidence that should be protected under presidential immunity…”

• Judge Merchan Delays Decision On Trump Guilty Verdict In Hush Money Case (JTN)

Judge Juan Merchan on Tuesday agreed to delay issuing a decision on whether to toss out President-elect Donald Trump’s guilty verdict on state charges of falsifying business records until Nov. 19. This pause in the proceedings to consider what effects Trump’s victory in the presidential election means for the case moving forward was requested by Trump’s legal team, which wants Merchan to dismiss the guilty verdict. Trump was found guilty in May after a six-week trial on 34 counts of falsifying business records during the 2016 presidential election to hide a hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels so that she would stay quiet about an alleged sexual encounter. The former president pleaded not guilty to the charges. The chargers were brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg last year.

In July, after a landmark Supreme Court ruling outlining presidential immunity, Trump asked Judge Merchan to toss out the guilty verdict. The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 opinion earlier that month that presidents have presidential immunity for some “official acts,” but not unofficial ones. The high court did not specified what would constitute official versus unofficial acts, leaving Merchan to parse the evidence cited in the case. Trump attorneys Todd Blanche and Emil Bove argued that the hush money trial was “tainted” by evidence that should be protected under presidential immunity.

“Because of the implications for the institution of the Presidency, the use of official-acts evidence was a structural error under the federal Constitution that tainted [the District Attorney’s] grand jury proceedings as well as the trial,” the lawyers wrote. The lawyers argued specifically that testimony from former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks and former Special Assistant to the President Madeleine Westerhout as well as other testimony about the inner workings of the executive branch should not have been admitted under the high court’s ruling. Merchan was originally set to rule in September, but delayed the decision to “avoid any appearance” that he was attempting to influence the election.

Read more …

“Though the networks could try to manufacture another phony scandal, who would believe them?”

• MSNBC, CNN Ratings Collapse After Election While Fox News Flourishes (ZH)

Mainstream propaganda outlets MSNBC and CNN have seen an absolute collapse in viewership following the 2024 presidential election. According to Neilsen data, last Thursday’s total views on Fox News came in at 2.6 million – of which 375,000 were in the coveted 25-54 age demographic, Mediaite reports. In comparison, MSNBC only had 596,000/71,000 25-54 viewers and CNN brought in 419,000 / 91,000 25-54. Fox News was up some 60 percent year over year for the day, while MSNBC and CNN were down 23 and 40 percent – respectively. In prime time the news was even more bleak for CNN and MSNBC as they shed 30 percent and 54 percent of their viewers, respectively, compared to the same day last year.

MSNBC host Alex Wagner had her lowest-rated show ever in terms of total viewers, while Chris Hayes’s show brought in its worst numbers since May of 2016. On Friday, seven MSNBC shows recorded their lowest Friday ratings for the year. While Fox averaged 4.4M viewers Wed-Fri in prime time and 701,000 in that key demographic, MSNBC had just 808,000 total viewers for the same period (90k in demo), and CNN had 611,000 total average prime time viewers (159k in demo). No wonder CNN’s Chris Wallace is about to explore podcasting. Fox’s Elizabeth MacDonald breaks down the carnage at MSNBC by time slot between Oct. 30 and Nov. 8:

Morning Joe 1st hour – down 39.6%
Morning Joe 2d hour – down 36.9%
Andrea Mitchell – down 39.7%
Ari Melber – down 49.6%
Joy Reid’s Reidout – down 54.6%
All-in w Chris Hayes – down 47.2%
Alex Wagner Tonight- down 53.6%
Lawrence O’Donnell – down 60.6%
Stephanie Ruhle – down 67%

Three weeks ago Axios, citing Gallup, pointed out that Americans’ trust in media has plummeted to a historic low… What’s interesting is that Democrats have the highest trust in mass media, yet their networks are ghost towns. As Outkick.com reports further; CNN and MSNBC’s futures are bleak. The two networks maintained relevancy during Trump’s first term by aggressively promoting the Russia hoax. Though the networks could try to manufacture another phony scandal, who would believe them? Trump’s decisive victory demonstrated that the left-wing cable news networks have lost their influence. CNN and MSNBC exhausted every resource at their disposal to stop Donald Trump from achieving victory, eventually stooping to a plot to depict him as the second coming of Adolf Hitler, the most ruthless dictator in modern world history. It didn’t work. The lies, the hysteria, and the besmirchment only made Trump more popular and sunk CNN and MSNBC deeper. Here is how race lady Joy Reid is handling the results:

Read more …

“..the Ukrainian leader proposes inviting Ukraine to NATO, lifting restrictions on strikes deep into Russian territory, and deploying a “comprehensive non-nuclear deterrence package” in Ukraine.”

• Zelensky Tries to Woo Trump With Revised ‘Victory Plan’ (Sp.)

Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky showed his “victory plan” to Donald Trump back in September, with two clauses designed specifically to spark the US president-elect’s interest in potential resource-related deals, Financial Times reported on Tuesday, citing several European and Ukrainian sources. According to the newspaper, Ukraine is adjusting its “victory plan” for the future Trump administration, emphasizing potential business deals, access to raw materials and the deployment of troops in an attempt to secure his support. According to the sources, Ukraine’s allies in Europe and the US, including leading representatives of the Republican Party, gave advice on how best to formulate proposals that would stimulate close cooperation with Kiev, rather than stop critically important assistance to the country.

One of the two tailored clauses suggested replacing part of the US’s contingent in Europe with Ukrainian troops after the end of the conflict. The other, which was first developed by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham (listed in Russia as a terrorist and extremist), involves the sharing of Ukraine’s most important natural resources with Western partners. Zelensky unveiled his “victory plan” in mid-October, insisting that it could help end the conflict in Ukraine no later than 2025. The document includes five clauses and three secret addendums. In particular, the Ukrainian leader proposes inviting Ukraine to NATO, lifting restrictions on strikes deep into Russian territory, and deploying a “comprehensive non-nuclear deterrence package” in Ukraine.

Zelensky’s plan drew criticism in the EU and NATO for outlining in detail the multiple obligations of Ukraine’s Western allies but not assigning any to Kiev itself. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova slammed it as a set of incoherent slogans that pushed NATO into a direct conflict with Russia, while Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the real peace plan for Kiev would be to realize the futility of the Ukrainian policy. He said that Kiev should “wake up” and understand the reasons that led it to the conflict.

Read more …

“Donald Trump has lots of different voices in his ears and there’s a front of the Republican Party, quite a lot of them actually, who take the wrong line on Ukraine..”

• UK Could Send Troops To Ukraine – Boris Johnson (RT)

The UK cannot let Ukraine suffer a defeat in its ongoing conflict with Russia, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson told GB News in an interview published on Tuesday. London could go as far as sending in troops if Kiev “goes down,” he warned. According to Johnson, Russia’s success in Ukraine would spark a security crisis for the US and its allies on a multitude of fronts. “It’ll be the Baltic states. It’ll be in Georgia. You’ll see the impact of a Ukrainian defeat in the Pacific theater. You’ll see it in the South China Sea,” the politician said, without specifying what exactly could happen in those regions. He also described military and financial assistance to Kiev as a “sensible investment” and a “good” way to spend public funds, arguing that the UK would supposedly have to pay much more otherwise because “our collective security will be really degraded by a resurgent Russia threatening all sorts of parts of Europe.”

The former prime minister also pointed to the prospect of the US cutting aid to Kiev as a potential risk, claiming some people with “wrong” views on the issue were in president-elect Donald Trump’s inner circle. “Donald Trump has lots of different voices in his ears and there’s a front of the Republican Party, quite a lot of them actually, who take the wrong line on Ukraine,” he said. If aid to Ukraine is reduced and Kiev starts losing, London could be forced to deploy troops to the region, Johnson claimed. “We will then have to pay to send British troops to help defend Ukraine,” the politician stated.

Russia has repeatedly stated that it had no plans to attack NATO or any of its members. At the same time, Moscow has also warned on multiple occasions that by providing military aid to Kiev, the bloc increases the risk of a direct clash, specifying that it would treat the provision of long-range missiles for Ukrainian attacks deep inside Russian territory as a direct assault by the countries which had supplied the weapons. Earlier, Putin ordered changes to the nation’s nuclear doctrine that listed attacks by a non-nuclear state supported by a nuclear power as a reason for a nuclear response on Russia’s part, among other things. Last week, The Telegraph reported that the UK, together with France, could push for further escalation of the Ukraine conflict by attempting to convince Washington to allow Kiev strike targets deep inside Russia with Western weapons, including Storm Shadow/Scalp cruise missiles.

