Menu Icon

Debt Rattle July 25 2025

Jul 252025
 
 July 25, 2025  Posted by at 9:53 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  52 Responses »


Henri Matisse Harmony in red 1908

 

• Trump Sends So-Called Experts Reeling After Historic First 6 Months (VDH)
• DOJ Forms “Strike Force to Assess ODNI Evidence” (CTH)
• Russiagate Was America’s Other Pearl Harbor – Ted Cruz (RT)
• Epstein vs. Russiagate (J. Peder Zane)
• Kirk To Tucker: Trump Only Has A Short Window To “Smash The Deep State” (MN)
• We’re Close To The War Nobody Wants But Everyone’s Preparing For (Timofeev)
• James Carville Slams Democrats’ ‘Cracked-Out Clown Car’ (Margolis)
• DNI Tulsi Gabbard Holds a Press Conference (CTH)
• Could Obama Be Prosecuted Over the Russian Hoax? A Look at the Law (Spakovsky)
• ‘Russiagate’, Revenge, and The Rotten Core Of US Power (Amar)
• Deputy AG Blanche To Meet With Ghislaine Maxwell On Thursday (JTN)
• “I Want Elon To THRIVE” Trump Says (ZH)
• Candace Owens Responds To Macrons’ Lawsuit Over Transgender Allegations (RT)
• Germany’s €450 Billion EU Tribute: Brussels Demands, Berlin Pays (Kolbe)
• Europe Is Stuck in a Disastrous, Failing Marxist Trap (GI)

 

 

Jesse Tulsi

Powell
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1948206791449346162

Steele

Sydney Powell
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1948201594287472751

CNN

Subpoena
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1948175505586315652

 

 

 

 

For some reason, a lot of longer overviews and assessments today. Let’s follow them. And start positive:

Victor Davis Hanson. Promises made. And more then kept.

• Trump Sends So-Called Experts Reeling After Historic First 6 Months (VDH)

In this first six months of the Trump administration, we’ve entered unknown territory. I guess the best way to term it is there are a lot of known unknowns. We’re doing things we’ve never done before. And our experts think they can predict it, but they’ve been wrong. Let’s take some examples. Usually, tariffs are not a source of revenue because traditional economic orthodoxy says that whatever revenue they generate, they decrease gross domestic product by inflicting attacks on goods. But yet, we don’t know what the profit margin is in these countries. And perhaps the tariffs are not resulting in rising prices. At least they haven’t in May and June. Which suggests, again, that the Germans or the South Koreans or the Chinese were making so much money by exporting to the United States, while protecting their own industry and piling up surpluses, that they could pay tariffs and still remain in our market at a cost-competitive profit.

The result is that we’re getting $26 billion a month and higher. No one anticipated that. Scott Bessent, the treasury secretary, said, “In theory, the year could end with a third of a trillion dollars—$330 billion.” That’s almost 5% of our revenue is coming from tariffs, which we’d thought would be impossible. Another impossibility is usually we’re running a $2 trillion debt. That’s what we were usually told by people. But in the month of May, there were more federal revenues than there were debits. And that was a result of the Department of Government Efficiency cuts and the tariffs and the seasonal increase in federal revenues that come through taxation and other charges against the private sector.

Everybody said, “Well, May’s always a good month. It’s the one good month of the year.” But we haven’t had a surplus since 2017 in any month, which is kind of strange if we’re going to run this huge $2 trillion budget deficit. And while we’re discussing it, more money is coming in than going out. And we have this known unknown about tariffs. Then something’s up. And that something’s up is amplified. When we look at the foreign investment, we were told, $4 trillion, $6 trillion, $8 trillion. That’s a phenomenal number. Nobody has ever had $8 trillion of foreign investment in the United States in one year. The secretary of interior, Doug Burgum, says to us now that the actual income or amount or capital investment from foreign sources of various statuses could be $15 trillion. Economists have ratios for each billion dollars in foreign investment, depending on the nature of the foreign investment, the jobs created. If this were true, it’s a phenomenal number.

He also said something that was quite striking. That the value of U.S. assets that have been untapped—natural gas, coal, oil, timber, rare earth minerals—is somewhere between $100 trillion and $200 trillion. Now, we don’t want to exploit and plunder our countryside, but it’s something to think about, that if we were not buying rare earth minerals from China—and we probably may not be—or we had a mechanism to tap our coal and use it cleanly to help generate the electricity for artificial intelligence. This is unusual. This is crazy: $15 trillion of foreign investment, $200 trillion of unrealized assets. And remember that the $15 trillion is coming from people who were not willing to do that prior to President Donald Trump. They’re doing it in fear of tariffs.

There’s a couple of other things, and that is the military was short anywhere—depending on who you talked to—45,000 to 65,000 recruits. They could only get 50% of their benchmarks. A year ago, at this time, about 50%, only about half of the people were enlisting. But when they changed the ad campaigns, and they said they were no longer going to prejudice recruits for tenure promotion, enlistment, advancement, etc. by their race or gender, and they were going to stress battle efficacy, all of a sudden, recruitment soared.

Nobody thought you could do it in six months. But in less than six months, the military went from, “We’re short 50%. We don’t know what to do. Maybe it’s gangs. Maybe it’s tattoos. Maybe it’s drug use. Maybe it’s obesity. Maybe we’re competing—” to, “I don’t know what happened but all these people have enlisted.” And we all know what happened. They stress what the military is for in their ads and communications. And they got what they wanted. And there’s one other final thing that’s inexplicable. We were letting in up to 10,000 illegal immigrants a day for over a four-year period. It’s controversial how many in total came. But it could be from 8 million to 12 million.

So when Donald Trump said he was going to offer a self-deportation, you get a thousand dollars, you get your way paid for, and you can apply for legal immigration at some future date—if you don’t do this, you’re disqualified for 10 years. And then the “Big, Beautiful Bill” will continue the wall. He put pressure on Mexico to enforce its own borders, to stop this trek northward. We could go through all the things he has done. But we all thought that maybe he could reduce it from 10,000 to 2,000, maybe to 1,000. I thought maybe, “Wow. If he does all this, if he actually forces people and he creates a new deterrence, he might get only 500.” Some months, there’s nobody; 126 people I think it was in May. This is phenomenal. There is no illegal immigration right now, as we speak. That frees the Border Patrol and the new agents that’ll come online and the new Big, Beautiful Bill to round up the 10 million, starting with the 500,000 criminals that former President Joe Biden let in.

Add it all up and the orthodoxy, the conventional wisdom about tariffs, about foreign investment, about our assets that are unrealized, about military recruitment, about illegal immigration, they’ve all gone with the wind. We’re in new territory. All the perceived wisdom is ignorance. And nobody knows what is what, except we’re in a very exciting period. If $9 trillion represents the market capitalization of all of Silicon Valley, you can imagine what $10 trillion to $15 trillion would do to this country. It’s like bringing a new Silicon Valley—in total, one and a half of them—and plopping them down. And when you add in robotics and AI and the efficiency in government regulation, through these cuts and fast-tracking permits, we don’t know where we are, but we might be on the verge of an economic boom.

Read more …

“The DC intel silos are built so their lack of sharing creates a natural defense mechanism; there is no cross-reference capability..”

• DOJ Forms “Strike Force to Assess ODNI Evidence” (CTH)

Main Justice has announced the formation of a DOJ strike force to assemble and assess the evidence provided by Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, against former intelligence and government officials. This will require the DOJ to take a new approach, extracting information from multiple silos and then overlaying context to the content therein. That’s essentially the new approach that DNI Gabbard has taken to break down the silo defenses, and this is the first time since I’ve been outlining how they self-protect that someone (DNI) has actually done the extracting and cross-referencing.

– Dept of Justice – WASHINGTON – “Today, the Department of Justice announced the formation of a Strike Force to assess the evidence publicized by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and investigate potential next legal steps which might stem from DNI Gabbard’s disclosures. This Department takes alleged weaponization of the intelligence community with the utmost seriousness. Upon the formation of the Strike Force, Attorney General Pamela Bondi stated: “The Department of Justice is proud to work with my friend Director Gabbard and we are grateful for her partnership in delivering accountability for the American people. We will investigate these troubling disclosures fully and leave no stone unturned to deliver justice.” Don’t underestimate how radical and challenging this type of an approach is going to be.

https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1948200092365992336

OIG Michael Horowitz never could attempt it (not authorized), SC John Durham was not permitted to do it (not authorized); the House Select Sub-Committee on Govt Weaponization ran away with hair on fire at even the suggestion of doing it (ask me how I know), and no modern internal investigative unit has ever been allowed to extract national security information from multiple IC institutions, and review it in context.

The DC intel silos are built so their lack of sharing creates a natural defense mechanism; there is no cross-reference capability. DNI Tulsi Gabbard has the unique ability -due to her position- of reaching into each IC silo regardless of their effort to stop her. That’s what has led to this point. If the DOJ is successful, things could change; but that’s a very big ‘if’. The entire mechanism of the USIC, led by defenses from the Senate Intel Committee (Cotton), will do everything to stop any internal extraction and review of their silo information. “National security” claims will run rampant. This will be a heavy lift requiring Executive Office support and coordination at every level.

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1948198774779568451

Read more …

“..a moment of “infamy” in American political history..”

• Russiagate Was America’s Other Pearl Harbor – Ted Cruz (RT)

US Senator Ted Cruz has compared the launch of the Trump-Russia investigation to the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, calling it a moment of “infamy” in American political history. The Texas Republican made the remark on Fox News on Wednesday, accusing former President Barack Obama’s administration of lying to the public and using federal agencies to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency. ”December 9 should be a day that lives in infamy,” Cruz said, referencing the date in 2016 when the FBI opened its inquiry and the famous wording Franklin D. Roosevelt used in a speech following a surprise Japanese attack on the US naval base in Hawaii. “That’s a moment when senior members of our government decided to lie to the American people and sabotage President Donald Trump.”

During a meeting on December 9, 2016, then President Obama ordered National Security Council officials to discard intelligence assessments that found no Russian involvement in Trump’s campaign and replace them with claims blaming Moscow based on fabricated data, according to declassified documents released by US National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard last week. Trump had defeated Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the presidential election that November.

The scandal led to the years-long Trump-Russia probe known as ‘Russiagate’. It severely damaged relations between Moscow and Washington, leading to sanctions, asset seizures, and a breakdown in normal diplomacy. Russia has not yet commented on Gabbard’s revelations. It has however consistently denied allegations that it interfered in the 2016 US election. The Kremlin has described the Russiagate affair as a politically motivated smear campaign intended to justify sanctions and worsen relations with Moscow.

Read more …

I’ve mentioned this a few times: the MSM have revived Epstein -after a 4-year silence- so they have a counterweight to Tulsi’s accusations. When will we start calling it Epsteingate?

• Epstein vs. Russiagate (J. Peder Zane)

It’s a tale of two stories. The first concerns President Trump’s back-peddling on pledges to release government files connected to the long-dead pervert Jeffrey Epstein. The second involves the growing evidence that President Obama and his top officials spread the false narrative casting Trump as a treasonous agent of Russia, one that hobbled his first term. While the Epstein saga is a tawdry kerfuffle with no larger significance, the new revelations about the Russia hoax provide scorching detail on one of the biggest political scandals in American history. Guess which one the legacy media is running with? Which one is it trying to bury? The answer is obvious. If only stating that was enough, and we could just laugh away the legacy media’s predictable and partisan coverage.

They are not serious people. Unfortunately, they are deadly serious in their continuing efforts to malign Trump while covering up their own malfeasance. The contrasting coverage of the Epstein and Russiagate stories is just the latest example of a media that has lost its way. First, Epstein. During the last few weeks the legacy media has covered that story as if it were Watergate. The New York Times, for example, published more than 50 articles and opinion pieces on Epstein and Trump between July 16 and July 23. Much of the rest of the legacy media has followed suit. Except for a salacious, if inconsequential, story spoon-fed to the Wall Street Journal – that Trump may have contributed a bawdy letter to a birthday book for Epstein 23 years ago – none of them broke news or advanced the story.

The last blockbuster article written about Epstein was Lee Fang’s May 21 piece for RealClearInvestigations revealing how officials in the U.S. Virgin Islands – including Democratic Rep. Stacey Plaskett – appear to have benefitted from and shielded Epstein, who brought young girls to a private island he owned there. Yes, the Epstein saga is a legitimate story. Despite legacy media claims to the contrary, there was a cabal of wealthy and influential men who cavorted with Epstein – and almost certainly some of them had sex with young girls. But it is unlikely that proof of such criminal acts is detailed in material in the government’s possession. Nevertheless, the Trump administration should release what it has and let the chips fall where they may for these amoral folks who tied themselves to a disgusting person.

Or Trump should forthrightly explain why that is a bad idea. A full account may be hard, given a Florida federal judge’s ruling yesterday that the law “does not permit” the release of secret Epstein grand jury testimony as requested by the DOJ. It is telling that the recent wall-to-wall coverage focuses so much on Trump. The irony is that he appears to be one of the few stand-up guys in the Epstein story. The two men were apparently friends at one time, – though probably not all that close given the lack of articles linking the two men before Trump ran for office. We do know that Trump was one of the few people who distanced himself from Epstein long before the financier pleaded guilty to sex crimes in 2008. Trump barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago before his arrest, supposedly because of his creepy behavior toward a minor.

There are also reports that Trump may have been the one who alerted the authorities to Epstein’s predations – not, perhaps, out of conscience but because of a real estate dispute. While the legacy news organizations pile on to the Epstein story, they are downplaying the recent revelations detailing the Obama administration’s efforts to push the Trump/Russia hoax. In their telling, his administration declassified a batch of new documents to distract from the Epstein scandal and to seek retribution against his perceived enemies. Whatever Trump’s motivations, the newly disclosed documents are significant. As Aaron Maté reported this week for RealClearInvestigations, they show that the official “confirmation” of the Russiagate hoax – the Intelligence Community Assessment completed in the January 2017 and reports by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the Senate committee investigating the issue – “all excluded the intelligence community’s own secretly identified doubts and evidentiary gaps on the core allegation of Russian meddling.”

The intricate timeline of events Maté details makes this point abundantly clear: Suspicions that Russia interfered in the 2016 election were repackaged as purported facts after Trump’s stunning win. We do know that emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee were published in the summer and fall of 2016 by Wikileaks. But, Maté notes, a September 2016 intelligence assessment reportedly “had no hard evidence that Putin ordered the theft of Democratic Party material as part of an influence campaign to help Trump.” Maté’s previous reporting for RCI has also shown that there is still no proof that Russia removed any emails from the DNC servers or passed them along to anyone else. That assessment was ignored after Trump’s victory in November. It is also clear that President Obama was a key player in advancing the false narrative of Russian interference.

Obama – who had been briefed that summer about Hillary Clinton’s plans to falsely cast Trump as a Kremlin stooge to deflect from her email scandal – requested a new intelligence assessment in December 2016. It was to be a rush job he wanted to get out before leaving office. That report, crafted largely by CIA Director John Brennan, suppressed FBI and NSA doubts about Russian interference. Obama went further. On Jan. 5, 2017, he held an Oval Office meeting with various figures, including FBI Director James Comey. Two days later, Comey briefed President-elect Trump about the Steele dossier – a phony and sloppy bit of opposition research paid for by Clinton’s campaign that suggested Trump and his associates had been compromised by the Russians. That briefing became the news hook anti-Trump media needed to quickly report on the bogus dossier, launching the Russiagate probes.

Two points: First, Russia probably did try to interfere in the 2016 election. But the actual facts we know – that they purchased a handful of ads on social media, and that they probably hacked into the DNC servers, albeit without proof that they removed emails published by Wikileaks – do not support the Mueller Report’s famous claim regarding a “sweeping and systematic” effort. More importantly, Democrats and the legacy media are trying to pretend that we spent three years debating Russian meddling. In fact, their efforts were aimed at painting Trump and his associates as treasonous allies of a foreign enemy. It was never about interference, but collusion.

I believe this was the worst scandal in American history because unlike Watergate – where wrongdoing was largely confined to the White House – Russiagate’s cancer metastasized from the White House to the CIA, the FBI, and the legacy media. The lack of accountability for these actions gave Democrats and their media allies a sense of impunity. It is why they felt free to lie so brazenly about other things, including Hunter Biden’s laptop and Joe Biden’s mental acuity. Those forces are so invested in hiding their own duplicity that they can never admit the truth. While the Russiagate and Epstein stories are clearly of different orders, Democrats and the legacy media insistently push a mirror image of the news, claiming the new revelations about corruption at the highest reaches of the government are simply Trump’s effort to “deflect” from Epstein. You can’t make this up – except they can.

Read more …

“I know what the grassroots want. I know what President Trump wants. We need perp walks. We need arrests..”

• Kirk To Tucker: Trump Only Has A Short Window To “Smash The Deep State” (MN)

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk believes that President Trump only has a short timeframe to take decisive action and score a meaningful victory over the Deep State before it’s too late.Kirk told Tucker Carlson that the clock is ticking and “We need accountability. If we do not smash the administrative state and the deep state in the coming six to 12 months, then we’re actually not going to.” “I know what the grassroots want. I know what President Trump wants. We need perp walks. We need arrests,” Kirk further urged.

Referring to the bombshell documents on Obama’s role in the Russia hoax dropped by Tulsi Gabbard last week, Kirk noted “I believe that all roads lead back to the intel agencies on all this stuff. And so Tulsi is now getting under the hood.”“This revelation of Russiagate is massive. It’s huge. God bless her for doing this,” Kirk contiuned, adding “I know the president cares about it personally, as he should, because how much of his life and his energy was just spent defending against a fabrication? Not a fabrication of the Chinese Communist Party, by the way. Not a fabrication of our adversaries, [but] a fabrication of our own government.”

“That’s what makes this so sinister, is that our own government was turned against the duly elected president. So here we are now in the year of our Lord 2025. Who’s running the United States government?” Kirk continued adding “President Trump, he is now the hunter. He was the hunted back in the first term.” However, Kirk warned that if progress is not rapidly made then “We’re not going to bring this entire intelligence apparatus to heel,” asserting “We have to lance the boil because it’s gone so out of control.”

“I can tell you, they are deeply fearful of this movement. They know that we are aware. They notice that they know that we are noticing things, that we’re seeing patterns, that we know how powerful the intelligence agencies have become,” Kirk further urged. “So that’s why I think Russiagate really matters, is that it’s a way to hold them accountable to see how dark and honestly demonic their activities have become,” he emphasised. Kirk described the remaining months of 2025 as “Hopefully an opportunity to fulfill a mandate that President Trump ran on I still know [he] believes to this day, which is to bring the deep state to hopefully smash it or, [at] the very least, bring it back into balance.”

Read more …

A one-on-one result of Russiagate.

• We’re Close To The War Nobody Wants But Everyone’s Preparing For (Timofeev)

US President Donald Trump’s recent push for peace in Ukraine highlights a troubling reality: the options for resolving the conflict are narrowing. Kiev continues to rely on NATO military support, while member states are ramping up defense spending and bolstering their arms industries. The Ukraine war may yet spark a broader confrontation between Russia and NATO. For now, the chances remain low – thanks, in large part, to nuclear deterrence. But how strong is that deterrent today? It’s difficult to gauge the role of nuclear weapons in modern warfare. Their only combat use – the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 – occurred under vastly different political and technological conditions. Nonetheless, most international relations experts agree that nuclear weapons serve as powerful deterrents.

Even a small nuclear arsenal is seen as a shield against invasion: the cost of aggression becomes unthinkable. By this logic, Russia, as a nuclear superpower, should be nearly immune to external military threats. The use of nuclear weapons has become a political and moral taboo – though military planners still quietly game out scenarios. The dominant belief holds that nuclear weapons are unusable – and that no rational actor would challenge a nuclear-armed state. But is that belief grounded in reality? For Russia, this is becoming an increasingly urgent question as the risk of direct confrontation with NATO – or individual NATO members – grows, especially in the context of Ukraine. There are political flashpoints aplenty. Both Russia and NATO have made their grievances known.

Whether these tensions erupt into conflict will depend not just on intent, but on military-industrial capacity and force readiness. And these are changing fast. Russia has expanded defense production since 2022. NATO countries, too, are rearming – and their collective industrial base may soon surpass Russia’s conventional strength. With that shift could come a more assertive posture – military pressure backed by material power. Several pathways could lead to a NATO–Russia war. One scenario involves direct NATO intervention in Ukraine. Another could stem from a crisis in the Baltics or elsewhere along NATO’s eastern flank. Such crises can escalate rapidly. Drone strikes, missile attacks, and cross-border incursions are now routine. In time, NATO regulars – not just volunteers – could be drawn in.

Could nuclear deterrence stop that? At first glance, yes. In a direct clash, Russia would likely begin with conventional strikes. But the war in Ukraine has shown that conventional weapons, even when effective, rarely force capitulation. NATO possesses Ukraine’s defensive tools – but at greater scale. Its societies are less prepared to endure casualties, but that could change with sufficient political mobilization and media messaging. Russia has amassed significant military experience – especially in defensive operations – but NATO remains a formidable opponent.

Read more …

“Constipated. Leaderless. Confused. A cracked-out clown car. Divided. These are the words I hear my fellow Democrats using to describe our party as of late. The truth is they’re not wrong..”

• James Carville Slams Democrats’ ‘Cracked-Out Clown Car’ (Margolis)

Let’s be honest here: The Democratic Party is a train wreck, and famed party strategist James Carville is screaming it from the rooftops. I’ve given him a lot of flak for torching his credibility by confidently predicting a Kamala Harris victory—but credit where it’s due; this time, he’s not wrong. In a scathing New York Times op-ed, Carville called his party a “cracked-out clown car”—and let’s face it, he hit the nail on the head. The Democrats are bleeding voters, hemorrhaging credibility, and spiraling into irrelevance with no clear leader or message. Carville’s attempt to patch this sinking ship is bold but delusional, and it’s a perfect snapshot of a party too broken to fix itself. Buckle up, because this is a masterclass in liberal denial.

Carville’s diagnosis is spot-on: “Constipated. Leaderless. Confused. A cracked-out clown car. Divided. These are the words I hear my fellow Democrats using to describe our party as of late. The truth is they’re not wrong: The Democratic Party is in shambles.” His evidence? Well, he points to the shocking nomination of Zohran Mamdani, a far-left socialist, for New York City mayor as proof of the party’s problems. Mamdani’s win isn’t just a fluke; it’s a symptom of a deeper rot—generational and ideological divides that have Democrats eating their own. Older and more pragmatic party members like Carville see pie-in-the-sky promises of economic utopias as undeliverable, while the younger, radical wing demands fealty to woke causes like defunding Israel over Gaza. Good luck uniting that mess.

But here’s where Carville’s plan goes off the rails. He thinks the Democrats need a “savior” to swoop in and save the day, like Barack Obama in 2008 or Bill Clinton in 1992. The Democratic Party is steamrolling toward a civilized civil war. It’s necessary to have it. It’s even more necessary to delay it. The only thing that can save us now is an actual savior, because a new party can be delivered only by a person — see Barack Obama in 2008 and Bill Clinton in 1992. No matter how many podcasts or influencer streams our candidates go on, our new leader won’t arrive until the day after the midterms in November 2026, which marks the unofficial-yet-official beginning of the 2028 presidential primary contest. No new party or candidate has a chance for a breakthrough until that day.

Really? A knight in shining armor to rescue a party that’s alienated half the country with open borders, skyrocketing prices, and identity politics on steroids? Carville’s banking on a mythical figure to emerge after the 2026 midterms. That’s not a strategy; that’s wishful thinking combined with the admission that he believes nobody on the theoretical Democrat Party bench for 2028 has a prayer of winning. So yes, he’s right about one thing: The party’s in shambles. But his solution—waiting for a political unicorn—isn’t just delusional, it’s an insult to voters who are fed up with Democrat overreach. While they wait for a fairy tale comeback, President Trump is getting real results—securing the border, growing the economy, and leading with strength.

Read more …

I’ve hinted at Trump apologizing to Putin over Russiagate.

“The timing does not appear to be accidental. President Trump gives Russia 50 days to come to the negotiation table and end the conflict in Ukraine. A few days later, DNI Tulsi Gabbard begins releasing information that shows both President Trump and President Putin being framed by the U.S. Intelligence Community.”

• DNI Tulsi Gabbard Holds a Press Conference (CTH)

Today, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard declassified and released the 2020 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence report (HPSCI), that outlines their investigation into the Intelligence Community Joint Analysis Report (JAR) of 2016 and the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that followed. I know that’s a lot of acronyms, however, the key element of Director Tulsi Gabbard’s release today is to underscore just how fraudulent the JAR/ICA created in 2016 and 2017 was. The JAR/ICA report was fabricated by the CIA and Intelligence Community to give the appearance of Russia interfering in the election. The declassified HPSCI report takes that fraudulent intelligence analysis apart, step by step.

The JAR/ICA was also used to justify President Obama expelling Russian diplomats, confiscating Russian property, targeting Russian officials for sanctions, and imposing a series of sanctions against various Russian entities, individuals, groups and organizations. All of the Obama’s Russian targeting effort was part of an enhanced IC op to give additional patina of credibility to the fraudulent premise. In many ways, Russia was collateral damage created by a domestic USA political intelligence operation run by Obama allies in order to attempt to destabilize the incoming administration of President Donald Trump. The framing of both Donald Trump and Russia is going to be a key facet to accept as time moves forward on this story. Tulsi Gabbard gives a press conference. WATCH:

I will have more on the Tulsi release of the HPSCI report shortly. In the interim… The timing does not appear to be accidental. President Trump gives Russia 50 days to come to the negotiation table and end the conflict in Ukraine. A few days later, DNI Tulsi Gabbard begins releasing information that shows both President Trump and President Putin being framed by the U.S. Intelligence Community. It would appear that President Trump is setting a new baseline for a relationship with Russia. However, first the tables need to be cleared of the historic manipulation and targeting that structurally, and fraudulently, set the course of conflict and antagonism in U.S-Russia relations.

Read more …

It’s not so easy. Presidents are well protected. Since the recent Supreme Court involvements in Trump cases, probably more than ever.

• Could Obama Be Prosecuted Over the Russian Hoax? A Look at the Law (Spakovsky)

Can former federal officials be prosecuted in the Russia-Trump collusion hoax? That is the question arising from the recent actions of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Gabbard has released declassified documents over what she says was a “treasonous conspiracy” that was “directed by President [Barack] Obama” to provide “manufactured intelligence” that “Russia had helped Donald Trump get elected.” This was in the face of contradictory intelligence analyses that said the exact opposite: that “Russia had neither the intent nor the capability to try to ‘hack the United States election.’” Gabbard says she is sending these documents to both the FBI and the Justice Department with the hope that they will criminally prosecute those involved in this hoax. That includes, in addition to Obama, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, and former national security adviser Susan Rice.

If we assume, just for the sake of argument, that what Gabbard is saying is correct and that the internal, formerly classified communications and perhaps other evidence support those claims, what federal criminal statutes might cover what is alleged to have occurred? Two things should be kept in mind. First, a very thorough, intensive investigation is required to ensure that all the relevant facts and possible evidence pertaining to this claim are uncovered. Second, there is no point in federal prosecutors going forward with a prosecution unless they are confident they have a reasonable chance of obtaining a conviction. Despite Gabbard’s understandable language about a “treasonous conspiracy,” the federal treason statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2381, seems like a pretty far stretch.

As bad as the allegations are—the misuse of federal power to target a political opponent and eventual president—the statute only applies to someone who “levies war against” the country or “adheres to [its] enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere.” What about the sedition statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2384? That criminal statute applies to “two or more persons” who “conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States … or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States.” Again, even if we assume the truth of these allegations, there was no force involved in what happened. On the other hand, what are the statutes that former special counsel Jack Smith attempted to use against Trump?

He indicted Trump under 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Conspiracy to Defraud the United States); 18 U.S.C. § 1512(k) (Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding); 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) (Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding); and 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights). The description Smith gives in the original grand jury indictment to justify using these particular federal criminal statutes seems to fit Gabbard’s description very aptly. Here is that description—just substitute Clapper, Brennan, and company for Trump as the defendants (changes are in brackets): So for more than two months following election day on November [8, 2016], the Defendant[s] spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election [by the Russian government in conspiracy with the Trump campaign] and that [Hillary Clinton] had actually won.

Those claims were false, and Defendant[s] knew that they were false. But the Defendant[s] repeated and widely disseminated them anyway—to make [their] knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election [and the legitimacy of the Trump presidency]. Remarkable resemblance to Gabbard’s allegations, isn’t it? Were the alleged conspirators obstructing an official proceeding? Last year in Fisher v. U.S., the Supreme Court held that prosecution under that statute requires showing that a defendant impaired the availability or integrity of documents used in an official proceeding, which includes creating false evidence. That could apply here if official intelligence reports were falsified as is alleged and that became part of the official investigation.

The federal fraud statute Smith was using is very general and applies to those conspiring to defraud the United States “in any manner or for any purpose.” But the use of this fraud statute by Smith was very questionable. As my colleague John Malcolm has pointed out, in recent cases “the Supreme Court has taken a dim view of more amorphous theories of what constitutes fraud against the United States.” In a unanimous opinion in 2023 in Ciminelli v. U.S., the court held that “Federal fraud statutes criminalize only schemes to deprive people of traditional property rights,” like money or property. They don’t “vest a general power” in the federal government to enforce its view of “integrity in broad swaths of state and local policymaking.” The serious misbehavior here doesn’t seem to meet that requirement.

And a “Conspiracy Against Rights?” That statute covers conspirators who “injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person … in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same.” This statute was part of the Enforcement Act of 1871, also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act, and was designed to stop the violence against newly freed blacks in the South. Applying it to Trump for merely questioning the outcome of the 2020 election was a gross misuse of the statute. Could it be applied to the actions of Brennan, Clapper, and other alleged conspirators? Perhaps. But the statute had never been applied in this manner before Smith tried to misuse it.

Finally, to the extent any of these alleged conspirators lied about what they did when they were testifying before Congress, that is a potential violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1621. This federal statute makes it a crime for an individual under oath to “testify, declare, depose, or certify truly … any material matter which he does not believe to be true.” The biggest problem any investigation conducted by the Justice Department faces is the federal statute of limitations. All of this is alleged to have happened at the end of 2016 and in 2017, more than five years ago. That is significant because the general federal statute of limitations for most crimes, 18 U.S.C. § 3282, is five years.

There are exceptions. There is no statute of limitations on treason, espionage, or capital crimes such as murder, but that is not the situation here. Additionally, for those hoping that the evidence would be sufficient to prosecute Obama, that also is highly unlikely to happen. Recall that last year, the Supreme Court held in Trump v. U.S. that presidents have absolute immunity from federal criminal prosecutions for actions taken within the scope of their official duties while president. If all the facts alleged are true, was Obama acting within the scope of his constitutional authority as president? Maybe not but trying to prove that in a court of law in order to overcome the Supreme Court’s holding of his presumptive immunity would be an almost impossible task.

Read more …

“Just ask that crackhead, porn addict, and shady “businessman” from an infamous clan, who is currently not in prison but giving expletive-laden interviews instead.”

• ‘Russiagate’, Revenge, and The Rotten Core Of US Power (Amar)

Be real: It is not hard to see that America – as it really exists, not the ‘dream’ version – is neither a democracy nor a country with genuine rule of law. That’s because democracy worth the label is impossible, for starters, with elections awash in private money and a bizarre Electoral College making sure that Americans do not, actually, have votes of even numerically equal weight when electing their single most powerful official, the president. The rule of law can only exist where citizens are equal before laws that apply to everyone in the same, just manner. This is a challenge everywhere, but the US is an almost comically egregious case of legal bias, obscurantism (masquerading as limitlessly re-interpretable case law), and inequality by status, wealth, ethnicity, and skin color. Just ask that crackhead, porn addict, and shady “businessman” from an infamous clan, who is currently not in prison but giving expletive-laden interviews instead.

The US, simply put, does not operate the way it claims to operate. It takes an extraordinary amount of naivete – on the scale of believing in Santa Claus or an honest Vladimir Zelensky – not to notice that much. What is more difficult to figure out is how politics and power actually do work in America and, most of all, who is really in charge. We have, for example, recently witnessed a presidency in which a severely senescent Joe Biden claimed to be but clearly could not be in command. So, who was? And who is in general? That, ultimately, is perhaps the single most disturbing question raised by recent developments around the rotting corpse of “Russiagate” (aka Russia Rage). In its heyday – between 2016 and about 2020 – “Russiagate” was the shorthand for a conspiracy theory that dominated US politics and mainstream media, causing mass hysteria.

Its details were exceedingly complicated but its core was extremely simple: the claims that Russia had manipulated the American presidential elections of 2016, that it had done so to facilitate the first victory of Donald Trump, and finally that Donald Trump’s team had colluded with Russia. The power of this preponderantly factually false and entirely misleading narrative was such that it overshadowed much of Donald Trump’s first presidency and contributed greatly to a catastrophic and very dangerous decline in the always challenging relationship with Russia. Indeed, there even is a plausible connection to be made between the mass madness of “Russiagate” and the reckless policy of provoking and waging a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. Now, Trump is back for a second term and bent on revenge against his detractors not only but especially over “Russiagate.”

In his usual refreshingly candid style, he has announced that “it is time to go after people,” fingered former president Barrack Obama for “treason,” and gleefully shared an AI-generated video showing Obama being arrested in the White House. Just before that typical Trump outburst, his Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, released a freshly declassified report – produced in early 2017 by the intelligence committee of the House of Representatives – that addresses what really happened in 2016 when “Russiagate” was initially invented. This release was clearly meant to be a sensation: Gabbard accompanied it with press statements and a detailed thread of X posts bringing out its most explosive aspects. Among them, the key finding is that Russia did not work to make Trump president. Boom: the basis of “Russiagate” gone, just like that.

And who was to blame? Gabbard made clear that “Russiagate” was not a cluster-fiasco born of mere incompetence but a monster intentionally produced and carefully nurtured. She accused “top national security officials,” including FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper as well as Obama himself of deliberately creating and spreading the impression of Russian election meddling in favor of Trump by manipulating the actual, contradictory findings of the intelligence agencies. Gabbard used strong language: a “coup” against Trump, the “weaponization of intelligence,” a “treasonous conspiracy,” and a “betrayal concerning every American.” Those mainstream media, such as the New York Times, that are among the worst offenders in spreading the “Russiagate” hoax have already pounced on this language to, in essence, pooh-pooing Gabbard’s charges as hyperbolical.

Don’t fall for that deflection. Gabbard’s way of presenting her case does have a political edge. Of course it does. Duh. And if they wish, the old “Russiagaters” can nitpick over her terms to their heart’s content. But that makes no difference to the fact that what has happened is an enormous blight on US politics, implicating the intelligence services as well as other state agencies, the media, and, indeed, former President Obama. Gabbard may be laying it on a little thick (or not, actually), but even without any embellishment, the fabrication of “Russiagate” was the real, humungous scandal. And it must be dealt with at long last.

Read more …

Another meeting today. After that he’ll talk to the press I’m sure.

• Deputy AG Blanche To Meet With Ghislaine Maxwell On Thursday (JTN)

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche is set to meet Thursday with Jeffrey Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, according to a news report. Blanche will meet Maxwell in Tallahassee, Fla., where she is serving a 20-year sentence for child sex trafficking and related offenses, anonymous sources told ABC News. The reported meeting comes amid bipartisan furor over the Trump Justice Department effectively shutting down any further investigations related to Epstein, a financier and convicted sex offender who died in prison amid more charges related to additional sex crimes. Among the lingering questions who were Epstein’s close, powerful friends and-or on his purported “client list.” President Trump was friends with Epstein before he was convicted in 2005 in Florida of sex crimes.

Maxwell helped find women, some of them minors, for Epstein. “I anticipate meeting with Ms. Maxwell in the coming days,” Blanche said Tuesday. “Until now, no administration on behalf of the department had inquired about her willingness to meet with the government. “President Trump has told us to release all credible evidence. If Ghislane Maxwell has information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims, the FBI and the DOJ will hear what she has to say,” the deputy attorney general explained.

Maxwell’s lawyer, David Oscar Markus, said Tuesday, “I can confirm that we are in discussions with the government and that Ghislaine will always testify truthfully. We are grateful to President Trump for his commitment to uncovering the truth in this case.” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer on Wednesday subpoenaed Maxwell to sit for a deposition at the Federal Correctional Institution Tallahassee on Aug. 11.

Read more …

Of course he does. Elon went off the rails, and his rocker, but he’s still a unique asset. It’s just that Trump has an entire country to run, and that’s too large of a picture for Musk.

• “I Want Elon To THRIVE” Trump Says (ZH)

Today former President Donald Trump denied accusations that he plans to harm Elon Musk’s companies, such as Tesla and SpaceX, by cutting off federal support. Responding to recent speculation, Trump posted on Truth Social: “Everyone is stating that I will destroy Elon’s companies by taking away some, if not all, of the large scale subsidies he receives from the U.S. Government. This is not so!” He added, “I want Elon, and all businesses within our Country, to THRIVE, in fact, THRIVE like never before! The better they do, the better the USA does, and that’s good for all of us.” “We are setting records every day and I want to keep it that way” Trump added.Though Trump had previously threatened to revoke billions in government subsidies to Musk’s ventures, his recent statements mark a softer stance.

The two have had a turbulent relationship in recent weeks, with tensions rising after Musk’s departure from the Department of Government Efficiency. Despite their past alliance, Trump emphasized his broader commitment to American business success. It was reported over the past week that President Trump had expressed a willingness to harm Musk’s companies by targeting their federal funding and contracts. Following a public feud between the two men—intensified after Musk left his government advisory role—Trump reportedly suggested he could retaliate by canceling contracts with Musk’s businesses, including SpaceX.WSJ reported that after tensions between President Trump and Elon Musk escalated in early June 2025, the Trump administration began reviewing SpaceX’s multibillion-dollar government contracts to assess potential waste and whether any could be canceled.

This move followed Trump’s public suggestion that terminating Musk’s federal deals would be an effective cost-cutting measure. The General Services Administration asked several agencies, including the Defense Department and NASA, to compile detailed spreadsheets—known as “scorecards”—on SpaceX’s active contracts, evaluating their financial value and whether any competitors could fulfill the same roles. However, after reviewing the data, officials concluded that most of the contracts were essential to national security and space exploration, making them difficult to terminate.

SpaceX’s dominance in the launch and satellite sectors left the government with few viable alternatives. Despite ongoing frustrations and scrutiny, the company continued securing major contracts, including a $5.9 billion Pentagon deal for 28 national-security launches. SpaceX’s proven track record, reusable rocket technology, and critical role in programs like Crew Dragon and Starlink have solidified its position as a cornerstone of U.S. space and defense operations—even amid political friction. Most recently, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said she did not believe Trump supported federal agencies contracting with Musk’s AI company, xAI, which had just secured a $200 million deal with the Department of Defense.

Read more …

The Fench president can’t win in a French court, but thinks he can in a US court?

• Candace Owens Responds To Macrons’ Lawsuit Over Transgender Allegations (RT)

American commentator Candace Owens has vowed to fight a defamation lawsuit filed by French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte, after the conservative Youtuber repeatedly claimed the first lady was transgender. The lawsuit, filed earlier this week in a US court, accuses Owens of spreading “false and defamatory claims” – including that Brigitte Macron was born male, that the couple are blood relatives, and that Emmanuel Macron is a product of a CIA mind control program. According to the filing, the allegations were made “to promote her independent platform, gain notoriety, and make money,” and amounted to “relentless bullying on a worldwide scale.”

In a video posted to her YouTube channel on Wednesday, Owens shared a message intended for Brigitte Macron with her 4.5 million subscribers: “You were born a man and you’ll die a man,” adding that she is “fully prepared to take on this battle on behalf of the entire world” and that she will see the French president’s spouse in court. The Macrons filed a 219-page lawsuit in the US state of Delaware earlier in the day, alleging 22 counts of defamation against Owens. The complaint includes 99 pages of factual claims and evidence such as Brigitte Macron’s childhood photos, birth records, and documentation of her three children with her first husband. The document says Owens has turned the couple’s life “into fodder for profit-driven lies.”

Suing the podcaster was “the last resort,” as she ignored all requests to stop her activities, Macron’s lead counsel Tom Clare told CNN. Owens has repeatedly attacked Mrs. Macron on social media. In 2024, she posted a video titled “Is France’s First Lady a Man?” Earlier this year, she shared an investigation called “Becoming Brigitte.” The rumors about Brigitte date back to 2021, when Amandine Roy and Natacha Rey posted a four-hour video alleging she was born a man. However, this July, the Paris Appeals Court overturned the fines put on the bloggers following Mrs. Macron’s 2022 lawsuit. The court ruled out the women acted in “good faith” and that their allegations were an expression of belief.