Read more …

“First, the United States will refuse to export liberal democracy.”

• Trump Will Abandon Two Key Principles Of US Foreign Policy (Gevorg Mirzayan)

The return of Donald Trump to the White House portends significant changes in American foreign policy. Experts name at least two US foreign policy features that Trump will be forced to abandon. Why from them and who personally in the immediate circle of the US president will embody this new approach? A two–month period of political fortune–telling begins in the United States before Trump takes office. American experts and journalists are trying to figure out who will join the new administration of the President-elect. And in particular, who will lead his foreign policy – who, that is, will take the posts of Secretary of State, National Security Adviser, and head of the Pentagon. Various candidates have been named, including former Defense Secretary Mike Pompeo and U.S. representative to the United Nations Nikki Haley. However, Trump has made it clear: he will not rely massively on his ex-officials, even those who served under him during his first term.

And this has its own logic – after all, the classic Washington establishment is unlikely to fit into Donald Trump’s new foreign policy strategy. A strategy that will not comply with a number of principles of classical American diplomacy. First, the United States will refuse to export liberal democracy. “We have built our foreign policy on intimidation, moralizing and lecturing countries that seek to avoid cooperation with us. In contrast, China’s foreign policy is focused on building roads and bridges, as well as providing food for the poor. And I think we should follow a foreign policy based on respect… and the national interests of the United States,” U.S. Vice President–elect J.D. Vance said a year and a half ago when he criticized the appointment of the “moralizing Stephanie Sullivan” as the American ambassador to the African Union.

And Trump fully shares this approach. “The new Trump administration will try to implement a realistic foreign policy course and abandon the liberal hegemonic traditions that were characteristic of American foreign policy throughout the period after the end of the Cold War. They will try to make American policy more pragmatic and more successfully counter American rivals,” Dmitry Suslov, the Deputy Director of the Higher School of Economics Center for Integrated European and International Studies, explains to Vzglyad. That is, to China, Russia and their global projects (like the BRICS). This approach has actually been overdue for a long time – after all, moralizing no longer works. Not only because the United States has ceased to be a moral beacon, but also because many countries (including a number of American allies) have begun to pay increasing attention to their own sovereignty; and, accordingly, to resist the imposition of any values destructive to their societies from the outside.

Under Trump, moralizing is generally impossible. After all, it implies demonstrative loyalty in exchange for the material benefits provided by America – in particular, access to the American market. And Trump is not going to hand out economic carrots. “The new administration will pursue a more protectionist and self-seeking foreign policy line. We strive to ensure that investments go to the United States, and not from the United States to third world countries,” Dmitry Suslov explains. Following moralizing, another important principle of Western globalist diplomacy will be thrown into the trash: “whoever is not with us is against us.”

Unlike Russia, which professed the principle of “we work with those who are not against us” (allowing states to pursue a multi-vector policy), the West has rigidly forced Third World countries to make a choice between it and its opponents. For example, the West has forced Ukraine to cooperate with either the EU or Russia in 2013. And then it forced Ukraine to turn into an anti-Russian springboard within the framework of “who is with us”. Perhaps eleven years ago, this strategy was effective – then the collective West was strong and had a reputation as a player who should not be messed with. However, the situation has changed now. And just in recent years the strategy “who is not with us is against us” has produced at least five misfires.

With Turkey, which, while remaining in NATO, has continued to cooperate with the Russian Federation. With India, which the United States unsuccessfully tried to force to stop working with Iran and Russia (in particular, to buy Russian hydrocarbons). With Saudi Arabia, which is establishing relations with China and has even transferred oil trade with it to the yuan. Washington’s attempts to train the Saudi leadership only led to a humiliating hours-long wait for US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to have an audience with the head of Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. With Hungary, whose Prime Minister Viktor Orban has refused to follow the pan-European policy of isolating Russia. He is betting on national interests – and as part of this bet, he is blocking Brussels’ initiatives on new sanctions, He even flies to Moscow. And also, with Georgia where the local leadership has defiantly refused to open a second front against Russia, participate in anti–Russian sanctions, or accept Western LGBT values.

Read more …

“..Biden’s hardline policy toward Tehran ultimately harmed his major foreign policy initiative, of defeating Moscow..”

• What Rough Beast? (Juan Cole)

President Joe Biden has now joined the ranks of Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush as a president whose Middle East policy crashed and burned spectacularly. Unlike Carter, who was stymied by the Iranian hostage crisis, or Bush, who faced a popular Iraqi resistance movement, Biden’s woes weren’t inflicted by an enemy. Quite the opposite, it was this country’s putative partner, the Israeli government, that implicated the president in its still ongoing genocide in Gaza, as well as its disproportionate attacks on Lebanon and Iran, for which Biden steadfastly declined to impose the slightest penalties. Instead, he’s continued to arm the Israelis to the teeth. Israel’s total war on Palestinian civilians, in turn, significantly reduced enthusiasm for Biden among youth and minorities at home, helping usher him out of office. It also created electoral obstacles for Kamala Harris’s presidential bid.

By his insistence on impunity for the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Biden has left the Middle East in flames and the U.S. and the world distinctly in peril. During his first three years in office, his administration wielded the tools of diplomacy in the Middle East. Donald Trump’s sanctions against the Houthis in Yemen had imperiled the civilian population there by denying them humanitarian aid and gasoline to drive to the market for food. Biden lifted those sanctions and sponsored continued negotiations between those in power in the Yemeni capital of Sanaa and in the neighboring Saudi Arabian capital of Riyadh. Only relatively small contingents of American troops remained in Syria and Iraq to help with the mopping-up operations against the so-called Islamic State terrorist organization.

Danger signals nonetheless soon began flashing bright red among friend and foe alike in the region, as Biden’s team quickly squandered an opportunity to restore the 2015 “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” or JCPOA, between the U.N. Security Council and the Iranian regime in Tehran, which Trump had so tellingly trashed. Between 2015 and 2019, that deal had successfully kept Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program purely civilian, closing off the four most plausible pathways to a nuclear weapon. In those years, the Iranians had, in fact, mothballed 80% of their nuclear program in return for sanctions relief. While the U.N. Security Council lifted economic sanctions on that country, Republicans in Congress refused to halt unilateral American sanctions, which applied to third parties as well. European investors had to jump through hoops to invest in Iran while avoiding Treasury Department fines. As a result, a disappointed Iranian leadership went unrewarded for its careful compliance with the JCPOA.

Then, in May 2018, Trump stabbed the Iranians in the back, withdrawing the U.S. from the JCPOA and slapping the most severe economic sanctions ever applied by one country to another in peacetime on Iran. It essentially added up to an invisible blockade of the Iranian economy, even interfering with ordinary commerce like that country’s oil sales. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu boasted of having convinced the gullible Trump to take such a step, which led Iran’s petroleum exports to plummet over the next three years. Trump even designated the Iranian National Bank a terrorist organization, again with potentially crippling consequences for the entire economy. In revenge, Iran went back to enriching uranium to high levels and building more centrifuges, though without actually producing weapons-grade material. To this day, its civilian nuclear program remains a form of “the Japan option,” an attempt at deterrence by making it clear that it does not want a bomb but that, if it feels sufficiently threatened, it can build a nuclear weapon relatively quickly.

As soon as Joe Biden defeated Trump in 2020, the centrist Iranian President Hassan Rouhani declared that the JCPOA could be restored by the two leaders virtually by fiat. And Biden’s foreign policy team initially appeared to consider negotiations to reinstate the treaty, only to ultimately retain Trump’s outrageous sanctions as “leverage,” demanding that Iran return to compliance with the JCPOA before the two sides could talk. Perhaps the Iranian public got the message that Biden was determined to be as hostile as Trump. Certainly, in the next round of voting in the summer of 2021, they swung behind hardliner Ebrahim Raisi. And despite occasional modest diplomatic forays since then, relations have been in a dumpster for the remainder of Biden’s term, with most of Trump’s “maximum pressure” sanctions still in place. And once again, as in the Trump years, the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu has lobbied Biden hard to cease all negotiations with Tehran.

Iran, which might have been drawn into the Western camp, has instead become a hostage to Beijing. Starting in 2019, China accepted smuggled Iranian petroleum at a substantial price discount. Then, when the Ukraine War broke out and Biden imposed maximum sanctions on the Russian Federation, Moscow and Tehran found themselves pushed ever closer. Now, the two countries plan to sign a “strategic partnership agreement,” while, in July 2023, Iran joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, cementing the alliances with both China and Russia into which it had been so vigorously pushed by Washington. Iran also became a definite asset for Russia in its Ukraine War, providing Vladimir Putin with crucial weaponry. In short, Biden’s hardline policy toward Tehran ultimately harmed his major foreign policy initiative, of defeating Moscow.

Read more …

“What in the world is going on? Israel’s security problem, on its border, is 50 miles to the south. What’s an Israeli army doing here in Beirut?”

• A 1984 Conference Forged Israel’s Influence Over US Media (Klarenberg)

The story of how Western media was transformed into Israel’s doting, servile propaganda appendage is not only a fascinating and sordid hidden chronicle. It is a deeply educational lesson in how imperial power can easily subordinate supposed arbiters of truth to its will. Comprehending how we got to this point equips us with the tools to assess, identify, and deconstruct lies large and small – and effectively challenge and counter not only Israel’s falsehoods but the entire settler colonial endeavor.

On June 6, 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon. The effort was ostensibly intended to drive Palestinian Liberation Organization freedom fighters away from their positions on Israel’s northern border. But, as the IDF savagely pushed ever-deeper into the country, including Beirut, it became clear that ethnic cleansing, massacres, and land theft were – as in Palestine – the true goal. Throughout the Lebanese capital, news crews from major networks and reporters from the West’s biggest newspapers were waiting. Israel’s rapacious bloodlust and casual contempt for Arab lives had hitherto been, by and large, successfully concealed from the outside world. Suddenly, though, scenes of deliberate IDF airstrikes on residential housing blocks, Tel Aviv’s trigger-happy soldiers running amok in Beirut’s streets, and hospitals overflowing with civilians suffering from grave injuries, including chemical burns due to Israel’s use of phosphorus shells, were broadcast the world over, to nigh-universal outcry.

As veteran NBC news anchor John Chancellor contemporarily explained to Western viewers: “What in the world is going on? Israel’s security problem, on its border, is 50 miles to the south. What’s an Israeli army doing here in Beirut? The answer is we are now dealing with an imperial Israel, which is solving its problems in someone else’s country, world opinion be damned.” Global shock and repulsion at Israel’s conduct would only ratchet during the IDF’s resultant illegal military occupation of swaths of Lebanon. In September 1982, an Israel-backed armed Christian militia, Phalange, entered Sabra, a Beirut neighborhood home to many Palestinians displaced by the 1948 Nakba. Over a two-day span, they slaughtered up to 3,500 people while mutilating and raping countless others. Again, unfortunately for Tel Aviv, mainstream journalists were on hand to document these heinous crimes first-hand.

To say the least, Israel had an international PR disaster of historic proportions on its blood-soaked hands. The risk that further exposure of its genocidal nature might decisively and permanently shift global opinion in favor of the Palestinians and the Arab world more generally was significant. The attack on Lebanon had already spurred Western news outlets to critically reassess other illegal annexations and occupations in which Israel was and remains engaged. As ABC News reporter Richard Threlkeld commented at the time: “Israel was always that gallant little underdog democracy fighting for survival against all the odds. Now, the Israelis have annexed East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, settled down more or less permanently on the West Bank, and occupied close to half of Lebanon. In the interests of self-defense, that gallant little underdog, Israel, has suddenly started behaving like the neighborhood bully.”

So it was that in the summer of 1984, the American Jewish Congress – a major Zionist lobby organization – convened a conference in Jerusalem, Israel’s Public Image: Problems and Remedies. It was chaired by U.S. advertising supremo Carl Spielgovel, who a decade earlier provided pro bono advice to the Israeli government on strategies for publicly communicating why Tel Aviv refused to adhere to the terms of the Henry Kissinger-brokered 1973 Sinai Accords. Spielgovel later recalled: “It occurred to me then that the Israelis were doing a good job at training their military people, and they were doing a relatively good job at training their diplomatic corps. But they weren’t spending any time training information officers, people who could present Israel’s case to embassies and TV anchormen around the world. Over the years, I made this a personal cause celebre.”

The 1984 Jerusalem conference offered Spielgovel and a welter of Western advertising and public relations executives, media specialists, editors, journalists, and leaders of major Zionist advocacy groups an opportunity to achieve that malign objective. Together, they hammered out a dedicated strategy for ensuring the “crisis” caused by news reporting on the invasion of Lebanon two years earlier would never be repeated. Their antidote? Ceaseless, methodical, and wide-ranging “Hasbara” – Hebrew for propaganda – for “changing people’s minds [and] making them think differently.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Roman precision
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856294347643199665

 

 

Feed fish

 

 

Tesla Berlin

 

 

Madre

 

 

Tuck in horse

 

 

SOS

 

 

Dog

 

 

2 points

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle November 3 2024

Nov 032024
 
 November 3, 2024  Posted by at 9:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  86 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Field with Flowers near Arles 1888

 

• “The American System” Made America Great (Rickards)
• Elon Musk Asks Ron Paul To Join Department Of Gov’t Efficiency (ZH)
• House Speaker ‘Really Bullish’ Washington Will Be All-GOP Town In January (JTN)
• House Speaker Plan: Moving Bureaucrats From DC To Reshape Government (JTN)
• Candidates’ Final Tours: A Flustered Harris, And A Joyful Trump (Whedon)
• People Aren’t Garbage. Partisan Politics Is (Matt Taibbi)
• Trump, Vance Take Aim At Renewable Energy, Many Communities Already Did (JTN)
• Polymarket’s Trump-Bullish Whale: “Absolutely No Political Agenda” (ZH)
• Leftists Predict Hysterical Dystopian Future (ZH)
• Kiev Officials ‘Ready’ For Potential Trump Presidency – WaPo (RT)
• West’s Rules-Based Order To Collapse Soon – Medvedev
• West Sees Red Over Failed Second Color Revolution In Georgia (SCF)
• Novichok: UK Government Sedated The Skripals To Stop Them Talking (Helmer)
• Brutally Murdered 13 Years Ago, Gaddafi Is Only Growing More Beloved (Fetouri)

 

 

 

 

Maher
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852565201515630859

In the bag

Tucker

Fulton County

RFK

Dec. 5?
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852539432395845815

Tulsi
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852686204921426042

Baris

Jesse

 

 

Tucker Grand Finale With President Donald Trump in Glendale, AZ (start at 1.12?!, Trump at 1.38)

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Donald Trump recently did an interview with John Micklethwait, Bloomberg’s top editor and a former editor of The Economist. Micklethwait made the tired point that Trump’s tariffs would raise prices and be bad for Americans.”

• “The American System” Made America Great (Rickards)

Most of us have been taught that free trade is good and that tariffs are bad. And on the surface it certainly seems true. The theory of free trade based on comparative advantage was advocated by British economist David Ricardo in the early 19th century. Ricardo’s theory said that trading nations are endowed with attributes that give them a relative advantage in producing certain goods versus others. These attributes could consist of natural resources, climate, population, river systems, education, ports, financial capacity or any other factor of production. Nations should produce those goods as to which they have a natural advantage and trade with other nations for goods where the advantage was not so great. Countries should specialize in what they do best, and let others also specialize in what they do best. Then countries could simply trade the goods they make for the goods made by others.

All sides would be better off because prices would be lower as a result of specialization in those goods where you have a natural advantage. It’s a nice theory often summed up in the idea that Tom Brady shouldn’t mow his own lawn because it makes more sense to pay a landscaper while he practices football. For example, if the U.K. had an advantage in textile production and Portugal had an advantage in wine production, then the U.K. and Portugal should trade wool for wine. But if the theory of comparative advantage were true, Japan would still be exporting tuna fish instead of cars, computers, TVs, steel and much more. The same can be said of the globalists’ view that capital should flow freely across borders. That might be advantageous in theory but market manipulation by central banks and rogue actors like Goldman Sachs and big hedge funds make it a treacherous proposition.