Read more …

Europe will be much poorer than anyone today can imagine. Simply because of their politics. Totally preventable.

• Germany’s €450 Billion EU Tribute: Brussels Demands, Berlin Pays (Kolbe)

Political centralism doesn’t come free of charge. On the path toward the United States of Europe, Brussels is entangling itself in a web of overreach, control mania, and interventionism. The invoice for this arrogance is being handed down to the outposts of Eurocracy. Celebration in Berlin. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz proudly presented what he called a comeback for Germany’s depression-plagued economy this Monday. Under the deeply original (read: painfully clichéd) slogan “Made for Germany”, 60 of the country’s top corporations showcased their already planned investments as a kind of aggregated act of economic liberation. “Germany is back,” Merz posted on X – grandiose, juvenile, and more cringe-inducing than inspiring. The reality of the German economy paints a different picture.

The labor market has already tipped into decline, with more than 100,000 industrial jobs set to be eliminated this year. A record wave of bankruptcies and a dramatic capital flight round out the portrait of an economic policy in freefall. How far Merz’s corporate pep rally strays from the economic facts is made clear by the country’s net direct investment figures: In 2024, Germany saw €64.5 billion in net capital leave the country. In 2023, it was €67.3 billion; in 2022, a staggering €112.2 billion. Germany is bleeding. And the real scandal is this: the country’s political leadership and, for practical purposes, let’s call them its “economic elite,” refuse to speak about the true causes of this collapse. A summit truly “Made for Germany” would call for an exit from the suicidal green policy agenda.

It would advocate a drastic reduction in bureaucracy and regulatory coercion, a return to affordable Russian gas, and the revival of nuclear power – the pillars of any serious industrial policy. Contrast this PR stunt with the hard numbers, and it becomes obvious why the event faded into oblivion – uninspired, flat, and quickly archived as another placebo moment of postmodern politics. Merz, for his part, was likely already preoccupied with another headache. While he toasted in Berlin, half of Europe was reacting to the ballooning budget proposal by his party colleague, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. She had just introduced her draft for the EU’s Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2028 to 2034: a whopping €1.82 trillion.

No one can accuse Brussels of lacking ambition. €100 billion is earmarked to keep the proxy war in Ukraine afloat, while another €650 billion is slated for the EU’s green subsidy machine – a lifeline for its artificial eco-economy. The proposed budget would increase by €750 billion, or nearly 50%. Unlike China’s five-year plans, the EU dreams in seven-year cycles. A true central planner’s paradise. If enacted, this mega-budget would trigger a massive increase in member-state contributions – with Germany, as usual, stuck with the lion’s share. Based on its economic size, Germany would be expected to contribute around 25% of the total, or approximately €450 billion.For comparison: Germany currently pays around €30 billion annually into the EU budget and receives €14 billion in return – a net loss of €16 billion per year.

Under the new framework, Berlin’s net contribution could rise to as much as €50 billion per year – more than triple today’s level. Cynics might argue that Germany could absorb the extra debt without much fuss. After all, Berlin is planning to borrow €90 billion next year anyway – what’s another €26 billion? Relative to GDP, it’s just a 0.6% bump in spending. A small price to pay for stabilizing Europe’s central authority. In the lingo of German politics: a Democracy Tax.And since no one in Brussels or Berlin seems to care about the Maastricht debt rules anymore, the path is clear for another round of debt-financed Euro-socialism.Merz, together with von der Leyen and French President Emmanuel Macron, is united in the belief that consolidating power within Brussels is the only way to keep Europe geopolitically relevant.

Merz is increasingly revealing himself as a committed central planner. With him, there will be no market-based reset – no return to constitutional economics. The German government’s current budget plan shows that Berlin is on board. The crisis will be “managed” through massive borrowing and state-directed investment of fictitious capital. To resolve Brussels’ budget dilemma, we can expect a two-pronged solution: new EU taxes and increased national contributions. I’ll go ahead and predict what’s coming: in the next few months, we will see a coordinated push to eliminate the veto rights of individual EU member states in budget negotiations.

Let Viktor Orbán stomp his feet in Budapest all he wants – the advance of European-style socialism won’t be stopped by ox or donkey. One imagines CDU members quietly humming The Internationale under their breath. Once that veto hurdle is cleared, national debts could be pooled under the umbrella of the EU Commission, monetized via the European Central Bank, and camouflaged by a digital Euro – all in an effort to halt the economic hemorrhaging of the Eurozone. The Ukraine conflict serves as the ideal justification for this massive wave of public credit creation.

Read more …

“..seem destined to diverge ever more sharply. By 2023, US GDP per capita had climbed to $82,770, exactly double the EU’s $41,420..”

• Europe Is Stuck in a Disastrous, Failing Marxist Trap (GI)

In a world where shifting economic forces are redrawing the global balance of power, the trajectories of the United States and the European Union over the coming decade (2025-2035) seem destined to diverge ever more sharply. By 2023, US GDP per capita had climbed to $82,770, exactly double the EU’s $41,420. America’s lead rested on average annual real GDP growth of 2.2% between 2010 and 2023; productivity gains of roughly 14%, and research-and-development spending equal to 3.4% of GDP. Add to that a remarkably flexible labor market, modest demographic growth (0.5% per year) and, since 2019, energy self-sufficiency. The EU tells a different story: average annual real GDP growth of barely 1.3%, a mere 7% rise in hourly productivity, a working-age population that shrinks by about one million a year, and an energy-dependence rate still hovering around 58%.

“Ah, but….” retort the socialists of every political hue — and in Europe they exist in every political party — “you cite average income, not median income.” Median income, the point at which 50% earn less and 50% earn more, is indeed lower than the mean in the United States. Inequality is more pronounced in the US than in Europe. Yet their reply, presented as though it settled the debate, is itself part of Europe’s predicament. In Europe, inequality is generally treated as an evil, a moral abomination; therefore material equality, even if it means, as in the former Soviet Union, that no one (except senior party members) has anything, is elevated to the status of an ideal good. At 17, as first-year law student, I had the opportunity to interview André Molitor, former chief of staff to King Baudouin of Belgium. Molitor, a gracious left-wing Catholic, confided that the single thing he truly despised was inequality; his dream was for “fewer rich and fewer poor.”

True material equality is a myth. The “real equality” championed by communists and socialists of every stripe has simply never existed. Hand every European €100,000 today, and by tomorrow there would already be a handful of tycoons — perhaps even an Elon Musk or two — alongside those who squandered everything, with the vast majority scattered somewhere in between. Equality, as a moral value, has served largely as a pretext for socialism — take from Peter and give to Paul — all while funding a sprawling, parasitic apparatus of “redistribution” that provides little opportunity or incentive to succeed or to keep what one has earned. Europe’s elevation of material equality may well be its most disastrous bequest to itself. With ironclad consistency, the continent advances toward greater equality — in increasing misery and squalor.

The baseline projection for 2035 at current growth rates shows that if current trajectories persist — 2% annual growth in the United States versus 1% in Europe — the average American income will exceed $100,000 by 2035, while Europe’s will remain around $50,000. Carriage drivers in New York’s Central Park or dog-walkers in Beverly Hills will soon earn more than French physicians and German engineers — not metaphorically, but in cold cash. Even taking into account the differences in inflation and purchasing power between Europe and the US — the cost of living is lower in Europe — the transatlantic gap is immense and growing.

Under alternative scenarios — a European technological renaissance, or conversely a severe geopolitical shock for the United States, the ratio rarely falls below 2:1. America’s productivity growth, energy production and R&D investment remain decisive. Plainly stated: absent a political sea-change, Europe is on a path of swift decline, notwithstanding genuine strengths such as longer life expectancy. Per-capita GDP — imperfect yet inescapable — crystallizes a transatlantic chasm. Europe is becoming to the USA what Greece was to Rome: a charming open-air museum. Is it inevitable? Hauling Europe out of the mire of socialism, in all its guises, would demand two transformations so radical they verge on the unimaginable.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Power bill


Optimus

Scott

Bean
https://twitter.com/HJB_News__/status/1948384161107972544

Balance impossibile

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 20 2025

Jul 202025
 
 July 20, 2025  Posted by at 9:43 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  52 Responses »


Saul Leiter Man with flowers, NY 1950s

 

• Obama Admin Engineered The Russia Hoax To Undermine Trump (Margolis)
• China’s Economic Demise And Its Impact On The US (Lance Roberts)
• Zelensky May Not Last Much Longer – Seymour Hersh (RT)
• Zelensky Wants Personal Meeting With Putin (RT)
• Putin and Trump Need To Meet – Orban (RT)
• Putin, Trump and Xi Could Meet In September – The Times (RT)
• Trump Toughens Stance In EU Trade Talks – FT (RT)
• Trump Issues New Threat To BRICS (RT)
• Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia Is Bluster and Bluff (SCF)
• DOJ Asks Court To Unseal Jeffrey Epstein Grand Jury Testimony (JTN)
• The Epstein Enigma (James Howard Kunstler)
• And It’s One, Two, Three, What Are We Fighting For? (Pepe Escobar)
• Russia Will Target Multinational Forces in Ukraine (Kyle Anzalone)
• The World Woke Up (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Red, White, and Bitcoin (Beirne)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/BarronTNews_/status/1946621370105790687

https://twitter.com/PU28453638/status/1946338084833923411


Clint
https://twitter.com/ProudElephantUS/status/1946291703469466044

Comey

PDB

 

 

 

 

Tulsi Gabbard nuked the entire US political system with her report on Friday. It will take time for it to sink in. She doesn’t merely accuse Comey and Brennan, she says former president Obama is guilty of treason. An accusation lifted at Trump many times over the past 10 years of course, but the difference is Tulsi brings the receipts. Even then, it will be hard to get the MSM to report on all the court cases we will see, in anything like a neutral fashion. If only because the media, too, will be among the accused.

• Obama Admin Engineered The Russia Hoax To Undermine Trump (Margolis)

Fox News Digital has uncovered damning evidence that the Obama administration deliberately “manufactured and politicized intelligence” to push the now-debunked Russia election interference narrative, despite contradictory assessments from within the intelligence community itself. According to newly declassified documents that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released Friday, there’s “overwhelming evidence” that Barack Obama and his national security inner circle went to work immediately after Donald Trump’s stunning 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton. Their goal? Lay the foundation for the Trump-Russia hoax that would consume the nation for years. This wasn’t a matter of bad judgment; it was a calculated operation to delegitimize Trump’s presidency before it even began.

“Documents revealed that in the months leading up to the November 2016 election, the intelligence community consistently assessed that Russia was ‘probably not trying…to influence the election by using cyber means,’” the report reveals. “One instance was on Dec. 7, 2016, weeks after the election, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s talking points stated: ‘Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the U.S. presidential election outcome.’” Fox News Digital obtained a declassified copy of the Presidential Daily Brief, which was prepared by the Department of Homeland Security, with reporting from the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, FBI, National Security Agency, Department of Homeland Security, State Department and open sources, for Obama, dated Dec. 8, 2016.

“We assess that Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure,” the Presidential Daily Brief stated. “Russian Government-affiliated actors most likely compromised an Illinois voter registration database and unsuccessfully attempted the same in other states.” But the brief stated that it was “highly unlikely” the effort “would have resulted in altering any state’s official vote result.” “Criminal activity also failed to reach the scale and sophistication necessary to change election outcomes,” it stated. Declassified documents reveal that the FBI raised serious concerns about a 2016 Presidential Daily Brief (PDB), which claimed that Russia was trying to undermine the U.S. election.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence had assessed that Russia’s efforts were likely aimed at sowing doubt in the process — not disrupting it — and noted that cyberattacks on election infrastructure failed to cause any real impact. Internal FBI communications show agents pushed back, drafting a formal dissent and warning the brief shouldn’t move forward until their objections were heard. As a result, the brief’s release, originally slated for Dec. 9, 2016, was delayed following “new guidance” from ODNI. “It will not run tomorrow and is not likely to run until next week,” wrote the deputy director of the Presidential Daily Brief at Office of the Director of National Intelligence, whose name is redacted. The following day, Dec. 9, 2016, a meeting convened in the White House Situation Room, with the subject line starting: “Summary of Conclusions for PC Meeting on a Sensitive Topic (REDACTED.)”

The meeting included top officials in the National Security Council, Clapper, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice, then-Secretary of State John Kerry, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, among others, to discuss Russia. The declassified meeting record shows that Obama administration officials agreed to recommend sanctions against members of Russia’s intelligence agencies — if their cyber activities met the legal threshold under an executive order targeting foreign cyber interference. But that wasn’t all. Following the meeting, then-DNI James Clapper’s executive assistant instructed intelligence agencies to produce a new assessment “per the president’s request,” specifically aimed at detailing how Moscow allegedly tried to influence the 2016 election. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence would lead the effort, with help from the CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS, effectively setting the wheels in motion for the Trump-Russia narrative.

The story confirms what many long suspected: Obama-era officials deliberately leaked false claims to the media about Russian interference in the 2016 election, pushing a narrative they knew wasn’t supported by actual intelligence. According to documents obtained by Fox News Digital, a Jan. 6, 2017, Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) was politically weaponized, contradicting prior assessments and burying evidence that Russia lacked both the intent and ability to hack the election. Officials revealed that the ICA suppressed internal dissent — such as FBI and NSA skepticism about Russia’s role in the DNC leaks — and was based on debunked sources like the Steele Dossier. Despite this, the flawed report triggered a chain reaction: media smears, the Mueller investigation, two impeachments, and deep damage to U.S.-Russia relations. Intelligence officials now say this entire operation was designed to delegitimize President Trump and overturn the will of the voters.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard called the plot “a treasonous conspiracy” to subvert the Constitution and called for full accountability. She confirmed that all related documents have been handed over to the DOJ. Meanwhile, former CIA Director John Brennan and ex-FBI Director James Comey are under criminal investigation for their roles in pushing the phony narrative. As President Trump put it: “I think they’re crooked as hell… maybe they have to pay a price for that.” This wasn’t the work of a few rogue officials freelancing their partisan vendettas; it was a coordinated effort that implicates the highest levels of the Obama administration, including Barack Obama himself. The declassified documents lay out a damning paper trail: Obama was personally briefed on intelligence that debunked the Russia-collusion claims, yet his team deliberately buried those facts, rewrote assessments at his request, and fed a false narrative to the press that ultimately ignited a multi-year witch hunt against his successor.

This was no accident. It was a deliberate abuse of power, an attempt to sabotage the incoming president before he even took office, all under the guise of “protecting democracy.” From Obama to Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Rice, and Lynch, this wasn’t just dirty politics; it was a subversion of the peaceful transfer of power. And now, with criminal investigations underway and the full truth coming to light, we know that the real election interference operation wasn’t run from Moscow — it was orchestrated in Washington, D.C., at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Read more …

“This particular real estate bubble, which is unprecedented in magnitude, is bursting. This creates deflationary pressures and undermines the value of collateral supporting large portions of China’s shadow banking system.”

• China’s Economic Demise And Its Impact On The US (Lance Roberts)

Few are as candid and historically accurate as hedge fund manager Kyle Bass when identifying structural breaks in the global economy. In a recent interview, Bass painted a grim but telling picture of China’s economic condition, warning: “We are witnessing the largest macroeconomic imbalances the world has ever seen, and they are all coming to a head in China.” While China has long been touted as the next great economic superpower, its recent trajectory reveals a far different story, one marked by policy missteps, systemic financial rot, and a rapidly eroding growth engine. Bass didn’t mince words either: “China’s economy is spiraling with no end in sight.” China’s GDP deflator, the broadest measure of prices across goods and services, continues to decline as economic activity erodes.

For investors around the globe, this isn’t just a regional concern; it’s a seismic macroeconomic event that will ripple through capital markets. The implications are significant for U.S. investors because when global economies falter, especially one as large and interconnected as China’s, capital doesn’t just vanish. It moves. That movement will significantly impact U.S. assets as flows transfer back into U.S. dollars and Treasury bonds. This global repositioning of capital isn’t merely a symptom of market volatility; it reflects a profound reevaluation of risk in the face of deteriorating confidence in China’s financial system. We must examine what’s breaking in China to understand why this matters so profoundly. Bass emphasized that the issue’s core lies in the real estate sector, which accounts for roughly 30% of China’s GDP.

This massive share of economic activity is under severe strain, with property developers defaulting, sales volumes collapsing, and home prices declining across major cities. However, this should be unsurprising as, after the financial crisis, we wrote many times about the mass overbuilding of “ghost cities” that were responsible for China’s growth at the time. However, the “bullwhip” effect of that massive overbuilding was inevitable. “They’re sitting on 60 to 70 million vacant homes. It’s a Ponzi scheme that is finally collapsing.” – Kyle Bass. This particular real estate bubble, which is unprecedented in magnitude, is bursting. This creates deflationary pressures and undermines the value of collateral supporting large portions of China’s shadow banking system.

Adding to the concern is the Chinese Communist Party’s refusal to implement reforms that would bring greater transparency, capital discipline, and market-based corrections. Rather than allow markets to clear, Beijing is opting for control through capital restrictions, state intervention, and increased surveillance of financial activity. “China is experiencing a slow-motion banking crisis, and capital is doing everything it can to escape.” – Kyle Bass. That capital flight is inevitable and, as noted, will significantly impact the U.S. economy and financial markets. This exodus of domestic and foreign capital will reshape the global macro landscape. We recently discussed that the “Death of the Dollar” narrative was vastly exaggerated. While that post goes into more detail, there are five primary reasons why the dollar will remain the reserve currency of the world:

• Lack of a viable alternative currency
• Strength of the U.S. economy
• Network effects and global financial inertia
• Limited scope of de-dollarization efforts
• Resilience amid policy changes.
Most importantly, the dollar dominates the composition of global currency transactions.

China’s economic collapse only exacerbates the world’s dependence on the U.S. dollar for trade and storing reserve assets to support that trade. In times of crisis, investors don’t seek yield; they seek safety. Despite the U.S. running its fiscal imbalances and maintaining high levels of debt, the U.S. dollar and Treasury bonds remain the world’s premier safe havens. There is no alternative with the same depth, liquidity, and perceived security.

Read more …

From a Sputnik piece on the same topic: “..the delivery of F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine has been a “total bust,” as Ukrainian pilots have only managed to learn how to take off, not how to land.”

• Zelensky May Not Last Much Longer – Seymour Hersh (RT)

The political future of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky appears increasingly uncertain, according to officials in Washington cited by legendary journalist Seymour Hersh. The prospect of the politician being replaced by former armed forces commander Valery Zaluzhny is reportedly growing amid waning domestic support and mounting frustration in Washington. Zelensky suspended national elections under martial law and opted not to step down after his presidential term officially ended in 2024. His former top military commander, who was dismissed earlier this year and later appointed ambassador to the UK, has reportedly long been considered a potential successor. “Zelensky is on a short list for exile, if [US] President Donald Trump decides to make the call,” the veteran reporter wrote on Friday.

One US official familiar with internal discussions suggested that if Zelensky refuses to step down — which they believe is the most likely scenario — he may ultimately be removed by force. Zaluzhny is currently seen as the most credible successor to Ukraine’s leader, according to “knowledgeable” officials in Washington cited by Hersh, who added that the “job could be his within a few months.” Zelensky’s popularity, which soared to 90% in the early months after the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022, has steadily declined due to battlefield setbacks and ongoing economic difficulties. The latest polls suggest that only 52% of Ukrainians still trust him, while around 60% would prefer he not seek another term.

Western media outlets have recently shifted their tone, with some portraying Zelensky as increasingly authoritarian. Others have reported that officials in Washington believe “it’s time for an election and new leadership.” Russian officials have also raised concerns about Zelensky’s legitimacy, arguing that any international agreements signed under his leadership could be legally challenged. While Moscow has expressed a willingness to negotiate with Zelensky, it remains skeptical of his authority to finalize any lasting deal.


Read more …

Putin has zero reason to meet.

• Zelensky Wants Personal Meeting With Putin (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has once again called for a personal meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying this is the only way to secure a lasting peace. Moscow considers this pointless until the countries’ delegations find some common ground. Putin offered in May to resume direct negotiations – from the point at which Ukraine unilaterally abandoned talks in 2022. However, Zelensky challenged him to come and meet in Istanbul personally. Ukraine eventually agreed to send a delegation amid reported pressure from Washington, and since then the sides have held two rounds of talks, resulting in prisoner exchanges but no breakthrough toward ending the conflict.

The talks stalled in June after Kiev dismissed Moscow’s peace proposals. It later declared the process “exhausted” and indicated it had only taken part to avoid appearing dismissive of US President Donald Trump’s diplomatic initiative. On Saturday, Zelensky stated that the “pace of negotiations must be increased,” offering to hold a new round of talks next week – and once again demanded a personal meeting with Putin. “A meeting at the level of leaders is needed to truly ensure a lasting peace,” he said, adding: “Ukraine is ready.” Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, but he has cited martial law, which he imposed, as grounds for remaining in office. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova recently accused the Ukrainian actor-turned-politician of pushing for a personal meeting with Putin to reaffirm his political legitimacy, claiming he “is insanely afraid of being forgotten, of becoming unnecessary for the West.”

Despite Zelensky’s dubious legal status, Putin previously said he is open to a potential meeting – but questioned Zelensky’s authority to sign binding agreements. “I am ready to meet with anyone, including Zelensky. That’s not the issue,” the Russian president stated in June. “The question is different: Who will sign the documents?” According to Moscow, legal authority in Ukraine now resides with the parliament, not with Zelensky. On Tuesday, Ukrainian lawmakers once again extended martial law and general mobilization for another 90 days, with just a single dissenting vote.

Read more …

“Everyone says they want peace, but there’s still war. That means someone is lyin..,”

• Putin and Trump Need To Meet – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has called for an in-person meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump, describing it as the only realistic path to ending the Ukraine conflict. In an interview with the Ultrahang YouTube channel published on Thursday, Orban called Trump “the man of peace” but voiced skepticism about the sincerity of other Western governments and officials in Kiev. “Everyone says they want peace, but there’s still war. That means someone is lying,” he said, accusing some parties of having a vested interest in prolonging the bloodshed. “They want the war to continue, no matter what they say.” A deal won’t come from Kiev. It must come from Washington and Moscow. Until then, there will be no peace.

“The conflict will not stop until the Russian and American presidents sit down at the negotiating table,” Orban added. He expressed hope that such a meeting could lay the foundation for a broad agreement addressing not only Ukraine, but also global trade and arms control. Earlier this week, Trump said he was “very, very unhappy” with Putin and threatened Moscow’s trade partners with “severe” secondary tariffs if no diplomatic progress is made within 50 days. Budapest has consistently criticized efforts to arm Kiev and opposes its EU and NATO ambitions, warning that it prolongs the conflict at growing cost to European economies and taxpayers.

Trump has indicated that Washington will no longer fund Kiev’s war effort, but has allowed other NATO members to continue purchasing US-made weapons for Ukraine. Since returning to office in January, Trump has held several phone calls with Putin and has alternated between assigning blame to Moscow and Kiev for the lack of progress. In May, Ukraine agreed to resume direct negotiations with Russia under pressure from Washington. However, talks stalled after two rounds, with Kiev declaring the process “exhausted” and indicating it had only participated to avoid appearing dismissive of Trump’s diplomatic initiative. Moscow has said it remains committed to achieving its core objectives in Ukraine but prefers a diplomatic solution. The Kremlin has expressed hope that, despite his public statements, Trump is also applying private pressure on Kiev.

Read more …

That would be great. If Trump doesn’t get all braggadocious about his part.

• Putin, Trump and Xi Could Meet In September – The Times (RT)

US President Donald Trump could meet his Russian and Chinese counterparts, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, at an upcoming event marking the 80th anniversary of victory over imperial Japan in World War II, The Times has reported. China has announced plans to honor the date with a military parade in Beijing in September, and Moscow has confirmed that Putin will attend. The Soviet Union, China and the US cooperated in the fight against Japan during World War II. Both analysts and ordinary Chinese have called on Xi to “seize the opportunity,” invite Trump and host a three-way summit during the upcoming victory celebration, The Times wrote on Friday.

“Why not align Trump’s visit with the September 3 commemoration?” Renmin University of China Professor and popular Chinese opinion leader Jin Canrong told the Guancha news outlet last month. “If the leaders of China, the US, and Russia were to stand together during the military parade, it would be a great positive signal to the world,” he suggested. According to The Times, Beijing “tacitly encouraged speculation” on the subject by refusing to deny a report by Japan’s Kyodo News released last month, which claimed that the decision to invite Trump had already been made. Relations between Washington, Beijing, and Moscow have soured in recent years over the Ukraine conflict, accusations of Chinese cyber warfare, and what the US describes as “unfair” market practices.

Since the start of his second term in January, Trump has moved to thaw diplomatic ties with Russia and pushed for a settlement in the Ukraine conflict. However, on Monday, he expressed exasperation with the pace of the talks and threatened 100% secondary tariffs on Russian trading partners if the hostilities aren’t resolved within 50 days. Trump has also reignited a trade war with Beijing, which earlier this year rattled global financial markets. The tit-for-tat tariff standoff peaked with 145% US duties on Chinese imports and 125% retaliatory levies from Beijing. Tensions appear to have eased following a trade deal last month under which China relaxed restrictions on key rare earth mineral exports.

Read more …

Brussels has nothing.

• Trump Toughens Stance In EU Trade Talks – FT (RT)

US President Donald Trump has ramped up his demands in trade talk with the EU and is pushing for a minimum tariff of between 15% and 20% in any deal with Brussels, the Financial Times reports, citing informed sources. The negotiations between Brussels and Washington have been underway since early April, when Trump announced a set of measures aimed at protecting American manufacturers he called the ‘Liberation Day.’ They included a blanket 10% tariff on all imports from the EU and most other US trading partners. The duties have been put on hold pending the talks, but the US president warned that they would grow to 30% if no deal is reached between Washington and Brussels by August 1. The tariffs would be applied on top of the existing sector-specific duties, such as 50% on steel, aluminum duties and 25% car imports levies introduced by the US earlier this year.

The Trump administration is hardening its stance in talks with the EU in order to test the bloc’s “pain threshold,” the FT said in an article on Friday. According to the paper’s sources, the president was also “unmoved” by an offer from Brussels to reduce the 25% car tariffs and wants them to stay as they are. EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic provided a “downbeat” assessment of his recent discussions with the Americans during the meeting of the bloc’s ambassadors on Friday, two people briefed on the matter said. An EU diplomat has told the paper that if Trump insists on 15% to 20% duties, the EU would be forced to retaliate. Brussels has prepared several packages of counter-tariffs against Washington, but delayed their implementation until August 1.

“We do not want a trade war, but we do not know if the US will leave us a choice,” the source said. A second EU diplomat stressed that “the mood has clearly changed” in Brussels in favor of retaliation, adding that “we are not going to settle at 15% percent.” Washington has so far largely avoided retaliation for its tariffs, while collecting a record high of $64 billion in customs duties in the second quarter of 2025, according to the US Treasury.

Read more …

For now, this is simply about the reserve currency. Stop the threats and they will let you keep it.

• Trump Issues New Threat To BRICS (RT)

President Donald Trump has claimed that BRICS is “fading out fast,” while warning that any attempts by the group to challenge the US dollar will be met with a harsh economic backlash. Speaking at the White House on Friday, Trump denounced what he called BRICS’ attempts to weaken the dollar. “They wanted to try and take over the dollar, the dominance of the dollar… And I said, anybody that’s in the BRICS consortium of nations, we’re going to tariff you 10%.” Trump stressed that Washington will spare no effort to preserve the dollar’s hegemony. “The reserve currency is so important. You know, if we lost that, that would be like losing a World War.” Washington “can never let anyone play games,” Trump said, adding that he has decided to “hit them [BRICS] very, very hard.” “If they ever really form in a meaningful way, it will end very quickly,” he said.

Trump also claimed his threat to impose 10% tariffs on imports from the BRICS had completely derailed the group’s summit in Rio de Janeiro earlier this month. “They had a meeting the following day and almost nobody showed up,” he said. However, the BRICS summit featured broad participation at the highest level. While China’s President Xi Jinping was absent from the meeting, his country was represented by Chinese Premier Li Qiang. Russian President Vladimir Putin was also absent, but addressed the summit remotely. Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa and Indonesia’s President Prabowo Subianto, as well as leaders from Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the UAE attended in person.

In October, Russia’s Finance Minister Anton Siluanov stated that the share of national currencies in trade among BRICS countries has reached 65%, with the share of the dollar and euro plunging below 30%. Earlier this week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov explained that BRICS countries are exploring dollar alternatives “to shield themselves from US arbitrariness.” However, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has said that BRICS has never been meant as a rival to the US, although warning that “the language of threats and manipulation… is not the way to speak to members of this group.”

Read more …

“Resolving a conflict like Ukraine requires deep historical understanding and genuine commitment to due diligence.”

• Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia Is Bluster and Bluff (SCF)

What’s behind Trump’s angry ultimatum to Russia this week? The short answer: failure and frustration. Donald Trump promised American voters that he would end the Ukraine war in 24 hours upon his election in November 2024. Six months into his presidency, Trump has failed to deliver on his boastful promises. This week, Trump flipped his pacemaker image by pledging billions of dollars worth of new American weaponry to Ukraine. He also issued a warning to Russia to call a ceasefire within 50 days or else face severe secondary tariffs on its oil and gas exports. The tariffs, quoted at 100 percent, will be applied to nations purchasing Russian exports, primarily Brazil, China, and India. The latter move indicates that the U.S.-led proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is really part of a bigger geopolitical confrontation to maintain American global hegemony.

In any case, Moscow dismissed Trump’s ultimatum. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Moscow would not comply with pressure and that Russia would not back down from its strategic goals in Ukraine to counter NATO’s historic aggression. It is clear that Trump and his administration have failed to understand Russia’s strategic position and the root causes of the conflict. Trump’s supposed diplomacy is seen to operate on a superficial basis more akin to showbiz, with no substance. He wants a peace deal with Russia to show off his vaunted skills as a business negotiator and to grab the limelight, headlines, and adulation.

Resolving a conflict like Ukraine requires deep historical understanding and genuine commitment to due diligence. Moscow has repeatedly stated the need to address the root causes of the conflict: the expansion of NATO on its borders, the CIA-sponsored coup in Kiev in 2014, and the nature of the NATO-weaponized Neo-Nazi regime over the past decade. Trump and his administration have failed to appreciate Russia’s viewpoint. Thus, expecting a peace deal based on nothing but rhetoric and vacuous claims about “ending the killing” is futile. It won’t happen.

This failure, based on unrealistic expectations, has led Trump to adopt an increasingly bitter attitude towards Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent weeks. Ironically, Trump has accused Putin of duplicity and procrastination when, in reality, it is Trump who has shown no serious commitment to resolving the conflict. Now, with chagrin and bruised ego, Trump has reacted with frustration over what are his own failings by issuing ultimatums to Russia. Trump’s 50-day deadline for a Russian response to his demands has a similarity to the 60-day deadline he threatened Iran with, after which he carried out a massive bombing attack on that country. Trump’s aggression towards Iran has turned out to be a fiasco and failure. Threatening Russia is even more useless.

This proclivity for threatening other nations has the hallmark of a Mafiosa megalomaniac. It is also causing Trump to lose support among his voter base, who believed he was going to end “endless wars.” It’s shambolic. Biden’s war is becoming Trump’s war because, at the end of the day, it is the U.S. imperial deep state that rules. Trump’s mercurial switch from professing peace in Ukraine to ramping up the promise of weapons shows that his previous aspirations were always hollow and contingent on other interests. It seems that the 47th American president did not want peace after all. What was driving his apparent desire to end the conflict in Ukraine – what he deprecated as “Biden’s war” – was simply to cut American financial costs.

2016

Read more …

“..related to the late financier’s alleged “client list,” which the administration says does not exist…”

• DOJ Asks Court To Unseal Jeffrey Epstein Grand Jury Testimony (JTN)

The Justice Department on Friday afternoon formally asked a federal judge to unseal grand jury testimony related to the prosecution of the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, fulfilling President Donald Trump’s directive on Thursday. Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to file the request in a Truth Social post, where he criticized the news media for its focus on the administration’s handling of the Epstein case. Bondi vowed to do so. The Justice Department claimed in its filing that the release of the additional information in the case was “a matter of public interest.”

“The public’s interest in the Epstein matter has remained,” the filing reads. “Given this longstanding and legitimate interest, the government now moves to unseal grand jury transcripts associated with Epstein.” The department said it will file a similar motion in the case against former Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, CNN reported, though Trump did not direct the publication of testimony in her case. The Trump administration has faced heavy backlash for its handling of the case, particularly related to the late financier’s alleged “client list,” which the administration says does not exist.

Read more …

Epstein is so last week…

• The Epstein Enigma (James Howard Kunstler)

Do you detect the signs of Rope-a-Dope in Mr. Trump’s recent blasts against the Epstein mess? It must be obvious that anything he says will be violently opposed by his Democratic Party enemies. So, now he’s got them slavering for release of the Epstein files, whatever they are, or rather, whatever’s left after former FBI Director Christopher Wray & Co. curated them, shall we say. (They had many years to get it done.)

I’m not the first to point out that the president’s most rabid enemies ignored the Epstein case during the entirety of “Joe Biden’s” four-year ectoplasmic visitation in the White House. (They were up to their eyeballs siccing Fani Willis, Letitia James, and Alvin Bragg on Trump.) “Squad” stalwart Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) said the other day that she was “too busy” to delve into Epstein. Everybody else from Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) to Jamie Raskin (D-MD) just barfed up word salad on MSNBC to excuse themselves for overlooking the matter. But since Mr. Trump affected to quash the whole psychodrama in the harshest tones, they’ve got all the time in the world to pore over Epstein docs. Well, maybe they’ll get what they asked for.

So, yesterday, the president ordered AG Bondi to release the grand jury testimony that has been under seal for years and years, and she has promised to do that today, Friday, July 18, subject to the court approval, meaning it could invite a months-long legal battle. Gawd knows what’s in there, but at least it was kept out of Christopher Wray’s clutches. So, it’s separate from the videos and other stuff alleged to be in the FBI possession. Many say, not altogether convincingly, that the names of “victims” and witnesses must be protected. There’s much confused public controversy as to whether girls allegedly trafficked by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were children or young adults (who would be middle-aged now), and that issue is apparently separate from whatever commercial “child porn” was in the FBI’s Epstein file cabinet that AG Bondi has referred to.

Anyway, Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure says: “Disclosure is permitted to government attorneys or personnel (including state or tribal officials) deemed necessary to assist in enforcing federal criminal law, such as in complex investigations involving organized crime or public corruption.” The current state of the Epstein scandal looks a little like a ruse by Mr. Trump to hang his enemies out to dry and sell them the clothes-line to do it with. In all their garish attempts to get Trump, the Democrats have only ended up Wile E. Coyote’d every single time. Why would this round be any different?

Meanwhile, Naomi Wolf by way of Eric Weinstein has come up with quite an original view of what Jeffrey Epstein was about in the strange role he played among the so-called elite. I will link to her recent substack entry below this blog so you can see for yourself. For Ms. Wolf, it was all about the Silicon Valley “network” of tech moguls, their vast power and influence, and an effort by this group, using Epstein as a broker, to steer science generally in the direction that benefited them and their companies. Epstein served as a middleman between politicians, the weapons industry, the big research universities (all those grants!), and linked intel services such as CIA, Mossad, and MI6.

This is what Eric Weinstein means when he describes Epstein as “a construct.” He was less a person than a function. Epstein cultivated the “list” of elite scientists, tech entrepreneurs, academics, and movie stars with lavish parties and trips to his various compounds in Manhattan, Florida, the US Virgin Islands, and his New Mexico ranch — all in the service of building this tech-and-science network that would become a gigantic mutual aid-and-allegiance society advancing the interests of themselves and their institutions. In the process, certain goodies in the form of young ladies groomed in the sexual arts were made available. Some members of this elite network indulged and some did not, the theory goes.

Read more …

Pepe travels a lot, but his mind is stuck in place.

• And It’s One, Two, Three, What Are We Fighting For? (Pepe Escobar)

All of you Vietnam vets and draft resisters will recognize where this column’s headline is coming from. Oh yes, this ain’t the late 1960s anymore, so it’s time to revamp it – no AI needed – and expand it: from now on, be assured everyone in the wild, wild West will be forced to fight and/or endure three overlapping NATO wars.

War number 1
It’s Europe v. Russia, of course. Not proxy anymore: hot ‘n nasty, direct. Considering the advanced rottenness of the whole Ukrainian front, new fronts are already proliferating: the South Caucasus; clandestine ops in the Baltic Sea; MI6 recruiting frenzy across Central Asia; fresh terrorism ahead in the Black Sea, especially Crimea. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson succinctly nailed it: we are already on WWIII. Actually we are already deep in the extended preamble to WWIII. Circus Ringmaster in D.C. and the billionaires/donor class behind him are of course clueless. Re-reading Keynes – The Economic Consequences of the Peace – is an absolute must like never before. History does repeat itself. Yet this ain’t 1914 or 1935; now nuclear weapons may come into play.

The Kremlin and Russia’s Security Council are very much aware of the high stakes. In his recent interview to Kommersant, Sergei Shoigu even rolled out some key NATO numbers to stress the threat Russia faces: over 50,000 tanks and armored vehicles; over 7,000 combat aircraft; over 750 warships; 350 military and civilian satellites; an immense offense (italics mine) budget. Well, what sly Shoigu did not say is that when push comes to shove, it only takes Mr. Khinzal, Mr. Sarmat, Mr. Zircon and Mr. Oreshnik to deliver a few strategic business cards to paralyze the whole NATO machinery in a matter of minutes.

War number 2
It’s the Empire of Chaos v. Iran in West Asia, with Eretz Israel as much as proxy as a lead actor. The Circus Ringmaster – whose only “strategy” is to concoct shady deals to enrich himself and shysters in his close circle – dreams of an Israeli-centric West Asia, a toxic crossover of the Abraham Accords 2.0 with the IMEC corridor, creating, as Alastair Crooke defined it, “a business-led West Asia, centered on Tel Aviv (with Trump as its de facto ‘President’), and via this business connectivity corridor, be able “to strike further beyond – with the Gulf States penetrating into BRICS’ south Asian heartland to disrupt BRICS connectivity and corridors.”

Using the Arabs against BRICS won’t cut it even with MbZ in the UAE and MbS in Saudi Arabia, who have both realized the business scam will only work if there is real peace in Gaza; some sort of humanitarian solution for the Palestinians; and rebuilding the Gaza strip. The death cult in Tel Aviv will never allow any of the above: their plan is to kill them all, steall all their land, and eradicate their culture. And as the genocide goes on – totally legitimized by the NATO sphere – the death cult keeps bombing anything in sight, perpetrating the balkanization of Syria, and expanding Eretz Israel.

Read more …

And the countries that send the forces will use it as a casus belli.

• Russia Will Target Multinational Forces in Ukraine (Kyle Anzalone)

The Russian Foreign Ministry said any troops from third countries deployed to Ukraine will become targets. European nations have discussed plans to send their soldiers to Ukraine if a ceasefire with Russia is reached. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova explained that any country that joins a coalition of the willing and deploys troops to Ukraine will become targets. “We have repeatedly stated that a deployment of armed forces of other countries in Ukraine under any pretense would be absolutely unacceptable,” she said. “We regard this as preparations for foreign military intervention. We will consider these so-called ‘multinational forces’ as legitimate military targets,” she added.

Several European countries have said they would be willing to join a “coalition of the willing” to deploy soldiers to Ukraine after a ceasefire with Russia is reached. Earlier this month, UK Defense Minister John Healey said, “The prime minister has always been clear that he’s ready to put troops into Ukraine to help reinforce a ceasefire.” “The coalition of the willing” is an infamous phrase used by the George W. Bush administration to try to sell the Iraq War. Moscow says it is unwilling to enter into a ceasefire with Ukraine and is seeking a permanent end to the conflict that addresses the Kremlin’s security concerns.