The problem with this theory of comparative advantage is that the factors of production are not permanent and they are not immobile. If labor moves from the countryside to the city in China, then suddenly China has a comparative advantage in cheap labor. If finance capital moves from New York banks to direct foreign investment in Chinese factories, then China has the comparative advantage in capital also. Trump understands this, Micklethwait doesn’t. Trump didn’t just make polite conversation in the interview. He called out Micklethwait by saying, “It must be hard for you to spend 25 years talking about tariffs as being negative and then have somebody explain to you that you’re totally wrong.” Ouch! Micklethwait certainly isn’t alone. Listening to hysterical commentary from the mainstream media about Trump’s tariffs, one would think his policies were in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Nothing could be further from the truth. By advocating tariffs, Trump actually wants to return to what made America great in the first place. In fact, tariffs are as American as apple pie. From 1790–1962, the United States pursued high tariff policies under a program known as the American System. It was created by George Washington’s secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, who drafted a report to Congress called the Report on Manufactures presented in 1791. Hamilton proposed that in order to have a strong country, America needed a strong manufacturing base with jobs that taught skills and offered income security. To achieve this, Hamilton proposed subsidies to U.S. businesses so they could compete successfully against more established U.K. and European businesses. These subsidies might include grants of government land or rights of way, purchase orders from the government itself or outright payments. This was a mercantilist system that encouraged a trade surplus and the accumulation of gold reserves.

Hamilton’s plan was later proposed on a broader scale by Kentucky Sen. Henry Clay. This new plan began with the Tariff of 1816. Later on, Abraham Lincoln adopted the American System as his platform in the election of 1860, and it became a bedrock principle of the new Republican Party. It was affirmed by William McKinley at the end of the 19th century and by Dwight Eisenhower in the 1950s. The 19th and early 20th centuries were a heyday of the American System. This period was characterized by enormous economic growth and population expansion by the U.S. The American System was also accompanied mostly by low inflation or even deflation (which increases the purchasing power of everyday citizens) despite occasional financial panics and some inflation during the Civil War. The key takeaway is that America grew rich and powerful from 1787–1962, a period of 175 years, using tariffs, subsidies and other barriers to trade to nurture domestic industry and protect high-paying manufacturing jobs.

Read more …

Ron Paul was made for this.

• Elon Musk Asks Ron Paul To Join Department Of Gov’t Efficiency (ZH)

With just two days left before the presidential election, Libertarians are waking up Saturday to a bunch of buzz on X about a potential “Ron Paul Revolution” in the White House—only possible if Donald Trump wins next week. On Friday evening, AFpost wrote on X, “Ron Paul says he wants to join Elon Musk to cut government waste in second Trump administration.” Musk chimed in on X: “It would be great to have Ron Paul as part of the Department of Government Efficiency!” Ron Paul responded: “I’d be happy to talk with you about it, Elon.” X users instantly went bananas on the prospect that Musk would give Ron Paul a role in the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, only if Trump wins. For months, Musk and Trump have been discussing DOGE, which the billionaire would serve as “Secretary of Cost-Cutting” – a government agency that doesn’t exist yet…

Musk would basically take his skills as a successful manager – in which he slashed 80% of the Twitter workforce a few years ago to make the ‘free speech’ social media platform operate more efficiently. In August, Musk said the goal of DOGE was to cut wasteful spending by the federal government and roll back massive regulations that stifle the economy. Musk recently said DOGE could identify “at least $2 trillion in cuts” as part of a formal review of federal agencies. This would also mean tens of thousands of job cuts—if not more—across the federal government. Just imagine if Trump wins, Musk and Ron Paul would wind down unneeded federal agencies like a scene from Argentina’s Javier Milei.

You hear that, Libertarian… Deal of a lifetime. And Libertarians, even Trump’s VP JD Vance, is coming around to Ron Paul’s argument on the Federal Reserve. Ron Paul had fun on X in the overnight hours. Delayed over the years … but now entirely possible. For decades, Ron Paul has proposed a smaller government by eliminating several wasteful federal agencies, ending foreign wars, eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends, eliminating the estate tax, and—everyone’s favorite—abolishing the Federal Reserve. This has become true over the years. The only problem is when federal government spending accounts for 22.7% of the US GDP (in fiscal year 2023), reducing this spending could spark a recession. However, if Trump wins, DOGE could be messaged to the American people as a way to curb sky-high inflation sparked by disastrous ‘Bidenomics.’

Read more …

“..Hispanics are no longer a Democrat bloc, that they have become free agent voters..”

• House Speaker ‘Really Bullish’ Washington Will Be All-GOP Town In January (JTN)

House Speaker Mike Johnson told Just the News on Thursday he is increasingly confident that Republicans will sweep control of Congress and the White House in next Tuesday’s election, saying Hispanics, Blacks, Jews, union workers and other Democrat-leaning constituencies are switching parties over frustration the country is moving in the wrong direction. “I feel really bullish,” Johnson said in a wide-ranging interview with the John Solomon Reports podcast when asked about the GOP’s chances for a clean sweep of Washington D.C. “….I believe we’re going to win unified government with Republicans back in the White House and controlling the Senate, and we grow the House majority.” Johnson said the election between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris presented a rare moment in U.S. history where voters could choose between two White House holders – a former president and a current vice president – based on their records and not just their promises.

“I genuinely believe we’re going to have an historic demographic shift in this election,” he said. “I think when all the analysis is done on the other side of this, they will see that we had a record number of Hispanic and Latino voters, for example, coming into the Republican Party, a record number of Black and African-American voters, Jewish voters, union workers. I mean, people who have not traditionally been in our camp are coming now. “And the reason is because they’re desperate for change, and they know the unique thing about this presidential contest is that both of these persons have had an administration. This isn’t theoretical…. They know what life is like under Harris and Biden, and they know what it was like under Trump, and I think that has a big effect across the board and all the way down the ballot,” he said.

Johnson’s comments follow several recent polls noting demographic shifts toward Trump by several Democratic constituencies even as Harris holds a commanding leading with female voters. The Speaker also reacted to comments the new CEO of the Spanish-language TV network Univision, Daniel Alegre, made on the John Solomon Reports podcast on Wednesday that Hispanics are no longer a Democrat bloc, that they have become free agent voters driven by issues and are shifting this election toward Trump and the GOP.

“Hispanic and Latino voters are just like everybody else, and they they’re so fed up and fired up about the cost of living and rising crime rates in all their communities.,” Johnson said, adding that border security has become another compelling concern for Latino voters. “And then also, on top of that, remember that Hispanic and Latino voters are very family oriented,” he added. “Many of them have deep religious traditions and beliefs, and they see the Democratic Party abandoning all of these sort of foundational principles. And they’ve had enough, and I think they have the same frustration everybody else does. I think that’s why they’re coming into our camp.”

Read more …

” I just think there’s almost unlimited potential in front of us, and we’ve got to seize that moment..”

• House Speaker Plan: Moving Bureaucrats From DC To Reshape Government (JTN)

House Speaker Mike Johnson says Republicans have an ambitious plan to reshape and shrink federal government if they win the election. That vision includes a plan to deport tens of thousands of federal bureaucrats from Washington and relocate them to middle America. In a wide-ranging interview this week with Just the News, Johnson said he and other GOP leaders wants to move federal agency offices, personnel and assets from the nation’s capital to bring them closer to the people they serve and farther from the monied special interests that often hijack policy and spending. “There’s a lot of talk about uprooting, you know, these entrenched bureaucracies and putting them out elsewhere around the country,” Johnson told the John Solomon Reports podcast.

He explained such a re-invention of the monstrous federal bureaucracy with more than 2 million federal workers and contractors would integrate with former President Donald Trump’s plan to name billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk to lead a government efficiency office and also tie to fiscal conservatives’ vision to eliminate federal bureaucracies and send monies to the states in the form of block grants. The Louisiana Republican said the deportation of Washington bureaucrats would also create a natural shrinkage in the size and cost of government, “That accomplishes a lot of important goals but the first would be that you don’t have all these career civil service law protected bureaucrats,” he said. “Some of them have been camped out of these agencies for decades. They’re nameless, faceless. We don’t know who to hold accountable,” he said.

Johnson continued, saying “The idea is, if you move the agency to, you know, northern Kansas or southwest New Mexico, or wherever it is around the country, then some of the swamp dwellers they will not desire to follow the job to the new, less desirable location,” he added. “They love the swamp. You know they want to stay. They’ll turn them into lobbyist or something to stay in D.C.” The mass transfer and departure of bureaucrats then leads to a “business reorganization proposition” for federal government, he said. “You’ve got agencies that you can scale down because you have empty cubicles and … almost all the agencies are bloated and inefficient,” he said. “So you can scale that down. And then in the cubicles that you do need to fill, we’ve had America First Policy Institute and some of our other think tanks that have been working to develop a notebook full of highly qualified, previously vetted, limited government conservatives who have expertise in these areas.”

Johnson’s comments were the most sweeping he’s made about a congressional vision for shrinking the budget and reshaping the budget. He said the process would take a “blowtorch” to the regulatory state and align government agencies in the aftermath of a historic Supreme Court ruling this summer that reversed a decades old “Chevron doctrine.” Under the new ruling, federal bureaucrats can’t make up or interpret their own regulations and simply must enforce those authorized by Congress. “We have a once in a lifetime, yeah, once in a lifetime opportunity to really claw back article one authority to the legislative branch under the Constitution and have an administration that is in tune with that whole agenda. So look, I just think there’s almost unlimited potential in front of us, and we’ve got to seize that moment,” Johnson said.

Read more …

“We’ve done something that’s unprecedented, and we’ve had fun, but now we have to get, hopefully, to work.”

• Candidates’ Final Tours: A Flustered Harris, And A Joyful Trump (Whedon)

With the election just days away, both former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are in the final stretch of their campaign tours, but the tones of each couldn’t contrast more, with Trump on offense and on message and Harris playing defense against the political far-left at her own rallies. Though Harris initially attempted to portray her campaign as one of “joy”, Trump has taken on an almost jovial tone as polling and betting odds increasingly paint him as the favorite. His recent Madison Square Garden rally, moreover, was an offensive play in the heart of Democratic territory and saw tens of thousands of people gather in the Big Apple for what he later deemed a “love fest.” Polling data shows a tight contest, with Trump holding a 0.3% lead in the RealClearPolitics average. That outlet currently projects Trump to win 287 electoral votes to Harris’s 251. Polymarket betting odds also favor Trump to win with a 61.1% chance to Harris’s 39.0%.

Though the race remains in tossup territory, the Trump campaign is quite optimistic. Campaign pollster Tony Fabrizio, this week, released a memo highlighting the difference in polling between this election and 2020. The key point was that, in every swing state, Trump is polling better than in 2020 by a significant margin. “I point this out NOT to stoke overconfidence or complacency, but to illustrate just how close this election is and that victory is within our reach,” he wrote. “It is crucial we do not get distracted by the media noise and remain focused on our closing message, persuading the few remaining undecided voters and turning out our base.” The Trump campaign appears to have taken his words to heart. Kicking off the week with his blowout rally at Madison Square Garden, Trump proceeded to hold event after event all across all the key battlegrounds, often doing two rallies per day.

Election weekend will see him go beyond that and hold three rallies each on Saturday and Sunday, with four more scheduled for Monday. While two are set for North Carolina, Trump plans to appear in Salem, Va., as the Old Dominion appears competitive. His Saturday events come off of Friday rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin. His Sunday will feature rallies in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia while his Monday will see him hold four more, two in Pennsylvania and one each in North Carolina and Michigan. Trump opened his Michigan rally, by applauding the crowd sizes and positive energy of his events, including stunts such as driving a garbage truck after President Biden called his supporters “garbage.” “They’ll never be anything like what we’ve done,” he said of Democratic rallies. “We’ve done something that’s unprecedented, and we’ve had fun, but now we have to get, hopefully, to work.”

Read more …

“It’s the people who define us by votes who are garbage, not the other way around.”

• People Aren’t Garbage. Partisan Politics Is (Matt Taibbi)

The cycle was the usual nonsense. At a Donald Trump rally in Manhattan a comic called Puerto Rico a “floating island of garbage.” Joe Biden emerged from his crypt to croak, “The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters.” The Internet exploded. Reporters were dispatched around the country to gauge how much more pissed off everyone was now. ABC’s take interviewing Harris supporters in Pennsylvania was, “Voters view one another across partisan divide with increasing animosity.” They quoted humans-in-the-street, who all felt strongly. “I would say that some of them are garbage,” said Samantha Leister, 32, while Shawn Vanderheyden, 44, opined, “I just think they are uneducated, and they believe all the lies.” ABC summed up the cultural divide: “Interviews with voters in battleground states reveal that it’s only growing deeper and more insurmountable.”

Surely people know it, but this is all a trick. First, campaign writers only talk to people at campaign events, so the pool of quotes is automatically pared to holders of Very Strong Political Opinions. Second, the odd “Who cares?” answer is instinctively culled by campaign writers as commercially/politically unhelpful. Non-voters or even just people who care more about other things than Harris/Trump — UFOs, knitting, the girl in biology class — ruin the suspension of disbelief. You end up reading copy that hugely over-represents that strange subset of people who define themselves by their votes. When I was first sent to cover campaigns in 2004, a year in which 40% of eligible voters didn’t bother, I was troubled by the absence of non-voters in coverage.

A Rolling Stone editor with whom I rarely worked rolled eyes and said, “We don’t cover them because they’re not part of the fucking story,” which I instantly knew wasn’t true, but I was new and to my shame I didn’t say anything. The numbers of non-voters exposed how inconsequential presidential politics was for most people. It measured the number of people left behind or out, and leaving the non-enthused out of the shot was journalism’s way of covering the holes in the charade. Two years later I was embedded with a group of Oklahoma reservists sent to work as MPs in Iraq. Sgt. Stephen Wilkerson was the team commander. He wore a tattoo on his foot with an arrow pointing to his big toe that read, TAG GOES HERE. His nickname was “Stretch-Nuts” because it was said he could balance a Heineken bottle on his ball-skin. On my first day he asked what I do. I cover presidential elections, I said. He made a jerk-off gesture. That was the last mention of politics on the trip.

In the roughly twenty years since the act of not voting, or even just not really really caring about presidential politics, has been villainized. Now the emotionally healthy person, the one who has a life and isn’t consumed with fears about the Next Hitler, is assumed to harbor secret sympathies, as bad as the worst MAGAT. This is different from the old scam. Now the person who shrugs and says “Who cares?” is called a liar. Everyone must care the way they do, and if you don’t care in that right way — every waking minute, with chewed nails and a carefully weeded social circle to match the correct vote and attitude set — you’re garbage. Many of us have seen in recent years what this hounding has done even to friends or relatives, turning them to Flatland characters, two-dimensional nerve cases scanning everyone for signs of unsuitability. Whatever happens next week, I don’t ever want to be that. It’s the people who define us by votes who are garbage, not the other way around.

Read more …

“In 2014, one wind project was canceled. Since then, the total number has grown to 464 wind projects shot down, as well as 281 solar projects.”

• Trump, Vance Take Aim At Renewable Energy, Many Communities Already Did (JTN)

While it’s been difficult for voters to determine exactly where Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris truly stands on energy, former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, each discussed their views at length on “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast. Vance, who appeared on the podcast Thursday, spent several minutes discussing energy with host Joe Rogan. Vance said he and his wife took a road trip through Iowa, Nebraska and Kansas and for miles all they could see were wind farms. “This is beautiful American countryside that used to be green rolling hills, and now you have these disgusting, dystopian wind turbines. I’m sorry. They are ugly. I will die on this hill. They’re ugly. I don’t want them in American society,” Vance said. The wind energy industry is running up against more and more opposition. Much of it comes from grassroots efforts at the local level.

Energy watchdog Robert Bryce maintains a database of renewable energy projects that have been scrapped, most often because of community opposition. In 2014, one wind project was canceled. Since then, the total number has grown to 464 wind projects shot down, as well as 281 solar projects. The wind industry doesn’t appear to believe these community concerns are valid. The Associated Press reported on comments wind energy lobbyists made at a conference in Atlantic City, New Jersey Tuesday, claiming that concerns about wind projects are driven by “misinformation.” The industry is vowing to fight against it. Paulina O’Connor, executive director of the New Jersey Offshore Wind Alliance, told the Associated Press that she has trouble predicting “what crazy thing they’re [wind energy opponents] going to come next.” Bryce told Just the News that, while lobbyists the Associated Press quoted are dismissive of communities’ concerns, developers are going to find it harder and harder to get a welcoming response.