Multiple leaks throughout the war have exposed that a small number of American and NATO troops are inside Ukraine. However, Europeans are now discussing a large-scale deployment meant as a deterrent to a future Russian invasion. The escalating support for Kiev has led some in the Kremlin to argue for Moscow to take a more aggressive position against Ukraine’s Western backers. Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian President and current deputy head of the National Security Council, suggested launching preemptive attacks. “What is happening today is a proxy war, but in essence it is a full-fledged war,” Medvedev, who is now a senior Russian national security official, told the Tass news agency.

“We need to act accordingly. Respond in full. And if necessary, launch preventative strikes.” However, Medvedev also acknowledged that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ruled out attacking more European countries. “Let me remind you that our president stated unequivocally: Russia does not intend to go to war with NATO or ‘attack Europe’. Such claims by Western politicians are utter nonsense.” He continued, “I would also like to add that this kind of drivel is deliberately injected into the information space to destabilize an already difficult situation. It is yet another front in the West’s open war against us.”

Read more …

Anything written before Friday is old.

• The World Woke Up (Victor Davis Hanson)

In less than six months, the entire world has been turned upside down. There is no longer such a thing as conventional wisdom or the status quo. The unthinkable has become the banal. Take illegal immigration—remember the 10,000 daily illegal entries under former President Joe Biden? Recall the only solution was supposedly “comprehensive immigration reform”—a euphemism for mass amnesties. Now, there is no such thing as daily new illegal immigration. It simply disappeared with commonsense enforcement of existing immigration laws—and a new president. How about the 40,000-50,000 shortfall in military recruitment? Remember all the causes that the generals cited for their inability to enlist soldiers: generational gangs, obesity, drugs, and stiff competition with private industry? And now?

In just six months, recruitment targets are already met; the issue is mostly moot. Why? The new Pentagon flipped the old, canceling its racist DEI programs and assuring the rural, middle-class Americans—especially white males—that they were not systemically racist after all. Instead, they were reinvited to enlist as the critical combat cohort who died at twice their demographic share in Iraq and Afghanistan. How about the “end of the NATO crisis,” supposedly brought on by a bullying U.S.? Now the vast majority of NATO members have met their pledges to spend 2% of gross domestic product on defense, which will soon increase to 5%. Iconic neutrals like Sweden and Finland have become front-line NATO nations, arming to the teeth. The smiling NATO secretary-general even called Trump the “daddy” of the alliance.

What about indomitable, all-powerful, theocratic Iran, the scourge of the Middle East for nearly 50 years? Although it had never won a war in the last half-century, its terrorist surrogates—Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis—were supposedly too dangerous to provoke. Now? Most of their expeditionary terrorists are neutered, and their leaders are in hiding or dead. Iran has no air force, no real navy, no air defenses, and no active nuclear weapons program. Its safety apparently depends only on the mood of the U.S. or Israel on any given day, not to fly into its airspace and take out its missiles, nuclear sites, generals, or theocrats at will. What happened to the supposedly inevitable recession, hyperinflation, stock market collapse, unemployment spikes, and global trade war that last spring economists assured us would hit by summer?

Job growth is strong, and April’s inflation rate is the lowest in four years. GDP is still steady. The stock market hit a record high. Trade partners are renegotiating their surpluses with the U.S. It turns out that staying in the U.S. consumer market is the top priority of our trading partners. It seems their preexisting and mostly undisclosed profits were large enough to afford reasonable U.S. symmetrical tariffs. For now, news of tax cuts, deregulation, “drill, baby, drill” energy policies displacing Green New Deal strangulation, and $8-$10 trillion in potential foreign investment has encouraged—rather than deterred—business. Then there were our marquee elite universities, whose prestige, riches, and powerful alumni made them answerable to no one. And now, after the executive and congressional crackdown on their decades of hubris?

Supposedly brilliant university presidents have resigned in shame. The public has caught on to their grant surcharge gouging. Campuses have backed off their arrogant defiance of the Supreme Court’s civil rights rulings. They are panicked about the public exposure of their systemic antisemitism. They are scrambling to explain away their institutionalized ideological bias and their tawdry profit-making schemes and mass recruitment of wealthy foreign students from illiberal regimes. So, the mighty Ivy League powerhouses are now humbling themselves to cut a deal to save their financial hides and hopefully return to their proper mission of disinterested education. What happened to the trans juggernaut of sex as a social construct and its bookend gospel that biological men could dominate women’s sports?

People woke up. They were no longer afraid to state that sex is binary and biologically determined. And biological men who dominate women’s sports are bullies, not heroes. Where are the millionaire-scamming architects of Black Lives Matter now? Where is the “DEI now, tomorrow, and forever” conventional wisdom? Where is professor Ibram X. Kendi and his $30,000 Zoom lessons on how to fight racism by being racist? They have all been exposed as the race hustlers they always were. Their creed that it is OK for supposed victims to be racist victimizers themselves was exposed as an absurd con. So, what flipped everything?

We were living in an “emperor has no clothes” make-believe world for the last few years. The people knew establishment narratives were absurd, and our supposed experts were even more ridiculous. But few—until now—had the guts to scream “the emperor is naked” to dispel the fantasies. When they finally did, reality returned.

Read more …

“.. it is just the latest chapter in a 2,600-year story of value, trust, and human ingenuity..”

• Red, White, and Bitcoin (Beirne)

Bitcoin may feel futuristic, but when you peel away its digital veneer, it is just the latest chapter in a 2,600-year story of value, trust, and human ingenuity. Having reached record highs, Bitcoin has been making headlines as nations declare strategic stockpiles and corporate America embraces the new asset class. Why now? The answer lies in a pattern as old as civilization itself: When governments corrupt a currency, people innovate their way to something better. As the saying goes, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” When the first coin clanked into existence in 600 B.C., it was not merely a gold and silver alloy stamped with the face of the Lydian king.

It was a financial revolution. For the first time, people could move past the inefficiencies of barter and instead use a medium of exchange to trade. But this value was not in the sparkle; it was the individuals’ collective understanding that these coins have worth. The integrity of that system has waxed and waned over the ensuing millennia, typically driven by governmental spending policies. The silver-backed Roman denarii enabled the empire to flourish, but as subsequent emperors diluted its value – reducing their silver content to fund wars and build grand palaces – citizens lost faith in their currency. When Emperor Nero reduced silver content from 98% to 83% in A.D. 64, Romans began hoarding old coins and rejecting new ones. By A.D. 260, the denarius contained just 5% silver. Inflation spiraled and commerce crumbled, contributing to the eventual fall of the empire.

The United States has battled currency crises since our nation’s birth, but unlike Rome, America has consistently innovated solutions along the way. After we declared independence from Britain, the Continental Congress printed the nation’s first paper money. Called “Continentals,” it was backed by neither gold nor silver – simply by belief in its value. While gold and silver are at least relatively scarce metals that constrain supply, paper can be printed. And that is precisely what the first U.S. government did. Desperate to pay troops and buy supplies necessary to wage the Revolutionary War, Congress turned to making more Continentals. Bills flooded the market, driving down value as Americans questioned whether the new nation could honor its promises.

In 1777, one patriot complained to his father as inflation spiked by an estimated 200%, writing, “America has much more to fear from the effects of large quantities of paper money than from the operations of British Generals.” Prices climbed so rapidly that George Washington himself came to refuse Continentals as payment. In fact, it became common to describe something of little value as “not worth a Continental.” The currency became such a laughingstock that sailors paid in the bills would sew them onto their clothes and parade through town to mock it. But rather than crumble like the Roman Empire, the U.S. innovated: This currency crisis was a driving force that led our Founding Fathers to scrap the American government under the Articles of Confederation and draft our current Constitution.

This change represented more than political reform – it was monetary advancement, shifting from discretionary to rule-based money. The new U.S. government adopted a bimetallic standard in 1792, which tied the value of dollars to both gold and silver. The country eventually simplified its approach by shifting to a de facto gold standard in 1834, which lasted until 1971 when President Nixon abandoned it in favor of fiat currency. Like the Continentals before it, the dollar has since been backed by belief in its value: full faith and credit of the U.S. government. And then came the 2008 financial crisis. Lehman Brothers fell, banks wobbled, and the public? They started asking: “What is money?”

It was then, from the digital shadows, that an anonymous figure – Satoshi Nakamoto – dropped a whitepaper like a patriot dropping a leaflet on the eve of the Revolutionary War: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. No emperors. No banks. Just math, cryptography, and an unbreakable record called the blockchain. A new kind of trust was born – not in a ruler, but in code. What was initially viewed as an interesting hypothetical idea was quickly put to real-world use. Users beget more users. Trust grows. Entrepreneurs dream. It’s a full-blown historical saga unfolding in real time.

Bitcoin has risen above the other cryptocurrencies it inspired, in large part due to its scarcity: no longer could an Emperor add bits of cheap copper to silver coins or Congress print more paper because it is hardcoded that only 21 million Bitcoin will ever exist. Further, all Bitcoin transactions are verified by a decentralized network of approximately 20,000 individuals’ computers across the world, all checking one another beyond politicians’ control. In an age of runaway government spending, investors have turned to those scarce Bitcoin that no government can dilute. A decentralized system that guards the people from government domination – how American is that!

It is no coincidence that Bitcoin has skyrocketed to a $2 trillion valuation just as the U.S. national debt has reached record highs. Researchers debate how long fiat currencies last on average throughout history, with some placing time of death at between 27 and 35 years. Since the U.S. has been off the gold standard for over 50 years, history suggests the dollar is poised for decline. People are simply asking the age-old question: What is money, really? As trust is shaken in paper money due to inflation and ballooning federal spending, many are turning to innovation. Even nations themselves have begun to set up strategic reserves. In fact, the United States is the largest known state holder of Bitcoin – once again positioning America at the forefront of monetary evolution.

As John Adams advised in 1787, “All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from the defects of the Constitution, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.” It is incumbent upon Americans to arm themselves with knowledge and engage in the age-old American tradition of challenging broken systems with better ideas in the pursuit of liberty.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Aaron Siri
https://twitter.com/newstart_2024/status/1946312859824099353

Letterman

CBDC

lipitor

Yellowstone

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 27 2025

Apr 272025
 
 April 27, 2025  Posted by at 10:29 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  22 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Massacre in Korea 1951

 

• The Awakening – Look Carefully at This Picture (CTH)
• Putin Reaffirms Readiness For Unconditional Talks With Ukraine (RT)
• Kiev’s Backers Pushing Zelensky Toward Land Concessions – WaPo
• Trump Threatens Russia With More Sanctions (RT)
• Trump Demands Kiev Sign Minerals Deal ‘Immediately’ (RT)
• Russia Says North Korean Troops Helped Liberate Kursk Region (RT)
• The Cold War Never Ended — But Washington’s Priorities Just Did (Bordachev)
• Berlin To Ban Russian Flags On Victory Day (RT)
• Trump Demands Free Passage Via Suez Canal (RT)
• British Mercenaries Now Run America’s Front Lines (RT)
• No One Is Above the Law. Not Even The Rogue Prosecutors (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Trump Admin Takes Wrecking Ball To DOJ’s Woke Civil Rights Division (ZH)
• Why And How To Fire 42,000 IRS Agents… (David Stockman)
• The Thankless Life of Elon Musk (Jeffrey Tucker)
• Time Is The Friend of The US And The Enemy of China’s (Bill Ackman)
• The Death of Globalization (Jim Rickards)

 

 

 

 

Not a Suicide

https://twitter.com/WallStreetApes/status/1916366530222428178

 

 

 

 

When I first saw the picture(s) yesterday, I just found the setting very strange: Someone sure went through a lot of trouble to make that look spontaneous. Why did they need to sit in a huge space, well-lit, to say something important? It looked, still does, like a photo-op, exclusively. That the photos, at least the ones I’ve seen, come from Zelensky’s own press service, only makes it stranger.

‘sundance’ had some more thoughts.

• The Awakening – Look Carefully at This Picture (CTH)

From the outset of the Ukraine -vs- Russia conflict I have been saying this is “world war Reddit”. CTH awakens today to this photo, blasting across the geopolitical landscape. I want you to look carefully at this picture; think about it and elevate yourself to understand exactly what this picture represents in the biggest framework of our ongoing discussion. The image origin: “Photographs released by the Ukrainian presidency showed the two leaders huddled in close discussion without aides in the ornate surroundings of St. Peter’s Basilica.”This scene is purposefully staged. This scene is staged by the control agents who control the Ukraine conflict, the intelligence community.

President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump attended the funeral of Pope Francis to pay their respects on the international stage. Let me be clear. The people around President Trump do not and did not align with this photo-op, it’s genuinely in poor taste and bad form given the nature of the background event, the funeral for Pope Francis. However, fearless President Trump knows exactly what this represents just as businessman Donald Trump knows how the seating is arranged in high stakes business negotiations; the sun at the back of the person wanting to be in the power position. Again, we should stay elevated and see the bigger picture here because it is incredibly important. When it comes from CNN, it’s coming from the PR firm of the State Dept., and who controls the State Dept, the CIA.

CNN: How the pope’s funeral format allowed for Trump-Zelensky talk. “The meeting occurred just outside the Baptistry Chapel, which is inside St. Peter’s Basilica near its entrance, and the talk hadn’t been telegraphed in advance. Ahead of the president’s brief visit to Rome, officials had downplayed the prospect he would meet with Zelensky or any other world leaders, pointing to the truncated time frame for the trip and its solemn purpose of memorializing the late pope. Trump had originally selected Saudi Arabia for his first stop abroad of his new term and will visit there next month.

But when Francis died those plans changed, and instead Trump made his first foreign stop in Europe, a continent he’s railed against frequently. The seating chart and crush of fellow leaders made brief interactions possible, including with leaders Trump had seemingly been avoiding since taking office. He engaged briefly with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, with whom he hadn’t spoken at all since returning to office amid trade and defense disputes with the European Union.”

President Trump, a man of respectful honor, indeed would expect to engage in polite and quiet conversation with Zelenskyy, Macron, Starmer et al, at the funeral. Yes, he would quietly have a conversation in a private room with the principals to quickly discuss political affairs. That’s his style. That’s the way he operates, retaining focus and respect toward the purpose of the gathering, holding quick conversation in private and retaining emphasis on the purpose. THIS IS NOT THAT. This is a stage set for the optics of a geopolitical conflict that involves Ukraine and Russia, and this stage is set up by the same controlling agents who have been in control of the events since the outset. This stage is why CTH instinctively knew the conflict was World War Reddit. What are we seeing?

The intelligence communities’ control western government. The government does not control the intelligence communities. This reality is the core of the great awakening that reconciles every facet of the conflict present and visible. When things do not make sense; when things are unnatural and fraught with irreconcilable datapoints stemming from traditional perspectives that no longer align with what is visible; that’s because the intelligence apparatus is in control of it. Every example you can cite returns to this basic truth. All of the western government systems, the “new democracy” as it is called, stem from a radically different construct. The intelligence services control the government; the government does not control the intelligence services. The conflict in Ukraine exists because western intelligence services are controlling it.

The reality is this “war” is not the Russian government -vs- the governments of various western nations in support of Ukraine. The true conflict is the western intelligence community vs the Russian government. Vladimir Putin does not hate Americans. The Russian President hates the CIA. When envoy Steve Witkoff is representing President Trump in his discussions with Vladimir Putin, Witkoff and Trump represent the government. However, the government is not the real control agent and Putin together with Trump/Witkoff know this. Vladimir Putin and Donald J Trump are mutually aligned entities in a fight against western intelligence services. That’s the core understanding that must be at the forefront of any review or intellectually honest analysis of what is taking place.

The vulnerability within the position of the Western Intel Services, is that they must hide this reality. The IC must retain the illusion that government is in control of geopolitical events, because if that control mask is dropped everything changes. And I do mean EVERYTHING. Everything that was irreconcilable suddenly starts to make sense when you accept that government is not in control, the government does not have the power. The intelligence services control government and the intel agencies are currently the source of geopolitical power. The politicians are the illusion of representative democracy that must be retained. That’s what this image should represent to everyone!

….”Once you see the strings on the marionettes you can never return to that moment in the performance when you did not see them.”….

Read more …

It’s Zelensky who has the preconditions.

• Putin Reaffirms Readiness For Unconditional Talks With Ukraine (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin reiterated Moscow’s readiness for unconditional talks with Ukraine during a recent meeting with US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has revealed. Speaking to reporters on Saturday, Peskov confirmed that the topic was brought up during the meeting between the Russian president and the US special envoy at the Kremlin on Friday. “During yesterday’s conversation with Trump’s envoy Witkoff, Vladimir Putin reiterated that the Russian side is ready to resume the negotiation process with Ukraine without any preconditions,” Peskov stated. The spokesperson stressed that the Russian president has repeatedly spoken about Moscow’s readiness for talks.

In October of 2022, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky issued a decree explicitly banning all talks with Russia for as long as Putin is in charge. Since then, Kiev has somewhat softened its position, with Zelensky claiming later on that the provision applied to everyone in the country besides himself. As of late, Kiev has been demanding an unconditional ceasefire to be implemented before any talks could happen. The Putin-Witkoff meeting on Friday was the latest in a series of contacts between Moscow and Washington in recent months. The US special envoy, seen as a key figure behind kickstarting negotiations on the Ukraine conflict, has held multiple rounds of talks with senior Russian officials, including at least three meetings with the Russian president.

Putin’s foreign policy aide, Yury Ushakov, and presidential investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev also took part in the meeting. Ushakov described the three-hour conversation as “constructive and very useful in nature.” “The conversation allowed us to further align the Russian and US positions not only on Ukraine, but also on a number of other international issues,” he said on Friday, confirming that the possibility of resuming direct talks between Moscow and Kiev was discussed during the meeting.

Read more …

“The moment the war ends, so too ends this era of personal glory. The messy realities of rebuilding a bankrupt, fractured, and corrupted state would quickly erode his myth..”

• Russia Wants Immediate Peace Talks. Zelensky Wants Perpetual War (Romanenko)

The tragedy of Ukraine today is not merely the physical devastation of its cities or the displacement of its people. It is the political paralysis at its core, embodied in the figure of Vladimir Zelensky – a man who, under the guise of defending sovereignty, has turned the prospects of real peace into a distant mirage. Once again, we see Zelensky putting forward a laundry list of preconditions before he will even consider sitting down for direct talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. A full ceasefire, complete withdrawal from what he calls “occupied” territories, international security guarantees, and a tribunal for alleged war crimes – the list grows longer by the week. In essence, he demands that Russia first capitulate to all of Ukraine’s strategic objectives, nullify its military leverage, and admit guilt, before any negotiation even begins. One might ask: What exactly would be left to negotiate then?

Negotiations, by their very nature, are predicated on compromise, not on issuing ultimatums. In a genuine dialogue, both sides bring their grievances, demands, and visions to the table, without first requiring the other to surrender all their positions. But Zelensky’s approach ensures that talks can never begin, because his ‘preconditions’ pre-decide the outcome in Kiev’s favor. It is an unserious, irresponsible stance that can only prolong the suffering of his people. On the other hand, Vladimir Putin has repeatedly reaffirmed his readiness to engage in talks without preconditions. This openness should not be dismissed lightly. Russia holds all the cards on the battlefield. After the sweeping victories in the Kursk region and steady advances in the new Russian territories, it is Russia – not Ukraine – that is dictating the military realities. Yet despite being in this position of strength, Moscow shows a willingness to negotiate. A responsible leadership would seize this opportunity to end the bloodshed. Zelensky instead chooses to throw it away.

One might argue that Russia’s ‘preconditions’ are baked into the military situation. And rightly so. In negotiations, power dynamics matter. Russia’s achievements on the ground create a natural incentive structure for talks: Kiev comes to the table recognizing its diminished position, while Moscow can be expected to negotiate from a position of strength. This is the normal course of conflict resolution throughout history. But Zelensky’s precondition that Ukraine must regain all lost territories first is absurd – it demands the total reversal of the battlefield situation without acknowledging the military realities. In effect, he asks for a fantasy. This raises an uncomfortable question: Does Zelensky truly want peace?

Every day the war drags on is a day Zelensky remains in power without facing democratic accountability. Under martial law, elections are indefinitely postponed. Criticism is muted, political opponents are sidelined or silenced, and dissent is framed as ‘pro-Russian treason.’ Furthermore, the endless war provides a convenient channel for billions of dollars of Western aid to flow into Ukraine – money that too often disappears into a black hole of corruption, never reaching the soldiers or citizens who need it most.

On the international stage, Zelensky continues to enjoy the lionization of Western media as the brave David facing the Russian Goliath. His celebrity status ensures endless speaking tours and photo ops. The moment the war ends, so too ends this era of personal glory. The messy realities of rebuilding a bankrupt, fractured, and corrupted state would quickly erode his myth. It is no wonder, then, that Zelensky clings to absurd preconditions. They offer a fig leaf of righteousness while ensuring that talks will never happen. They buy him time, money, power, and prestige – at the cost of Ukrainian lives. Meanwhile, the suffering grows. Ukraine’s best and brightest are sent to the frontlines to defend indefensible positions. Entire towns are depopulated. Infrastructure collapses. A generation is sacrificed, not in pursuit of peace, but in service to a leader who sees in perpetual war the means of his own political survival.

The world must recognize this grim reality. Genuine peace will require dialogue, compromise, and a recognition of the facts on the ground – not wishful thinking or political theatrics. Zelensky’s insistence on preconditions is not the mark of a statesman. It is the strategy of a man desperate to postpone the inevitable reckoning with his failures. If he truly cared about his people, he would sit down with Putin today. Not when every demand has been met. Not when he has a script that guarantees Ukraine’s total victory. But now – when the price of delay is measured in blood. Peace is not built by ultimatums. It is built by the courage to face hard truths and make painful compromises. Zelensky has shown neither.

Read more …

“it is not only reasonable but necessary to push back on some elements of the US proposal, as it gives Ukraine practically very, very little. And Russia a lot..”

• Kiev’s Backers Pushing Zelensky Toward Land Concessions – WaPo

European officials are pressing Ukraine to accept the likelihood that it will be forced to agree to certain territorial concessions to Russia as part of a peace agreement, the Washington Post reported on Friday, citing sources. The issue was reportedly discussed during talks in London involving European and Ukrainian officials, which were, however, downgraded after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced he would not attend. Despite this, one official told the WaPo that the talks “made progress” in terms of convincing Kiev that concessions may be unavoidable. Western negotiators are said to have a sense that Ukraine “may be willing to endure effective Russian control of Crimea,” provided Kiev is not required to legally recognize this reality. The peninsula overwhelmingly voted to join Russia in 2014 following a Western-backed coup in Kiev.

Many Ukrainians, however, are reluctant to renounce future claims to Crimea, viewing any territorial compromise as setting a “dangerous precedent” for potential formal recognition of Moscow’s control over four other former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia in 2022. This comes as the US has clashed with European nations and Kiev over their vision for a Ukraine peace arrangement, with the sides presenting different proposals on the terms for ending the conflict, according to a Reuters report, which was confirmed by the WaPo.

In particular, US envoy Steve Witkoff reportedly proposed that Washington recognize Crimea as Russian and accept Moscow’s de facto control over large parts of the other four regions. Meanwhile, Ukraine and its European supporters, however, reportedly continue to resist any mention of territorial recognition in the proposed agreements. Their version of a peace framework postpones territorial issues until after a ceasefire and emphasizes the necessity of strong security guarantees for Kiev.

For Europe and Ukraine, “it is not only reasonable but necessary to push back on some elements of the US proposal, as it gives Ukraine practically very, very little. And Russia a lot,” a Western official told the WaPo. The report also noted that Europe is trying to “edge Washington toward a more reasonable agreement,” including the recognition that a ceasefire must be an essential first step. The WaPo report comes as Russian President Vladimir Putin held lengthy talks on Friday with Witkoff at the Kremlin on Friday. Presidential adviser Yury Ushakov described the meeting as “constructive and very useful” in nature,” adding that the talks included the idea of possibly resuming direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev. Trump, commenting on the state of the negotiations, said Ukraine and Russia “should now meet, at very high levels, to ‘finish it off.’ Most of the major points are agreed to.”

Read more …

“..shortly after a brief meeting with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky in the Vatican..”

• Trump Threatens Russia With More Sanctions (RT)

US President Donald Trump has accused his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin of launching attacks on Ukrainian “civilian areas” for “no reason” and not wanting to “stop the war,” and threatened Moscow with new sanctions. The statement comes just as Russian President Vladimir Putin reiterated Moscow’s readiness for unconditional talks with Kiev during a recent meeting with Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff. Trump issued the threat in a post on Truth Social on Saturday, shortly after a brief meeting with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky in the Vatican. The US president sharply criticized Russia’s continuing long-range strikes against Ukraine, accusing Moscow of desiring to prolong the hostilities. “

There was no reason for Putin to be shooting missiles into civilian areas, cities and towns, over the last few days. It makes me think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along, and has to be dealt with differently, through ‘Banking’ or ‘Secondary Sanctions?’ Too many people are dying!!!” Trump claimed. Following a brief lull in fighting during the Easter ceasefire announced by Moscow last weekend, the Russian military staged multiple long-range strikes against Ukrainian military and industrial facilities over the week. Moscow has long maintained it strikes only targets used by the Ukrainian military. “We only strike military targets or civilian sites used by the military,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told CBS News earlier this week.

Apart from threatening Russia with sanctions, Trump also reiterated his longstanding claim the Ukraine conflict would have never happened if he had been in office, blaming the crisis on his predecessors. He also lashed out at the New York Times and, in particular, its reporter Peter Baker, over a recent piece on the negotiations to bring the Ukrainian conflict to its end. “No matter what deal I make with respect to Russia/Ukraine, no matter how good it is, even if it’s the greatest deal ever made, The Failing New York Times will speak BADLY of it. Liddle’ Peter Baker, the very biased and untalented writer for The Times, followed his Editor’s demands and wrote that Ukraine should get back territory, including, I suppose, Crimea, and other ridiculous requests,” Trump wrote.

Read more …

Hard to deny he’s being played.

• Trump Demands Kiev Sign Minerals Deal ‘Immediately’ (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is “three weeks late” in signing a minerals deal with the US, President Donald Trump has said. In a post on Truth Social on Friday, he demanded the agreement be signed “immediately.” Washington and Kiev have been negotiating a deal for weeks that would grant the US access to Ukraine’s natural resources, including rare-earth minerals that are vital for high-tech industries. Ukraine hopes the deal will secure the US as a lasting security partner, a commitment that the Trump administration has so far declined to make. Washington insists the deal should compensate America for past aid in the conflict with Russia. Kiev, however, claims the assistance was provided unconditionally. A preliminary Memorandum of Intent was signed last week, according to Ukraine’s first deputy prime minister, Yulia Sviridenko.

Trump, however, has complained that the process is dragging on too long. “Ukraine, headed by Vladimir Zelensky, has not signed the final papers on the very important Rare Earths Deal with the United States. It is at least three weeks late. Hopefully, it will be signed IMMEDIATELY,” he wrote. The deal was expected to be signed in February during a visit by Zelensky visit to the White House. The event, however, devolved into a heated spat between the leaders, with Trump accusing Zelensky of disrespecting America and showing ingratitude for US aid, while being reluctant to seek peace with Russia and “gambling with World War III.” Trump later said Zelensky was “trying to back out” of the deal, warning that he faces “big, big problems” if he does.

Last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said White House officials were “still working on the details” of when and where the signing would take place, but expected that negotiations would be completed by April 26. The Memorandum of Intent also outlines this timeline. In his post on Friday, Trump also commented on Ukraine peace efforts, saying “work on the overall Peace Deal between Russia and Ukraine is going smoothly” and that “success seems to be in the future.” In another post, he indicated plans to meet with Russian and Ukrainian representatives on Saturday in Rome, where he is attending Pope Francis’ funeral, which Zelensky also plans to attend.

“They are very close to a deal, and the two sides should now meet, at very high levels, to finish it off. Most of the major points are agreed to,” Trump wrote. While the details have not been officially disclosed, the agreement proposed by Washington reportedly includes US recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, a “freezing” of the conflict along the current front lines, acknowledgment of Moscow’s control over large parts of the four former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia, and formal opposition to Ukraine’s NATO bid.

Read more …

First time I see Russia admit to North Korean troops.

• Russia Says North Korean Troops Helped Liberate Kursk Region (RT)

Chief of the Russian General Staff Valery Gerasimov has praised the contribution made by North Korean servicemen in helping liberate Kursk Region from Ukrainian forces. He cited their “resilience and heroism” during the operation, which Moscow has hailed as a major success in its campaign against Kiev’s forces. “The DPRK military, acting shoulder to shoulder with the Russian military in Kursk Region, showed resilience and heroism,” Gerasimov said during a report to Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday. The Russian military has now completely liberated the border region from Ukrainian forces, Putin announced. According to Gerasimov, Ukraine’s forces suffered more than 76,000 casualties, including both killed and wounded, during their incursion into Kursk Region, which was launched in August of last year.

Russian troops are currently conducting operations to locate any Ukrainian forces hiding in the liberated areas, the military official added. Moscow’s forces are also working to establish a security zone in the neighboring Ukrainian Sumy Region, where they control four settlements and more than 90 square kilometers of territory. Meanwhile, 19 settlements in Kursk Region have been cleared of mines, according to the chief of the General Staff. Putin thanked Russian service members “who took part in defeating the neo-Nazi groups” that invaded the region last summer.

Gerasimov said North Korean troops were taking part in the liberation of Russia’s Kursk Region under the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement between Moscow and Pyongyang, which came into force last December. The treaty provides for mutual military assistance in the event of an attack, pledging immediate support “by all means available” under Article 51 of the UN Charter. The agreement’s implementation followed claims by the US and other Kiev backers that Pyongyang had sent some 12,000 troops to Russia for training and potential deployment in the Ukraine conflict. At the time, Moscow and Pyongyang neither confirmed nor denied the reports. Putin said it was up to the two nations to determine how they fulfill their obligations under the pact. Commenting on Gerasimov’s praise of North Korea’s involvement, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote on Telegram that Russia “will never forget our friends.”

Read more …

“Even during the Cold War, after the mid-1950s, the USSR had no intention of attacking Western Europe.”

• The Cold War Never Ended — But Washington’s Priorities Just Did (Bordachev)

Recent statements from senior American officials have raised eyebrows. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington is beginning to better understand Russia’s position as Ukraine negotiations proceed. Simultaneously, Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth declared the era of the US serving as Europe’s sole security guarantor is over. Is this a diplomatic victory for Russia? Not yet. There is still a long road ahead. But these signals from Washington should not be dismissed as mere tactical maneuvers. Rather, they suggest the growing possibility of a strategic compromise – the very goal Russia sought with its European security initiatives in December 2021. Tragically, many lives have been lost to bring the international system to this point, a grim reminder that significant change in global affairs rarely comes peacefully.

For 80 years, the European security order has been biased against Russia. Even when the USSR or Russia formally participated, it was merely a mechanism for limiting Russian influence. The entire postwar ‘legitimacy’ of the international order, as the late Henry Kissinger observed, rested on containing Russia. After 1945, Western countries prioritized Russia’s containment above even their own autonomy. To abandon this principle would acknowledge the collapse of the old order and the necessity of constructing a new one. Today’s political upheavals in the US make this shift conceivable, although certainty remains distant. Washington’s erratic policy toward Ukraine is merely a symptom of deeper changes in Europe’s political architecture. It would be naive to believe that earlier American hostility toward Russian interests stemmed from ignorance. Americans have often been stereotyped as crude ‘nouveaux riches’, but the truth is that states act based on calculations of power and interest, not emotions or misunderstandings.

For all its peculiarities, America remains a sovereign power. And now, its relative decline forces a reassessment of priorities. Washington no longer has the luxury of fulfilling endless foreign obligations. Its voters – who ultimately foot the bill – demand that their leaders focus on domestic concerns. In such circumstances, the need to freeze the conflict with Russia becomes paramount. Faced with a rising China and diminishing global influence, Washington sees little value in clinging to outdated commitments. Support for European satellites or the Kiev regime has become an unaffordable luxury. In reality, American ‘guarantees’ to Europe were always more myth than substance. Their primary purpose was psychological – to convince Russia that the West is invincible, thereby deterring challenges without having to justify the US military presence in Europe. Even during the Cold War, after the mid-1950s, the USSR had no intention of attacking Western Europe.

After 1991, all Russia sought from Europe was commerce and leisure. There was never any real need for an external ‘protector’ on the continent. Moreover, American politicians prioritize their own people. No US government would sacrifice the lives of its citizens to fulfill formal pledges to foreign nations. Even during the past three years, the greatest danger of escalation between the US and Russia stemmed not from a hypothetical defense of Europe, but from direct security risks involving American interests. Western Europeans, of course, have long understood that US security guarantees are a convenient fiction. Even the most Russophobic regimes in the Baltics know this. But for decades, the EU states relied on this myth to justify hostile policies toward Russia while avoiding the burden of real defense expenditures. It became the ideological glue holding the European project together. Without it, they are at a loss: They have no alternative vision for a common order that isn’t based on enmity toward Russia.

The likely retreat of American leadership from Europe does not mean Russia should rush forward aggressively. On the contrary, it should proceed with cold-blooded calculation. War has never been the preferred tool of Russian foreign policy. Throughout history, Russia has favored diplomacy, even when progress was slow and interrupted by conflict. Patience has been its great strength. Thus, Russia’s response to American disengagement will be measured and cautious. We are even prepared to assist our American colleagues in ‘explaining’ their evolving position to their allies. After all, a sudden epiphany regarding Russian interests requires careful handling. In the emerging world, change will not be defined by grand declarations, but by the steady reassertion of sovereignty and the quiet death of the illusions that once governed international relations.

Read more …

The loser bans the liberator.

• Berlin To Ban Russian Flags On Victory Day (RT)

Russian symbols will be banned at key Soviet memorials in Berlin during Victory Day commemorations on May 8 and 9, Berliner Morgenpost reported, citing the authorities. Berlin officials told the newspaper that a general decree is being prepared to block the display of Russian banners and commemorative items at the Treptow, Mitte, and Pankow memorials. The anniversary of victory over Nazism and the end of World War II in Europe is celebrated on May 9 in Russia and many post-Soviet states. In Western countries, the event is observed on May 8, known as Victory in Europe Day, Liberation Day, or Victory Day. “The police in Berlin will again issue a general order prohibiting the display of Russian flags and banners on Victory Day,” the report stated. The move is aimed at preventing “violence and the associated propaganda,” according to a police spokesperson quoted by Berliner Morgenpost.

The decree mirrors last year’s restrictions. In 2024, Berlin banned the flags of the Soviet Union, Belarus, and Russia, as well as wartime songs. The list of prohibited items extended to “any flags linked to Russia” and elements of military uniforms, even if altered. The St. George’s ribbon, a revered symbol of remembrance in Russia and several former Soviet republics, was also banned. At the time, the Russian Embassy denounced the measures as “discriminatory” and accused Berlin of undermining “historical reconciliation,” demanding that “all the relevant bans be lifted.” In 2023, activists challenged a similar ban in court. Although a German court initially sided with the plaintiffs and partially lifted the restrictions, police overturned the ruling, reinstating the prohibition.

Earlier this week, Bild reported that officials in Brandenburg plan to expel Russian Ambassador to Germany Sergey Nechayev from a ceremony marking the defeat of Nazi Germany. Despite the threats, Nechayev vowed to honor fallen Soviet soldiers. According to the tabloid, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock and Brandenburg’s minister-president, Dietmar Woidke, intend to prevent such appearances. The Federal Foreign Office had earlier advised organizers against inviting Russian and Belarusian representatives to WWII commemorations. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova condemned the move, saying it revealed the organizers’ “deep-rooted Russophobia.” Zina Schonbrunn, a member of Brandenburg’s regional parliament, called the exclusion of Russian participation in the 80th-anniversary Victory Day events “absurd.” On Wednesday, Nechayev and diplomats from several former Soviet republics laid wreaths at a Soviet cemetery in Potsdam without interference. Nechayev said many German citizens still honor the Red Army’s heroic role in liberation.

Read more …

I think he wants control of the canal.

• Trump Demands Free Passage Via Suez Canal (RT)

President Donald Trump has claimed that neither the Panama Canal nor the Suez Canal would “exist” without the United States, and demanded that American commercial and military vessels be allowed to pass through the crucial waterways free of charge. Trump has repeatedly expressed his intention to “take back” control of the Panama Canal, using economic or military means if necessary. On Saturday, the US president’s desire to protect American “national security” interests from Chinese competition extended to another strategic waterway – Egypt’s Suez Canal, which connects the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea. “American ships, both military and commercial, should be allowed to travel, free of charge, through the Panama and Suez Canals! Those canals would not exist without the United States of America,” the president said in a Truth Social post.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was already instructed “to immediately take care of, and memorialize [sic], this situation,” Trump added. While the Suez Canal was conceived, financed and built in the 1850s by the British and French, Egypt has received more than $87bn in foreign aid from Washington since 1946, according to Al Jazeera, making the country one of the highest recipients in the Middle East after Israel. The United States and the Soviet Union played key roles in pressuring Britain, France, and Israel to withdraw troops from Egypt during the 1956-1957 Suez Crisis, thereby helping to restore Egyptian control over the canal.Later, after Israel had invaded and occupied the Sinai Peninsula in 1967 and shut down the canal, the US brokered a peace deal which restored full control to Egypt in 1982.

The US not only constructed the Panama Canal, which connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, in the early 20th century, but was also instrumental in securing Panamanian independence from neighboring Colombia. Full control of the canal was transferred to Panama in 1999 under the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, which stipulated that it would remain neutral and open to all nations. Trump and US officials have argued that China’s economic activities – including infrastructure projects and port operations – may violate the 1977 Panama Canal Neutrality Treaty, which grants the US the right to “defend” the waterway.

Panamanian officials have previously rejected Trump’s assertions and threats, while the Panama Canal Authority maintains that the canal is operated solely by Panamanians, with no evidence supporting claims of Chinese control. President Jose Raul Mulino has stated that the canal is part of Panama’s “inalienable patrimony” and stressed that the country maintains full control over its operations. However, after Rubio personally delivered Trump’s ultimatum to Panama in February, Mulino made a concession to Washington by refusing to renew the country’s 2017 agreements with China under Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative. Earlier this month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that multiple US Navy vessels, Coast Guard assets, and aircraft have been deployed in and around Panama as part of “bold first steps to revive our defense and security ties between our countries.”

Read more …

“G4S secures US embassies around the world, guards airports, government agencies, and military installations for both Washington and London, and even monitors sections of the US border.”

• British Mercenaries Now Run America’s Front Lines (RT)

The British-American private military company Group 4 Securitas (G4S) has evolved far beyond its original mission of providing security for Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and Ukraine’s critical infrastructure. Today, it resembles a quasi-state, complete with its own armed forces, prison systems, and global reach. G4S secures US embassies around the world, guards airports, government agencies, and military installations for both Washington and London, and even monitors sections of the US border.

It also manages prisons notorious for abuse, torture, and killings. British-American firms now dominate roughly 90% of the global PMC market, and experts say that outsourcing warfare to private contractors has become the preferred tool of foreign policy. It’s easier – and more politically palatable – to fight through intermediaries. G4S earns the lion’s share of its revenue from contracts with multinational corporations and government agencies in the US and UK. Its former CEO, Ashley Martin Almanza, previously served as CFO of the British energy giant BG Group, a major supplier of liquefied natural gas to China. In 2016, BG merged with Royal Dutch Shell – another UK-based energy titan and the world’s largest oil and gas company.

Since 2016, G4S has been protecting employees and assets of the Barash Gas Company in Iraq – a joint venture between the Iraqi government and Shell, which owns a 44% stake. This is one of the largest gas infrastructure projects in the country. Over the past three years alone, G4S has raked in more than $100 million from contracts securing US embassies worldwide. Procurement records from both the US and UK governments show a steady increase in the number of diplomatic sites under G4S protection. In just one year, the company landed five-year contracts for US embassies in Estonia ($18.8 million), Hong Kong ($35 million), Luxembourg ($29 million), and Côte d’Ivoire ($12.6 million).

The US Bureau of Diplomatic Security counts on G4S to safeguard American facilities in South Africa through 2025. The company protects not just the embassy in Pretoria but also consulates and offices in Johannesburg, Durban, and Cape Town. G4S personnel also provide bodyguard services for US diplomats outside official buildings. The bodyguard contract alone is worth $9.5 million. The total value of security services in South Africa exceeds that tenfold. Notably, some contract obligations – amounting to $3 million – were paid for but never fulfilled by G4S, according to oversight reports. G4S also protects American embassies in the UK, France, India, Madagascar, Morocco, Botswana, Denmark, and Qatar, as well as across South America, including Peru and Paraguay. The company also operates in Canada.