“The public acceptance of wind energy is exhausted. People don’t want to live near these massive turbines, and they are expressing that in many [places] across the country, from Maine to Hawaii,” Bryce said. Among the concerns that wind lobbyists described as “misinformation” was the claims that offshore wind is killing whales. During his appearance on the Rogan podcast, Trump commented on these concerns. “I wanna be a whale psychiatrist. It drives the whales fricking crazy. And something happens with them, but for whatever reason, they’re getting washed up onshore and you know, they’re ignored by these environmentalists. But they don’t talk about it.” Trump said. The Associated Press, which has received millions of dollars from political advocacy groups that promote the wind and solar industry, reported that these claims are “unsubstantiated” based on the fact that federal agencies tasked with carrying out the Biden-Harris goal of building 30 gigawatts of offshore wind have denied any connections between offshore wind and whale deaths.

While it’s true that wind turbines aren’t directly killing whales, whale advocates argue that the noise of the construction causes harm that results in the animals swimming into vessel traffic. Robert Rand, founder of the acoustics consultancy company Rand Acoustics, has surveyed noise levels from pile driving and sonar survey vessels. Both studies found that the incidental harassment authorizations — permits that offshore wind developers are required to obtain to conduct activities that may adversely affect marine animals — don’t impose sufficient mitigation requirements to protect marine animals. Rutgers professor Apostolos Gerasoulis performed a statistical analysis and found a strong correlation between where whales are dying and offshore wind development.

Besides growing opposition to offshore wind, especially after a blade broke off a wind turbine near Nantucket and scattered debris across multiple beaches, the offshore wind industry is struggling financially. An offshore lease sale in the Gulf of Maine netted only 4 bidders on 439,096 acres that were offered, and the bids came in at $50 per acre. A 2022 auction for a lease area off the coast of New York and New Jersey sold 6 leases on 488,000 acres for $8,955 per acre. The sale may be the last for at least a year, as a provision in the Inflation Reduction Act prohibits offshore wind lease sales without offering up oil and gas lease sales. The Department of Interior’s five-year offshore oil and gas lease shale program offers the fewest leases in the program’s history.

Read more …

“..leftist major media outlets are setting America up for post-election social unrest by perpetuating a fiction that the race is a close one.”

Be that as it may, there have been some major shifts at Polymarket. Overnight, Trump has fallen from 67% to 55%. Wisconsin and Michigan are now Harris. The House has gone Democrat.

• Polymarket’s Trump-Bullish Whale: “Absolutely No Political Agenda” (ZH)

While still guarding his anonymity, the mysterious man who’s bet more than $30 million on a Trump election victory via the Polymarket prediction marketplace has come forward to assert that his wagers aren’t intended to sway the election, but simply to profit from an outcome he’s highly confident in. “My intent is just making money,” said the man who describes himself as a Frenchman and former US resident who was a trader for American banks. In an exclusive interview with the Wall Street Journal via Zoom, he used the pseudonym “Théo,” saying he wanted to remain anonymous out of a desire to conceal the extent of his assets from his children and friends. The Journal said he was “sport[ing] a short, neatly trimmed beard” and spoke English with a small accent. Here’s how the Journal described the precipitation of the interview, and the paper’s process to ensure it wasn’t talking to an imposter:

“Théo emailed the Journal after the publication of an Oct. 18 article about his wagers. To prove that he was behind the Polymarket wagers, the Journal asked him to place a bet on whether Taylor Swift would announce that she is pregnant in 2024—one of the many small, nonpolitical wagers available on the platform. Minutes later, Polymarket’s website showed that one of the four accounts, Theo4, had placed a small bet on Swift’s pregnancy. ” In that original Oct. 18 article, the Journal gave some credit to the idea that the concentrated bets may represent some form of intentional narrative-control scheme meant to benefit Trump. Théo emailed the Journal to refute that theory, writing, “I have absolutely no political agenda.” In his subsequent interview, Théo told the Journal he’s a veteran trader with a history of risking tens of millions of dollars when he discovers a high-confidence trade — and said that’s what he sees in the chance to wager on a Trump victory.

When news broke of the whale’s huge wagers on Trump, Polymarket engaged outside experts to scrutinize transactions in presidential election betting, an unnamed source told the Journal at the time. Last week, Polymarket said it had contacted the whale and confirmed it was a French citizen with an extensive financial services and trading background. “Based on the investigation, we understand that this individual is taking a directional position based on personal views of the election,” the firm said. Théo said his conviction on a Trump victory rests on pollsters’ failure to capture the full extent of Trump’s support in both the 2016 and 2020 elections, and his belief that the “shy Trump voter effect” still endures in 2024. “I know a lot of Americans who would vote for Trump without telling you that,” he said, while also scoffing at the possibility that pollsters have improved their methodologies this time around. Having been previously accused of trying to shape the election, Théo dished out an accusation of his own, saying leftist major media outlets are setting America up for post-election social unrest by perpetuating a fiction that the race is a close one.

Théo thinks Trump is poised to rout Harris, which is why he has more than $30 million on Trump reaching 270 electoral votes, with the potential to receive $80 million if he’s right. He says his $30 million on Trump represents most of his liquid assets. Théo also has bets on a Trump popular-vote victory, along with bets on various swing-state wins. He also gave some insights into how he’s been trading: He started quietly in August by betting several million dollars on Trump, using an account with the username Fredi9999. At the time, Trump and Harris had roughly even chances on Polymarket. Théo spread out his wagers over multiple days and weeks to avoid causing a price spike. Still, as his bets grew, Théo noticed other traders were backing away from quoting prices when Fredi9999 was buying. That made it harder for Théo to get attractive prices. He created the other three accounts in September and October to obscure his purchasing, Théo said.

Single-handedly accounting for 25% of the contracts on a Trump electoral college win and 40% of the bids on a popular vote victory, Théo would have a hard time pulling money off the table without pushing the value of his contracts down. Speaking of which, the electoral college version of a Trump win peaked on Wednesday at 76 cents (with a dollar payoff if Trump wins). However they’ve taken a big dive since — plunging to 57.5 cents as this is written in the wee hours of Saturday morning. [..] If you’re itching to buy the dip, note that Americans are officially barred from Polymarket. You can thank your all-powerful, all-knowing, Constitution-violating federal government for protecting you from yourself: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission fined the platform in 2022 for allegedly providing illegal trading services, prompting Polymarket to bar Americans going forward.

Read more …

“JD Vance as dictator for life? Conservatives banning contraception? Elon Musk as an immortal techno god who spies on the masses using X and AI?”

• Leftists Predict Hysterical Dystopian Future (ZH)

The secret to understanding the average progressive mind is to first realize that everything they do revolves around a deeply ingrained fantasy world in which they are rebels; righteous underdogs fighting against “the system” or “the patriarchy.” Leftists cannot function within their collectivist ideology without first creating a fascist bogeyman to revolt against. If they were to ever realize that they are, in fact, the establishment and the authoritarians, their entire world view would collapse. This is why you will continue to see content like the election propaganda video below, no matter how ridiculous the premise might be. Leftist activists create these narratives, not because they are necessarily convincing to most people, but because they need to convince themselves that they are still the good guys.

JD Vance as dictator for life? Conservatives banning contraception? Elon Musk as an immortal techno god who spies on the masses using X and AI? Global warming destroying the planet and creating a Mad Max future in which the homeless are forced into concentration camps? The only thing missing is the forced birthing ceremonies from The Handmaid’s Tale. The video credits cite a handful of progressive NGOs as references for donations (including Vote.org) but little on who specifically made it. The relevant issue is the insight this gives into the insanity of left activists. They cling to so many assumptions they have been proven wrong about time after time (global warming), and they also imagine a world in which conservatives are the elites searching for immortality. They seem to be projecting the habits and hobbies of the very globalists that fund leftist groups today.

One could argue that perhaps this is gaslighting – They’re accusing conservatives of scheming to rule the world when they are the people that actually want control. That could be, but the conspiracy theories surrounding “Project 2025” suggest a Q-Anon level of delusion going on that feeds directly into bizarre narratives like those in the video. Leftists have to believe they’re fighting the good fight, even though they’re actually useful idiots for the establishment. This desperate need to take on the role of “freedom fighter” doesn’t mesh very well with reality. Keep in mind, for nearly two decades progressives have enjoyed expanding political and social power, with nearly every western government, every major NGO, every corporation, every legacy media outlet and every Big Tech platform dominated by woke ideology. From ESG to DEI to LGBTQ+ and beyond, Americans and much of the west have been endlessly bombarded from every angle by leftist propaganda.