One of its more recent assignments involves the US Embassy in Lusaka, Zambia, where G4S was hired for $8.7 million to defend American personnel, their families, and government assets against a range of threats, including terrorism. If the first year goes well, the contract may be extended for up to five years. Following the targeted killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, Iranian investigators accused G4S of providing intel to the Pentagon regarding his location prior to the drone strike. At the time, G4S was contracted to protect Soleimani at Baghdad International Airport.

According to global arms expert Darko Todorovski, Western PMCs are deeply embedded within their countries’ military and foreign policy frameworks. These companies operate under intelligence agency oversight and are awarded government contracts via institutions like the US State Department or the UK’s Foreign Office. Todorovski points out several advantages of relying on PMCs: they can be deployed quickly, typically boast higher professionalism than traditional forces in volatile regions, and aren’t beholden to local elites or religious factions. Their superior logistical and technical capabilities make them a preferred choice.

Read more …

“She had a PAC or some kind of nonprofit, it had a hundred dollars in it. Then suddenly, when Biden’s on his way out of office, almost $2 billion go under her direction.”

• No One Is Above the Law. Not Even The Rogue Prosecutors (Victor Davis Hanson)

I think you’re all aware—you who are religious or maybe secular—you’re all aware of a force in the universe that what comes around goes around. Or in classical mythology and Greek and Roman studies, there was the goddess Nemesis that pays back hubris or arrogance. I think in Eastern philosophy and religion the term is “karma.” And in the New Testament it is: ”Do unto others as you would like them to do unto you.” But there is something innate to the human condition that you should not go in one direction in excess because there’s a force in the universe that corrects us and brings us back to the middle, what we call in classical terms the golden mean. Nothing too much. Know yourself. But we have watched for the last five years a corruption of the American judicial system by four prosecutors:

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in Georgia, who is trying to magnify a phone call that President Donald Trump made to the registrars into some type of RICO corruptive act. And it was not. And that case has been dropped. We saw District Attorney Alvin Bragg in Manhattan try to bootstrap a federal offense—that the federal prosecutors did not want to prosecute—on a nondisclosure form and claim it was a campaign donation. We saw former special counsel Jack Smith with the records. And that was asymmetrical because at the same time they were investigating former President Joe Biden for essentially the same crime and let him off. And then we had New York Attorney General Letitia James on the real estate deal where she created, kind of, new laws that had never existed before on minor details about forms on real estate applications, about a loan to the Deutsche Bank that didn’t—they were happy.

But my point is this: They have exceeded what the Greeks called “hubris.” They were arrogant. They were overweening. They were self-righteous. They kept bragging, in the case of James or Willis, as political animals, “We’re going to do this. We’re going to get Trump.” And then these forces in the universe said, “This is wrong and we’re going to correct it.” And what do we find out now? Jack Smith, the federal prosecutor, before he left his tenure, he went to the Covington law firm. That’s former Attorney General Eric Holder’s law firm, by the way. And he asked and received $140,000 of free legal services. Did he pay taxes on that? That’s above the gift tax. I don’t know. But if any of you decide that you’re going to get a gift of either services or materials or cash for $140,000 and you don’t pay taxes, you’re in big trouble.

Fani Willis, well, she was removed from the case, as you know, with her paramour—that she did not disclose—Nathan Wade, whom she made her lead prosecutor. They went on junkets. They didn’t record their expenses. Half of them, perhaps, came from Nathan Wade’s wages that were inflated by Fani Willis. She wouldn’t turn over subpoenaed records. The court forced her to pay a fine of $54,000. They took her, as I said, off the case. Now she’s facing an investigative inquiry by the Georgia legislator. She’s in big trouble.

And then we get to Letitia James. She was the most confident and kept giving us soapbox lectures about, “No one is above the law.” It turns out that for years she was fudging on her real estate investments in an illegal fashion. But because Nemesis always deals in irony, some of the forms that she exaggerated on or lied about were the same things that she alleged that Donald Trump had done on his forms. But clearly, Donald Trump had a much better case, so far, that he didn’t do that. She said an apartment unit had fewer rooms than it did. She said that her principal residence was in Virginia when, in fact, she was the New York district attorney, by statute she must live in New York those five years. The house that she purchased she’s not living in now. She listed her father as her husband. What am I getting at? She’s committing the same type of fraud that she’s alleging Donald Trump did.

I’ll just finish with, remember Stacey Abrams? She was the one that denied she lost the 2018 gubernatorial race. She lost by 50,000 votes. She lost it again to Brian Kemp in 2022 by even more, a greater margin. She had a PAC or some kind of nonprofit, it had a hundred dollars in it. Then suddenly, when Biden’s on his way out of office, almost $2 billion go under her direction. And now we’re learning that she was giving millions of dollars away, bought a beautiful home, and suddenly went from bankruptcy and owing the IRS and not paying her taxes in 2016—she’s a millionaire. That’s going to be investigated. Bottom line: Be very careful. Tread softly. Listen to the sages of the ages. Listen to your secular and your Scripture. And no one is above the law. And all of these people felt that they were above the law. And that invisible hand of Nemesis, or God, or karma struck them down. And it’s a good lesson for all of us.

Read more …

“Dhillon, meanwhile, said the changes were no different than what happens anytime there’s a change in administration, along with a quest for efficiency.”

• Trump Admin Takes Wrecking Ball To DOJ’s Woke Civil Rights Division (ZH)

Harmeet Dhillon – Trump’s hand-picked choice to lead the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, has been taking a wrecking ball to the woke government entity – forcing out ‘a majority of career managers and implementing new priorities’ that have radically altered its mandate, NBC News’ swamp scribe Ken Dilanian reports. “It’s been a complete bloodbath,” one senior DOJ lawyer told Dilanian. Other sources said that over a dozen senior lawyers – “many with decades of experience working under presidents of both parties,” have been reassigned, while others have resigned in frustration after they were shuffled around. Dhillon kicked the hornet’s nest last week – issuing a series of memos outlining the shifting priorities, which include (gasp!) “Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports,” and “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling.” “This is a 180 shift from the division’s traditional mission,” one former senior official said – declining to be named “in fear of retaliation.”

“These documents appear to have been created in a vacuum completely divorced from reality,” the former official continued. “The division can only enforce statutes that have been passed by Congress, and these orders seem to contemplate division attorneys’ executing on work that fundamentally departs from the division’s long-standing mission.” Dhillon, meanwhile, said the changes were no different than what happens anytime there’s a change in administration, along with a quest for efficiency. “Each new administration has its own priorities, and allocates resources accordingly,” said Dhillon. “The Trump administration is no different. When I assumed my duties as Assistant Attorney General, I learned that certain sections in Civil Rights had substantial existing caseloads and backlogs, and that formed the basis of temporary details to assist those sections in getting, and staying, caught up.”

10 ‘current and former officials’ in the Civil Rights Division told NBC News that several division chiefs have been transferred to roles unrelated to their legal backgrounds, including handling complaints, as well as the office that handles public requests (lol). So, customer service. “Every presidential administration has its own policy priorities,” said former employee Stacey Young, who spent 18 years in the division before resigning in January, “but I don’t think there’s any precedent for an administration almost completely refocusing the civil rights division’s enforcement priorities the way this one has.” So sad.

Read more …

“We discovered the scam way back in our OMB days while jousting with the Treasury Department over the sacred cows in its budget. But nothing is different 40-years later..”

• Why And How To Fire 42,000 IRS Agents… (David Stockman)

The true scandal of current American fiscal governance needs be commented on. Or, better still, hammered upon good and hard. To wit, the American electorate apparently doesn’t give a shit about runaway government spending because as a practical matter the overwhelming share of voters don’t pay the taxes to fund it. Aside from social insurance taxes, which most payroll taxpayers still believe to be a premium for a government-sponsored retirement annuity, the bottom 90% of households fund only a tiny fraction of Federal spending. That’s right. The bottom 145 million US income tax filers (out of 161 million total filers) currently pay just $500 billion in Federal income taxes. That’s barely $3,500 per return and even then approximately 50 million of these returns owe zero taxes or actually get tax credit refunds for taxes they haven’t paid!

In the grand scheme of things, therefore, direct tax payments by the bottom 90% of income tax filers amounted to only 12% of Federal spending in FY 2024 outside of social insurance trust funds. To wit, Federal spending ex-social insurance was $4.82 trillion in FY 2024 and upwards of $4.3 trillion of this was paid for by the top 10% of income tax payers, corporations, minor excise and import duty payers and borrowing—of which there was $1.8 trillion of the latter in FY 2024. Needless to say, the top 10% got soaked good and hard, paying $1.538 trillion of Federal income taxes and as a practical matter nearly the entirety of the $530 billion corporate income tax, which in today’s globally competitive world gets mainly pushed back to shareholders. In effect, $2.1 trillion or 43% of Federal spending outside of social insurance is paid for by the top 10%.

Needless to say, that’s just plain unfair and economically counter-productive, too. The current marginal rate for top bracket taxpayers is 40.8% when you include the Medicare surcharge and the so-called NIIT (net investment income tax). That’s already extortionate because in a free society there is no way that the government should grab 40% of anyone’s income—especially since that’s only the Federal take, which can easily grow to 50% after state and local income and property taxes. Moreover, when the TCJA act of 2017 expires at year-end 2025, the top marginal rate will jump to truly confiscatory rate of 43.4%, and well beyond 50% in most states after state and local levies are layered on. In short, America desperately needs to raise more revenues to fund even a downsized government after the DOGE treatment. But the income tax is more than tapped out, and 90% of the public is getting a hall pass on the latter.

Accordingly, what needs to happen is a sweeping reform, which would shift the Federal revenue base overwhelmingly to consumption and sales tax levies. That would ensure that the economic damage is limited and that 100% of the voting public would have skin in the game and feel the pain of spending via commensurate tax extractions. Then they might well demand fiscal sanity from their elected representatives in a manner that rarely occurs under the current defective fiscal regime. We will elaborate more on the needed sweeping tax base reform in Part 2, but suffice it here to say that not only is the current Federal income tax grossly unfair to the productive classes and tapped out as a practical matter of revenue generation, but it is also unadministratable. Accordingly, more than half of the massive 100,000 man IRS bureaucracy could be eliminated even without a sales/consumption tax replacement, while upwards of 90% could be eliminated if the income tax were mainly substituted by a sales tax.


Needless to say, we are not talking about just bureaucratic nannies and meddlers in the case of the current 83,000 IRS employees—-a figure which is heading for 102,000 by the end of the decade under the still unrepealed Biden revenue grab. In the ranks of what amounts to a small city’s worth of Federal bureaucrats are also a goodly phalanx of tax cops, gumshoes, enforcement lawyers and tax filing proctologists. So the question recurs: What has generated this massive bureaucracy in the first place, and what fundamental policy shifts are needed to cut the IRS headcount by 50% (42,00 jobs) and upwards of $5 billion of compensation and other operating costs? The answer starts with calling the IRS’ bluff. When you look at the actual tax filing data it is damn evident that the Deep State bureaucrats are faking mightily when it comes to their massive staffing demands. We discovered the scam way back in our OMB days while jousting with the Treasury Department over the sacred cows in its budget. But nothing is different 40-years later—so here’s the smoking gun that points the way.

Read more …

“I bought this car before I knew that Elon was crazy..”

• The Thankless Life of Elon Musk (Jeffrey Tucker)

There’s a Tesla in my neighborhood with a bumper sticker that seems to be begging people not to key the car. “I bought this car before I knew that Elon was crazy,” it says. Fascinating message there. Is it a protest, plea, or both? The car is brilliant, obviously and the guy loves it. But these days, driving a Tesla comes with implied messaging, due entirely to Musk’s political actions. Elite liberals were buying this car for years as a status symbol of their love of the planet. Then everything changed. Now they are experiencing something like an existential crisis. That’s because a movement has emerged among elites who have turned against it. Then began a campaign of violence against property. Marauding gangs have attacked dealerships and vigilantes have vandalized cars and trucks all over the country. It’s revealed a point about the political left that has heretofore been only suspected: it harbors a violent streak that is alarming, even terrifying.

This idea that we are what we buy—that our purchases are not just about the products but a judgment for or against the companies that make them—seems rather new as a mass phenomenon. We saw it in the mass consumer boycott of Bud Light. These violent actions, however, go far beyond a buyers’ boycott. No one in a free enterprise system objects to declining to buy. It’s another matter to lash out at others for their decisions. The political actions of the CEO dragged the company into a difficult relationship with the main customers of the product. There seems to be no question that this is the reason for the dramatic fall in both sales and the company’s stock price. EV sales otherwise seem to be on the rise, while Tesla has experienced disproportionate losses at the tail end of a very contentious election followed by the CEO’s actions that have attempted to gut the civil service.

The fall has been so stinging that Elon is stepping back from politics to focus again on bolstering his company and reputation. Certainly he seems to have become less outspoken than he was a few months back. The markets seem to have humbled him into going back to business and staying out of the political muck. His project called DOGE will live on, and I suspect that he will ultimately be vindicated. For now, however, he is taking it on the chin. His early estimate of saving $2 trillion with cuts kept being pared back given court judgements and impossible bureaucracy. It now stands at $150 billion, much of which will be lost in litigation fees. It’s a terrible realization: if Musk could not do it, even with the full confidence of the U.S. president, can it even be done? Ever since Musk distinguished himself as the most prominent corporate voice against lockdowns, I’ve paid careful attention to his political migration.

He was a conventional corporate liberal not too long ago, say 10 years ago. His experience during COVID changed him. This was when governments around the country and the world said they and they alone would decide which companies would open and which would close. Understandably, he came to believe that civilization was under attack and swore he would do something about it. He promised to keep his factories open even as the rest of the world was shutting down. He moved his company out of California and his corporate registrations out of Delaware in protest against what was happening. The sudden dawning of his political enlightenment mutated into a serious attack on a range of government and corporate policies that mitigate against merit in hiring and promotion. He turned on “woke”—also in part due to private family struggles that hurt him deeply.

Elon eventually put his money where his mouth was. He decided to buy a heavily censored and deeply propagandistic Twitter and turn it into the much freer X that drove forward public narratives which contributed mightily to Trump’s victory in 2024. In so doing, he fired 4 out of 5 employees in the wildly bloated staff and dramatically changed the platform to become the world’s most popular news and social media application. Those actions earned him a great deal of influence over policy in the new administration. He was tasked with doing to the government what he had done at Twitter: clean it up, refresh it to become more effective and efficient, and bring some degree of transparency to government finance. Musk had some success. That said, changing government is much harder than changing a private company over which you are CEO.

He has had wide influence within the Trump administration, but not as much as perhaps he had hoped. He wanted budget cuts and worked within established parameters to get them, even fully gutting several terrible sources of corruption like USAID. My judgment on his role is that Musk’s activities here have been absolutely heroic. He helped restore free speech. He has cleaned up some waste and fraud. He has streamlined some processes of government. He has set a new standard for accounting, personnel, and accounting. DOGE will go on without him. Also, it is not generally understood how xAI or Grok broke an emergent monopoly in artificial intelligence, shattering OpenAI’s hopes for a monopoly once it let go of its non profit status. Grok made that impossible.

Even now, Musk’s Grok AI engine ranks very high in all side-to-side comparisons of AI tools, and certainly excels in its user interface. Musk is very easily the leader in autonomous driving, which could revolutionize transportation on many fronts. And he does it all with open-source technology. I’m not a Tesla owner and I’ve written many articles with grave doubts about EVs in general. That said, I’m for consumer choice. If you think he makes a better car, great. Buy it and drive it. He has been very clear, too, that he is against all mandates, subsidies, and even patent protections, which is quite remarkable. In general, I would say that he has behaved throughout with notable scrupulosity. Further, he threw himself into politics with the best of motives.

He wanted to end censorship. He wanted to stop the corruption. He wanted to fix government finances. He has been sincere throughout and performed extraordinary deeds. He was not only not paid for his service; he has been punished financially for what he has done. This entire episode prompts a kind of reflection on the role of public life, courage, and doing what is right. Musk truly attempted to make a difference. He was courageous. He took on huge financial risks in buying Twitter that seem to have paid off. He risked the status of all of his companies when he threw in with Trump’s campaign. He could have played it safe but chose a different path. Why did he risk it all? Because he strongly believed it was the right thing to do. This is a beautiful thing to see in our cynical times. There is an element of tragedy in how his sacrifices have not been rewarded but rather punished.

Read more …

X post.

“There is no board of directors or management team who will ever again feel comfortable relying on China for a major portion of their supply chain.”

• Time Is The Friend of The US And The Enemy of China’s (Bill Ackman)

Some have suggested that because China takes a very long-term view, China can ‘win’ a trade war with the U.S. which, according to the conventional view, is a much shorter-term player than China. The problem with this assessment is that the longer the tariffs persist, the more rapidly every company that has a supply chain based in China relocates it to India, Vietnam, Mexico, the U.S. or some other country. China has to understand this dynamic, which is why it should be highly incentivized to make a trade deal as quickly as possible. Unless it is clear that a company can continue to source from China on economically viable terms, it must leave the country. The longer high tariffs persist, the greater the likelihood that no company can be confident it can rely on China for sourcing or production over the long term. This is true for US and non-US companies. As a long-term player, China must understand this dynamic.

The China tariffs are very damaging in the short term to companies that rely on China for a large percentage of their goods or for parts to make their products. This is particularly true for small companies who don’t have the wherewithal to weather the storm. If the tariffs were to persist, our government could provide loans to help companies manage their transitions out of China, but I don’t think this will be necessary. The tariffs are similarly damaging for medium-size and large businesses, but their greater financial resources allow them to better manage the tariff burden until they can relocate production outside of China. In light of the above, both China and the U.S. are highly incentivized to take the tariffs down to more reasonable levels — say 10% to 20% — as quickly as possible. The only thing stopping the reduction in tariffs to a more sensible level is the fear on the part of both countries’ leadership of looking weak.

A pause, however, would not be a sign of weakness because it requires both countries to take down their tariffs. It is just common sense. Both countries know that the 145% tariffs have to come down now. They are just trying to manage the diplomacy in such a manner to make clear that it is a mutual decision as opposed to one country ‘going first’. So let’s imagine the U.S. and China agree to a 180-day pause to allow for negotiations to take place. Once the pause is announced, China would be highly incentivized to make a deal as quickly as possible, whereas we have time on our side. This is true because the longer the tariffs persist, the greater the reputational damage to China as a reliable country in which to do business, and therefore the higher the probability that US and non-US companies will leave.

A lower level of tariffs in the short term will enable companies to better manage the transition out of China. It is a near certainty they will leave unless and until a new and highly favorable deal is made with China. Even then, no company will be confident it can rely on China for a major portion of its supply chain. That cake is already baked. There is no board of directors or management team who will ever again feel comfortable relying on China for a major portion of their supply chain. The damage has been done.

The only hope for China as a place to do business is for China to immediately come to the table and make a deal which provides permanent commitments addressing IP theft, forced technology transfer, market access restrictions, tariffs, and other barriers to doing business in China. If instead China stubbornly decides to hold out and not negotiate due to pride or other emotional issues, China will suffer that much more severe and permanent economic consequences. In China holds out, I expect we will launch a loan program to enable US companies to better manage the exit from China. Time is the friend of the US and the enemy of China’s in this negotiation. A pause and negotiations should therefore begin soon. Tell me why I am wrong.

Read more …

The consequences will take time to seep through.

• The Death of Globalization (Jim Rickards)

With so much attention focused on U.S. stock markets, it seems timely to pivot away from stocks for the moment and consider the global perspective. Globalization may be dying in terms of trade and supply chains, but financial markets are inextricably linked in ways that relatively few understand. The dollar still dominates the global financial system despite the cracks in the foundation and the valid criticisms. If there’s a dollar problem in Eurodollar banks, it’s sure to echo from Tokyo to Shanghai and New York. And problems in those locales affect everything else. I’ve just returned from separate visits to India, Japan and Jekyll Island, Georgia. India has the largest population in the world, has the fifth largest economy, is a nuclear power and a key member of BRICS. Japan is the fourth largest economy in the world and is a key geopolitical ally of the United States in its faceoff with China. Jekyll Island is a lovely ocean resort but is best known as the site of a secret meeting in 1910 where the Morgan, Rockefeller and Warburg interests dreamed up the Federal Reserve System.

I continually urge people to get away from their desks, stop staring at screens and go out and talk to real people. There’s no substitute for walking the streets around the world (including the poorest areas) if you really want to know what’s going on. While India, Japan and Jekyll Island could hardly be more diverse and geographically scattered, they share a common thread. It’s their economic linkage through the U.S. dollar. The following are some impressions I gathered during these visits that reflect the volatile situation facing markets today. India and Japan had the most reasoned response to Trump’s new tariff policies. Trump quickly backed off his high “reciprocal” tariffs (27% for India and 24% for Japan) and reverted to his blanket 10% tariff on all imports for every country in the world except China.

Responses varied from retaliation tariffs (proposed by Canada, China and the EU) to a much more reasonable approach of simply asking the White House for a meeting to sit down and discuss the issue amicably with a view to lowering tariffs in both directions. Japan and India fell into this latter category and are being rewarded by being included among the first countries that will actually have that opportunity. (Mexico has also taken the moderate route by engaging in discussions rather than retaliation). There will be some give and take. Some U.S. tariffs on certain items are likely to remain in place. But the optimal solution is not to cut down on U.S. purchases from those countries but for them to buy more from the U.S. That trims the U.S. trade deficit without reducing world trade and so constitutes a win-win resolution with both India and Japan. India will likely buy more military hardware and semiconductors from the U.S. Japan will likely buy more agricultural goods including soybeans and beef. The result will be higher growth in the U.S.

Bilateral deals like this have losers. Taiwan may miss out on some semiconductor sales (although they are investing hundreds of billions of dollars to build semiconductors in the U.S.). Russia may miss out on military sales to India although they will remain a major energy supplier. Still, the U.S. is done being the “consumer of last resort” to the world and wants to increase its profile as a seller. Trump’s policies move the U.S. in that direction. There is little question that the new U.S. tariff policy will hurt some countries around the world. Not to sound harsh, but that’s their problem. Trump’s job is to make America great again. President Xi’s job is to make China great again. Chancellor-in-waiting Merz’s job is to make Germany great again. The U.S. cannot carry the world on its back. If other countries (rich or poor) took Trump’s growth-oriented approach instead of free riding on America, the entire world would be better off. That’s certainly the view from the White House and is a good guide to U.S. policy going forward.

Defenders of China point to the fact that Chinese exports are not a particularly large percentage of their total GDP. (Germany is the worst offender by that metric). The problem with that data point does not come from the Chinese export number; I’m sure that’s roughly correct. The distortion comes from the GDP denominator. Chinese GDP is overstated by 100% (at least) perhaps more, and China may already be in a recession. The reason is that China shows about 45% of its GDP as investment, mostly in the form of government backed construction. I’ve been to the ghost cities in China and seen more on the horizon. I got mud on my boots on the construction sites (except I was wearing Italian loafers). There is real steel, glass and copper in the buildings and it takes real labor to build them. That all counts as GDP.

But they’re all empty. If you used GAAP or international accounting principles, you would write that investment down to zero immediately. You can’t put a ghost city into inventory. Buildings age rapidly and take enormous amounts to maintain. I saw this in the Congo in the early 1980s. They had a commodity boom in the 1970s and wasted much of the money on skyscrapers and other showcase projects. By the time I arrived there, the windows were falling out and rust stains ran down the sides of their showcases. The same thing will happen in China. Once you make that accounting adjustment for wasted investment, GDP shrinks, and the Chinese export/GDP ratio goes up exponentially. China is much more dependent on exports for any real growth than most analysts realize. Trump and Scott Bessent have this right.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Frizzle

 

 

Emperor
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1915998021193527578

 

 

Rogan

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 22 2025

Mar 222025
 
 March 22, 2025  Posted by at 10:54 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  40 Responses »


Caravaggio The calling of St. Matthew 1599-1600

 

• Trump Accuses Federal Judge Of Trying To ‘Usurp’ His Presidential Power (NYP)
• Trump Is Fighting A Cartel Of Vile, Corrupt And Far-left Judges (Miranda Devine)
• DOJ May Invoke State Secrets Privilege in Showdown With Federal Judge (ET)
• Judgepocalypse Now (James Howard Kunstler)
• Trump Eyeing Crimea As ‘International Resort’ – Seymour Hersh (RT)
• Azov Gaining Power is ‘Symptom of Collapse’ of Ukraine’s Civil Society (Sp.)
• Zelensky Slaps Trump in the Face by Subverting Ceasefire Deal (Sp.)
• Kiev Blew Up Metering Station For EU-Bound Gas – Russia (RT)
• Why Diplomacy With Kiev Is A Dead End (Romanenko)
• Democrats Lurch Ever Further Left (Palathingal)
• Sen. Kennedy Delivers Epic Takedown of Chuck Schumer (Margolis)
• There’s a Mutiny Brewing in the Democratic Party (Margolis)
• AOC, Sanders On Multi-state Tour To Rally Democrats Against MAGA (JTN)
• EU Finds Way To Bypass Hungary – Politico (RT)
• Seizing Russian Assets Would Be ‘An Act of War’ – Belgian PM (RT)
• Kill Europe’s Future Competitiveness Through Exorbitant Military Expenses (Sp.)

 

 

 

 

This answers all Trump related questions today

Optimus

Lutnick

USIP

LBJ

Miller

Lutnick

 

 

 

 

It is all here in this video. The Dems have over 200 judges on their side, ready to do their bidding. These judges don’t have to win, they only have to spend time. Until the next case opens. Multiple cases at the same time is even better.

• Trump Accuses Federal Judge Of Trying To ‘Usurp’ His Presidential Power (NYP)

President Trump accused US District Court Judge James Boasberg of trying to “usurp” his presidential power by temporarily halting his attempts to deport illegal immigrant gangbangers in firey Truth Social posts Thursday night. Trump labeled the federal judge as a “radical left” and ranted that he was welcoming “unparalleled” danger into the country. Boasberg set himself at odds with the commander in chief earlier this week by blocking the administration’s attempt to deport alleged migrant gang members — a move which may have exceeded his judicial authority.“Judge James Boasberg is doing everything in his power to usurp the Power of the Presidency,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. “He is a local, unknown Judge, a Grandstander, looking for publicity, and it cannot be for any other reason, because his ‘Rulings’ are so ridiculous, and inept.”“SAVE AMERICA!,” the president ended the post.

In another Truth post, Trump expounded on the problems stemming from a federal judge attempting to overrule a decision made by the president of the United States. “Unlawful Nationwide Injunctions by Radical Left Judges could very well lead to the destruction of our Country! These people are Lunatics, who do not care, even a little bit, about the repercussions from their very dangerous and incorrect Decisions and Rulings,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday. “The danger is unparalleled! These Judges want to assume the Powers of the Presidency, without having to attain 80 million votes,” he continued.Trump further characterized the judge’s actions as wanting all of the advantages of being president without taking any of the risks. He then called on Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts to intervene.

“If Justice Roberts and the United States Supreme Court do not fix this toxic and unprecedented situation IMMEDIATELY, our Country is in very serious trouble,” the missive concluded. Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order on Mar. 15 that halted Trump from invoking the Alien Enemies Act to deport criminal aliens, including members of Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. The Trump administration defied those orders initially, deporting hundreds of migrant alleged gang members to El Salvador the following day. Boasberg attempted in court Monday to order the deportee-carrying flights to return home with the migrants onboard — much to the irritation of the Trump Justice Department. “These are foreign terrorists. The president has identified them and designated them as such — and we will continue to follow the Alien Enemies Act,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News on Monday.

Read more …

The Trump camp better find something fast.

• Trump Is Fighting A Cartel Of Vile, Corrupt And Far-left Judges (Miranda Devine)

If you ever doubted that Washington’s corrupt cartel of Democratic law firms, judges, NGOs, and deep-state bureaucrats is a machine designed to thwart the Trump administration, just watch as judge after judge blocks the president’s ability to keep his campaign promises. It may not be brown paper bags changing hands, but this lawfare that defies the people’s will is every bit as corrupt. It will be up to the Supreme Court to define the limits of presidential authority, but Chief Justice John Roberts’ preemptive scolding of Trump for musing about judicial impeachment doesn’t bode well for the president. Trump won a resounding mandate in the November election, winning every swing state, the popular vote and both houses of Congress. Democrats are rudderless, fighting each other and incapable of mounting an effective opposition.

Read more …

The entire Department of Justice vs one judge. And they still have trouble prevailing.

• DOJ May Invoke State Secrets Privilege in Showdown With Federal Judge (ET)

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is considering invoking its state secrets privilege in its showdown with a federal judge over the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act and deportation of illegal immigrants, a high-ranking DOJ official said in a new court filing submitted Friday. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, a former criminal defense lawyer for President Donald Trump, confirmed a statement issued by Robert Cerna, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official, in court papers filed earlier this week in the case that Cabinet secretaries under Trump “are currently actively considering whether to invoke the state secrets privilege.” “I attest to the accuracy of those statements based on personal knowledge of the events described by Mr. Cerna,” Blanche wrote, “including my direct involvement in ongoing Cabinet-level discussion regarding invocation of the state-secrets privilege.”

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg told government officials that they have a Friday deadline to submit a sworn declaration by a person “with direct involvement in the Cabinet-level discussions” about the state secrets privilege and to tell the court by next Tuesday whether the government will invoke it. Invoking the state secrets privilege—an evidentiary rule used under U.S. legal precedent—means that government lawyers can assert that court proceedings may divulge sensitive state information that may endanger national security. Boasberg this week ordered the government to explain why it did not turn around flights carrying deportees to El Salvador and to argue whether the move violated his court order blocking the Alien Enemies Act deportations of those individuals last week.

Boasberg had directed the government to return flights with Venezuelan illegal immigrants alleged to be members of the Tren de Aragua back to the United States. The judge, who is based in Washington, had given the government until noon Thursday to either provide more details about the flights or make a claim that it must be withheld because it would harm “state secrets.” The government resisted the judge’s request, calling it an “unnecessary judicial fishing” expedition. In a written order, Boasberg called government officials’ latest response “woefully insufficient” and said that the Trump administration “again evaded its obligations” by merely repeating “the same general information about the flights.” The judge ordered the government to “show cause” as to why it didn’t abide by his court order to turn around the planes, increasing the prospect that he may consider holding government officials in contempt of court.

The order issued by Boasberg has drawn sharp condemnation from Trump and some Republicans, who have said the judge should be impeached. At least one Republican lawmaker introduced articles of impeachment targeting the judge, although it’s unclear whether GOP House leaders will pursue their usage.House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told news outlets that they may pursue an alternative legislative remedy other than impeachment but will hold hearings on Boasberg and other judges in the coming days. Calls for impeachment, meanwhile, sparked a response from U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who released a statement suggesting that it’s unprecedented to impeach a judge for issuing an order that the government disagrees with.

“Impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said in his statement.While no other Supreme Court justices have publicly commented on the matter, retired Justice Stephen Breyer told CNN this week that he agrees with Roberts’s assertion and said that instead, the government should appeal the matter rather than focus on impeachment. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has said in court papers and in media appearances that she believes Boasberg is exceeding his authority by issuing a nationwide injunction blocking deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 law that typically is invoked in times of war. While issuing the proclamation on the Act, Trump said that his administration believes that the United States is being invaded by Tren de Aragua, a transnational gang that was declared a foreign terrorist organization last month.

Read more …

“Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ ‘due process.'” — Buck Sexton

• Judgepocalypse Now (James Howard Kunstler)

Impeachment would be too mild for the claque of Woke-activist federal judges attempting to nullify the executive branch with hectoring writs against any and all sorts of executive actions. If simply bounced off their benches, they could just take up new careers as NPR legal commentators or transsexual pole-dancers. Rather, what you’ve got here is an obvious seditious conspiracy, plain for all to see, orchestrated by the same legal Nosferatus as RussiaGate, the 2020 election, and the J-6 witch hunt.The catch is, this time it is discoverable and subject to prosecution because the party running this legal insurrection no longer has its hands on the levers of power in the DOJ and the FBI as it did when they ran the aforementioned ops. And so, the mighty silence emanating from those two agencies just now should tell you something: namely, that cases are being carefully constructed to finally bring these despicable caitiffs to real and chastening law.

If you want to know one paramount reason for institutional failure in our country, look to the evil enterprise that calls itself “Lawfare.” It originated as a blog launched on September 1, 2010, founded by three key figures: Benjamin Wittes, Jack Goldsmith, and Robert Chesney. Over time it evolved into an activist operation, The Lawfare Institute, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to (cough cough) “Hard National Security Choices,” and run under the shady umbrella of the Brookings Institution. The point of Lawfare is self-evident in its name: it is an instrument of warfare against a perceived enemy which, for the past decade, has been the political faction led by Mr. Trump, the once-and-current chief executive of the federal government. Mr. Trump is a danger to the bureaucratic arm of the federal government because he has defined it as a racketeering operation and moved decisively to end its depredations.

Lawfare is the praetorian guard of the permanent DC bureaucracy, including especially its rogue intel actors, who function as enforcers for the Democratic party that largely staffs the bureaucracy. Norm Eisen, a Brookings senior fellow, is the chief operational strategist for the Lawfare enterprise. He has been active in all its ops, capers, and mind-fucks since Mr. Trump came on the scene in 2015 vowing to “drain the swamp” (i.e., end the racketeering). Norm Eisen holds leadership roles in two subsidiary Lawfare orgs: States United Democracy Center and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Eisen’s broader connection stems from his history of orchestrating legal challenges against Mr. Trump — advising the Mueller investigation, drafting impeachment articles, and leading CREW’s 200-plus lawsuits in Mr. Trump’s first term.

Now, following the Biden interregnum, Norm Eisen leverages a network of nonprofits (ACLU, Public Citizen, etc.) and left-leaning judges to file hundreds of new lawsuits to thwart the MAGA clean-up effort under Elon Musk’s DOGE. Tax filings show that CREW’s funding, in part, comes from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations. Item: during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, CREW received $432,000 in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans from Newtek Small Business, which evolved into a financial holding company after acquiring National Bank of New York City in January 2023, rebranded as Newtek Bank.

The money-laundering through multitudinous foundations, NGOs, and “non-profits” is the essence of the Democratic Party’s racketeering mode in league with federal bureaucracies such as USAID that dispensed billions of dollars to a vast network of activist recipients. Translation: it provides salaries (often six-figures) to party foot-soldiers whose only duties are to move the money through the organizational layers and to be available for such party tasks as ballot harvesting, vote-counting, and organizing riots. This is the mischief that Mr. Trump seeks to put an end to, and so he must be thwarted at all costs by those whose lifeblood depends on the ongoing rackets. The so-called “Resistance” alliance between the Democratic Party and the bureaucracy seeks to prevent reform by any means necessary.

Since they no longer control potent executive agencies such as the DOJ and the FBI for intimidating and punishing their enemies, their only recourse is the federal judiciary and its officers of the courts, that is, lawyers and judges practicing Lawfare. The federal judges are political appointees, such as John J. McConnell from the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, who was a personal injury lawyer (i.e., “ambulance chaser”) and major Democratic Party doner, giving nearly $700,000 to party causes, and serving as Rhode Island Democratic State Committee treasurer. Judge McConnell issued a wide-ranging restraining order against the DOGE-advised freeze of federal funding launched in February of this year. McConnell’s daughter, Catherine, is a senior policy advisor at the U.S. Department of Education, appointed by President Joe Biden in 2022. See how that works?

Read more …

That must have put a smile on Putin’s face.

• Trump Eyeing Crimea As ‘International Resort’ – Seymour Hersh (RT)

US President Donald Trump is reportedly considering lifting sanctions against Moscow in order to turn Russia’s Crimean Peninsula into a major international resort, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh has reported, citing a White House official. Since his inauguration in January, Trump has pursued direct negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the conflict in Ukraine. His administration has indicated that it is open to recognizing Moscow’s sovereignty over Crimea and some of the Donbass as part of a potential peace deal. The Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol officially joined Russia in 2014 following public referendums; they were followed in 2022 by the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and the regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye. Kiev continues to claim the territories as its own and has vowed to take them back, but Moscow has insisted that their status is non-negotiable.

In a post on his Substack blog on Thursday, Hersh reported that Trump’s broader aim is to improve US-Russia relations through economic cooperation. The president, he says, is seeking to lift sanctions imposed since 2014 and 2022 and “form a partnership with Putin aimed at turning Crimea into a major international resort.” The official source cited in Hersh’s report added that “they might do the same in Donbass.” The journalist noted that Trump’s approach is markedly different from that of the administration of Joe Biden, with his unnamed source describing the current president as an “economic winner.” Trump’s reported interest in Russian energy and natural resource assets includes oil, gas, and unmined rare earth metals.

Since taking office in January, Trump has reversed several foreign policy positions on Moscow. Following a phone call with Putin in February, US and Russian delegations met in Saudi Arabia, with both sides agreeing to restore diplomatic ties and explore joint business ventures after the Ukraine conflict is resolved. Trump and Putin held another phone call on Tuesday to discuss a US-proposed ceasefire. According to statements from both sides, the conversation was productive, with Russia agreeing to a one-month halt on strikes against Ukrainian energy infrastructure as talks continue.

Read more …

“The anger of the Azov will not be quenched, even after Zelensky is gone and a new president elected.”

• Azov Gaining Power is ‘Symptom of Collapse’ of Ukraine’s Civil Society (Sp.)

The destruction of the gas pumping station in Sudzha by Ukraine makes it look like Volodymyr Zelensky has “limited control” over the Ukrainian military and “limited to no control” over the neo-Nazi “Azov* forces,” USAF Ret. Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski tells Sputnik. Due to their belief in their superiority over the rest of the Ukrainian troops, Azov militants “believe that the war was theirs, always, not the politicians, and certainly not Zelensky’s as a propped-up politician who actually ran on enforcing the Minsk II treaty, a ‘peace’ platform.” “I think Azov, like many effective, violent and nationalistic military groups, disrespect politicians on principles, as compromisers and double dealers. Traditionally, these are the ‘generals’ that the politicians fear, not the other way around,” says Kwiatkowski, a former US Department of Defense analyst.

Thus, there appears to be a danger of Azov exercising the “real political power” in Ukraine. “It is a symptom of imminent collapse of what is left of Ukraine’s civil and political society, and it underlines the real problem that [US President Donald] Trump will have to face and has not yet — and that is how to help Ukraine recover a liberal and rights-based society at the conclusion of hostilities,” Kwiatkowski says. “The anger of the Azov will not be quenched, even after Zelensky is gone and a new president elected.

Read more …

“Trump should immediately halt all military aid and demand the withdrawal of American personnel..”

• Zelensky Slaps Trump in the Face by Subverting Ceasefire Deal (Sp.)

Volodymyr Zelensky appears to be challenging Donald Trump “after realizing his stance on the Ukraine conflict differs sharply from Joe Biden’s,” Professor Stevan Gajic of the Institute of European Studies in Belgrade tells Sputnik. How could the US force Ukraine to honor the ceasefire? “Trump should immediately halt all military aid and demand the withdrawal of American personnel,” Gajic suggests. The US must declare Zelensky illegitimate and refuse to negotiate with him. Washington should pressure him into holding long-overdue elections. Since Ukraine has lost its independence, Trump should also pressure its backers, including the EU and UK.

On March 20, Ukrainian forces struck the Sudzha gas metering station, violating the energy ceasefire deal agreed upon by Zelensky and brokered by Trump on March 18. Despite the truce, Ukraine attacked Russian infrastructure in Krasnodar that same day. Moscow views this as a deliberate provocation, yet Kiev denies any involvement. Ukrainian media suggest Washington wants a ceasefire to push Zelensky to lift martial law and hold elections in August, but Zelensky has rejected this, fearing he’ll lose his grip on power.

Read more …

“The station, located close to the border, was deliberately blown up as part of the Ukrainian retreat..”

• Kiev Blew Up Metering Station For EU-Bound Gas – Russia (RT)

Ukrainian forces retreating from Russia’s Kursk Region have destroyed the Sudzha gas metering station, the Defense Ministry in Moscow has reported. The incident took place early on Friday, roughly 20 minutes after midnight, the ministry said in a statement. The facility had been previously used to deliver fuel to consumers in European nations. Ukrainian forces seized the site in early August during their incursion into Kursk Region and used it as a secure logistics base, the ministry explained. The station, located close to the border, was deliberately blown up as part of the Ukrainian retreat, the military added.

”The demolition of the key Russian energy site was nothing short of an intentional provocation” in the context of the US-mediated partial ceasefire, under which Moscow pledged to refrain from attacks against Ukrainian energy infrastructure in exchange for a similar moratorium by Kiev. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has cited the incident as evidence that Kiev cannot be trusted, saying during a regular media briefing that Russian officials “have repeatedly warned our interlocutors about this.” He said that President Vladimir Putin’s order not to attack Ukrainian energy sites remained in force, per his agreement with Trump.

Russia’s Investigative Committee has launched a criminal probe into the incident as an act of terrorism. It said Ukrainian military personnel currently involved in the Kursk Region incursion were responsible for the gas station’s demolition. Kiev launched an assault into Kursk Region in hopes of seizing Russian territory as leverage in negotiations. Russian forces have since largely ousted Ukrainian troops, with Sudzha, previously a linchpin of Ukrainian operations, being liberated earlier this month.

Read more …

“Ukraine blew up a Russian gas facility just days after a mutual agreement not to do just that. As if anyone expected something different.”

• Why Diplomacy With Kiev Is A Dead End (Romanenko)

In a brazen act of duplicity, Ukraine has once again demonstrated that it is not a reliable partner for diplomacy – let alone peace. Mere days after a US-brokered agreement saw Moscow and Kiev commit to a mutual moratorium on targeting each other’s energy infrastructure, Ukrainian forces reportedly launched a deliberate strike on a gas metering station in Russia’s Kursk region. This was no accident, no miscommunication, and no unfortunate timing—it was a calculated breach of trust and yet another glaring signal that Ukraine cannot be reasoned with. The agreement in question was a result of a bold and rare diplomatic effort led by President Donald Trump, who had secured direct conversations with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky.

Despite the immense complexities of this long-running conflict, Trump managed to extract a commitment from both sides: a 30-day freeze on attacks against energy infrastructure. It was a starting point – modest, but meaningful. And yet, even that modest agreement was too much for Kiev to honor. Russia, for its part, not only adhered to the ceasefire but did so with a level of discipline and self-restraint that should have been headline news across the globe. In a show of integrity seldom seen in modern warfare, Russian forces actively intercepted and shot down their own drones – already airborne and en route to targets – because those drones had been launched prior to the agreement’s announcement. That is a serious country taking a serious peace process seriously.

Contrast that with Kiev’s conduct. According to reports from the ground and satellite imagery, a Ukrainian strike targeted the gas infrastructure facility near Sudzha in Russia’s Kursk region. The attack caused a fire, damage to critical energy infrastructure, and sent a clear message: Ukraine is not interested in honoring its word, and it certainly isn’t interested in diplomacy – only escalation. This latest incident is not occurring in a vacuum. It is part of a long and well-documented pattern of deception and provocation, especially in the face of good-faith overtures by Russia.

Let’s go back. In 2014, the Minsk agreements were hailed as the roadmap to a peaceful resolution in the Donbass. Russia backed them, and Western leaders nodded approvingly. But years later, former Western officials themselves openly admitted that Minsk was never intended to be implemented – it was merely a ploy to buy time for Kiev to rearm. In other words, a lie from the very beginning. In 2022, there was another real opportunity. Talks in Istanbul between Russian and Ukrainian negotiators reportedly came close to a viable ceasefire. But just as Kiev was nearing a deal, then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson intervened, reportedly urging Ukraine to walk away from the table. The result? Thousands more lives lost and the door to peace slammed shut once again.

Now, in 2025, with yet another window of opportunity pried open through diplomacy – this time led by Trump – Ukraine has apparently chosen to burn it down. Literally. The Kursk attack is not a deviation from Ukraine’s diplomatic record; it is the continuation of it. To President Trump’s credit, his efforts thus far have been the most realistic of any Western leader since the conflict began. Unlike the performative moralizing of his predecessor or the reckless interference of EU and UK heads of state, Trump’s approach has been grounded in pragmatism: reduce civilian suffering, de-escalate the war incrementally, and restore a framework for diplomacy. But those efforts require a willing partner.

Russia has signaled, time and again, that it is ready. Even now, despite this attack, Moscow has not withdrawn from the agreement. It is attending talks. It is engaging. It is showing up to the table. But the table is increasingly starting to look like a trap, set for anyone naive enough to believe Kiev’s promises. And that is the central, bitter truth: Kiev has shown not just unreliability, but outright duplicity. It will sign agreements, only to break them. It will smile for the cameras, only to sabotage talks behind the scenes. It will invoke Western values while acting in direct opposition to the very foundations of diplomacy and peace. For Washington – especially President Trump – this should be the wake-up call. The Kursk strike wasn’t just an attack on Russian infrastructure; it was an attack on diplomacy itself. It was an attack on the possibility of peace.

The world has now seen, repeatedly, who honors their word and who discards it the moment it’s politically convenient. Russia has shown that it is willing to pause, to restrain, to negotiate. Ukraine has shown that it will exploit every agreement, twist every olive branch into a weapon, and backstab at every opportunity.There can be no more illusions. No more Minsk-style traps. No more Istanbul disappointments. If there is to be peace, it cannot be built on the quicksand of Kiev’s promises. Any further negotiations must be predicated on reality – not hope – and the reality is this: one side is showing maturity, consistency, and openness. The other is showing that it cannot be trusted, or even talked to.

Read more …

” They’re not just fighting Trump; they’re fighting the future. And in the process, they’re making themselves obsolete..”

• Democrats Lurch Ever Further Left (Palathingal)

The Democratic Party is in free fall. Once a party of pragmatic leadership, strong borders, fiscal responsibility, and law and order, it has devolved into a chaotic, leaderless mess. While President Donald Trump and Republicans rally around an “America First” vision prioritizing economic growth, national security, and government efficiency, Democrats seem more focused on tearing down their own past successes, rather than presenting a coherent vision for the future. With Joe Biden and Kamala Harris out of office, the Democratic Party should be resetting itself for a comeback. Instead, it is rudderless and lost, with no serious leadership stepping up to challenge Trump on substance. The loudest voices—Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.; Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.; and their ideological allies—have driven the party into a radical fringe, where woke activism overshadows the core concerns of working Americans.

But it wasn’t always that way. The Democrats of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama once promised hope, change, and reform—Clinton championed fiscal responsibility, strong borders, and tough-on-crime policies, while Obama’s 2008 “Hope & Change” mantra inspired millions who believed he would unite the country, end corruption, and restore faith in government. Yet, instead of delivering on those visions, today’s Democratic Party leadership has abandoned pragmatism in favor of radical identity politics. Many Americans now feel that Trump 2.0—not the Democratic Party—is fulfilling the very “Hope & Change” promise that Obama once made, while Clinton and Obama stand by silently as their party turns into a circus sideshow of gender activism and woke extremism.

Bill Clinton famously declared, “The era of big government is over.” His presidency was defined by pragmatism, working with Republicans to balance the budget, reform welfare, and enforce immigration laws. He understood that unchecked government expansion led to inefficiency, and he wasn’t afraid to challenge progressive orthodoxy when necessary. His 1995 State of the Union address would be unrecognizable in today’s Democratic Party. Clinton stated: “All Americans … are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. That’s why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders.” That speech could have been delivered by Trump himself, yet back then, Democrats applauded. Today, any Democrat saying those words would be attacked by his or her own party.

Obama, too, understood the importance of strong governance. He championed cracking down on government waste, promising that Obamacare would be funded by eliminating “fraud, waste, and abuse.” In 2010, he reassured Americans: “We are scrutinizing spending for waste, looking for ways to achieve savings for taxpayers, and we will continue to enforce the law to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely.” Yet today’s Democrats mock those very principles, calling fiscal responsibility a right-wing obsession. Obama also had a firm stance on illegal immigration—one that modern Democrats would denounce. Under his administration, the U.S. deported nearly 3 million illegal immigrants, peaking at more than 410,000 removals in 2012—far higher than anything Trump ever achieved during his first term.

Yet now, even suggesting border enforcement gets you branded a “racist” by the Democratic Party. For all their flaws, Clinton and Obama also took Islamic terrorism seriously—something today’s Democrats fail to do.Clinton launched missile strikes against al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan and Sudan in response to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings. He recognized the growing threat of Islamic extremism, though he lacked the political will to fully eliminate it.Obama went even further. His administration drastically expanded drone strikes, authorizing more attacks than Bush and Clinton combined.He personally ordered the special forces raid that killed Osama bin Laden, often overruling left-wing activists who wanted softer policies on terrorism. However, his refusal to use the term “radical Islamic terrorism” signaled a dangerous unwillingness to confront the ideological roots of the problem.

Trump, by contrast, obliterated the ISIS caliphate in record time and took out Qassem Soleimani, Iran’s top terrorist mastermind—something neither Clinton nor Obama had the courage to do.Under today’s Democrat leadership, even acknowledging that terrorism has ideological roots is considered “Islamophobic.” The party has drifted so far left that even Clinton and Obama now look conservative by comparison.Many of us voted for Obama in 2008 because we believed in “Hope and Change.” We thought he would challenge the corrupt system, particularly the Bush-Cheney administration, for lying America into the Iraq War—a war that cost thousands of lives and destabilized the entire region. But Obama didn’t just fail to prosecute Bush and Cheney—he became them. Instead of exposing the military-industrial complex, he expanded it. Instead of ending regime-change wars, he continued them.

Trump, on the other hand, punished Bush and Cheney by taking over the Republican Party, purging neocons from power, and realigning the GOP toward an America First agenda. Obama had the opportunity to be that kind of leader—but instead, he joined the club he promised to dismantle. Elon Musk is delivering the kind of hope and change Americans expected from Obama—but never got. Instead of cutting red tape and fueling innovation, Democrats are blocking progress, filing lawsuits, and relying on partisan judges to do their dirty work. They’re not just fighting Trump; they’re fighting the future. And in the process, they’re making themselves obsolete. Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency launch proves that America’s biggest advancements are happening in spite of the Democratic Party, not because of it.

While Republicans, independents, and free-thinking liberals support innovation, today’s Democrats look like a bunch of clowns, desperately trying to suppress progress through lawsuits and regulations. Clinton and Obama must decide: Will they watch their party collapse, or will they step in and save it? The Democratic Party is collapsing under its own weight—but that’s only half the story. The other half is Trump’s speed, strength, and relentless punch. While Democrats flounder in confusion, Trump is moving fast—rebuilding the economy, securing the border, and reshaping America’s global standing in record time. The longer Democrats delay a course correction, the harder his impact will hit them. America needs a serious opposition party, not a circus. If they don’t act soon, Democrats will be remembered not as leaders, but as the ones who let the party die. The choice is theirs. But time is running out.

Read more …

“I don’t hate anybody, and that includes Senator Schumer. He’s very smart. On the other hand, Chuck’s often wrong. He never makes the same mistake twice; he makes it five or six times just to be sure.”

• Sen. Kennedy Delivers Epic Takedown of Chuck Schumer (Margolis)

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has learned the hard way that he can’t buck the radical wing of his party without consequences. The Senate Minority Leader’s decision to support the GOP funding bill has unleashed a torrent of progressive fury that’s tearing the Democratic Party apart at the seams. During an appearance on Fox News, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) delivered his trademark straight talk about the Democratic meltdown with a diagnosis that only he could provide. “Among them right now, we’ve all seen the news, he’s about as popular as chlamydia,” Kennedy quipped about Schumer’s current standing with his fellow Democrats.

The progressive rage machine is running at full throttle, with House Democrats now demanding Schumer’s resignation, and some calling on Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to challenge Schumer for his seat. Notably, their Senate colleagues haven’t joined this circus yet, probably because they have to actually work with the guy. But the damage is done, and the left’s circular firing squad is locked and loaded. I’m enjoying the show. Kennedy, who’s never met a metaphor he couldn’t make memorable, summarized Schumer’s leadership style perfectly. “I don’t hate anybody, and that includes Senator Schumer. He’s very smart. On the other hand, Chuck’s often wrong. He never makes the same mistake twice; he makes it five or six times just to be sure.” While acknowledging Schumer’s intelligence, Kennedy made it clear that being smart doesn’t always translate to good judgment — he is a Democrat after all.

The Louisiana senator praised Schumer’s rare moment of clarity in supporting the funding bill and noted with characteristic wit, “Unless a football coach taught you history, you understand that shutting government down never achieves anything.” But the real gem came when Kennedy described the current state of the Democratic Party: “The loon wing of the Democratic Party is firmly in control.” Anyone who’s watched these progressives push their radical agenda – especially their bizarre obsession with denying biological reality – knows exactly what he’s talking about. “These people are deeply weird,” Kennedy observed in what might be the understatement of the year.

The GOP’s strategy for handling these Democratic extremists? Kennedy revealed it with a smile: “Our Republican secret plan for dealing with the Democrats is called Operation Let Them Speak.” It’s brilliant in its simplicity – just let them keep talking, and voters will run screaming in the opposite direction. However, Kennedy acknowledged a sobering truth about this Democratic descent into madness: “That’s good for our party, but it’s bad for America, and I think Schumer did the right thing.” He’s absolutely right. While Democratic extremism might help Republicans at the ballot box, watching radical ideologues hijack half of our political system is a tragedy for our republic. We’ve booted them out of power for now, but there’s no guarantee that they won’t get it back someday, perhaps sooner than later.

Read more …

The Democratic Party will continue to exist, just under different leadership. But with the same people behind the curtains.

• There’s a Mutiny Brewing in the Democratic Party (Margolis)

No one knows better than Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer just how enraged the Democratic base is — and it’s not just a little frustration. According to Politico, the party is on the verge of mutiny. According to the outlet, the fury gripping the party has reached historic levels, creating a seismic rift between congressional Democrats and their grassroots. If this anger keeps boiling over, it could upend the 2026 primaries and reshape the party’s future. “Congressional Democrats have typically enjoyed higher popularity with their voting base than their Republican counterparts,” the paper notes. “But the trauma of the 2024 presidential election defeat appears to have ruptured that relationship. A review of Quinnipiac University’s annual first-quarter congressional polling reveals that, for the first time in the poll’s history, congressional Democrats are now underwater with their own voters in approval ratings.”

Just 40 percent of Democrats approve of the job performance of congressional Democrats, compared to 49 percent who disapprove. That’s a dramatic change from this time last year, when 75 percent of Democrats approved compared to just 21 percent who disapproved. The Democratic base’s disillusionment runs so deep that it’s eerily reminiscent of Republican grassroots sentiment in the period leading up to Donald Trump’s takeover of the Republican Party. The numbers are clear: No longer satisfied with the status quo in their party, Democrats are on the verge of a Tea Party-style, intra-party revolt. The latest approval data for Democrats is unlike anything we’ve seen in recent history, and it’s not just the usual case of sore losers still stewing over an election defeat.

When Democrats first lost to Donald Trump in 2016, their congressional approval ratings within the party actually went up. Why? Because the Democratic base largely approved of the way their leaders fought back against Trump in early 2017. A similar trend played out among Republicans in 2021 — despite Trump’s loss and the left’s overblown hysteria over Jan. 6, GOP voters still viewed congressional Republicans favorably. But this time, something is different. The numbers suggest that Democrats aren’t just upset; they’re fed up with their own party. As Politico points out, the closest comparison to the level of fury gripping Democratic voters today goes back about a decade to when GOP outsider Dave Brat stunned the political world by defeating House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a shocking 2014 primary upset.

Just two years later, Donald Trump bulldozed his way through a crowded field of establishment Republican candidates, reshaping the Republican Party forever. If history is any guide, Democrats could be in for a similar reckoning. In the short term, this is great news for the GOP. The Democrats’ internal civil war is bound to create electoral headaches and give Republicans an edge. But the real concern is what comes next. Once the dust settles, we’re likely to be left with a Democratic Party even more radical than it is today. Some might argue that this shift will only help the GOP, as the left’s increasingly extreme agenda continues to alienate mainstream voters.

But underestimating the radical left is a mistake. For its part, Politico insists that this isn’t about dragging the party further left, but history suggests otherwise. Despite the restive energy in the party’s progressive wing, the Democratic discontent does not seem to be centered around a desire to pull the party to the left or the right. Democrats cannot seem to agree on which direction the party should move in — recent Gallup polling found that 45 percent wanted the party to become more moderate, while 29 percent felt it should become more liberal, and 22 percent wanted it to stay the same.

I’m not convinced that the Democratic Party won’t emerge more radical in the end. But the short-term outlook still looks good. Politico suspects that Democrats could experience “a potentially bruising string of primaries in both the House and Senate.” One of the biggest mistakes of the Tea Party movement was primarying Republicans in moderate to blue districts or states, resulting in the nomination of candidates who couldn’t win a general election. The most notable example would be Christine O’Donnell, who beat Rep. Mike Castle in the Republican primary and ultimately lost to Democrat Chris Coons in the general election in a seat that was actually competitive thanks to the political climate at the time. Will Democrats make the same mistake in 2026 as Republicans did in 2010?

Read more …

Might as well bring Kamala back.

• AOC, Sanders On Multi-state Tour To Rally Democrats Against MAGA (JTN)

Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has embarked on a multi-state tour in what appears to be the most recent and organized effort to unify the Democratic Party against the Trump administration. Ocasio-Cortez, a New York Democrat, and Sanders, a Vermont Independent and former Democratic presidential candidate, stopped in Nevada on Thursday and will be in Colorado and Arizona on Friday.The tour is part of Sanders’ “Fighting Oligarchy: What’s Next” tour, in which the senator essentially argues the U.S. is headed toward an Oligarchy government as President Trump continues to fill his cabinet and other top-level posts with industry titans including billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, head of the administration’s Department of Government Efficiency.

“This isn’t just about Republicans,” Ocasio-Cortez told a crowd in Las Vegas, according to NBC News. “We need a Democratic Party that fights harder for us, too.” Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, considered among the most progressive lawmakers on Capitol Hill, are also touring together amid Democratic Party backlash against Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for having supplied enough Senate Democrat votes for the passage of a GOP-led, stopgap spending bill earlier this month to avoid a government shutdown.

Ocasio-Cortez did not mention Schumer by name, but the crowd at times broke out into multiple “Primary Chuck” chants – a growing call within the party to challenge Schumer, a fellow New York Democrat, in a 2028 primary should he seek reelection. At the Las Vegas rally, Sanders said to regain voters’ support, the Democratic Party leadership must tell the truth about the influence billionaires have in U.S. politics. He told CBS News the face of the Democratic Party needs to be “working-class people, young people, people who get their hands dirty, people who may not have graduated college, people who do not have PhDs in economics, people who are struggling to put food on the table. They’ve got to be involved. We’ve got to listen to them.”

Read more …

Democracy in all its shining glory.

• EU Finds Way To Bypass Hungary – Politico (RT)

The EU has found a way to issue so-called “joint” statements on the Ukraine conflict, by bypassing Hungary’s objections to the bloc’s continued support for Kiev, Politico has reported. Hungary refused to endorse a bloc statement following Thursday’s European Council meeting in Brussels, which reaffirmed the Brussels’ stance on the Ukraine conflict, and the bloc’s intentions to continue arming Kiev. However a document ignoring Hungary’s position was published as a formal European Council conclusion, bearing signatures from only 26 member-states, instead of 27. The EU intends to continue using the exclusionary tactic in preparing key statements in the future, the outlet reported on Thursday. Issuing documents “on behalf of the 26… is the new normal. And it is useful when it comes to political intent. Maybe down the line though we will encounter other problems,” a senior diplomat told Politico.

A top EU official cited in the article, pointed out that “no one has any doubts that there is divergence with one member state. The objective should always be to have conclusions at 27 — if it is not possible, if the strategic division is maintained, and we have all the indications that it is maintained, that we would move forward at 26.” Another diplomat insisted that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who has consistently criticized EU weapons deliveries to Ukraine and called for a diplomatic solution to the conflict, “chose isolation and a path of illiberal democracy against the obvious interest of the EU and, in fact, Hungary.” “The security of Europe is too serious of an issue to negotiate with one person who sees things 180 degrees differently than everyone else,” the diplomat stressed.

Hungary’s absence from bloc’s statements does not remove its ability to veto key EU policy decisions, as they still require unanimous support from all 27 members. “The EU wants to avoid the kind of public breakdown in unity” that would likely be triggered by the suspension of Hungary’s voting rights, it said. Orban told Kossuth radio on Friday that at the summit in Brussels he “saw in the eyes of every [EU leader] that Ukraine has lost this war. Getting involved was a bad decision. The Hungarians were right.”

Read more …

“..Euroclear is already entangled in legal battles with several parties, many of whom have turned to Russian courts to challenge the asset freeze..”

• Seizing Russian Assets Would Be ‘An Act of War’ – Belgian PM (RT)

Confiscating Russian assets frozen in the EU would be considered “an act of war,” Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has warned, according to Politico. He cautioned that the move would likely provoke a response from Moscow. Western countries froze an estimated $300 billion worth of Russian sovereign funds following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Around $213 billion of that is held by Euroclear, a Brussels-based clearing house. The frozen funds have already accrued billions in interest, of which Euroclear transferred €1.55 billion ($1.63 billion) to Kiev last July. Speaking to reporters after a meeting of EU leaders in Brussels on Thursday, De Wever warned that seizing Russian assets would pose “systemic risks to the entire global financial system” and could trigger retaliation from Moscow.

“We’re not living in a world of fantasy. We’re in the real world, where if you take €200 billion from somebody there will be consequences,” the outlet quoted the Belgian prime minister as saying on Thursday. De Wever’s warning comes as some EU countries including France and Spain have been pushing to confiscate Russian frozen assets as they seek to use the funds to strengthen Ukraine’s defense and improve its negotiating position in any future peace talks with Russia, the article noted. Earlier this month, French Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu announced that Paris will use interest accrued on Russian assets frozen in European banks to buy weapons for the Ukrainian military, a move condemned by Moscow. While proceeds generated from the frozen funds are already being used to back a $50 billion loan for Ukraine provided by the G7, most Western nations have stopped short of directly confiscating the assets.

According to Politico, Belgium has a major stake in the issue as Euroclear is based in Brussels. The country is reportedly concerned that handing over the funds to Kiev could expose Euroclear to additional legal claims from asset holders. Euroclear is already entangled in legal battles with several parties, many of whom have turned to Russian courts to challenge the asset freeze and demand compensation. The International Monetary Fund has also warned that seizing the funds without a clear legal framework could erode global trust in Western financial institutions. The Kremlin has condemned any attempts to confiscate Russian assets, labeling them “theft” and warning of serious legal repercussions. Russia has also hinted at potential retaliatory measures against Western investments in the country.

Read more …

Globalists dream.

• Kill Europe’s Future Competitiveness Through Exorbitant Military Expenses (Sp.)

NATO intends to ask its European members to boost their military gear stocks by about 30%, Bloomberg claims, citing its sources. Commenting on this development, German geopolitical analyst and AfD MP Dr. Rainer Rothfuss tells Sputnik that European countries today find themselves pressured by globalists and defense industry lobbyists pushing to ramp up military spending even as Trump in the US is doing the exact opposite. Just as countries in the northern hemisphere have an opportunity to lower defense spending, “the globalists groups and lobbyist groups lobbying for defense industry interests have found the European countries where most pressure can be exerted where most successfully arms sales can still be increased.” This situation, Dr. Rothfuss explains, does not bode well for Europe’s “future competitiveness” because European powers need to spend more on education, research, development and civil infrastructure instead of military pursuits.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Giza

 

 

Birds
https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1902968692641505523

 

 

Mantis
https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1903188992645853192

 

 

Fold

 

 

Ray
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1903174013276348587

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle December 11 2024

Dec 112024
 
 December 11, 2024  Posted by at 9:59 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  57 Responses »


Johannes Vermeer Woman holding a balance 1662-63

 

• Pressure Mounts For Support Of Trump’s Cabinet Picks During Honeymoon (JTN)
• 250 Conservative Veterans Sign Letter Backing Tulsi Gabbard Nomination (Hill)
• Pete Hegseth Lashes Out At Media ‘Smear’ Campaign (RT)
• Pete Hegseth Will Be Confirmed As Secretary of Defense, Predicts His Lawyer (JTN)
• DOJ Spied On Kash Patel, Staffers Without Telling Courts (JTN)
• How Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg Plans To Keep Trump Case Alive (ZH)
• Giuliani Says Jury Verdict In Penny’s Case Is A Black Eye To Bragg (JTN)
• Russia Close To Winning Ukraine Conflict – Spy Chief (RT)
• Obstruction of Immigration Enforcement Could Prove Costly for Citizens (Turley)
• Bernie Sanders Says Musk Is Right On Military Spending (JTN)
• Boeing Reportedly Restarts 737 Max Production (ZH)
• State Dep. Scrambles To Scuttle $100M Censorship Network Before Trump (ZH)
• Putin-the-Unready Is Beginning to be Held Accountable (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Elon Musk Jokes Bill Gates Could Go “Bankrupt” On Short Tesla Bet (ZH)
• SCOTUS Asked to Block State From Probing Doctors Who Question COVID Policies (ET)
• Western Conservatives Find Asylum In The Russian Federation (SCF)

 

 

 

 

Newt

Judge+Sachs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866257322798100761

Putin

Freak out

Elon AI

 

 

 

 

“..the first Democrat to join the House’s newly-formed DOGE caucus..”

• Pressure Mounts For Support Of Trump’s Cabinet Picks During Honeymoon (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump seems to finally be enjoying the honeymoon period he didn’t get after his 2016 victory, with Democrats publicly expressing willingness to work with him on key initiatives and public polling showing broad approval of his plans. After winning the White House the first time, Trump didn’t experience the traditional polling bump and sense of public optimism that often comes with a new president. The post-2024 transition period, however, has been discernibly different. In a recent Rasmussen Reports survey, 55% of voters expressed the belief that Trump’s election win had given him a mandate to implement his agenda, while 32% disagreed and 13% were unsure. A separate Napolitan Institute survey, found that 53% approved of how Trump is handling the transition while 43% disapproved.

As he goes to war with some Senate Democrats and moderate Republicans over his Cabinet nominees, public support for his agenda seems to be giving him momentum to push through the controversial personnel picks who will implement it. Some Democrats, moreover, have expressed openness to specific nominees and interest in participating in some of his initiatives. The incoming commander-in-chief has repeatedly pointed to his landslide electoral victory that saw him carry both the Electoral College and the popular vote to support claims of a mandate for change. To that end, he has selected nominees for key departments with unconventional backgrounds and has rattled upper chamber lawmakers in doing so. The confirmation hearings won’t begin until January, but in the meantime, lawmakers face a pressure campaign from Trump supporters to get on board with his efforts.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., last week became the first Democrat to join the House’s newly-formed DOGE caucus, a group of lawmakers dedicated to trimming the size of the government and working with Trump’s planned Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). “I’ve been clear that there are ways we can reorganize our government to make it work better for the American people,” he said at the time. “The Caucus should look at the bureaucracy that the DHS has become and include recommendations to make Secret Service and FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] independent federal agencies with a direct report to the White House.” Potentially driving lawmakers like Moskowitz to get on board with the DOGE agenda is public polling data suggesting it enjoys broad support. The Napolitan survey also found that 52% of Americans approve of the way Trump is managing the transition.

Some of the specific proposals from DOGE co-leaders Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, such as bringing federal employees back to the office, have majority support. Fifty-seven percent of Americans backed requiring federal employees to cease remote work, while just 28% opposed the move in the Napolitan survey. Fifty-three percent backed firing those who refused to work in-person. Another 60% supported moving some federal agencies out of the Washington, D.C., area. The public is, at best, cautiously optimistic about DOGE’s prospects, even if they support its efforts. Only 45% think the new department can “easily eliminate” trillions in waste. Forty-nine percent think eliminating waste fraud and abuse will balance the budget.

At least some of Trump’s cabinet picks seem to have picked up support from upper chamber Democrats, notably Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., whom he tapped for Secretary of State. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., had positive words for the Florida Republican, as did other lawmakers across the aisle. “Unsurprisingly, the other team’s pick will have political differences than my own,” Fetterman said. “That being said, my colleague [Rubio] is a strong choice and I look forward to voting for his confirmation.” Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., moreover, has also expressed interest in Rubio’s potential confirmation. “I look forward to talking to him. You know, Marco Rubio, you have strange bedfellows, and you have strange alliances,” she said.

Fetterman also expressed openness to Dr. Mehmet Oz to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Oz and Fetterman squared off for one of the Keystone State’s Senate seats in 2022. Fetterman insisted he doesn’t have “any kind of bitterness” toward Oz and was “open to dialogue” on the issues relevant to CMS. To be sure, Democrats haven’t signed up to back some of his more contentious nominees. Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, R, had to drop his bid for Attorney General in the face of intransigent Democrats and moderate Republicans who refused to support him.Now, Defense Secretary-designate Pete Hegseth faces uncertain prospects as Democrats largely oppose him and some of the same Republicans concerned with Gaetz have not committed to his confirmation.

Read more …

“A warrior whose vote cannot be bought, and whose integrity cannot be folded,” the letter reads. “We are honored to call her one of our own.”

• 250 Conservative Veterans Sign Letter Backing Tulsi Gabbard Nomination (Hill)

More than 250 veterans have signed a letter supporting former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), President-elect Trump’s nominee to be director of national intelligence. The letter offers a fierce defense of Gabbard’s “lifelong devotion to service” and blasts critics who call into question her loyalty. “We are appalled by the baseless attacks questioning Tulsi’s loyalty to our great nation. For over 20 years and across multiple combat deployments, Tulsi has risked her life to defend the safety, security and freedom of the American people,” the letter reads. “These attacks insult not only her, but every one of us veterans who have served our country.” The support comes as Gabbard faces growing scrutiny for her past comments on Moscow and her 2017 visit with the former Syrian dictator, Bashar Assad.

Gabbard — who served in the House for eight years as a Democrat — has made remarks about the Russia-Ukraine war that were sympathetic to Moscow and echoed by Russian state news, which has praised her nomination. In the Middle East, Gabbard visited Syria in 2017 and said Assad was not an enemy of the U.S. — though she later labeled him a “brutal dictator.” The remarks have gained renewed attention in recent days, as the Syrian government collapsed and Assad was driven out of the country by rebels. The letter comes days after a group of nearly 100 former national security officials issued their own letter about Gabbard, urging the Senate to “carefully scrutinize” the former congresswoman. They raised concerns about her experience level, her past comments and meeting with Assad, and that she has “publicly cast doubt on U.S. intelligence reports.”

“Her sympathy for dictators like Vladimir Putin and Assad raises questions about her judgment and fitness,” the letter last week read. The veterans, in their letter Monday, push back against “so-called ‘experts’ in Washington” who have criticized Gabbard, saying their attacks are “baseless lies and smears.” “Unable and unwilling to challenge the substance of her views, her critics resort to baseless lies and smears, exposing the weakness of their arguments,” the letter reads. “Tulsi’s patriotism, shaped on the battlefield, mirrors the values and aspirations of the American people far more than the failed policies of so-called ‘experts’ in Washington, who have been part of the problem for too long.”

The veterans praise Trump in the letter for selecting Gabbard as the nominee, saying, “As Director of National Intelligence, she will be a fearless reformer and a true patriot, ensuring that the intelligence apparatus serves the American people and protects our Republic.” “We are deeply grateful to President Trump for appointing Tulsi Gabbard to this critical role and proud to stand beside her—a leader whose courage and convictions we know firsthand. A warrior whose vote cannot be bought, and whose integrity cannot be folded,” the letter reads. “We are honored to call her one of our own.” The letter was signed by former acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, both of whom served for short periods of time in the first Trump administration. Reps. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) and Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) signed the letter, as did Rep.-elect Abe Hamadeh (R-Ariz.).

Read more …

“They take something, then add anonymous sources, and contortions, and flat-out lies and then they try to try you in the media..”

• Pete Hegseth Lashes Out At Media ‘Smear’ Campaign (RT)

Donald Trump’s nominee to be US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, has accused the media of staging a libel-based show trial to prevent him from becoming the next Pentagon chief. The US president-elect’s naming of Hegseth has led to a series of negative news reports that have raised questions about his fitness for the job and likelihood of being confirmed by the Senate. Among the accusations leveled at the army veteran and television presenter are alcohol abuse and sexual misconduct. In 2017, then Fox News host Hegseth was accused of raping an unnamed woman after a Republican convention in California. Police investigated the claim and did not file any charges. It was reported recently that Hegseth paid the woman an undisclosed sum, and both parties signed a confidentiality agreement. In an interview with Fox News on Monday, Hegseth insisted that “the left” is trying to use the case to stage a show trial in the media.

”This is what the left does… It’s the anatomy of a smear. They take something, then add anonymous sources, and contortions, and flat-out lies and then they try to try you in the media before you can even get into the doors with senators,” he said.Hegseth went on to say that Trump urged him to “keep fighting” and “stand up for the change that needs to come to the Defense Department.” During his re-election campaign, Trump accused the Democrats of damaging America’s standing on the world stage and vowed to restore the country’s prestige under a “peace through strength” banner.Under the US constitution, presidential appointments to significant offices must be confirmed by the upper chamber of the US Congress, the Senate. Historically, the Senate has confirmed most nominations, with only three exceptions in the past 100 years.

Hegseth

Read more …

“The most effective army is the one that the enemy does not want to face on the battle [field]..”

• Pete Hegseth Will Be Confirmed As Secretary of Defense, Predicts His Lawyer (JTN)

Timothy Parlatore, the attorney for Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth, on Monday said that he believes his client has enough support in the Senate to get him confirmed early next year. President-elect Donald Trump nominated Hegseth, a former Fox News host, for the position last month, but reports of allegations of sexual misconduct and heavy drinking have threatened to derail his confirmation. Parlatore said that the nominee has had some positive discussions with Republican senators in recent weeks that have focused on policy, which have helped them feel more confident in confirming Hegseth. The lawyer did not have a specific count for how many Republicans are now on board with Hegseth, but said his team was “feeling very good” about the numbers.

The attorney also said that Hegseth had a good discussion with Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst, who described the conversation on Monday as “encouraging.” “I think that once … you kind of strip away all of the anonymous, you know, fake claims, then that gives him the opportunity to sit down with Senator Ernst and others and start talking about policy,” Parlatore said on the “Just The News, No Noise” TV Show. “Let’s talk about what we’re going to actually do to improve the Pentagon. And I think that that is one place where the two of them really have found common ground.” Parlatore said that some of the policy ideas that Hegseth has would get “politics” out of the Defense Department, and that he is focused on returning the department to military readiness and projecting a strong military to deter enemies from attacking. “The most effective army is the one that the enemy does not want to face on the battle [field],” Parlatore said.

Read more …

“.. because the DOJ sought court approval ex parte to keep its surveillance secret, he wasn’t alerted until earlier this fall, six years after the initial subpoena.”

• DOJ Spied On Kash Patel, Staffers Without Telling Courts (JTN)

The Justice Department spied on two House members and and several congressional staffers in a leak investigation without telling the courts, the agency’s inspector general found in a sweeping investigation released Tuesday. As a result, the department obtained phone records from the two members of Congress and 43 staff members including President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for FBI director, Kash Patel, who worked as a staffer on the GOP-led House Intelligence Committee at the time. The department initiated the probe to investigate leaks to the media of FBI classified information as part of the now-discredited Trump-Russia probe which had recently been shared with Congress.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz found that the Justice Department, in filings with the court, did not reference “the fact that they related to requests for records of Members of Congress or congressional staffers,” despite implicating constitutional separation of powers between two government branches. Patel, who is poised to become the new director of the FBI if confirmed, previously sued former Trump Justice Department officials and FBI Director Christopher Wray, accusing them of violating his Fourth Amendment right to protection from unreasonable searches and seizures when they tried to obtain Patel’s personal records, Just the News previously reported. Patel said he was completely unaware of the subpoena until December 2022, when Google notified him about it.

Another former staffer, Jason Foster, previously told Just the News that he confirmed that the government successfully asked a federal court to hide its spying on Congress for five consecutive years. Foster is now the head of the Empower Oversight whistleblower center. In 2017 at the time of the secret surveillance, he was the chief investigative counsel for Sen. Chuck Grassley on the Senate Judiciary Committee. The seizure of his personal data occurred in 2017 while he worked for the Senate, and ordinarily under the original court order, Foster would have been notified a year later. But because the DOJ sought court approval ex parte to keep its surveillance secret, he wasn’t alerted until earlier this fall, six years after the initial subpoena.

Read more …

He should not be allowed to keep this hanging over Trump’s head.

• How Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg Plans To Keep Trump Case Alive (ZH)

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg – who had a Biden DOJ plant in his legal case against former President Donald Trump – is trying to ensure his hush money case doesn’t vanish into thin air as Trump prepares for his return to the White House. According to court filings revealed Tuesday, Bragg’s office is fiercely opposed to dismissing the case outright but is open to pausing proceedings while Trump serves his second term as president. The 82-page legal brief, prosecutors’ most detailed argument yet, stops short of recommending an explicit course of action but outlines several ways to keep the case alive. Among them: delaying sentencing until after Trump leaves office in 2029 or freezing the case while leaving the jury’s guilty verdict intact, The Hill reports.

“The extreme remedy of dismissing the indictment and vacating the jury verdict is not warranted in light of multiple alternative accommodations that would fully address the concerns raised by presidential immunity,” wrote Assistant District Attorney Christopher Conroy. The filing comes as Trump, now president-elect, wages a legal battle to quash the 34 felony charges stemming from hush money payments to an adult film star. Trump’s lawyers claim his status as president-elect grants him immunity and demands immediate dismissal. Prosecutors, however, aren’t buying it. They argue that immunity doesn’t apply until Trump is inaugurated, meaning the case could theoretically proceed to sentencing before January 20, 2025 — a prospect Trump has vowed to fight tooth and nail. Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over Trump’s trial, will now decide the case’s fate, with a ruling expected any day.

The DA’s office acknowledged the complications of prosecuting a sitting president but stopped short of saying the case should be completely shelved. Trump was convicted by a Manhattan Jury ‘of his peers’ on 34 counts of falsifying business records, however his reelection to the highest office in the land has put a damper on prosecutors’ plans. Sentencing was initially scheduled for last month, only to be postponed indefinitely by Judge Merchan, making it increasingly unlikely Trump will face punishment anytime soon. That would leave open the possibility that Trump could still proceed to sentencing in 2029, after he leaves office. Alternatively, state prosecutors said the judge could terminate the case without tossing Trump’s conviction, noting a jury verdict removed the presumption of innocence, he was never sentenced and his conviction was “neither affirmed nor reversed” on appeal because of presidential immunity. -The Hill

Trump’s legal team is crying foul, claiming the prosecution disrupts his transition efforts and his ability to govern effectively. “Wrongly continuing proceedings in this failed lawfare case disrupts President Trump’s transition efforts and his preparations to wield the full Article II executive power authorized by the Constitution pursuant to the overwhelming national mandate granted to him by the American people on November 5, 2024,” Trump’s attorneys fumed in a recent filing. Prosecutors hit back, accusing Trump of using delay tactics to muddy the waters. “Having filed those motions to dismiss and then sought repeated adjournments of sentencing to permit their determination by this Court, it is particularly brazen for defendant to argue that the Supremacy Clause bars the Court from taking any action on the motions defendant himself filed,” Conroy wrote.

Read more …

“.. the judge had wanted the jury to convict Penny, but that jurors, who ride the subways, understood Penny acted to save others.”

• Giuliani Says Jury Verdict In Penny’s Case Is A Black Eye To Bragg (JTN)

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Monday night claimed that a New York City jury sent a strong message to the city’s ruling elite by finding Daniel Penny clear of any wrongdoing in the death of Jordan Neely. Penny, a former Marine, was acquitted by the Manhattan jury earlier Monday, after he kneeled on Neely’s neck on a subway last year, which prosecutors argued resulted in the man’s death. The jury was deadlocked on a more serious charge last week, which resulted in the charge being dismissed, but they only debated the lesser charge briefly on Monday before finding Penny innocent. Giuliani said that the verdict was a “shocker” given how fast it was reached, but that it was “great day … for justice.” He also claimed the judge had wanted the jury to convict Penny, but that jurors, who ride the subways, understood Penny acted to save others.

“The jury of New Yorkers, and they ride the subways and you can be the most left wing wacko [but] you ride the subways, you’re scared,” Giuliani said on the “Just The News, No Noise” TV show. “And Penny, they know Penny did the right thing. This is a person to person, human reaction above the heads of the fools that have run the city for so long. The crazy, silly, criminal-loving liberals.” Giuliani also said that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg should have resigned or been removed from office the second he claimed he would not prosecute people “for beating up cops” or “resisting arrest.” “He’s probably not prosecuted half the cases that come before him,” Giuliani said. “He’s responsible for any number of murders in New York, and beatings. There are probably seven to 10,000 criminals walking the streets of New York that would not [be] if I were the mayor or Mike Bloomberg and Ray Kelly.”