Their war on conservative principles and individual freedom nearly came to a crescendo during the covid pandemic when they claimed the power to take away people’s access to the economy if they refused to accept an experimental vaccine and follow the mandates to the letter. Surveys showed a disturbing number of Democrats supported the outright destruction of constitutional freedoms in the name of forcing people to adhere to medical mandates based entirely on lies. Leftists also supported the widespread censorship of conservative voices on everything from the covid vaccine, to the lockdowns, to climate change, to Hunter Biden’s laptop. This censorship was spearheaded by the Biden Administration acting in violation of the constitution as they worked closely with Big Tech companies to shut down dissent. They aren’t fighting “the man”, they are the man. Ridiculous AI generated political videos like the one above are not going to change that.

Read more …

“There is optimism in Zelensky’s office that he could forge a personal bond with Trump..”

• Kiev Officials ‘Ready’ For Potential Trump Presidency – WaPo (RT)

Officials in Kiev reject the notion that an election victory for Donald Trump would spell disaster for Ukraine, despite his criticisms of US aid to Kiev and pledges to quickly end the conflict with Moscow, the Washington Post reported on Friday. Two unnamed members of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s team told the paper that the Republican presidential candidate’s “negative” messaging on Ukraine was “just campaign rhetoric” that will not necessarily correlate with his actions if he wins the election on November 5. There is a belief in the Kiev government that Trump would not want to look weak on the global stage by turning his back on Ukraine and, as a result, might make more decisive moves to support Kiev, WaPo said.

“With Russia advancing on the battlefield for the past year,” the Ukrainian officials believe that the status quo, which is likely to be maintained if Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris prevails in the race for the White House, is “not working,” the report read. Because of this, they suggested that “a drastic change” in US policy towards Ukraine could actually “be good” for Kiev. There is optimism in Zelensky’s office that he could forge a personal bond with Trump and eventually turn him into a supporter of Kiev, WaPo said. However, some Ukrainian officials, who talked to the paper, acknowledged that there is a “higher potential for a downside” if Trump wins a second term, and expressed concern that he would pressure Ukraine to make territorial concessions to Russia in exchange for peace.

Last month, Trump said on the PBD Podcast that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine was “a loser” and that Zelensky “should never have let that war start.” He described the Ukrainian leader as “one of the greatest salesmen I have ever seen,” referring to his ability to persuade the Biden administration to provide him with more military aid every time he comes to Washington. The Republican presidential candidate also reiterated his claim that he “will settle the Russia-Ukraine [conflict], while I am president-elect,” but did not reveal how he might achieve this. Back in June, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented on media reports of that Trump’s team was developing a roadmap for settling the Ukraine conflict, and stressed that “the value of any plan lies in the details and whether it takes into account the situation on the battlefield.” Peskov reiterated that Moscow remains ready for negotiations, but only if Ukraine recognises the realities on the ground.

Read more …

“.. the rules-based order is actually what that the West believes “is right”, adding that “once you are out of this order, you’re a perpetrator.”

• West’s Rules-Based Order To Collapse Soon – Medvedev

The so-called rules-based order imposed by the US and its allies on the global scene is an unstable structure, which is about to fall apart, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said in an exclusive interview with RT. Creating crises such as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine in various places is how the US is trying to rule the world, Medvedev, who now serves as the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, told the broadcaster on Saturday. “So, the more crises they create, the better, they think, the situation is for America… It makes money from weapons, supplies, and by allocating money to its defense industry,” he said. “The Americans are getting what they want at the price of more blood and casualties. This is why the Americans are engaging in feeding the war. But that system is coming to an end,” the former president warned.

The authorities in Washington “feel the world is falling out from under their feet and they are resisting it in every way possible,” he said.This is why the Americans see BRICS and other unions currently being created around the globe, in which the US has no say, as “hostile,” Medvedev explained. Washington and its allies accuse the members of those groups of “violating the rules-based order,” but, at same time, cannot explain what this order is,” he said. “I have carefully picked through the legal text and studied it: it is incomprehensible. It is not clear what the order is and who approved it. It is really just an idea of the US and its allies, while mostly in NATO, of how best to do business in the world,” the former president stressed. According to Medvedev, the rules-based order is actually what that the West believes “is right”, adding that “once you are out of this order, you’re a perpetrator.”

Read more …

“Western media reported that “Western pollsters” claimed that there were voting irregularities. What were Western pollsters doing in Georgia in the first place?”

• West Sees Red Over Failed Second Color Revolution In Georgia (SCF)

The United States and European Union are threatening consequences for Georgia after its citizens voted “the wrong way” – for peaceful relations with Russia and traditional moral values. Farcically, this is while the U.S. heads into presidential elections that are mired in chaos and recriminations over vote rigging and buying of votes by oligarchs and big businesses. Welcome to Western-style democracy where if you vote the way the powers-that-be want, it’s a fair election. If you vote the wrong way, it’s a rigged, flawed result that should be ignored or, worse, overturned. Such was the heated reaction from Western states to the electoral victory of the ruling Georgian Dream (GD) party last weekend in the South Caucasus nation. The party campaigned on a strong, clear platform for pursuing peaceful neighborly relations with Russia.

GD also declared support for traditional social and moral values, rejecting the Western pseudo-liberal agenda of promoting gender-bender LGBTQ+ identities, which was espoused by the Western-backed Georgian opposition parties. At the end of the day, Georgian Dream won a stunning victory, taking nearly 54 percent of the vote, translating into obtaining 90 out of a total of 150 parliamentary seats. Four opposition parties, which touted closer integration ties with NATO and the EU and acclaiming LGBTQ+ rights, won less than 38 percent of the vote. The Georgian people are to be commended for asserting their democratic rights in the face of massive Western interference in the election. Western money and NGOs amplified the opposition parties. If they had won, the new pro-Western administration would have turned Georgia into a second war front against Russia in conjunction with the NATO-backed Ukrainian regime.

Georgian and Ukraine have been at the center of the Western policy of expanding NATO around Russia’s borders. Both countries were declared future members of the military bloc as far back as 2008, although NATO membership is a red line for Russia. Fortunately, Georgian voters were aware of the geopolitical stakes and rallied to the cause of prioritizing peaceful regional relations and rejecting the notional security privileges of NATO. Western recriminations were fast and furious after the result. Western media reported that “Western pollsters” claimed that there were voting irregularities. What were Western pollsters doing in Georgia in the first place? Such entities sound more like a plant to stir post-election trouble.

As it turns out, there were indeed incidents of vote buying, ballot stuffing, and intimidation at polling stations. But videos showed that the incidents were agitprops organized by the Western-sponsored opposition parties. However, thankfully, such malfeasance was relatively minor and did not invalidate the overall final result. Georgia’s Central Election Committee declared the process to be free and fair. The authorized election invigilating body has given its verdict, and that should be the end of it.

Read more …

“As a result of having communicated with Yulia Skripal I was interviewed by the police and my statement recorded.”

• Novichok: UK Government Sedated The Skripals To Stop Them Talking (Helmer)

The British Government was exposed in the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry this week as keeping Sergei and Yulia Skripal unconscious to silence them. That was six years ago, when they were in Salisbury District Hospital in March 2018. Now, prevented from testifying in public at the public inquiry under way in London, they are still incommunicado, either in prison or dead. The evidence revealed in the published witness statements and transcript of testimony in four days of hearings at the Sturgess Inquiry October 28-31 shows that British Government officials have lied in public and lied on oath in the courts to conceal what they have been doing to accuse Russia of Novichok poisonings in the Salisbury area in 2018. The Inquiry records show that the chairman and judge, Anthony Hughes (titled Lord Hughes of Ombersley), and the lawyers working for him are actively working to protect the lies and prevent contradicting evidence from becoming public. .