The former mayor added that Neely, who has a history of mental illness and had been arrested himself in the past, should not have been on the street to begin with. “The person who caused this is number one, the New York system, and then the people who didn’t deal with his mental illness,” Giuliani said. “Mr. Penny didn’t have anything to do with this. He just tried to save people. [Neely’s] father had years to try to save us from this guy, and didn’t do a damn thing.”

Read more …

“..the regime of Vladimir Zelensky has completely lost its legitimacy and, as a result, its ability to be negotiated with.”

• Russia Close To Winning Ukraine Conflict – Spy Chief (RT)

Kiev’s military is now close to complete collapse, the head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), Sergey Naryshkin has said, adding that the current Ukrainian government has completely lost its legitimacy and is unfit for talks. In an interview with the Russian magazine Razvedchik (“Spy”) released on Tuesday, Naryshkin reiterated that the Ukraine conflict is essentially not a battle against Kiev but rather a struggle against the collective West, and that Russia’s freedom and sovereignty is at stake. The intel chief expressed optimism about Russia’s progress on the battlefield. “The frontline situation is not in Kiev’s favor. The strategic initiative in all areas belongs to us, we are close to achieving our goals, while the Ukrainian army is on the verge of collapse.”

According to Naryshkin, the regime of Vladimir Zelensky has completely lost its legitimacy and, as a result, its ability to be negotiated with.” The Ukrainian leader’s presidential term expired this past May, after he refused to hold a new election, citing the ongoing martial law. Russian forces have been making steady progress in recent weeks. Ukrainian commanders, meanwhile, have been complaining about a lack of manpower and exhaustion in their ranks, despite the draft age having been lowered from 27 to 25 and mobilization rules tightened this past spring. Moscow has said that its main goals in the conflict are Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification. It has also signaled that it is ready to declare an immediate ceasefire and begin peace talks as soon as Ukraine withdraws from all Russian territories, including Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye Regions.

Read more …

If woke is the only identity you have left…

• Obstruction of Immigration Enforcement Could Prove Costly for Citizens (Turley)

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston recently became the latest Democratic leader to engage in a chest-pounding call to arms in resistance to the incoming Trump administration’s plan to deport people who entered the United States unlawfully. While a post-election poll by YouGov for CBS News shows that a massive 73% of adults want President-elect Donald Trump to prioritize the repatriation of illegal migrants, the mayor pledged to not only have Denver police “stationed at the county line to keep (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) out” but also that “you would have 50,000 Denverites there.” Johnston said it would be like a “Tiananmen Square moment” and answered yes when questioned whether he’d be ready to go to jail. That moment soon passed, however, as lawyers apparently explained to the mayor that armed resistance to the federal government is often called – wait for it – insurrection.

It appears that Johnston was not keen on becoming the Jefferson Davis of the left, so he backpedaled, stating, “Would I have taken it back if I could? Yes, I probably wouldn’t have used that image.” Yet, Johnston is not alone in pledging resistance to repatriation efforts. Cities are reaffirming or adopting sanctuary city status, including most recently Boston. The cities pledge to continue their ban on any cooperation with the federal government in detaining or removing unlawful migrants. Other mayors are pledging to use city funds to pay for the defense costs of those fighting deportation. The doubling down on sanctuary city promises will likely draw more migrants to those communities, which some mayors have welcomed despite the heavy costs of housing, education and other city services.

Immigration proved to be one of the top issues for voters in this year’s election, which brought control of both houses of Congress and the White House to the GOP. Citizens overwhelmingly supported new tough immigration measures, including deportations. With Democratic cities joining the “resistance,” they may find the costs even higher. Congress cannot compel cooperation without triggering constitutional concerns. In Federalist #46, James Madison recognized the right of state officials to oppose federal policies, including “the refusal to co-operate with officers of the Union.” In cases such as Printz v. United States (1997), which involved federal requirements that states cooperate on gun control measures, the Supreme Court enforced an anti-commandeering line that allowed states to refuse such federal orders.

However, this is a two-way street. Just as cities and states do not have to carry water for the federal government, the federal government does not have to supply the water to the states. The second Trump administration and Congress can play hardball by barring federal funds in various areas for these cities. With their status as sanctuary cities, housing, law enforcement and social programming costs will continue to rise. Many of those budgets are heavily infused with federal funding. However, if cities resist or frustrate federal policy, there are ample reasons why the federal government might restrict funding. Such measures can go too far. The Supreme Court has warned that financial penalties can be so coercive that they effectively commandeer states. However, the federal government is not required to spend money on services where costs are rising at least in part because of resistance to federal law.

Under constitutional law, the federal government cannot be a bully, but it does not have to be a chump.It’s clear that elected leaders like Johnston did not think very long or well before starting a war with the incoming administration. In addition to the possible loss of federal funds, acts of resistance can trigger criminal liability if they amount to actively shielding or hiding unlawful migrants sought by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Under federal immigration law, it is a felony when anyone in “knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation.”

That is not triggered by a simple refusal to cooperate, but some officials have been accused of crossing the line, including state judges. It also could endanger private groups that work closely with these cities in housing and transporting unlawful migrants. Moreover, as I wrote recently, Trump can cite a curious ally in this fight: Barack Obama. During the Obama administration, the federal government largely triumphed over states in barring their interference with federal immigration policies. Back then, Democrats supported President Obama in claiming that the federal government had overriding authority on immigration in cases like Arizona v. United States. The pressure on cities could grow if the Trump administration prioritizes members of violent gangs such as Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) or Tren de Aragua for deportation. To resist those efforts would be politically unpalatable in cities dealing with crime associated with such gangs. It could take years to hash out these efforts. However, if Denver’s Mayor Johnston is any measure of the resistance, the chest-pounding may decline when the federal funding dries up.

Read more …

“Last year, only 13 senators voted against the Military Industrial Complex and a defense budget full of waste and fraud. That must change.”

• Bernie Sanders Says Musk Is Right On Military Spending (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency has energized Republicans, but it’s also receiving attention from some liberal lawmakers, including Bernie Sanders. Sanders, the independent from Vermont, wants to help Trump’s DOGE, which is co-led by Tesla CEO Elon Musk and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy. Sanders has his eye on the U.S. military budget. “Elon Musk is right,” Sanders wrote on X. “The Pentagon, with a budget of $886 billion, just failed its 7th audit in a row. It’s lost track of billions. Last year, only 13 senators voted against the Military Industrial Complex and a defense budget full of waste and fraud. That must change.”

Sanders’ comments come before the U.S. House is set to vote on a compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes nearly $900 billion to support U.S. military service members, infrastructure, and defense capabilities during the 2025 fiscal year. The 1,813-page document released Saturday by the Senate and House Armed Services Committees outlines U.S. defense policy priorities and their costs for 2025. Most of the proposed funds, $849.9 billion out of the $895.2 billion topline, would go to programs within the Department of Defense. Ramaswamy and Musk wrote in a November op-ed that the military is on their list. “The Pentagon recently failed its seventh consecutive audit, suggesting that the agency’s leadership has little idea how its annual budget of more than $800 billion is spent,” they wrote.

The U.S. Department of Defense’s annual audit once again resulted in a disclaimer opinion. That means the federal government’s largest agency can’t fully explain its spending. The disclaimer this year was expected. And it’s expected again next year. The Pentagon previously said it will be able to accurately account for its spending by 2027. Musk has gone even farther in his criticism of military spending. He called the military’s most expensive ever project, the F-35 stealth fighter, “obsolete.” “The F-35 design was broken at the requirements level, because it was required to be too many things to too many people,” Musk wrote on X. “This made it an expensive & complex jack of all trades, master of none. Success was never in the set of possible outcomes. And manned fighter jets are obsolete in the age of drones anyway. Will just get pilots killed.”

In May, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found the cost of the Pentagon’s most expensive weapon system was projected to increase by more than 40% despite plans to use the stealth fighter less, in part because of reliability issues. The U.S. Department of Defense’s F-35 Lightning II is the most advanced and costly weapon system in the U.S. arsenal. It’s a joint, multinational program that includes the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, seven international partners and foreign military sales customers. The Pentagon has about 630 F-35s. It plans to buy about 1,800 more. And it intends to use them through 2088. DOD estimates the F-35 program will cost over $2 trillion to buy, operate, and sustain over its lifetime. The Pentagon hasn’t responded to Musk’s comments. Late last month, a reporter asked Defense Department Press Secretary Air Force Major General Pat Ryder about Musk’s comments on the F-35.

“Yeah, as I’m sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently a private citizen, I’m not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35.” Trump set lofty goals for the new group. “It will become, potentially, ‘The Manhattan Project,’ of our time,” Trump’s announcement said. “Republican politicians have dreamed about the objectives of ‘DOGE’ for a very long time.” The original Manhattan Project was a research and development project during the second World War that led to the creation of nuclear weapons. Ramaswamy and Musk have previously outlined their plans for DOGE, which could include mass federal layoffs and reductions in federal regulations. Musk and Ramaswamy said they won’t rely on action from Congress and will instead “focus particularly on driving change through executive action based on existing legislation rather than by passing new laws.”

Read more …

There will be another accident. And then?

• Boeing Reportedly Restarts 737 Max Production (ZH)

Boeing has reportedly resumed production of its 737 Max aircraft at its Renton factory in Seattle, Washington, a little more than a month after a seven-week strike by 33,000 unionized factory workers concluded with a new contract. This marks a critical step in the company’s recovery efforts during a particularly turbulent year. Reuters was the first to report on Boeing’s restart of production of its best-selling commercial jet. According to three sources familiar with the situation, production at the Renton factory resumed last Friday. “Production resumed on Friday, said one of the sources, who all spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak with media. Boeing declined to comment.” -RTRS. Analysts at Jefferies forecast that Boeing will likely average around 29 737 Max jets per month in 2025, falling far short of the company’s pre-restriction goal of 56.

Earlier this year, the FAA capped 737 Max production at 38 per month due to safety vulnerabilities within Boeing’s production line at Renton. Two Max crashes, Covid travel downturn, supply chain snarls, financial challenges, and multiple Max jet incidents — including a door panel blowout on an Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9 — have been mounting headwinds for the struggling planemaker. On top of this all, a seven-week strike sent the company to the brink of a devastating stall. The good news is that Boeing is under new leadership, with newly appointed CEO Kelly Ortberg dismantling disastrous DEI initiatives and shifting the focus to safety as the era of wokeism comes to an abrupt end. As of mid-November, Goldman’s Noah Poponak and Anthony Valentini still had a “Buy” rating on the planemaker with a 12-month price target of $200.

“Our 12-month price target of $200 is derived from targeting a 4.5% free cash flow yield on 2026E free cash, discounted back one year at 12%. Key risks: (1) the pace of air traffic growth, (2) supply chain ability to ramp-up production, and (3) contract operating performance within the defense segment,” the analysts said. Shares of Boeing were up 1% to $158 handle in premarket trading. However, on the year, shares were down 40%. Shares have been locked in a multi-year lateral between $100 and $250 following the Max jet crashes. FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker recently told Reuters that he wouldn’t be surprised if it took the company a couple of months to ramp production at Renton to the FAA’s production limit.

Read more …

“[Elon] Musk put the GEC on the map in March 2023, when he deemed it to be the “worst offender in U.S. government”..

• State Dep. Scrambles To Scuttle $100M Censorship Network Before Trump (ZH)

The State Department revealed in a Monday filing that they are “substantially likely” to shut down their $100M Global Engagement Center (GEC), which was revealed in early 2023 to have been funding a “disinformation” tracking group which worked to pressure advertisers to demonetize outlets it accuses of spreading “disinformation.” Except, they’re really just “realigning” the “Center’s staff and funding to other Department offices and bureaus for foreign information manipulation.” The move comes amid a lawsuit from Texas AG Ken Paxton and several conservative media outlets listed a GEC-funded “dynamic exclusion list” of websites it doesn’t like, which it would then distribute to ad tech companies – such as Microsoft’s Xandr – in order to try and “defund and downrank these worst offenders,” and deprive said sites of ad revenue.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1864036564579561767

As Headline News’ Ken Silva notes further; it’s unclear how the GEC’s closure will affect the lawsuit. Monday’s court filing said lawyers for all parties are still discussing the implications. [Elon] Musk put the GEC on the map in March 2023, when he deemed it to be the “worst offender in U.S. government” when it comes to censorship and media manipulation. According to revelations from the “Twitter Files”—a trove of internal records about the censorship decisiosn made within the social media company—the GEC funded groups such as the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, which in turn compiled blacklists of Twitter accounts that were supposedly tied to foreign disinformation campaigns. The Digital Forensic Research Lab sent those blacklists to Twitter so that the company could deactivate the accounts listed.

Federalist senior legal correspondent Margot Cleveland further revealed in April 2023 that the GEC marketed anti-conservative censorship products to private-sector tech firms. Cleveland also noted that the GEC apparently worked with infamous FBI Agent Elvis Chan, who was revealed in the Twitter Files to be in constant touch with the social media firm about censorship issues. Despite those scandals, Democrats had been pushing to renew the GEC’s $100 million budget before it expires at the end of the year. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who drafted the original legislation in 2016 that led to the GEC, argued last year that the censorship network was crucial to counter foreign disinformation. “There’s no way to combat Russian and Chinese misinformation without the GEC,” Murphy insisted.

Read more …

The Russians weren’t going to save Assad yet another time. Cost/benefit.

• Putin-the-Unready Is Beginning to be Held Accountable (Paul Craig Roberts)

John Helmer’s December 8 report from Moscow substantiates my conclusion that the Russian government’s inability to acknowledge reality, instead relying on agreements with Russia’s enemies, results in failure . In Ukraine by trying to minimize conflict, the Kremlin maximized conflict. In Syria relying on diplomatic rather than military means resulted in a massive strategic defeat for Russia and Iran. The Middle East, where the correlation of forces were moving against US/Israeli dominance, has been lost to Greater Israel and US control of oil flows and waterways. From Moscow John Helmer reports that recriminations are running high for Putin’s loss of Syria. And it is not only Putin who is being held accountable but also the commanders of Russia’s forces in Syria, head of the General Staff General Valery Gerasimov, Russian military intelligence (GRU), and the Defense Ministry.

They are all damned for failure to detect, warn, and act to prevent the Israeli-American-Turkish overthrow of Assad and the Syrian government. The same group of failures are damned for failure to prevent the Israeli air force from preventing the resupply of Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards from providing reinforcements. Putin, like American presidents, puts the defense of Israel before the interests of his own country. Putin is so fearful of offending Israel that he constantly refused to provide his Syrian ally air defense from Israeli attacks. Now that Putin and Lavrov, essentially two 20th century American liberals, have brought a massive strategic defeat down on their heads and Iran’s, Russia’s last remaining Middle East ally, it is likely that Netanyahu and Trump’s Zionist appointees will behave more aggressively against Iran and Russia.

The Zionist are on a roll, having reversed their declining fortunes in one fell swoop while again Putin sat on his butt. As much as I admire Putin, he is certainly not proactive, or sometimes even aware, and thus lacks the leadership ability that a leader of a threatened country needs. Putin would be perfect in peace time, but he is not up to dealing with an existential threat. Putin and Lavrov are too fearful of offending someone to be able to act. I don’t know how far the recriminations will go. But if Washington should also succeed with its color revolution in Georgia, the Zionist neoconservatives could succeed in their plan to destabilize Putin. Whether Putin’s fall would help the neoconservative agenda depends on his replacement. The chance is high that Putin would be replaced with a more determined war leader. Regardless, the Russian defeat has caused a loss of confidence in Putin’s leadership, and it will encourage more provocations that are not good for peace.

Read more …

“If Tesla does become the world’s most valuable company by far, that short position will bankrupt even Bill Gates..”

• Elon Musk Jokes Bill Gates Could Go “Bankrupt” On Short Tesla Bet (ZH)

The rivalry between two of America’s top billionaires, Elon Musk and Bill Gates, continued on Tuesday morning when Musk jokingly suggested on X that Gates’ alleged short position on Tesla might lead to his financial demise. “If Tesla does become the world’s most valuable company by far, that short position will bankrupt even Bill Gates,” Musk wrote on X, referring to a multi-billion dollar equity short Gates put on Tesla a couple of years ago.

According to Walter Isaacson’s 2023 biography of Musk, Gates held an undisclosed short position in Tesla, allegedly worth billions. In late 2023, Musk wrote on X: “Gates placed a massive bet on Tesla dying when our company was at one of its weakest moments several years ago. Such a big short position also drives the stock down for everyday investors,” adding, “To the best of my knowledge, Gates *still* has that massive bet against Tesla on the table. Someone should ask him if he does.” Musk noted, “The lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy of Gates who had the nerve to ask me to donate to his mostly window-dressing environmental causes, while simultaneously aiming to make $500M from Tesla’s demise, boggles the mind …”

[..] There is still no word on whether Gates has doubled or tripled down – or possibly cut his Tesla short bet. Tesla shares have surged 62.5% this year, primarily due to President-elect Donald Trump’s victory and Musk’s increasing relationship with the incoming administration. In terms of wealth, Bloomberg data shows Musk is number one on the Billionaire Index at $376.2 billion, while Gates is number six at $165.9 billion. Regarding Tesla, the company’s market capitalization is nearing $1.3 trillion, and it ranks eighth on the list of the world’s most valuable companies. Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas wrote in a June note that Tesla is much more than an EV company, with tailwinds in the powering up America theme in the era of AI data centers. Naomi Seibt, a German teen who denounces the woke agenda, wrote on X, “Can’t imagine a greater form of retribution than bankrupting the vaccine vegan.” Another X user asked: “Why would someone who constantly talks about protecting the environment short the stock of one of the most environmentally friendly companies on the planet?”

Read more …

“It’s a disfavored practice to go to a second Supreme Court justice after the first one has turned down the request, so it was a long shot..”

• SCOTUS Asked to Block State From Probing Doctors Who Question COVID Policies (ET)

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas this week revived an emergency application to block the Washington Medical Commission from investigating licensed physicians in the state over their criticism of COVID-19 policies. The Washington state commission deems the doctors’ dissenting views on the disease as potentially dangerous misinformation that should be suppressed. The physicians counter that just because they have medical licenses they don’t forfeit their free speech rights under the First Amendment. The Dec. 4 order by Thomas regarding the application in Stockton v. Ferguson was unusual in that Justice Elena Kagan rejected the same application on Nov. 20. The applicants renewed their request in a court filing directed to Thomas on Nov. 22. Supreme Court rules allow an application that has been denied by one justice to be presented to another justice. Neither Thomas nor Kagan explained their respective decisions.

The application is now scheduled to be considered by all nine justices at the court’s private judicial conference on Jan. 10, 2025. The justices could grant an injunction against the commission, deny the injunction, or schedule the case for oral argument. As of Dec. 6, the Supreme Court had not requested a reply from the commission. The application was brought by former professional basketball player John Stockton along with Drs. Richard Eggleston, Thomas Siler, and Daniel Moynihan and another 50 unidentified medical doctors, as well as Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. President-elect Donald Trump, who will be inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2025, has nominated Kennedy to be secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Kennedy, an attorney, is also listed as co-counsel on the application.

The applicants filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, which denied the injunction on May 22. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the injunction on Sept. 3. An appeal remains pending in the Ninth Circuit. The application states that it concerns the state’s program that targets “Washington-licensed physicians for expressing public views on COVID-19 that diverge from prevailing orthodoxy.” The state calls the doctors’ viewpoint “misinformation” and claims that it may “regulate this speech,” which is something the Supreme Court ruled in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra (2018) that it cannot do, according to the application. “The Court should speak clearly and decisively to state actors, professional organizations, other non-state actors, and the national media: Public speech does not lose its constitutional protection from government action simply because it is uttered by a healthcare professional, even if it is at odds with medical orthodoxy,” the application stated.

In September 2021, based on its authority under Washington state’s Uniform Disciplinary Act, the Washington Medical Commission began enforcing a policy against doctors “for public speech critical of COVID-19 policies,” which has resulted in “disciplinary actions against at least ten healthcare practitioners,” it stated. Around the time the enforcement actions began, Washington Secretary of Health Dr. Umair A. Shah said, “It has never been more vital for trusted healthcare professionals to band together against the threat of misinformation.” “As we battle COVID-19, with so many tools at our disposal to protect ourselves and others, it is viral misinformation, rooted in unfounded scientific claims, that often stands in our way.”

The commission is prosecuting Eggleston and Siler for opinion articles that they wrote in The Lewiston Tribune and American Thinker, respectively, that criticized COVID-19 policies. The applicant Children’s Health Defense, which has a Washington state medical doctor as a member, joined the application because “[the nonprofit group] is actively involved in advocacy and protecting freedom of speech and Covid vaccine related issues and educates the public on these issues,” the application stated. The applicants’ attorney, Richard Jaffe of Sacramento, California, told The Epoch Times that he is “hopeful” about the application. “It’s a disfavored practice to go to a second Supreme Court justice after the first one has turned down the request, so it was a long shot,” he said.

But Thomas “seems to think it’s an important issue” that needs to be heard, Jaffe said. There are many articles in the mainstream media “talking about how they’re not sanctioning enough doctors for speaking out in public against vaccination or repeated boostering,” he said. “The country needs some guidance from the Supreme Court as to what the First Amendment means in terms of a physician’s free speech,” Jaffe said.

Read more …

“Offering asylum to these foreigners is simply giving ordinary people a chance to live in freedom..”

• Western Conservatives Find Asylum In The Russian Federation (SCF)

Defending family and traditional values has long been a central guideline of Russian policy, both domestically and diplomatically. Moscow is expanding its efforts to counteract the degrading cultural influence of the West in the country, as well as offering a safe haven for foreigners interested in living in accordance with their ancestral values. Recently, President Vladimir Putin signed a decree that makes it easier to obtain visas and citizenship for conservative-minded citizens from countries of degrading neoliberal ideologies. The goal of the Russian initiative is above all humanitarian, providing an opportunity for like-minded citizens to live in peace, away from the psychological and ideological challenges imposed by Western countries that have adhered to the so-called “woke agenda”.

As part of this initiative, Russian state organizations have been implementing various initiatives to provide refuge to foreigners interested in living in the country. A major press conference was recently held, bringing together Russian and foreign citizens interested in sharing their experiences of living in accordance with traditional values in Russia. The conference was led by State Duma deputy Maria Butina, who currently heads the Russian Parliament’s Committee on International Relations, and brought together a number of foreigners and members of civil society, including businesspeople from different sectors. Together with Russian authorities and journalists, foreigners who have taken refuge in Russia were able to share their impressions of life in the country, job opportunities and other personal experiences.

Among the foreign citizens who participated in the event were some public figures, such as the German journalist Anna Lipp, who suffered severe persecution in her country due to her support for the special military operation in Ukraine, and Martin Held, an Austrian citizen and author of the social project “Moya Rossiya”. In addition to them, the Frenchman Alexander Stefanesco, businessman and founder of the project “Ruspatriation”, also participated in the conference, as well as several other distinguished foreigners who were well received in Russia due to their common mentality with the local people. As a result of the conference’s discussion, participants announced the creation of the “Welcome to Russia!” project, which aims to show Russian reality to foreigners interested in living in the country, as well as to assist with processes such as legal bureaucracy and cultural adaptation.

In the end, Russians and foreigners showed interest in contributing to the arrival of more conservative-minded citizens in Russia, which is welcomed by both migrants, who can finally live the way they believe is right, and by natives, who can interact with like-minded foreigners and develop deep cultural ties that strengthen Russia’s image as a civilizational pivot. There is certainly a deep strategic Russian interest in receiving such immigrants. In recent years, Russia has faced a major challenge in integrating thousands of immigrants from the post-Soviet space, mainly from the Caucasus and Central Asia, into its society. On the other hand, Western immigrants, who are almost always Christian and conservative, certainly show fewer cultural barriers to adaptation than Central Asians, which facilitates a balance in the migration scenario, avoiding tensions in public opinion regarding the reception of foreigners.

However, the main point of the Russian project is humanitarian. Conservative people are being persecuted in the Western Hemisphere simply because they do not agree with so-called “progressive” ideas, such as woke culture and the LGBT agenda. Offering asylum to these foreigners is simply giving ordinary people a chance to live in freedom, without the state violating their values and beliefs. In the past, the US has created a strong anti-Russian propaganda campaign advocating a false conservatism, which it justified by the claim that the USSR and post-Soviet Russia were examples of moral degradation. History has shown which side in the world arena really defends traditional values. Today, it is clear to an increasing number of Western citizens that it is not in the US or Europe that Christianity and conservatism are truly valued and protected.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Cat maze
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866310477749555559

 

 

Grass
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866327339568976354

 

 

Octopus
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866290032614809600

 

 

Spike
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866273168563876321

 

 

Change

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle November 7 2024

Nov 072024
 
 November 7, 2024  Posted by at 9:45 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  114 Responses »


Edouard Manet Berthe Morisot with a bouquet of violets 1872

 

• A Good Morning in America (Paul Craig Roberts)
• If The Election Outcome Is As I Expected .. (Bill Ackman)
• Trump’s Win Is A Victory For The Non-Brainwashed Americans (Marsden)
• Trump Has Sweeping Plans for His 2nd Administration (ET)
• Musk Reveals Plans For Trump Government (RT)
• The US Should Establish A Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (Corva)
• Trump Comeback Also Engineered A Significant Exodus From Democrat Party (JTN)
• The Thrill is Gone (Turley)
• DOJ Moving To Wind Down Trump Criminal Cases (NBC)
• Rachel Maddow Threatens Musk Over ‘Russia Ties’ (RT)
• 84-year-old Pelosi Projected To Win Reelection (RT)
• Trump to Seek ‘Pragmatic’ Deals, No Budget Money to Sustain Ukraine (Sp.)
• Dave Smith: Will Trump Be Able To End The War In Ukraine? (ZH)
• Biden To Speed Up Arms Deliveries To Ukraine – Media (RT)
• Von der Leyen To Prepare EU For War – Defense Commission Nominee (RT)
• How British Media Is Turning On Zelensky. And Why (Jay)
• German Government Has Collapsed (RT)

 

 

 

 

Jennings

Joe AI
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854068685930991952

Speech
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854087148552528041

JD
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854073924893757731

Tucker RFK

Wallace
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854048711547957374

Tucker Elon
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854017145119932876

Epstein

UK

Decency

Right to Exist
https://twitter.com/i/status/1853940077849641147

 

 

 

 

 

 

“America now has a chance for renewal if Trump doesn’t blow it in forgiving his enemies, who still intend to destroy him.”

• A Good Morning in America (Paul Craig Roberts)

I awoke this morning to Donald Trump’s victory. Apparently, the election was not close enough for the Democrats and media to steal it as they did in 2020. Trump’s victory is not only a defeat for Democrats but also a defeat for the ruling elite that pulls the strings of both political parties and a defeat for the American media that serves as an enforcer for the official narratives that serve the agendas of the elite. Trump’s victory is also a victory for the American people who love their country and respect the Constitution. It is their victory over the left-wing intellectuals and university law schools who have been working diligently to overturn the First and Fourth Amendments that are in the way of their revolutionary intentions that are clearly anti-American.

Trump’s determination and strength are rare. Trump was attacked viciously from day one of his first term. Hillary Clinton, the CIA, and the FBI fabricated a “Russian dossier” that alleged that Trump aided by “Russian interference in the election” stole the election from Hillary Clinton. Women were produced to make sexual allegations. The ruling elite made two attempts to impeach Trump. When Trump’s term expired, false claims buttressed by concocted allegations of mishandling national security documents and instigating an “insurrection” were turned into indictments. Democrat prosecutors and judges weaponized law to pursue the former president. The FBI staged a raid on Trump’s home. The corrupt American media poured lie upon lie.

Trump stood up to all of this. The people stayed with him, and he regained the office that had been stolen from him by utterly corrupt people. Trump seems to have won all sectors of the electorate except for college educated white liberal-left women, the most brainwashed and indoctrinated element in American society. I pity any man who marries one of them. America now has a chance for renewal if Trump doesn’t blow it in forgiving his enemies, who still intend to destroy him. The Democrat Party is no longer a political party. It is an ideological party with ideological agendas. It sees itself as a revolutionary force and has no intention of political comprise. If Trump repeats the mistakes of his first term, his victory will be pissed away.

Read more …

X thread.

“If, however, you have been active on @X for the last year, you have known the truth days, weeks and often months before the facts appear in the MSM..”

• If The Election Outcome Is As I Expected .. (Bill Ackman)

If the election outcome is as I expected, it should cause the large minority of the country who supported @KamalaHarris and predicted her victory to begin to question their sources of truth. Half the country has believed that @X is filled with mis- and disinformation, and that they could only therefore rely on The NY Times, MSNBC, CNN and other mainstream media for their news. And they did. If, however, you have been active on @X for the last year, you have known the truth days, weeks and often months before the facts appear in the MSM. The MSM excerpted, clipped and cut to defame @realDonaldTrump while claiming that @JoeBiden was fit as a fiddle. Then when Biden’s polls collapsed, @KamalaHarris was anointed the candidate and her hagiography was written with glowing acclaim from the press. But this could not hold as she ducked the media and held fast to the teleprompter.

Citizen journalists with their phone cameras in hand captured the real Kamala forcing her to defend her record and her plans in more media appearances. It did not go well and the public demanded to learn more so @KamalaHarris had to risk more unscripted media. The doom loop was underway with perhaps 60 Minutes as one of the more dramatic examples, even after CBS tried to save her, most glaringly by excerpting one answer to replace a word salad response to another. But the citizen journalists on @X quickly caught and outed this fraud and demanded a transcript. As many who supported Kamala began to realize that they have been misled, they became open to Trump as an alternative, but they didn’t want to rely on the media to understand him because they did not want to be misled again.

They wanted to hear the candidate in his own words and that is where @lexfridman and@joeroganhq long form podcasts came to the rescue. When Kamala was offered the same opportunities to explain herself, she rejected them. And the voting public could only draw a negative inference. When the story of this election is written, I expect it will be as much about how half of America woke up to the reality that they have been manipulated by the media. This should lead to an abandonment by many of the MSM as their primary source of information. It will push more people to @X, to podcasts and other empirical sources, and it will lead to a more informed public. The other outcome I hope happens is the implosion of the Democratic Party. The Party lied to the American people about the cognitive health and fitness of the president.

It prevented, threatened, litigated and otherwise eliminated the ability of other candidates for the primary to compete, to get on ballots, and to even participate in a debate. The Party and the administration used lawfare in an attempt to imprison, bankrupt or otherwise kill off Trump as a candidate. These acts are collectively grave threats to our democracy. With the highest irony in order to hide these acts, the Party accused the opposition candidate of being the grave threat to democracy. The Democratic Party proved itself to be fundamentally undemocratic. It needs a complete reboot. The leadership should be thrown out and those responsible should apologize to the American people. Honest Abe said it best: You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.

Read more …

“Are we done yet with the anti-Trump fake news now that the majority of voters see through it? Probably not, huh?”

• Trump’s Win Is A Victory For The Non-Brainwashed Americans (Marsden)

Blowout alert! I guess average Americans don’t like being infantilized. At least Trump trusted them to be able to take a joke, unlike his opponents. So when’s Liz Cheney’s date with the firing squad already? Are we done yet with the anti-Trump fake news now that the majority of voters see through it? Probably not, huh? With the exception of those in a handful of states, Americans united to send former US President Donald Trump back to the White House and handed him carte blanche with Republican control of the Senate and likely the House as well. Not bad for a guy the establishment tried to brand as the reincarnation of Hitler. Did Hitler also have giant Israeli flags at his Madison Square Garden rally? Or hang out at the Jewish wall in Israel or with Hebrew-inscribed tablets in a yarmulke? That should have been the Democrats’ first sign that their branding attempt was off.

Yet, just like the fitting title of the upcoming Harris biography co-authored by Chelsea Clinton: She Persisted. Maybe next time, instead of persisting with their idiocy, they’ll come up with an actual agenda and a candidate who addresses questions and issues on point rather than punting them in favor of talking points and platitudes that leave voters guessing as to what to even expect if ever elected – beyond the usual establishment status quo, which, of course, sucks. Just ask the overwhelming majority of Americans who say that the country is headed in the wrong direction. Presumably, the Democrats figured that they could make a whole campaign about abortion rights – against a guy who, frankly, doesn’t actually seem too interested in the topic, which was recently re-opened by the courts.

It’s telling that, according to CNN exit polls, Harris won the female vote by five points less than Biden did in 2020 and three points less than even Hillary Clinton did against Trump in 2016, when abortion wasn’t even an issue. Certain categories of voters really capture the story of this election. The first is white women with college degrees, 11% more of whom voted for Harris than for Biden in 2020. Institutional establishment brainwashing and virtue signaling apparently works more effectively on well-formatted brains, female or otherwise. The message from the party hacks and their celebrity surrogates was that abortion was really all that should matter to women, reducing them to one-dimensional caricatures of actual human beings. But it turns out that many more women than they figured don’t like being talked down to and treated as little more than a walking uterus – even by other women.

Which would explain why white women with no degree voted overwhelmingly for Trump by 25 points over Harris, and even voters of color with no degree, generally considered a lock by Democrats, still voted by 14 points less for Harris than for Biden four years ago. The youngest voters, aged 18-29, who you’d figure would be most directly affected by reproductive rights issues, either as women themselves or their white-knighting male counterparts who were constantly told by Democrats that they had to cast their vote primarily in support of the reproductive rights of the women in their life, actually ended up shifting their vote to Trump by 11 points compared to 2020.

The bottom line is that women living real lives with a multitude of concerns and interests don’t like being paternalized, which is what the Democrats constantly do. Just because it’s a woman and her surrogates who are doing the talking down to them, doesn’t make it any more appealing. It just makes you a useful idiot of the patriarchal establishment – the same one that’s trying to emotionally manipulate women’s electoral choices to maintain the status quo that disadvantages women in every other possible way that actually matters to all of their lives, from cost of living to foreign wars in which their sons are sent to die and other countries’ sons are subjected to the same. All so Uncle Sam can turn a profit. It’s the guy you keep calling a misogynist who wants to take him on.

Read more …

“..the United States has 20 to 25 million illegal immigrants in the country. “What do we do with them? I think the first thing that we do is we start with the criminal migrants.”

• Trump Has Sweeping Plans for His 2nd Administration (ET)

Immigration Since 2015, Trump has made curbing illegal immigration a cornerstone of his campaigns. As president, he built or reconstructed about 400 miles of border barrier along the U.S.–Mexico border and implemented a number of rules curbing illegal migration into the country. During the campaign, Trump often said that he would initiate the largest “mass deportation” effort in U.S. history if elected. Recently, he also warned Mexico that he would impose a 25 percent tariff targeting the country if it fails to curb illegal immigration and that he would raise that tariff if Mexico doesn’t comply. Also, he’s suggested more enhanced screenings for immigrants, ending birthright citizenship—which may require a constitutional amendment—and reimposing certain policies enacted during his first term such as the “remain in Mexico” protocol.

Tom Homan, a former acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) who is expected to join the new administration, told media outlets last year that the scale of deportations depends on what resources are available. During a “60 Minutes” interview in October, Homan was asked about whether families would be separated. Homan responded, “Families can be deported together.” Vice President-elect JD Vance said in his debate with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz on Oct. 1 that deporting criminals would be a second Trump administration’s initial focus. “You’ve got to reimplement Donald Trump’s border policies, build the wall, reimplement deportations,” Vance said, adding that the United States has 20 to 25 million illegal immigrants in the country. “What do we do with them? I think the first thing that we do is we start with the criminal migrants.”

Taxes and Regulations Throughout the 2024 campaign, Trump has promised to curb federal regulations that he said would limit the creation of new U.S. jobs. He also has pledged to keep intact a 2017 tax cut that he supported and signed while in office. His team has also proposed a further round of individual and corporate tax cuts beyond those initiated in his first term. Trump has pledged to reduce the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 15 percent for companies that make their products in the United States. In a bid to win Nevada, Trump earlier this year pledged to end the taxation of tips and overtime wages to aid some service workers and waiters. He has pledged not to tax or cut Social Security benefits. Trump also has said that as president, he would pressure the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates but wouldn’t make any demands on the central bank. Some of his proposals would require congressional action. As of Wednesday morning, the GOP is projected to retake the Senate, but the picture around the House is murkier.

Tariffs In multiple campaign stops this year, Trump floated the idea of a 10 percent or more tariff on all goods imported into the United States, which he said would eliminate the country’s trade deficit. He has also said he should have the authority to set higher tariffs on countries that have put tariffs on U.S. imports. He has threatened to impose a 200 percent tariff on some imported cars, saying he is determined in particular to keep cars from Mexico from coming into the country. Trump has targeted China in particular. He proposes phasing out Chinese imports of goods such as electronics, steel, and pharmaceuticals over four years. He seeks to prohibit Chinese companies from owning U.S. real estate and infrastructure in the energy and tech sectors. “To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariffs,’” Trump said in an interview with John Micklethwait, editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News, in October. “It’s my favorite word.”

He added at the time, “You see these empty, old, beautiful steel mills and factories that are empty and falling down,” referring to facilities that used to make goods in the United States. “We’re going to bring the companies back. We’re going to lower taxes for companies that are going to make their products in the USA. And we’re going to protect those companies with strong tariffs,” Trump said. Micklethwait said that some economists have projected that the former president’s economic policies, including tariffs, could add trillions to the U.S. deficit. But Trump said that a number of countries, including “allies” have “taken advantage of us, more so than our enemies. ”

More Drilling The former president said that he wants to cut federal regulations on drilling for oil and natural gas, a move that he says would lower energy costs and inflation. In multiple instances, Trump said he would reauthorize drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, which was suspended under the Biden administration. Meanwhile, he would pull the United States out of the Paris Climate Accords, a worldwide plan that claims to reduce carbon emissions. Trump also said he would roll back some federal policies around electric vehicles. In his campaign, Trump has often said that gas prices were much lower under his administration than they have been under the Biden administration. He has suggested that prices would again fall when he takes office.

“When I left office … gasoline had reached $1.87 a gallon. We actually had many months where it was lower than that,” Trump told reporters over the summer. “But we hit $1.87, which was a perfect place, an absolutely beautiful number.” According to AAA, the average price for a gallon of regular gasoline stands at around $3.10. The highest recorded average price for a gallon was on June 14, 2022, when it reached $5.01, AAA figures show. The federal Energy Information Administration’s data show that the average annual price for a gallon of gasoline did not exceed $3 under the first Trump administration.

Social Policies Trump has pledged to require U.S. colleges and universities to “defend American tradition and Western civilization” and to purge them of diversity and inclusion programs, which he and Republicans have said are leftist in nature. He said he would direct the Justice Department to pursue civil rights cases against schools that engage in racial discrimination. At K–12 schools, Trump would support programs allowing parents to use public funds for private or religious instruction. Trump also wants to abolish the federal Department of Education and leave states in control of schooling.

Regarding abortion, Trump has said that a federal ban on abortion is not needed and that the issue should be resolved by states. He’s also said he backs rules that advance in vitro fertilization, birth control, and prenatal care. In campaign events and interviews, Trump has been critical of schools allowing transgender individuals to compete in women’s sports, saying that he would impose a ban on such practices. “It’s a man playing in the game,” Trump said at an October town hall event. “Look at what’s happened in swimming. Look at the records that are being broken.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1854087029753053640

Read more …

A lot of public “servants” have good reason to be nervous.

• Musk Reveals Plans For Trump Government (RT)

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has said he will seek to improve government efficiency by reducing the number of federal agencies if he is given a role in Donald Trump’s administration. Musk, a Trump supporter, made the remarks during an appearance on Tucker Carlson’s online show, broadcast from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate on Tuesday. Despite initially proclaiming political neutrality, Musk officially endorsed Trump after an assassination attempt on the president-elect in July. Trump promised the Tesla CEO that he would establish a special “government efficiency” commission, dubbed the DOGE, to be headed by the billionaire if he wins the election. Speaking with Carlson, the tech billionaire said that he would like to help Trump make the US government more efficient.

“I’d be happy to help improve government efficiency,” Musk said. “We’ve got a gigantic government bureaucracy, we’ve got overregulation, we’ve got agencies that have overlapping responsibilities… this translates into real costs to people, they’re hidden costs but they are very substantial.” Musk has invested millions of dollars in supporting Trump. According to media reports, he donated at least $118 million to the Republican’s political action committee, a group that focused on voter outreach. Speaking at a Trump rally last month, Musk pledged to help the Republican slash US annual budget spending by “at least $2 trillion” as part of a review of federal agencies that he would carry out if Trump returns to the White House. “Your tax money is being wasted and the Department of Government Efficiency is going to fix that,” Musk stated. The tech billionaire has repeatedly sounded the alarm over the US debt, warning just last week that the country is spiraling toward bankruptcy and will quickly go bust if Washington doesn’t curb its spending.

Read more …

“We embrace change in the United States. We can tell the world that we’re aware of Bitcoin’s numerous positive attributes and that we want to use them to our advantage..”

• The US Should Establish A Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (Corva)

Yesterday, the Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI) released a 53-page report on the pros of the United States establishing a strategic bitcoin reserve (SBR). As Bitcoin Magazine’s Frank Corva details below, the authors of the report touched on four key benefits of holding bitcoin as a strategic reserve asset:

• Economic and monetary stability – bitcoin is a hedge against currency debasement and debt instability

• Geopolitical competition – the US could gain a strategic advantage over other countries that are contemplating starting a bitcoin reserve and can reinforce the US’ influence over global financial standards

• Energy and climate – Bitcoin mining can be leveraged to accelerate the movement toward renewable energy

• Financial inclusion and human rights – the US can promote both the concepts of individual freedom and financial inclusion for both US citizens and those abroad

While I agree that the US’ establishing an SBR would have these benefits, I also think it would send a certain message loud and clear: We embrace change in the United States. We can tell the world that we’re aware of Bitcoin’s numerous positive attributes and that we want to use them to our advantage. In doing so, we can shift the narrative around Bitcoin from something to be feared and controlled to something that should be embraced and utilized, and we can stand behind a tool that can be used to increase the financial buoyancy of both people and institutions around the globe instead of standing in its way.

Read more …

Following the example of Tulsi, RFK et al. They made it look acceptable.

• Trump Comeback Also Engineered A Significant Exodus From Democrat Party (JTN)

Donald Trump pulled off the most improbable comeback in American political history Tuesday night, securing a likely return trip to the White House by beating back a relentless tide of media, Big Tech and Democrat opposition that stretched from the courthouse to the social media sphere Trump was poised to become only the second American president to secure non-consecutive terms but he did so against far greater odds than Grover Cleveland a century earlier after being impeached and acquitted twice, indicted four times, facing two assassination attempts and enduring an avalanche of lawfare unparalleled in the nation’s history. But even more consequential than his personal journey to President-Elect 47, Trump engineered a once-in-a-generation political realignment, one more deep and pervasive than his 2016 shocker as he peeled away long-rooted constituencies from the Democrat Party.

The electoral movement may soon be known as D-Exit, the American equivalent of Great Britain’s Brexit departure from the European Union as black males, Hispanic voters and young voters showed up more strongly from Trump and less fervently for Harris compared to Joe Biden or Barack Obama. Arabs and Muslims also underperformed for Harris. The shifts were small but compelling, crumbling a coalition born in the Kennedy-Johnson era and key to the Obama-Biden dynasty that dominated 12 of the last 16 years. The shifts toward Trump were jarring for Democrats. Trump cut the Democrat margin of victory in half in one of America’s darkest blue states, New York, and by two thirds in Democrat-stronghold Illinois. He won Florida – scene of the 2020 hanging election – by 15 points, all but erasing the Sunshine State as a battleground.

He won Georgia and North Carolina and was poised to take Arizona and Nevada. Pennsylvania was called for Trump and Wisconsin and Michigan were leaning strongly in his direction. He won a Senate majority and was in decent position to keep the U.S. House, which would make Washington an all red town in 2025. Perhaps most painful of all to blue America, Trump was in a position to win the popular vote, something Democrats have long used as a cudgel to delegitimize earlier GOP victories, including Trump’s in 2016. Mark Penn, the strategist behind the Clinton dynasty, succinctly described D-Exit early Wednesday morning. “The Trump edge is turning into a Trump trifecta. It looks like despite a good effort in a short period of time, Harris is falling short especially with young people and turnout in core urban areas. Black and especially Latino voters showed some shifts,” he noted on X.

“Trump has brought home with working class and created a new coalition of governing but the country remains divided and whoever wins must remember it’s time to genuinely reach out to the many moderate voters looking for the right leadership,” he added. Trump did it by talking directly to constituencies Republicans often ignored in the past, and that Democrats long took for granted. He did it by inviting recovering Democrats or stubborn independents to his big stage: Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Elon Musk, ex-Rep and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard and podcaster extraordinaire Joe Rogan to name a few. He went to places like the Bronx and Manhattan’s Madison Square Garden in New York to signal he wanted to be all Americans’ president. And when Democrats talked about ethereal ideological terms like ESG, CRT, and DEI, Trump talked about the kitchen table, the grocery cart and the gas tank. He warned of energy poverty, recognizing some were having a hard time to pay utility bills.

He made the EV revolution a debate about exporting jobs to China and the liberal transgender movement a debate about the safety and dignity of women’s sports and the sanctity of parents’ rights. Democrats did a historic switcheroo atop the ticket, subbing a younger female Harris for an aging Biden. But they didn’t change the debate. Trump chose the issues of insecurity, inflation and insanity and Democrats offered few specifics to counter. In the end, Trump’s prior record of economic growth in his first term seemed preferrable to Harris’ vagaries. Trump’s optimism that the nation’s woes could be solved was more appealing than Harris’ dark insistence that fascism, extremism and Hitler-like characters would destroy democracy.

Read more …

“Smith’s prosecutions ended with the 270th Electoral College vote secured around 2 a.m. Wednesday.”

• The Thrill is Gone (Turley)

After years of thrill-kill prosecutions, the thrill is gone for lawfare warriors. Election Day’s greatest losers may be special counsel Jack Smith, New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Donald Trump’s victory was the largest jury verdict that some of us anticipated for years of unrelenting weaponization of the legal system. Smith’s prosecutions ended with the 270th Electoral College vote secured around 2 a.m. Wednesday. His unrelenting efforts to convict Trump and then, when prevented from holding a trial, to release damaging material before the election have collapsed with the blue wall in the Midwest. Trump has said he plans to fire Smith on Day 1. That means the end of both the January 6 and the classified documents cases. That leaves James and Bragg as residue of long-forgotten lawfare battles, but even there Trump’s prospects look good.

James was able to secure a fellow lawfare warrior in Justice Arthur Engoron, who imposed a grotesque $455 million in fines and interest. That ruling is pending an appeal that is expected to be a partial or even total victory for Trump. Unlike Engoron, the appellate judges expressed great skepticism in September over the size of the penalty and even the use of this law. Trump faced half a billion dollars in penalty in a case where no one lost a dime, and the alleged victim banks wanted more business with Trump and his company. Separately, there is a hearing scheduled in front of Judge Juan Merchan for Nov. 11 on the “hush money” case involving Stormy Daniels, and a possible sentencing on Nov. 26. If Merchan seeks to jail Trump, it is unlikely to be carried out, as Trump appeals the case and the many alleged errors committed by the judge.

Merchan made an utter mess of a case that should never have been filed, let alone tried. Even commentators like CNN’s senior legal analyst, Elie Honig, have denounced the case as selective prosecution and unfounded. The case should result in a conditional discharge with no jail time if Merchan can resist the temptation to unjustly punish Trump, a level of restraint that has largely proven difficult for him in the case. Merchan created layers of appealable errors in the case. Putting those alleged errors aside, any sentencing to jail would create its own constitutional conflict with Trump’s performance of his federal duties. The question is whether the election will bring a moment of sobriety for New Yorkers who have spent years in a full rage-driven celebration of lawfare.

Read more …

Turley gets it. NBC not so much.

• DOJ Moving To Wind Down Trump Criminal Cases (NBC)

Justice Department officials have been evaluating how to wind down the two federal criminal cases against President-elect Donald Trump before he takes office to comply with long-standing department policy that a sitting president can’t be prosecuted, two people familiar with the matter tell NBC News. The latest discussions stand in contrast with the pre-election legal posture of special counsel Jack Smith, who in recent weeks took significant steps in the election interference case against Trump without regard to the electoral calendar. But the sources say DOJ officials have come to grips with the fact that no trial is possible anytime soon in either the Jan. 6 case or the classified documents matter — both of which are mired in legal issues that would likely prompt an appeal all the way to the Supreme Court, even if Trump had lost the election.

Now that Trump will become president again, DOJ officials see no room to pursue either criminal case against him — and no point in continuing to litigate them in the weeks before he takes office, the people said. “Sensible, inevitable and unfortunate,” said former federal prosecutor Chuck Rosenberg, an NBC News contributor. How Trump’s legal jeopardy has unfolded over the past year, in terms of both the criminal charges and his sweeping election victory, is unprecedented. The sources said it will be up to Smith to decide exactly how to unwind the charges and many questions remain unanswered. Could the prosecutions resume after Trump leaves office or would they be time-barred? What happens to the evidence? What about the two other defendants charged with helping Trump hide classified documents? Will the special counsel write a report, as special counsels usually do?

At the same time, Trump’s legal team is weighing its own next steps for how to resolve the outstanding federal cases in his favor now that he is the projected winner of the election. The ultimate goal is to get all the federal and state cases wiped out completely — the strategic call is how best to accomplish that task, according to a person familiar with the discussions. If the Trump side, for example, moved again in court to dismiss the charges in Washington related to election interference, then the Justice Department could use its legal response to explain its position on not moving forward with that case. Trump’s New York criminal case presents different challenges with a felony conviction and sentencing hearing scheduled for Nov. 26. The immediate goal of Trump’s legal team is to get that postponed indefinitely or otherwise dismissed.

The Georgia election interference case against Trump remains tied up on appeals over ethical issues surrounding the district attorney. “The American people have re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate to Make America Great Again,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement. “It is now abundantly clear that Americans want an immediate end to the weaponization of our justice system, so we can, as President Trump said in his historic speech last night, unify our country and work together for the betterment of our nation.” The DOJ’s thinking on Trump’s federal cases flows from a 2000 memo by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which affirmed a Watergate-era conclusion that a prosecution of a sitting president would “unduly interfere in a direct or formal sense with the conduct of the presidency.”

“In light of the effect that an indictment would have on the operations of the executive branch, ‘an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office,’” the memo concluded, quoting the earlier conclusion. The practical reality of Trump’s electoral victory Tuesday is that he is unlikely ever to face legal consequences in relation to the serious federal criminal charges brought against him by career Justice Department prosecutors working with career FBI agents. Some commentators have said the charges were arguably more serious than the conduct in the Watergate scandal that cost Richard Nixon the presidency and left him banished from politics. In the case accusing Trump of conspiring to illegally overturn the 2020 election, he is charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights.

In the classified documents case, he is charged with willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, lying to investigators and withholding documents in a federal investigation. “The idea that you could win an election to avoid justice just cuts so deeply against my expectations for our legal system and for our politics too,” said Joyce Vance, a former U.S. attorney and NBC News contributor. “But the voters have spoken, and that’s where we are.” She added that it has never been a foregone conclusion that Trump would be convicted — that would be up to a jury. “What bothers me so deeply is that he’s avoided the quintessential part of American justice — letting a jury decide, based on the evidence.”

Read more …

“Rachel Maddow is a crazy person,” Musk said, describing her as “frothing-at-the-mouth crazy fascist, basically, sort of pretending to be a liberal.”

• Rachel Maddow Threatens Musk Over ‘Russia Ties’ (RT)

Elon Musk can’t possibly keep his US government contracts because of his alleged secret contacts with “America’s worst enemy,” MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow has said. The Wall Street Journal claimed last week that Musk had communicated with Russian President Vladimir Putin and withheld the services of his Starlink network to Ukraine’s military. Both Musk and Moscow have dismissed the report as fake news. Maddow, however, proceeded as if the Journal’s reporting was a proven fact in her election day show on Tuesday evening. “You really can’t have the head of a company that is the primary rocket launcher for the defense department and NASA, you can’t have the head of that company in secret communications with America’s worst enemy while America’s enemy is actively waging a war against one of our allies, especially once you learn that he’s using his businesses to help the other side, to help Russia in that war,” Maddow said.

“Now that we know what we know about Elon Musk, this election – regardless of who wins – has produced a national security problem,” she continued, arguing that it will likely produce “tons of drama.” “So, buckle up. Even if [Donald] Trump doesn’t win, the Defense Department and NASA are gonna need a new arrangement for all their rockets and for all the multi-billion-dollar contracts Elon Musk’s companies have with the US government,” Maddow said. Either the government will have to get out of those contracts, or Musk’s companies “will have to unwind from him.” Musk has denied the Journal’s claims, pointing out that Starlink was “the BACKBONE of Ukrainian military communications at the front lines, because everything else has been blown up or jammed by Russia.” The founder of SpaceX and owner of X (formerly Twitter) addressed Maddow’s comments shortly afterward, speaking to journalist Tucker Carlson in a livestream from Mar-a-Lago.

“Rachel Maddow is a crazy person,” Musk said, describing her as “frothing-at-the-mouth crazy fascist, basically, sort of pretending to be a liberal.” Asked how much pressure he has been under because of his support for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, Musk resorted to a joke. “Well, apart from multiple Democrats saying they want to put me in jail, take away government contracts from my companies, nationalize my companies, deport me as an illegal, and have me arrested for apparently being Putin’s best friend, nothing besides those things,” he said. Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the Journal’s claims were untrue, “most likely linked” to Musk’s support for Trump, and should not be taken seriously. While the official count of votes in the US presidential election is still pending, Trump has secured the needed 270 electoral votes, according to multiple media organizations.

Read more …

“..while promoting her latest book this August, Pelosi called it her “goal in life” for Trump to “never step in the White House again.”

• 84-year-old Pelosi Projected To Win Reelection (RT)

Former US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi could return to Congress next year for a landmark 20th term, The Hill reported on Wednesday, citing voting projections. Congressional elections are being held along with the race for the White House, with 34 of 100 seats in the Senate and all 435 in the House of Representatives up for grabs. According to the report, the 84-year-old Democrat is expected to win reelection to the House in California’s 11th Congressional District, which includes most of San Francisco. The report came after 50% of the votes were counted, with Pelosi securing over 80%. First elected to Congress in 1987, Pelosi became the first woman to serve as House speaker, a role she held twice. She has also been the longest-serving leader in the Democratic Party’s history in Congress.

Pelosi publicly encouraged incumbent President Joe Biden to drop his reelection plans, which led to him quitting the race as the Democratic candidate and being replaced by Vice President Kamala Harris. Reports of Pelosi’s win come as the final votes are being counted in the presidential race. While the official results of the election have yet to be announced, Trump has already secured wins in key battleground states and passed the threshold of 270 electoral college votes required to take the White House, according to media projections. Pelosi is among the fiercest critics of Trump. She has called him a “snake-oil salesman” and “the creature from the Black Lagoon,” and led Democratic efforts during impeachment proceedings against Trump in his previous term in office. Speaking to reporters while promoting her latest book this August, Pelosi called it her “goal in life” for Trump to “never step in the White House again.”

Trump railed against Pelosi in his campaign’s closing speech on Tuesday, recalling her efforts to impeach him. He said Pelosi is an “evil, sick, crazy, horrible human being” and “trouble for our country,” adding that he wanted to call her the “B-word.” In an interview on Fox News last month, he called Pelosi America’s “enemy from within.” According to the latest media reports, the Republicans have won control of the Senate for the first time in four years. It is still unclear which party will control the House of Representatives, as there are too many races that have yet to be called.

Read more …

“..the Biden administration and its European acolytes fueling NATO’s proxy war “are history.”

• Trump to Seek ‘Pragmatic’ Deals, No Budget Money to Sustain Ukraine (Sp.)

Throughout his election campaign, Donald Trump consistently expressed his reluctance to continue funding the Zelensky regime in Ukraine. Following his declaration of victory in the US presidential race, Trump addressed his supporters in a celebratory speech, promising to “stop wars” across the globe. As the 47th US president, Donald Trump will not guarantee the US budget “to keep Ukraine afloat,” strategic analyst Paolo Raffone told Sputnik. He conjectured that the Biden administration and its European acolytes fueling NATO’s proxy war “are history.” “Trump does not see any advantage for the US to continue spending enormous budgets and political capital in Ukraine. If a deal with Russia and Ukraine cannot be reached, it is possible that Trump will push for a ‘frozen conflict policy’ as a sort of damage control… Europeans will have to cover those costs. It will probably be the end of the EU,” the director of the CIPI Foundation in Brussels speculated.

On the foreign policy front, the Republican is likely to display openness to “pragmatic” solutions with allies and foes to achieve “maximum advantage” for the US, he surmised, adding: “I expect a great bargaining in which Trump will keep the centrality of the US as the ‘indispensable interlocutor’ in bilateral relations, also within the framework of multipolarity. Probably, there will be much less hysteria about Russia, Iran, China. The probable objective is ‘rebalancing the interchange’ with all these countries. They may not become friends, but deals are possible in mutual interest.” In his pursuit of a national interest agenda, Trump may redefine America’s contributions to NATO, emphasizing that US protection for Europe “is not a free ride,” Raffone noted. “Trump will guarantee the Europeans the military shield, but each European state will have to contribute much more to NATO. The previous US administrations asked to raise European military expenditure above 2% GDP. Such a target will probably be insufficient during the new Trump administration,” said Raffone.

It is difficult for Trump to “accept any idea of European strategic autonomy,” emphasized the pundit. He supposed that a new Trump administration would brandish “a combination of trade, tariffs, security levy to force the Europeans to increase their military budgets and buy more American.” “European energy and technology dependency is a fact… Europe must find space for compromise to deal with not only the US, but also with Russia, China and the Middle East. The current ideological positions in the EU Commission, Paris and Berlin are not encouraging,” stressed the pundit. Looking ahead to the US elections of 2028, none of the “old guard” will be running, conjectured Raffone, suggesting that “new forces will emerge during the current Trump term.” “The Trump administration will probably be a transition time. The outcome will be visible in US politics over the next decade. Currently, the two US parties live a populist momentum. Time will tell if politics will arise again in the US,” he concluded.

Read more …

“..if he listens to Tucker Carlson, and ‘Bobby’ Kennedy, and Vivek Ramaswamy, and all the smart people around him – then yes, he could negotiate an end to that war.”

• Dave Smith: Will Trump Be Able To End The War In Ukraine? (ZH)

At a recent pre-election speaking and podcast event, comedian and Libertarian political commentator Dave Smith expressed his view that it is very realistic that the next President Donald Trump could successfully negotiate an end to the Ukraine war. Smith’s view is optimistic, as he articulated that he believes Trump’s expressed desire to end wars in Ukraine and Gaza is genuine. But Smith also laid out that much depends on who Trump puts around him in top national security positions. Below is the hard-hitting segment featuring the prominent commentator addressing the question: will Trump be able to end the war in Ukraine? Below are Dave Smith’s words from the segment on Trump and Ukraine below …

“Why the hell are we even expanding our military alliance to Ukraine? And listen, Donald Trump always says that the war ‘never would have happened if I was president, and I would negotiate an end to this.’ And I gotta say I think he’s right about that. I don’t think the war would have happened if he was president – I think he will negotiate an end to it. I don’t think he’s right that Hamas wouldn’t have attacked Israel if he was president – that seems kind of ridiculous to me. But he’s right: the Ukraine war could be over tomorrow if American wanted to negotiated a peace to it. Vladimir Putin has been trying to the entire time… Well the question becomes who does Donald Trump put around him? If Donald Trump puts Mike Pompeo, aka Liz Cheney’s pick for Defense Secretary… if he puts John Bolton, aka Hillary Clinton’s pick for national security adviser – then maybe not, maybe it doesn’t happen. But if he listens to Tucker Carlson, and ‘Bobby’ Kennedy, and Vivek Ramaswamy, and all the smart people around him – then yes, he could negotiate an end to that war.”

Indeed, the question ultimately becomes: will Trump really keep the ‘swamp’ out of his administration this time around? We hope so.

Read more …

“Politico described the plan as “the only option” to maintain the flow of weapons to Ukraine, although its sources acknowledged “immense” challenges..”

• Biden To Speed Up Arms Deliveries To Ukraine – Media (RT)

The White House intends to expedite up to $9 billion in new military aid in a last-ditch effort to bolster Ukraine against Russia, before President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January, according to sources within the outgoing administration. The plan is driven by concerns that Trump, who has criticized President Joe Biden’s generous support for Kiev, may halt or significantly reduce US taxpayer-funded aid, as reported by sources speaking to Reuters and Politico on Wednesday. “The administration plans to push forward… to put Ukraine in the strongest position possible,” a senior official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. Politico described the plan as “the only option” to maintain the flow of weapons to Ukraine, although its sources acknowledged “immense” challenges. US officials worry that even if Biden approves new aid, it could take the Pentagon months to actually deliver munitions and equipment to Ukraine, and the next commander-in-chief could halt shipments at any time.

It remains unclear whether the US military would be willing to draw more deeply from its stockpiles – risking its own readiness – to expedite the deliveries. Since February 2022, the US Congress has approved more than $174 billion to support Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. The latest tranche of $61 billion was delayed for several months amid a standoff between Republicans and the White House. Of that package, only $4.3 billion remains, along with another $2 billion allocated for new contracts with the US arms industry. With $2.8 billion in previously announced shipments, the White House has just over $9 billion available for emergency supplies to Kiev. Trump’s victory will not change Washington’s antagonistic stance towards Moscow, but will make it more difficult for Kiev to access American taxpayers’ money, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Wednesday.

“As a dyed-in-the-wool businessman, he hates wasting money on all sorts of freeloaders and tagalongs: On wacko allies, misguided grandiose charity projects, and insatiable international organizations,” Medvedev wrote in a Telegram post. “The only question is, how much will Trump be forced to fork out on the war? He’s stubborn, but the system is more powerful.” Trump has said that Ukraine cannot win against Russia militarily and has criticized Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky as “the greatest salesman in history,” who secures billions every time he visits Washington without getting any closer to victory. Trump claimed on the campaign trail that he could end the Ukraine conflict in 24 hours if reelected. In his victory speech, Trump reiterated: “I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars.”

Read more …

“..the EU has already spent nearly €120 billion ($128.8 billion) on supporting Ukraine, with another €74 billion pledged but yet to be allocated..”

• Von der Leyen To Prepare EU For War – Defense Commission Nominee (RT)

A top priority for the next European Commission will be making Europe self-reliant and ready for war, as the US is likely to focus on China in the coming decades, said Andrius Kubilius, the nominee for the EU’s new top defense post. Kubilius made this statement at his confirmation hearing in Brussels on Wednesday, after he was nominated to become the first-ever EU Commissioner for Defense and Space. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen designated the former Lithuanian prime minister for the position in September. The new Commission is expected to take office by December 1. “Defense is one of the top priorities for the next Commission,” Kubilius told MEPs. “Von der Leyen’s mission letter tasks me with helping Europe prepare for the most extreme military contingencies, which means preparing for the possibility of Russian aggression.”

While it is difficult to predict the policies of the upcoming administration of US President-elect Donald Trump, “we can anticipate that in the coming decades, the U.S. is likely to increase its focus on the strategic challenge posed by China,” Kubilius said. This shift “necessitates a more self-reliant European defense structure,” he added. “Adversaries and strategic rivals are rapidly outpacing us,” with Russia and China far ahead in defense spending, Kubilius noted. He claimed that Russia will spend more on defense than all of the bloc’s 27 states combined, in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). In the meantime, the best defense strategy for the EU would be to continue funding Ukraine, he stated.

Since 2022, the EU has already spent nearly €120 billion ($128.8 billion) on supporting Ukraine, with another €74 billion pledged but yet to be allocated, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. As emphasized by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the best investment in European security is investing in the security of Ukraine. Officials in Brussels are waiting for the US election results to determine their next steps in supporting Ukraine, Deutsche Welle reported earlier this week. During his reelection campaign, Trump has repeatedly suggested he would curtail funding for Kiev and focus on domestic American issues. The outgoing Biden administration intends to fast-track billions in military aid to Ukraine to reinforce Kiev’s military before Trump takes office in January, Reuters and Politico reported on Wednesday, citing anonymous sources.

Read more …

“Kursk is the ultimate meat grinder for Ukraine soldiers. No one comes back alive.”

• How British Media Is Turning On Zelensky. And Why (Jay)

It’s a little-known fact that the two British media giants, The Economist and The Financial Times, enjoy a very cosy relationship with the European Commission, so much so that one could almost imagine them all being one family. Each does its own bidding for one another and each assists one another with its aspirations, its viewpoint. And it’s fake news. And so, when you read in The Economist that the war is not going at all well for Ukraine and its hapless president you can more or less assume that this is the interpretation also of the very highest echelons of the EU. Since the war started, Ukraine’s president has had the full support of western media, which has agreed to go along with the fake news racket which his people organize; curtailing the freedom of western journalists, blocking them from getting hard news stories, data, statistics but above all taking them by the hand and leading them to the stories which they want reported.

This game reached epic proportions in recent months as a parody of journalism reached its apex when the war turned on Zelensky in the summer of this year. Journalists didn’t report on it in such a way. Many stayed in Kiev and other large cities and were so desperate for a story which wouldn’t upset their hosts that they peddled the same one over and over again of the conscripts being bundled into the backs of vans. It was literally all they could do to keep active. But this business model of late appears to have run aground. Both the Economist and the BBC have each reported on the frontlines and really told it how it is: bleak. No one can turn a blind eye any more to the advancement of Russian forces. The capture of Selydove might be played down by the Kiez media machine whose list of hilarious fake news stories is too long to publish; but Pokrovsk, which is the next target for Russian forces, will be a considerable victory which might topple the entire confidence of Zelensky and his cabal of advisors and sycophants.

Pokrovsk is a town which is a transport hub, which supplies thousands of Ukrainian troops. If it is taken, it would effectively mean the mass surrender of most of them, or their hasty retreat as they won’t be able to eat or replenish their ammunition stocks. This itself will have a devastating blow on Ukrainian troops’ morale and we might well see a domino effect which accelerates Russia’s advance from a kilometer or two in a day to scores. How will western media report the fall of this city? If The Economist and BBC reports are anything to go by, with some zeal one would imagine. It’s as though big media, in particular British, is anxious to stay on the right side of history when things start to fall down and emerge from the dust as wise old men with that “I told you so” sparkle in their eyes. It’s also about collective guilt. Western Media has blood on its hands as the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers sent to the “meat grinder” is partly attributed to the support U.S. and UK media gave Zelensky.

What we are witnessing now from Zelensky is a panic mode which is accelerating at the same pace. His so-called “victory plan” hasn’t been taken seriously by any western leaders and he looks stupid now, alienated. His recent outburst about Biden leaking to the press about the ludicrous idea of using U.S.-made Tomahawk missiles might have been a defining moment which history writers obsess over then they write his eulogy. For now, the panic isn’t really even about the battlefield, although it must be hard for Zelensky to read the dispatches each day of the losses in Kursk which could be considered Ukraine’s own Battle of the Bulge where German troops fought hard at the end of WWII against larger, bigger numbers of allied soldiers in the Ardennes and ultimately lost. In many ways Kursk was a trap which Zelensky set for himself, as the failure to capture the nuclear power plant pales into insignificance compared to the losses of men. Kursk is the ultimate meat grinder for Ukraine soldiers. No one comes back alive.

The real panic for Zelensky is now about his own political credibility. He is only thinking now how to survive the inevitable loss to Russia and stay a president. He knows only too well that if a quick ceasefire happens under Trump’s leadership, the Martial Law status of the country will be cancelled and presidential elections will be obligatory. Under Harris, the pain will only be drawn out longer, but with even more lost ground, lost bargaining leverage as she will force Putin to shift gear with his advance and head for Kiev. The irony of The Economist piece and its timing is that it prepares the ground for a massive blame game which starts with those who have been doing it like pros for decades – The European Commission – and amateurs who have just started to learn how it works, like Zelensky. The Economist is just warming up.

Read more …

Economy is breaking down.

• German Government Has Collapsed (RT)

Germany’s ‘traffic-light’ coalition has fallen apart, leaving Olaf Scholz at the helm of a minority government consisting solely of his Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Greens. This follows the Chancellor’s dismissal of Free Democratic Party (FDP) leader Christian Lindner from the position of Finance Minister. After failed crisis talks on Wednesday night, the Chancellor dismissed the Free Democratic Party (FDP) leader Christian Lindner from the position of Finance Minister. In response, the FDP’s parliamentary group leader, Christian Durr, announced that the party is withdrawing all its ministers from Scholz’s government, formally ending the three-way coalition. The Greens expressed regret over this development but stated they wish to remain part of a minority government, emphasizing the need for the EU – and Germany in particular – to demonstrate its capacity for action following Donald Trump’s election as US President.

“I want to say for us that this feels wrong and not right tonight – almost tragic on a day like this, when Germany must show unity and the ability to act in Europe,” said Vice Chancellor and Economy Minister Robert Habeck in a joint press statement with Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Wednesday night. “This is not a good day for Germany and also not a good day for Europe,” Baerbock added. Finance Minister Christian Lindner was fired after he reportedly proposed early elections when the leaders of the three coalition parties once again failed to find common ground on how to address the multibillion-euro deficit in next year’s budget. “All too often, Minister Lindner has blocked laws in an inappropriate manner,” Scholz stated, accusing Lindner of refusing to ease spending rules which among other things would allow for more aid to Ukraine.

Lindner, in turn, accused the Chancellor of ignoring the real “economic concerns” of the German people. “Olaf Scholz has long failed to recognize the need for a new economic awakening in our country,” Lindner said. Scholz said he now wants to reach out to opposition leader Friedrich Merz of the Christian Democrats to offer him the “opportunity” to collaborate with his government, adding that in light of the US elections, this is “perhaps more urgent than ever.” Meanwhile, the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) opposition party welcomed the coalition’s collapse as a long-overdue “liberation” for Germany.

“After months of gridlock and countless self-centered therapy sessions, we now urgently need a fundamental political fresh start to lead the economy and the country as a whole out of the severe crisis into which it has been plunged by the ideology-driven policies of the SPD, Greens, and FDP,” said AfD parliamentary leaders Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla in a statement on X. Scholz announced that the Bundestag will hold a vote of confidence on January 15. According to the German constitution, if the Chancellor fails to secure sufficient support, he may formally request the President to dissolve the 733-seat lower house and call new elections within 60 days. This could push Germany’s parliamentary elections from next fall to March 2025.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Fishing

 

 

Mature tree

 

 

Flow hive
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854145206733373820

 

 

Slow motion fluid

 

 

Mesh

 

 

Hair
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854109578490782018

 

 

Pnut

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 25 2024

Sep 252024
 
 September 25, 2024  Posted by at 8:26 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  43 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Harlequin and woman with necklace 1917

 

• America Must Get Out of Ukraine – Trump (RT)
• Zelensky ‘Greatest Salesman In History’ – Trump (RT)
• America The Unready (Paul Craig Roberts)
• ‘Peace’ Has Become A Swear Word – Hungarian FM (RT)
• Trump: DOJ, FBI ‘Mishandling, Downplaying’ Second Assassination Attempt (JTN)
• Trump’s Protection To Be Enhanced – NBC (RT)
• Trump Urged Use Of Troops To Protect Capitol On Jan. 6, But Was Rebuffed (JTN)
• Zelensky Leaving Ukrainians to Die for BlackRock, Deep State (Miles)
• Russia Wins Ukraine Conflict Despite ‘Best’ US, NATO Weapons – Ron Paul (Sp.)
• ‘Israel Dying From One Thousand Cuts’ (Manley)
• Thirst For Money Enriches Oligarchs, But Bankrupts Europe (SCF)
• European Union Morphs Into NATO’s Financial War Machine (SCF)
• America In Collapse Plays World Leader (Pacini)
• Non-Citizens Added To States’ Voter Rolls Through DMV (JTN)
• Not Just Springfield, Haitians Being Flown To Small Towns Nationwide (Blankley)
• EVs “Up To Twice As Expensive” To Run As Regular Gas Cars In The UK (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Poll
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838375407105565105

 

 

Unrealized Gains Tax
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838390030588612986

 

 

RFK diabetes

 

 

2020

 

 

Trump states

 

 

O’Leary

 

 

John Paulson

 

 

Endorsed
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838379249486459201

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“I think that we’re stuck in that war unless I’m president. I’ll get it done. I’ll negotiate; I’ll get us out. We gotta get out..”

• America Must Get Out of Ukraine – Trump (RT)

The United States needs a clear exit strategy for the conflict in Ukraine, former President Donald Trump told a campaign rally, insisting that neither current US leader Joe Biden nor his Democratic rival Kamala Harris has any such plan. “Biden and Kamala got us into this war in Ukraine, and now they can’t get us out. They can’t get us out,” Trump told the crowd in Savannah, Georgia, on Tuesday, reiterating his promise to end the conflict as soon as he is reelected. “I think that we’re stuck in that war unless I’m president. I’ll get it done. I’ll negotiate; I’ll get us out. We gotta get out. Biden says, ‘We will not leave until we win,’” Trump argued. “What happens if the Russians win? That’s what they do – they fight wars. As someone told me the other day, they beat Hitler; they beat Napoleon. That’s what they do. They fight. And it’s not pleasant,” Trump said.

At another campaign rally on Monday, the Republican claimed that Zelensky wants his rival to win “so badly” because, as long as Democrats remain in power, the Ukrainian leader walks away with $60 billion every time he comes to the US. Zelensky is currently in the US, where he is expected to meet with President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and members of Congress to present them with his “victory plan,” which, rather than involving talks, revolves around somehow forcing Moscow into submission. Ukrainian officials also claimed that Zelensky had planned to see Trump; however, a Trump campaign official told AP that no such meeting has been scheduled yet.

During Zelensky’s stay, the US intends to announce another $375 million batch of military aid to Ukraine, AP reported on Tuesday evening citing anonymous sources in Washington. The package would include missiles for HIMARS launchers, cluster bombs for Ukrainian fighter jets and other ammunition, which will come out of the US military stockpiles. By the Pentagon’s account, the US has provided Ukraine over $56 billion in direct military aid since February 2022. In April, the US approved a $61 billion military aid package for Kiev after months of opposition by some Republicans. Ukrainian officials are concerned that Trump could cut the steady flow of US military aid.

Read more …

“He wants [Harris] to win this election so badly, but I would do differently – I will work out peace..”

• Zelensky ‘Greatest Salesman In History’ – Trump (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky wants Kamala Harris to win the election “so badly,” former US President Donald Trump told a campaign rally in Pennsylvania on Tuesday. The comment comes after the Ukrainian leader cast doubt on the Republican candidate’s claims that he could promptly end the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Trump has insisted that he would tell Russian President Vladimir Putin and Zelensky to “make a deal” to end the hostilities. “I think Zelensky is the greatest salesman in history. Every time he comes into the country, he walks away with $60 billion,” Trump told his supporters. In April, the US approved a $61 billion military aid package for Kiev after months of opposition by some Republicans. Ukrainian officials are reportedly concerned that Trump could cut US military aid. “He wants [Harris] to win this election so badly, but I would do differently – I will work out peace,” Trump added.

Zelensky called Trump’s claims into question in an interview published in The New Yorker magazine on Sunday. “My feeling is that Trump doesn’t really know how to stop the war, even if he might think he knows how. With this war, oftentimes, the deeper you look at it the less you understand,” he said. The Ukrainian leader is currently in the US, where he is expected to meet with President Joe Biden, members of Congress, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, to present them with his ‘victory plan.’ While the details of it are not clear, Zelensky told ABC News that his plan is aimed at “the strengthening of Ukraine” and its army to “push [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to stop the war.” The end of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev could be closer than one might think, according to Zelensky. “That is why we are asking our friends, our allies, to strengthen us. It is very important,” he added. Trump has said that he will “probably” meet Zelensky during his visit but no date has been scheduled.

Read more …

PCR never contemplates the option that Putin didn’t think Russia was ready for a bigger battle.

• America The Unready (Paul Craig Roberts)

Andrei Martyanov, an emigre from Russia, writes books about military strategy and America’s lack of one. He does his best to make us aware that if we are to find ourselves at war with Russia, we need better strategic thinking than we have. His latest book, America’s Final War, published by Clarity Press, tells us that the West is unprepared for the conflict the West is fomenting with Russia. Martyanov is contemptuous of American military thinking and the American echo chamber that passes for thought. Consequently, the establishment will ignore him and continue on its mistaken path. Martyanov uses Washington’s response to Russia’s Special Military Operation in Donbas to illustrate his point. Much of the book is his defense of his view of the conflict. Martyanov was the leading dissident to the view of Western pundits that Russia would be defeated and Ukraine would be victorious. The West’s propagandistic response to the conflict contributed to the West’s misunderstanding.

Believing its own misrepresentation of the conflict, the West continued to convince itself that just a little more Western intervention would turn the tide. Add this weapons system. Then this one. Then F-15s, and at the present time the Western idiots are deciding whether the US and NATO will launch long-range missiles into Russia from Ukraine. Such a desperate measure, which Putin said would mean the US and NATO are at war with Russia, is a powerful indication that Ukraine is defeated, just as Martyanov said would be the case. Martyanov is protective of Putin. I think because Putin did not invade Ukraine and immediately overthrow the neo-Nazi Regime Washington has established there. Instead he limited Russian arms to clearing Ukrainian forces out of Donbas, a former Russian territory that Soviet leaders attached to Ukraine. Putin has accepted numerous insults and provocations without expanding the war beyond his Special Military Operation. It is Putin, not the West, who has resisted the expansion of a limited conflict into a wider war.

I join Martyanov in admiring Putin for his concern with the life of humanity. Where I depart from Martyanov and Putin is that I regard Russia’s victory in Ukraine as tactical, not strategic. It is in strategy that Martyanov sees Russia’s advantage. Putin’s strategy was to avoid wider war by limiting the conflict to clearing Donbas, a Russian area of Ukraine, of Ukraine forces that were killing Russian people. I appreciate the good will in Putin’s decision, but he misread his adversary, and his decision was a strategic error of potentially immense consequences. To keep the US/NATO from becoming ever more involved in the conflict and, thus, ever widening the conflict, Putin needed to quickly prevail. He could not do this without attacking Kiev, preventing the government from continuing the fight, and sealing Ukraine’s borders with the West.

Thus, Putin’s Special Military Operation guaranteed increasing Western involvement, more casualties, and a wider war which, if Washington joins the European and British decision to fire missiles into Russia, brings us World War III. This is a total failure of strategic thinking on Russia’s part. How do we explain this? I think that Martyanov is correct that Russia has a war strategy whereas the West has bluster and delusion. But why didn’t strategy come into play in Ukraine? How did Putin convince himself that he was going to keep Ukraine out of NATO simply by evicting Ukrainian forces from Donbas? One possible answer is that Putin did not realize who the enemy was. It was not the puppet in Kiev. The enemy was in Washington, London, Berlin, Paris. Did Putin only see the enemy in Donbas? Did he not know that he was at war with the US and NATO?

The neoconservative doctrine that the principle goal of US foreign policy is the prevention of the rise of any country that can serve as a constraint on American unilateralism is perhaps too absurd for the Russians to take seriously. This policy declaration is known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine. It has been in effect since 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed, which removed constraint on US unilateralism. In public statements Putin shows awareness that Washington expects Russia, China, and Iran to accommodate themselves to Washington’s “rules based order.” Washington’s rules, of course. This is not subject to discussion and negotiation. It is a requirement. Not realizing the implications of this requirement is the mistake of the Russian, Chinese, and Iranian governments.

Putin
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838272642702348615

Read more …

“Diplomacy should provide the tools for international policy-making, which should be based on dialogue… We must cease attempts to discredit those arguing for peace..”

• ‘Peace’ Has Become A Swear Word – Hungarian FM (RT)

It is wrong that “peace” has become a curse word in international politics, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has insisted. The fighting between Russia and Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East are at risk of escalating and could “undermine global security at any moment,” Szijjarto said in his speech at the Summit of the Future at UN headquarters in New York on Monday. Humanity could be faced with two “sad” scenarios if tensions keep mounting: the outbreak of the Third World War or the world being divided into blocs again, he warned. The question now is whether such outcomes could be avoided and “whether the global pro-peace majority can ensure that the word ‘peace’ is not used as a swear word in international politics,” the foreign minister stressed.