Surprise testimony by Dr Stephen Cockroft, the doctor who cared for Sergei and Yulia Skripal on their admission to Salisbury District Hospital (SDH) on March 4, 2018, has revealed that the British Government kept them heavily sedated in order to tell the courts and media that they were unconscious and unresponsive when they had revived. Government officials ordered the hospital to punish Cockroft from talking directly to Yulia Skripal when she came out of her coma on March 8, 2018. Cockroft’s evidence of March 8, 2018, directly contradicts the evidence given on oath in the High Court in London on March 20-22, 2018, by state officials and an SDH “treating consultant” – the name was kept secret in the published court report — that “Mr Skripal is heavily sedated following injury by a nerve agent. Ms Skripal is heavily sedated following injury by a nerve agent. Mr Skripal is unable to communicate in any way. Ms Skripal is unable to communicate in any meaningful way.”

Cockroft’s disclosures also contradict the script which Yulia Skripal read out at a MI6-supervised and Reuters-filmed appearance for two minutes at a US bomber base in the UK in May of 2018. Skripal claimed then “after 20 days in a coma I woke to the news that we had both been poisoned.” In fact, Yulia woke from her coma after four (4) days. On July 18, 2024, Cockroft told the Inquiry which questioned him for a second witness statement: “An untoward event took place on Thursday 8 March 2018. A colleague (Dr James Haslam) had ordered all sedation to be discontinued temporarily to Yulia Skripal. This is quite a common practice on Intensive Care Units (ICU) and we refer to it as a ‘sedation hold’ and would normally be planned and discussed with the team. Unfortunately, having ordered the sedation hold, Dr Haslam left the ICU without advising me. I was present on the ICU treating another patient. As a consequence, Yulia Skripal regained consciousness very quickly and was confused, frightened, trying to get out of bed and was pulling at her various vascular access lines and breathing tube.

Cockroft then revealed that because the sedation had been stopped and Yulia was no longer comatose, Cockroft was punished by Blanshard, the hospital’s chief doctor. “I tried to feedback my concerns to Dr Haslam, but he was of the opinion that nothing untoward had occurred, but when these events were reported back to the Medical Director (Christine Blanshard) she had a very different opinion and I was summoned to a meeting with her on Monday 12 March to discuss my management of the incident. There is no formal record of that meeting [sic], however I was suspended from working on the ICU with immediate effect until Yulia and Sergei had either been discharged or died. Apparently by having had a conversation with Yulia Skripal I had been unprofessional and should have left such a conversation to the security services. I was warned by Dr Blanshard that I should not discuss any aspect of the poisonings with colleagues or other individuals and advised that any such discussion would be treated as serious misconduct. As a result of having communicated with Yulia Skripal I was interviewed by the police and my statement recorded.”

The Salisbury hospital official who collaborated with government officials and police to conceal the condition of the Skripals in hospital; to threaten and sanction the medical staff; and to intervene in the treatment of the Skripals, was the SDH medical director, Dr Christine Blanshard. By enforcing sedation on the two patients for the government’s political purpose, without their consent when they were conscious, out of coma, and capable of communicating, Blanshard violated her Hippocratic Oath.

Read more …

“..the strongest military alliance in human history had just launched its first war in North Africa since France was defeated in Algeria in 1962..”

• Brutally Murdered 13 Years Ago, Gaddafi Is Only Growing More Beloved (Fetouri)

October marked 13 years since Colonel Muammar Gaddafi was brutally murdered by a NATO-supported mob of rebels in circumstances still buried under a barrage of deliberate disinformation. Yet 13 years on, Gaddafi is probably the most popular figure in the North African country. Is it just nostalgia that makes the general public yearn for a man who has long been dead, or is there something else that goes beyond mere nostalgia as a human emotion? On September 23, 2009, in his first and only speech before the United Nations General Assembly, Muammar Gaddafi described the UN Security Council as council of “horror.” He explained that the council, by the UN charter, is responsible for peace in the world but has only brought “more wars and sanctions.” What he did not know at the time was that the same UN organ would, less than two years later, authorize his removal and ultimately his murder by adopting resolution 1973, which gave the green light to all UN member states to interfere in Libya as long they notified the UN Secretary General of their intention to do so.

Resolution 1973, adopted on March 17, 2011, was the UNSC response to public demonstrations that engulfed parts of Libya in the previous month, in which people demanded better living conditions, housing, and jobs. By the time the issue was deliberated at the UN, what had been peaceful and legitimate public demonstrations had turned into an armed revolt led by various stakeholders, including Islamists and former terrorists, against the legitimate government. The wave of public discontent in Libya was part of wider public awakenings that began in neighboring Tunisia before moving to Egypt. In both countries, the West attempted to save President Ben Ali in Tunisia and later his Egyptian counterpart, Hosni Mubarak, but failed. There were no calls for military intervention to “protect” civilians in either country. With Libya, it was a completely different matter.

Faced with armed groups seeking to destabilize the country, the Gaddafi government responded, just like any other respected government would do, by using force against the armed rebellion. Under Gaddafi, Libya had seen similar events in the previous four decades, where Western-supported attempts were made not only to kill Gaddafi but also to bring about regime change by force. The government used force to contain the demonstration, but specifically targeting the armed groups that had sprung up among the peaceful demonstrators. In this chaos, many innocent people were killed and wounded, but nowhere near the inflated figures reported in Western media and publically talked about by Western politicians in their quest to widen the rift between the Libyan authorities and its citizens and to sow discord among the Libyans who were divided between supporters of Gaddafi and supporters of what became known as the February 17 Revolution.

William Hague, the UK’s foreign minister at the time, for example, told the world’s media that Gaddafi had already fled the country and was on his way to Venezuela, when in fact Gaddafi never left Tripoli – so Hague misled public opinion, which further inflamed the situation. Under pressure from veto-wielding permanent superpower members, the UNSC passed resolution 1973 under the pretext of the ‘Right to Protect’ (R2P) doctrine that, controversially, allows the UN to use military force to protect civilians when their government fails to do so. Paragraph 4 of the resolution called on all world countries to “take all necessary measures” to protect civilians in Libya, impose a no fly zone, and urged all UN member states to tighten the embargo already imposed on the country by UNSC resolution 1970, passed on February 26, 2011, referring the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court (ICC), to investigate the alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly being committed on a large scale in Libya on the orders of Gaddafi himself, who was one of three officials indicated by the court.

Resolution 1970 was not passed based on concrete independent investigative reports of facts but, mainly, based on biased media reports. Neither the UN nor any of its relevant institutions investigated events on the ground to be able to lay blame, and the first official UN mission arrived in Libya in March and reported to the UNSC in April 2011. This means the UNSC adopted its two resolutions, 1970 and 1973, based on unverified media reports, unreliable witness statements and biased civil organizations accounts. By the time the UNSC adopted resolution 1973, Libya was already in a full-swing civil war between the armed rebels and government forces that, in being dehumanized by biased Western media, were called “Gaddafi brigades.” The rebels were actually a mix of terror organizations and locals who chose to fight the government.

They included groups such as Al-Qaeda, Ansar Al-Sharia, Al-Qa’ida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and remnants of other groups and Afghan war veterans who infiltrated the country. By mid-March 2011, Libya was consumed by internal violent strife, its government boycotted by most countries, its voice drowned under the barrage of media lies and fake news, its officials banned from travel, and its leader being hunted day and night. The rebels fighting the government were being supplied, financed, armed, trained, and directed by the West and several Arab countries such as Qatar, Jordan, and United Arab Emirates. The stage was set for NATO to take over the military intervention. In fact, France, the US, and UK had already started bombing Libya by launching the first wave of missile strikes on Libyan air defense sites and radars in order to prepare the ground for imposing a no-fly zone. Even civil security forces, manning checkpoints around Tripoli, were bombed.

By the end of March 2011, Libya has become a “theatre of operations” and NATO launched “Operation Unified Protector” with an around-the-clock bombardment. That meant that the strongest military alliance in human history had just launched its first war in North Africa since France was defeated in Algeria in 1962. By the end of its operation, NATO had killed hundreds of Libyan women and children, destroyed private properties and infrastructure, all in the name of reinforcing international law and protecting civilian while the real agenda was far more sinister. The scenes of chaos, destruction, displacements, and killings continued from March to October, in which the Libyan army managed to hold back the rebels on the ground while facing NATO air bombardments. On October 20, 2011, Gaddafi was murdered in gruesome scenes and his body, alongside the bodies of his son and his defense minister, displayed for the horrified public to see.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Rogan Fetterman

 

 

Eva
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852419256232636518

 

 

Dog fight

 

 

Dog kitten
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852392683748372979

 

 

Awesome

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Newer Entries