“European politicians usually argue in favor of diplomacy and peaceful solutions to certain wars if they are far away from Europe, but nowadays, unfortunately, a war is going on in Europe, and those who argue in favor of peace are immediately stigmatized, attacked and criticized,” he said. According to Szijjarto, those who are calling for a diplomatic solution to the Ukrainian crisis are being “branded [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s puppets and Russian spies, even as Europe is itself adding fuel to the conflict.” The international political system must undergo a fundamental change for the current problems to be resolved, and the UN has “a major role” to play in this, he argued.

“Diplomacy should provide the tools for international policy-making, which should be based on dialogue… We must cease attempts to discredit those arguing for peace,” he stressed. Unlike most EU member states, Hungary has refused to supply weapons to Ukraine during the conflict with Russia, criticized the bloc’s sanctions against Moscow, and consistently called for a diplomatic solution to the crisis. In July, after Budapest had assumed the European Council’s half-year rotating presidency, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban embarked on a ‘peace mission’ in an attempt to settle the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. He visited Ukraine, Russia and China, as well as met with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in the US.

His plan reportedly includes making concessions to Russia regarding NATO expansion in Europe, which Moscow has listed as one of the key reasons for launching its military operation in February 2022. However, Orban’s initiative faced harsh criticism in Brussels, with the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, insisting that the Hungarian PM was “not representing the EU in any form” and European Council President Charles Michel labeling the peace mission “a problem” and saying that it was “not acceptable.”

Read more …

They have enhanced the charges now.

• Trump: DOJ, FBI ‘Mishandling, Downplaying’ Second Assassination Attempt (JTN)

Former President Donald Trump on Monday issued a scathing statement against the FBI and Department of Justice, accusing them of “mishandling and downplaying” the second assassination attempt against him. Trump became the subject of an apparent assassination attempt in mid-September while golfing at his Palm Beach course. During that incident, the Secret Service engaged with an armed suspect after an agent noticed the barrel of an AK-47 protruding from the bushes where he was hiding. The suspect fled and authorities subsequently arrested Ryan Wesley Routh, 58, in connection with the incident. Routh currently faces gun charges for possessing a firearm while a felon and possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number. “The Kamala Harris/Joe Biden Department of Justice and FBI are mishandling and downplaying the second assassination attempt on my life since July,” Trump said.

“The charges brought against the maniac assassin are a slap on the wrist. It’s no wonder, since the DOJ and FBI have been coming after me nonstop with Weaponized Lawfare since I announced my first Historic Campaign for the Presidency.” Trump further accused the DOJ and FBI of a “conflict of interest” and insisted the agencies were obsessed with “getting Trump.” He then insisted that state authorities would bring a more rigorous prosecution. “If the DOJ and FBI cannot do their job honestly and without bias, and hold the aspiring assassin responsible to the full extent of the Law, Governor Ron DeSantis and the State of Florida have already agreed to take the lead on the investigation and prosecution,” he added. “Florida charges would be much more serious than the ones the FBI has announced. The TRUTH would be followed, wherever it leads.”

Read more …

First, ‘only a sitting president gets max protection’, then ‘he already has the same protection’, and now even ‘that protection has to be enhanced’.

• Trump’s Protection To Be Enhanced – NBC (RT)

Security around former US President Donald Trump will be heightened in light of the recent assassination attempts on the Republican presidential nominee, NBC News reported on Monday citing a Secret Service official. Trump was targeted during a rally in Pennsylvania in July, when a lone gunman managed to fire several shots at the former president, grazing his ear, killing one audience member and injuring another two. Earlier this month, another would-be assassin, 58-year-old Ryan Wesley Routh, was arrested by the Secret Service after being spotted near a Trump-owned golf course in Florida apparently trying to take a shot at the former president. The would-be assassin was found with a Soviet-made rifle and a backpack full of armor plates.

“Given recent events, the Secret Service is taking a heightened posture in its protection of the former president,” an agency official told NBC News. According to the outlet, the new security measures have already been put in place and could be seen on Monday when Trump got off his plane in Pennsylvania with a Secret Service agent following closely behind him. Last week, the US House of Representatives also passed a bill to boost Secret Service protections for all presidential nominees, including Trump, Vice President Kamala Harris, and their running mates.

Specifically, the new bill requires that the Secret Service apply “the same standards for determining the number of agents required to protect presidents, vice presidents, and major presidential and vice presidential candidates.” “We as a federal government have a responsibility to ensure the safety and the well-being of these candidates. One of them is going to be president, and the election should be decided by voters at the ballot box — not by an assassin’s bullet,” Congressman Mike Lawler, who introduced the legislation, told reporters on Friday. “If the argument by the Secret Service is that they don’t have enough resources or they don’t have enough manpower, then that needs to be addressed immediately,” he said.

Read more …

“..civilian leadership at the Pentagon admittedly openly they would not comply with Trump’s wishes..”

“..President Trump banter that you all are familiar with, and in no way, shape, or form did I interpret that as an order or direction..”

• Trump Urged Use Of Troops To Protect Capitol On Jan. 6, But Was Rebuffed (JTN)

Then-President Donald Trump gave clear instructions to Pentagon brass days before the Jan. 6 riots to “do whatever it takes” to keep the U.S. Capitol safe, including deploying National Guard or active-duty troops, but top officials did not comply because of political concerns, according to transcripts of bombshell interviews conducted by the Defense Department’s chief watchdog that shine new light on government disfunction ahead of the historic tragedy. Gen. Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff, confirmed to the Pentagon inspector general three years ago that during a Jan. 3, 2021, Oval Office meeting Trump pre-approved the use of National Guard or active duty troops to keep peace in the nation’s capital on the day Congress was to certify the results of the 2020 election. Milley’s interviews were among several key to transcripts obtained by House Administration Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., and shared with Just the News.

“The President just says, ‘Hey look at this. It’s going to be a large amount of protesters come in here on the 6th, and make sure that you have sufficient National Guard or Soldiers to make sure it’s a safe event,’” Milley told the inspector general in one of two interviews he did in spring 2021 during a probe of the Pentagon’s response to Jan. 6. Milley said then-Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, himself a former general, assured Trump there was an adequate safety plan for Pentagon assistance to Washington, D.C. “Miller responds by saying, ‘Hey, we’ve got a plan, and we’ve got it covered.’ And that’s about it,” Milley recalled. Milley confirmed a second time during the interviews that Trump was clear in his wishes. “It was just what I just described, which was, ‘Hey, I don’t care if you use Guard, or soldiers, active-duty soldiers, do whatever you have to do. Just make sure it’s safe,” the general told the IG.

The transcripts of Milley’s April 8, 2021, and April 16, 2021, interviews confirm reporting by Just the News two years ago that Trump wanted troops to keep the capital city safe. But other transcripts gathered by Loudermilk during his subcommittee’s ongoing probe of Jan. 6 security failures show civilian leadership at the Pentagon admittedly openly they would not comply with Trump’s wishes, with some saying they did not like the optics of armed soldiers or Guardsmen roaming the Capitol with weapons during what was supposed to be a peaceful transition of power.

[..] ex-Defense Secretary Miller told Congress that Trump gave a specific number of troops he wanted to see made available for security ahead of Jan. 6. “The President commented that they were going to need 10,000 troops the following day…I interpreted it as a bit of presidential banter or President Trump banter that you all are familiar with, and in no way, shape, or form did I interpret that as an order or direction,” Miller testified. But Milley, the former Joint Chiefs chairman, said he did not recall that number ever being uttered in the meetings with Trump. “There was no discussion of 10,000 troops,” the retired four-star general said.

The transcripts also provide some hints that top Pentagon officials personally disliked the 45th president. For instance, former Acting Secretary Miller at one point compared the former president to Cuba’s most infamous communist leader, the late Fidel Castro. “Everyone was like, ‘Did you listen to the President’s speech?’ I’m like, ‘The guy speaks for 90 minutes, it’s like Castro or something. No. I’ve got work to do,” Miller told the IG at one point.

Read more …

“Zelensky… could have stopped this war before it started..” [..] “That’s why he has to continue this rhetoric, to stay in power.”

• Zelensky Leaving Ukrainians to Die for BlackRock, Deep State (Miles)

While politicians wage a propaganda war to ensure continued funding for the Western proxy conflict against Russia, average Ukrainians are left to suffer for the sake of powerful outside interests, according to one whistleblower and former diplomat. Analyst Andrii Telizhenko, who previously served in Ukraine’s government but fled the country after facing opposition to his anti-war beliefs, joined Sputnik’s The Final Countdown program Monday, lamenting the fate of hundreds of thousands of young Ukrainian men and women who have sacrificed their lives for the intractable US-backed conflict. The former government official said Kiev has lost 970,000 troops since 2022, confirming previous analysis that has placed the number of Ukrainian deaths during the conflict at close to one million. “Zelensky… could have stopped this war before it started,” said Telizhenko of the controversial figure, whose constitutional mandate as president of Ukraine ended in May. “That’s why he has to continue this rhetoric, to stay in power.”

“He can’t [negotiate] because he’s owned by the West, by Washington, by London, by BlackRock, by the military industrial complex, so they’re not gonna let him do that,” he continued. “They are making money out of this war and getting everything they can out of Ukraine and out of the resources that Ukraine has. So he has no other possibility. He could have stopped it as soon as he became the president in 2019.” “He could have [granted] Donbass… autonomy without losing hundreds of thousands of lives,” the former diplomat noted, faulting Zelensky for not following through on a peace plan reached with Russia in Istanbul or implementing the Minsk Accords after campaigning on the issue in 2019. Ukraine’s Western allies have intervened multiple times to prevent Ukraine from reaching a peaceful resolution to its differences with Russia, most recently when the Zelensky regime took part in talks with Moscow after the launch of its special military operation.

The United States intervened to put an end to at least two separate rounds of peace negotiations, according to testimony from former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and revelations about the role played by former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Neoconservative elements in Washington have long sought to respond to the perceived threat of Russian military and diplomatic power, but the interests of large Western financial institutions in seeing the proxy war continue have received less attention. The US investment firm BlackRock and Delaware-based bank JP Morgan have launched a massive fund for public and private interests to invest in Ukraine’s reconstruction, it was announced earlier this year. It has been estimated that some half a trillion dollars could be sought to help the country rebuild. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink has emerged as one of the Democratic Party’s most prominent supporters, working behind the scenes with a number of wealthy donors to help Democrats craft campaign strategy as the party ultimately chose to replace President Joe Biden on the presidential ticket.

The investment firm was subjected to significant criticism from Republican presidential candidates during the party’s primary earlier this year; BlackRock has publicly supported progressive-leaning environmental, social, and governance (ESG) corporate principles and has made Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) the largest recipient of its campaign contributions. “Zelensky is… destroying his own country, leaving people to die for BlackRock, for Washington, for London – and Lindsey Graham confirmed it,” Telizhenko claimed, referring to the hawkish senator’s unyielding support for the proxy conflict. “Ukraine has trillions of dollars… worth of resources. That’s why we’re fighting this war. This is why Zelensky has to continue this war.

Read more …

“The US government’s “obsession” with Ukraine is going to “get us all killed..”

• Russia Wins Ukraine Conflict Despite ‘Best’ US, NATO Weapons – Ron Paul (Sp.)

Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine is succeeding despite the regime in Kiev receiving billions of dollars in weapons from the United States and other NATO allies, former US Congressman Ron Paul said on Monday. “The fact is that Russia is winning the war despite hundreds of billions of dollars and the best weapons systems from the US and NATO countries. Each new shipment of increasingly sophisticated weapons does not produce battlefield victories for Ukraine. It only produces more dead Ukrainian soldiers and more profits for the weapons manufacturers,” Paul said in a column for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

The world narrowly avoided nuclear destruction last week due to the Biden administration reportedly denying Ukraine’s request to strike deep inside Russian territory, Paul said. However, previous requests by Ukraine have been initially denied then granted later, Paul added. The US government’s “obsession” with Ukraine is going to “get us all killed,” Paul said. US arms manufacturers are the driving force behind the country’s interventionist foreign policy, Paul said. It is “madness” to risk the future of the US for wars that have nothing to do with the country and serve no national interest, Paul said. The statement applies to both the conflict in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East, according to Paul.

Read more …

“Now what the Hezbollah are sending in are just rockets. They haven’t really put into effect their high precision missiles that they have yet.”

• ‘Israel Dying From One Thousand Cuts’ (Manley)

Israel and Hezbollah have now entered a stage in their nearly year-long conflict that reports say is verging on a full-out war. Citing Israel’s military, The Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday that “dozens of warplanes” struck southern Lebanon on Saturday night into Sunday morning. In response to attacks on Lebanon’s communication devices, Hezbollah targeted Israel’s Rafael Advanced Defense Systems which is one of the developers of its Iron Dome air-defense system over the weekend. Hezbollah also said that they targeted Israel’s Ramat David Airbase near Haifa.Michael Maloof, a former senior security policy analyst with the Office of the Secretary of Defense, joined Sputnik’s The Final Countdown on Monday to discuss the increasing hostility between Israel and Hezbollah.

“[Displacing people is a] major problem for the Israeli government. That’s why they’ve now decided to put Gaza aside and start extending northward because they need to try to reopen that northern part. Because you got increasingly disgruntled population of Israelis, many of whom are saying they’re never going to return. Now, the Israeli government’s got to find room for them and new placement,” Maloof explained. “They have to pay for it and it’s draining the Israeli economy.” A week ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s security cabinet made the decision to initiate the return of residents to the north of Israel an “official war goal”, BBC reported. About 60,000 people were evacuated from the area due to the conflict between Hezbollah and Israel as the conflict in the Gaza Strip nears its one-year anniversary.

During a military parade in Tehran on Saturday which commemorated the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988, Iran revealed a new solid-fueled ballistic missile dubbed the Jihad (Holy War). The missile has a reported range of up to 1,000 km and was designed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ aerospace division, Sputnik reported on Saturday. “[Iran is] going to have to respond sooner than later because Hezbollah is, I should say Lebanon, not just Hezbollah, but Lebanon is now being attacked with missiles, soon to be with ground forces. That’s from reports that I’m getting there. There are troops coming up from Gaza as well as tanks being rolled into the northern parts to enter southern Lebanon,” the analyst explained.

“So, this is getting [riskier] by the day. It isn’t just, as I said, a tit-for-tat. Now it’s escalating on a daily basis, and that portends something very serious,” the expert said. “…this [conflict] could extend because I also see we’re going to have the Iraqi Shia and the, potentially, the Iranians and the Yemenis coming in on this,” he added. “Now what the Hezbollah are sending in are just rockets. They haven’t really put into effect their high precision missiles that they have yet. And, they may be doing some around the Haifa area. I understand that Haifa has been hit pretty much, but all news about that has been blacked out.”

Read more …

“By continuously and incessantly sending weapons, the German company has managed to escape a serious financial crisis..”

• Thirst For Money Enriches Oligarchs, But Bankrupts Europe (SCF)

There are many reasons why Europe wants to prolong the war in Ukraine. Irrational liberal ideology and commitment to the project of a unipolar global order are undoubtedly the most important reasons. However, business and private profit cannot be ignored. According to many recent reports, there has been a huge increase in the profits of military-industrial companies in a number of Western countries, which explains the thirst for war of the pro-Ukrainian oligarchies. One of the most notorious cases of this war profiteering is taking place in Germany. The military giant Rheinmettall is seeing its profits growing amid a wave of systematic support for the Kiev regime. By continuously and incessantly sending weapons, the German company has managed to escape a serious financial crisis and now has a chance to once again rank among the world’s leading defense companies.

Rheinmettal ‘s business was in a bad way. The company was on the verge of abandoning the military sector to focus on civilian production, since most of its profits were coming from the production of automobile parts. However, Germany’s participation in military assistance programs led the corporation to revitalize its production of weapons and ammunition, once again becoming a global giant in the sector. Armored vehicles, tanks, ammunition, artillery pieces and air defense systems are some of the products in Rheinmettal’s current industrial catalog. After making adventures into industrial base projects on the Polish-Ukrainian border, the company is now working on opening a new factory in Saxony, where it expects to produce more than one hundred thousand artillery shells per year. Obviously, the German state is interested in these profits.

Recently, an action plan by the German government was announced to use part of the profits of Rheinmettal for reindustrialization projects – which seem more necessary now than ever, since Germany has been the country most affected by the anti-Russian madness. It only remains to be seen how this reindustrialization will be possible without Russian gas and cheap energy. In short, Germany believes it is profiting from the war. But this calculation is wrong – as well as dangerous and irresponsible. The profits do not go to the German people, but to a small number of defense oligarchs who employ an absolute minority of German society. Furthermore, the real economic revival is minimal, since the constant demand for weapons requires a systematic production routine that hinders any research project in technological innovation. In other words, Rheinmetall – as well as the entire Western military-industrial complex – is doomed to continually produce the same type of equipment according to its current samples, without any relevant innovation.

Industry without innovation has little chance of long-term success. Western weapons, which have already proven to be largely unsuitable for the Ukrainian battlefield, are likely to become increasingly obsolete, and there will be no capacity for technological renewal, since, thanks to anti-Russian sanctions, the precarious European society is reaching a pre-industrial stage of development. And, still on the subject of sanctions, it is important to emphasize that increased spending on the military industry could be a ticking time bomb for a country without reliable sources of cheap energy. After the blockade of Russian gas, Germany has been experiencing a period of profound energy instability, depending on unusual alternative sources to meet its needs – such as burning wood or buying American gas at exorbitant prices. This scenario is completely inconsistent with a situation of economic development and stability.

Germany will discover an old lesson in economics: the private profits of the oligarchies do not reflect a real situation of economic development and social well-being. Without solving the problems generated by sanctions – which obstruct technological innovation – and without relieving the pressure on the systematic production of weapons, not even constant demand will be able to save Germany and the whole of Europe from a deep crisis. Despite the profits, aid to Ukraine remains an obstacle to European economic progress, pleasing only transnational oligarchies.

Read more …

The arms industry loves the Baltics.

• European Union Morphs Into NATO’s Financial War Machine (SCF)

Two key posts – in foreign and defense policy – reveal the militarist and anti-Russia direction of the European Union. Ursula Von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission – which works as the executive branch of the European Union – announced her new team of commissioners for the next five years. Taking over as foreign affairs minister for the 27-nation bloc is Kaja Kallas who is a staunch Russophobe and vigorous supporter of Ukraine. Kallas has called for more EU and NATO military funding for Ukraine to “defeat Russia” and the break up of the Russian Federation. The former Estonian prime minister has led the movement to destroy Soviet Red Army monuments across the Baltic states. (This is while her investor husband continues to profit from doing business with Russia.)

Working closely alongside Kallas will be another rabid Russophobe, the former Lithuanian prime minister Andrius Kubilius, who is taking up a newly created EU post as defense commissioner. The creation of that post is an alarming sign of how the EU bloc has transitioned from a trade and political union to a military organization. But what’s even more alarming is the assigning of such an anti-Russia hawk as Kubilius to oversee military policy. At a time when relations between the EU and Russia have become so fraught with tensions, the European bloc is giving politicians from hostile Baltic states a driving seat to push relations even further towards conflict. Indeed, the first announcement Kubilius made as the prospective new defense commissioner was that the European Union would likely be at war with Russia in the next six to eight years. That assessment is shared by Kaja Kallas.

Kubilius said the sole focus during his tenure is ramping up military spending by the EU nations to boost NATO and aid Ukraine. He said that he will be working closely with foreign policy chief Kallas to tap funds. What this means is that the European Union is moving towards making it mandatory for national budgets to allocate more to military procurement. That’s a breakthrough for all the worst reasons. Kubilius is reportedly aiming for a budget of €500 billion over the next five years to be spent on the military by the EU. That increase would represent about half of the projected EU total budget. His comments indicate the purpose of the massive redirection of finances – to boost NATO. Kubilius noted that “the European Union has instruments to get larger financing, which NATO doesn’t.”

Read more …

“..the masses have been fed an education that has resulted in a general impoverishment, a sudden lowering of skills and irreparable cultural damage..”

• America In Collapse Plays World Leader (Pacini)

American officials have sacrificed national security for decades in pursuit of national superiority. Further arms supplies to Ukraine will not guarantee victory for Kiev, but will only lead to escalation. This is not in the interest of the U.S., which should first and foremost take care of its own population. Some might ask the American political leadership – of whatever faction it is – whether they have realised that the U.S. is no longer the boss of the world. If the answer is no, an extensive update dossier would be needed, to be delivered very quickly to the desk of the president on duty. There is no more time. We repeat: there is no more time. The United States is in the midst of a political crisis afflicting the entire West (which happens to be directly influenced by the USA) and has not yet managed to resolve it.

This poses a major disadvantage internationally, because all around there is a world that is moving forward, in a multipolar key, with a large number of governments and peoples who no longer want to remain under the heel of the invader and who are rebelling, some through markets, some through partnerships, some through revolutions. In all of this, the U.S. is in the midst of a social crisis that mirrors the unprecedented political one. The demise of the West, as Oswald Spengler put it, is louder than people think. Nobody cares about Americans any more, because there are basically no politicians who have America at heart any more, while they rather have their own interests at heart. This process of separation of governance-representation-people is one of the most delicate points of a transition phase that will lead the whole of humanity to have to rethink the political processes through which societies organise themselves.

The problem is that the U.S. is still an imperialist political system with tentacles all over the world, and the dollar has been the main currency dominating the planet for almost a century, so the consequences of this debacle will be equally unprecedented. The final metastasis of a sick society cannot be avoided. The American generational problem is very much reflected in the country’s foreign policy: while it is true that there is a masterful consistency with the long-term planning that was established at the beginning of the 20th century, it is equally true that things have not gone as strategists and analysts expected. Reality must now be reckoned with. The U.S. has a very exclusive, lobbying, elitist education system linked to a few power groups, whose dependence on the ‘matrices’ of London and Tel Aviv makes the success of candidates complex. Many are called but few are elected, to paraphrase the well-known gospel verse.

Instead, the masses have been fed an education that has resulted in a general impoverishment, a sudden lowering of skills and irreparable cultural damage, starting a process that is self-perpetuating through its own successes (which are actually failures). Who will think about Americans in the future? Not even the current election candidates have managed to find the minimum number of successors. While the belligerent rhetoric continues, the U.S. is being destabilised by an unprecedented illegal immigration, settling social protests with violence or a few doses of new cheap psychotropic drugs, producing some new mass entertainment to keep the protest within tolerable limits. Perhaps nobody really cares what will happen in the ‘New World’ across the Atlantic Ocean. Or perhaps they care enough to let the murderer die his own death.

Read more …

“We have hundreds where they actually mark on the form, ‘hello, not a citizen,’ and they still get registered to vote..”

• Non-Citizens Added To States’ Voter Rolls Through DMV (JTN)

Non-citizens have been added to several states’ voter rolls largely through motor vehicle departments, sometimes even after they have explained that they are not U.S. citizens. States have been discovering non-citizens on their voter rolls over the years, with many being added through the “motor voter” process at motor vehicle departments that began with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA). If non-citizens are seeking to become naturalized citizens, then being illegally registered to vote can prevent that from occurring. An election integrity group has examined states’ voter rolls for years, finding many non-citizens who are illegally registered to vote across the country. J. Christian Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), said on a Just the News special report with The Association of Mature American Citizens to be aired Tuesday that non-citizens had been registered to vote in Pennsylvania for decades.

“Pennsylvania had been registering non-citizens, by admission – this wasn’t some conspiracy on the internet – and they admitted they had been registering non-citizens for 20 years at PennDOT, and it was a glitch, they called it,” Adams said. “So we use the National Voter Registration Act to go in to try to get the records of how bad the problem was, the records of how they fixed the problem, or allegedly fixed it, and they’ve been stonewalling us for about seven years.” He explained that PILF had oral arguments earlier this month before “the Third Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, defending our win. Hopefully, eventually, Pennsylvania coughs up the records.” In 2017, Pennsylvania Secretary of State Al Schmidt, a Republican who was a Philadelphia city commissioner at the time, told a Pennsylvania Senate committee that there were over 100,000 matches of voter registration records to state driver’s license numbers with Immigration and Naturalization Service indicators.

The matches don’t mean that all of those people were registered to vote, but Schmidt argued: “We’re not talking about an insignificant number here. We’re talking about a potentially very significant number of thousands and tens of thousands.” The Pennsylvania Department of State announced in September 2017 that records indicated 1,160 non-citizens since 1972 had requested their voter registrations be canceled. Meanwhile, in California, PILF filed a federal lawsuit in February against the Alameda County Registrar of Voters for allegedly violating the NVRA by not disclosing records of foreign nationals registering to vote and voting for more than 20 years. Non-citizens have been placed on voter rolls through motor vehicle departments by lying about their citizenship, Adams also noted. “[W]e’ve collected over the years of the data on how non-citizens get in, and it’s largely by not telling the truth in the motor voter process. And it includes people here on green cards, people here legally,” Adams added.

“Most of the people who get registered to vote, according to the data we’ve collected, are actual, legal residents, like 90% of them, 95%. And so they get sucked into the system, through motor voter, through DMV, and they get registered to vote that way, and it’s a big problem,” he continued. However, sometimes, non-citizens still get on states’ voter rolls despite explaining their citizenship status. “People get registered to vote when they tell, on their voter registration form, the election officials, that they are not a citizen,” Adams said. “We have hundreds where they actually mark on the form, ‘hello, not a citizen,’ and they still get registered to vote,” he explained.

Read more …

“The TPS (Temporary Permanent Status) program “came from the White House and is a Homeland Security policy..”

• Not Just Springfield, Haitians Being Flown To Small Towns Nationwide (Blankley)

Haitians are not just arriving in Springfield, Ohio, but also in small rural towns nationwide as a result of several Biden-Harris administration policies. Since fiscal 2021, more than 485,000 Haitian illegal border crossers, a record, have been reported by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The overwhelming majority were reported this fiscal year, nearly 216,000, compared to 48,727 in fiscal 2021. Since fiscal 2021 through August, the majority have been apprehended at the southwest border of nearly 262,000, followed by nearly 221,000 nationwide and nearly 2,300 at the northern border, according to the data. Additionally, since July, 205,000 Haitians have been released through the CHNV parole program, according to CBP data. Of the more than 765,000 illegal foreign nationals released into the country through the CBP One app, the top nationality is Haitian.

Through these programs, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas also extended Temporary Permanent Status to them and granted work authorization. All of these programs are illegal, state attorneys general who’ve sued to stop them, argue. U.S. House Republicans also cited them as among the many illegal actions Mayorkas caused them to impeach him. Mayorkas has since only expanded the programs and extended TPS. When responding to the Haitian influx, local officials claim Haitians are there to work and are contributing to society despite claims by residents to the contrary. The city of Springfield claims a “surge in our population over the last several years, primarily due to an influx of legal immigrants,” suggesting that Springfield “is an appealing place for many reasons including lower cost of living and available work.”

Springfield Mayor Bob Rue has said “my hands are tied in many ways” about the influx of Haitians, pointing to a designation they were given by the Biden-Harris administration. The TPS program “came from the White House and is a Homeland Security policy,” he said at a recent city commission meeting. Springfield residents have argued the overwhelming majority of Haitians are enrolling in welfare and not working; have caused increased crime and there aren’t enough police to deal with it; and residents are being killed by Haitian drivers. Rue has expressed concerns about the dangerous driving conditions, saying, “I have almost been hit myself.”

Read more …

“..rapid chargers cost 24.1p per mile, while slower chargers cost 16.4p per mile. This is roughly double the cost of a diesel car at 12.5p per mile, with petrol cars costing 14.5p per mile.”

• EVs “Up To Twice As Expensive” To Run As Regular Gas Cars In The UK (ZH)

As if the EV boom needed another nail its in coffin, the UK has now produced figures showing that driving and electric vehicle is “up to twice as expensive” as driving a regular gas powered car. Data from the app ZapMap has confirmed that operating an electric vehicle (EV) can cost over 24p per mile, compared to 12.5p per mile for a diesel vehicle, according to Yahoo Finance and The Telegraph. And charging an EV at a rapid or ultra-rapid roadside station can reach up to 80p per kilowatt hour. According to calculations by The Times, a typical electric car travels 3.3 miles per kWh, making rapid chargers cost 24.1p per mile, while slower chargers cost 16.4p per mile. This is roughly double the cost of a diesel car at 12.5p per mile, with petrol cars costing 14.5p per mile.

A round trip from London to Penzance would cost £148 using rapid chargers, compared to £77 for diesel and £89 for petrol. Charging at home is much cheaper, costing less than a third of rapid chargers. ZapMap noted a 5% rise in rapid charger prices over the past year, despite a 30% drop in electricity wholesale prices and falling oil prices, the report says. The Yahoo report says that even drivers using slower public chargers, which can fully recharge a vehicle in about 30 minutes, pay more per mile than petrol or diesel users. The number of rapid and ultra-rapid charging stations in Britain has risen by 40%, now exceeding 12,500. However, electric car sales have slowed, making up 17.2% of new registrations in 2024, down from 18.7% in late 2022. Currently, rapid chargers cost EV drivers 24.1p per mile, while slower chargers cost 16.4p per mile.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Meloni

 

 

Shepherd
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838335325984129480

 

 

Diabetes

 

 

Bees

 

 

Tiny house dragon

 

 

Cats
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838454090931577271

 

 

Kitty

 

 

Evzones
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838465693664034989

 

 

Ali

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 23 2024

Sep 232024
 
 September 23, 2024  Posted by at 9:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  57 Responses »


M. C. Escher Doric columns1945

 

• Trump Confirms 2024 Is His Final Presidential Campaign (RT)
• 741 Deep Staters Join Cheneys, Iran, Putin In Endorsing Harris (ZH)
• AG Garland Says He ‘Won’t Allow DOJ To Be Used As Political Weapon’ (RCW)
• Zelensky Launches Attack On J.D. Vance (RT)
• Just Days Left Until A Crippling Port Strike Paralyzes The East Coast (ZH)
• Scramble to Tighten Europe’s Borders (Sp.)
• Everything You Need to Know about the Conflict in Ukraine (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Who Seeks Russia’s ‘Defeat’ Should Remember Napoleon, Hitler – Schroeder (Sp.)
• Russia Has No Alternative to Victory in Ukraine Conflict – Kremlin (Sp.)
• Talk of Nuclear Red Button ‘Inappropriate’ – Lavrov (RT)
• US Actions Against RT Are ‘Terrorism’ – Russian Human Rights Chief (RT)
• US Crackdown On RT To Fall Short of Expectations – NYT (RT)
• Scott Ritter: Israel’s Collapse Is Imminent Amid Escalation In Lebanon (MPN)
• Secret Service Agents to Be Disciplined Over July 13 Trump Shooting (ET)
• Congress Reaches Shutdown Deal Without ‘Proof Of Citizenship’ SAVE Act (ZH)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Megyn

 

 

Undecided

 

 

Hillary

 

 

Stossel

 

 

If you’re going to film Amish, of course you do it … in front of a gas station.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1837532788683092395

 

 

Trump health
https://twitter.com/i/status/1837910884078727642

 

 

Trump racist

 

 

Elon communism
https://twitter.com/i/status/1837984119092883605

 

 

 

 

“No, I don’t. I think that that will be it. I don’t see it all..”

• Trump Confirms 2024 Is His Final Presidential Campaign (RT)

US Republican candidate Donald Trump has said that he would not seek another re-election bid if he loses the White House to Vice President Kamala Harris in November, During an interview on the TV show Full Measure on Sunday, Trump was asked whether he would consider launching another campaign in four years if he is unsuccessful this time around. “No, I don’t. I think that that will be it. I don’t see it all,” the former president replied, adding that he remains optimistic about winning the election this year. “I think that hopefully we’re gonna be successful,” he said. Trump earlier ruled out participating in another presidential debate with Harris, after CNN announced that the Democrat had accepted an invitation for a showdown on October 23. Harris replaced President Joe Biden as the Democratic Party’s candidate due to growing concerns over Biden’s electability given his age and the disastrous televised debate with Trump in June.

“The problem with another debate is that it’s just too late,” Trump told supporters at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina, explaining that the “voting has already started.” He previously slammed the ABC debate he had with Harris on September 10 as “dishonest” and “totally rigged,” while many allies claimed that the moderators were biased in favor of the Democrat. Trump argued that Harris only wants a rematch “because she lost” and said that he would only consider another face-to-face debate hosted on a “fair network.” Trump was elected in 2016 by beating Hillary Clinton. He lost the presidency to Biden in 2020 and has since insisted that the election was rigged. While the US Constitution bans a person from serving as president for more than two terms, Trump had floated the idea of somehow “negotiating” a third term if he gets re-elected.

Read more …

“Vice President Harris has all the leadership qualities needed to be a strong commander in chief. She’s prepared. She’s strategic. She’s understands all sides of an issue..”

• 741 Deep Staters Join Cheneys, Iran, Putin In Endorsing Harris (ZH)

In a surprise to no one, 741 ‘high-ranking national security officials’ have endorsed Kamala Harris’ bid for the White House – with some suggesting that former President Trump has a “scary authoritarian streak.’ Our endorsement of Vice President Harris is an endorsement of freedom and an act of patriotism. It is an endorsement of democratic ideals, of competence, and of relentless optimism in America’s future. “Vice President Harris has all the leadership qualities needed to be a strong commander in chief. She’s prepared. She’s strategic. She’s understands all sides of an issue,” Navy Rear Admiral Michael Smith told The Hill. “We saw as much during the debate.” “As we’ve seen for nearly a decade, however, former President Trump has none of those qualities, and he has a scary authoritarian streak,” Smith continued.

The Deep Staters join the likes of Dick Cheney and, more recently, an IRS-affilliated union in their support of the VP. They’re also in alighment with Iran – which offered ‘stolen, non-public’ Trump material to the (then) Biden-Harris campaign. Russian President Vladimir Putin recently joked that he’s thrown his support behind her as well.

“We do not agree on everything, but we all adhere to two fundamental principles,” reads the letter from the NatSec officials. “First, we believe America’s national security requires a serious and capable Commander-in-Chief. Second, we believe American democracy is invaluable.” “Each generation has a responsibility to defend it,” the letter continues. “That is why we, the undersigned, proudly endorse Kamala Harris to be the next President of the United States.” The signatories praise Harris for her contrast to Trump, who they call “impulsive and ill-informed,” citing his relations with Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and Kim Jong Un. “Our endorsement of Vice President Harris is an endorsement of freedom and an act of patriotism. It is an endorsement of democratic ideals, of competence, and of relentless optimism in America’s future,” the letter concludes.

Read more …

It is only ALL the DOJ has been doing for 4+ years..

• AG Garland Says He ‘Won’t Allow DOJ To Be Used As Political Weapon’ (RCW)

The Justice Department continues to allocate resources to the special counsel’s office; recent financial disclosures show Smith and DOJ spent more than $35 million in the first 14 months of the special counsel’s investigation. That figure likely could double by the time his appointment ends, which is at the discretion of the attorney general, or include the amount spent on the dual investigations before Smith was appointed. Smith’s continued pursuit of Trump has drawn renewed scrutiny and skepticism since the Supreme Court challenged his original indictment as a broad attack on presidential immunity. On July 1, the court published its decision in Trump v. United States. Authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the 6-3 opinion for the first time in history established three categories of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution: official acts, outer perimeter acts, and private acts.

Official acts, the court held, are covered by immunity while outer perimeter acts – such as Trump’s communications with Vice President Mike Pence related to the J6 indictment – are what Roberts described as “presumptively immune.” On that score, Roberts continued, “it is ultimately the Government’s burden to rebut the presumption of immunity.” The court further concluded that former presidents are not immune from prosecution for “unofficial” or private acts. In order to hew to the decision, Smith filed a superseding indictment on Aug. 28 that partially gutted his original indictment, which had been handed up a year earlier. Since the Supreme Court determined Trump’s interactions with DOJ officials fell safely within the core constitutional authority of a sitting president, Smith had to cut nine pages of evidence and drop a co-conspirator, former Assistant Associate Attorney General Jeffrey Clark.

Although the watered-down indictment contains the same four counts as the first version, the case remains on uncertain legal ground given the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling and opinion in the Fischer case. But the special counsel, presumably with the consent of Attorney General Garland, is reinvigorating the case to coincide with the final weeks of the 2024 presidential campaign. Long-standing DOJ rules preventing the department from interfering in national elections are once again being ignored as Smith reappears in the headlines as early voting begins this month in several states including Virginia, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. In early October early voting commences in the key swing states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina, and Nevada.

Smith found a like-minded ally in Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, the Obama appointee presiding over the unprecedented case. It was Chutkan’s 2023 order denying Trump’s claims of immunity from prosecution that the Supreme Court overturned and sent back to her for further proceedings. Chutkan, who has a record of making anti-Trump statements in court and who imposed a gag order on the former president last year, told Trump’s lawyers at a Sept. 5 hearing that the election is not a factor in her calculation as to the next steps. “I understand there is an election impending, and I’ve said before and I say again that the electoral process and the timing of the election and what needs to happen before or shouldn’t happen before the election is not relevant here,” Chutkan informed John Lauro, Trump’s lead attorney in the J6 case. “This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule,” she added.

Read more …

“Washington’s current “policy is ‘throw money at this problem, hope the Ukrainians are able to achieve a military victory’ that even the Ukrainians are saying ‘we can’t achieve..’”

• Zelensky Launches Attack On J.D. Vance (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has slammed former President Donald Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, as “too radical” in his views on ending Kiev’s conflict with Moscow. Zelensky’s comments were published as he arrived in the US, where he is expected to attend the UN General Assembly in New York and meet with President Joe Biden at the White House. Speaking to The New Yorker, the Ukrainian leader suggested that “Trump doesn’t really know how to stop the war even if he might think he knows how.” When asked about Trump’s vice presidential pick, Zelensky replied: “He is too radical.” “His message seems to be that Ukraine must make a sacrifice,” Zelensky said. “This brings us back to the question of the cost and who shoulders it. The idea that the world should end this war at Ukraine’s expense is unacceptable.”

“This would be an awful idea, if a person were actually going to carry it out, to make Ukraine shoulder the costs of stopping the war by giving up its territories,” Zelensky said. He argued that such a concession would not end the fighting, and dismissed the Trump team’s promise to end the conflict as “just sloganeering.” Vance, a senator from Ohio, opposes the continued US funding of Ukraine and voted against a $61 billion aid bill that Congress passed this year. He argued that the money sent to Kiev was only fueling “the most corrupt leadership and government in Europe,” without achieving the goal of ending the conflict. Washington’s current “policy is ‘throw money at this problem, hope the Ukrainians are able to achieve a military victory’ that even the Ukrainians are saying ‘we can’t achieve,’” Vance told former US Navy SEAL and CIA contractor Shawn Ryan in an interview earlier this month.

In 2022, Vance said that he did not “really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another,” stating that he was more focused on domestic issues like illegal immigration and the fentanyl crisis. Vance has backed Trump’s claim that he would end the fighting purely through diplomatic means. He suggested that the settlement could resemble the “current line of demarcation between Russia and Ukraine” and include “a demilitarized zone.” He also argued that Russia should receive a “guarantee of neutrality” from Ukraine, and that Kiev should renounce plans to join NATO.

The Republican senator’s vision is a sharp contrast with the current US administration, which believes that a peace deal with Moscow should be made on Kiev’s terms. Biden’s White House has insisted that the US should support Ukraine with weapons and money for “as long as it takes.” Zelensky, meanwhile, has maintained that a peaceful solution is only possible if Russia recognizes its 1991 borders. Moscow has repeatedly said that such a demand is completely unacceptable.

Read more …

“A stoppage – the first since 1977 -..”. 36 days before the election.

• Just Days Left Until A Crippling Port Strike Paralyzes The East Coast (ZH)

Late last week, the CEO of Flexport – one of largest US supply-chain logistics operators – warned that “the biggest wild card in the presidential election that nobody’s talking about? The looming port strike that could shut down all East and Gulf Coast ports just 36 days before the election.” With just over a week to go until D-Day, authorities are gearing up as a threatened strike by dockworkers at ports along the East Coast and Gulf Coast draws closer. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is “coordinating with partners across the supply chain to prepare for any impacts” from a possible work stoppage by workers represented by the International Longshoremen’s Association as they negotiate with the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX), a Port Authority spokesperson told CBS MoneyWatch on Friday.

“We urge both sides to find common ground and keep the cargo flowing for the good of the national economy,” added the spokesperson, noting that $240 billion in goods move through the two ports each year and that such trade supports more than 600,000 local jobs. According to the union, a strike would affect ports from Maine to Texas, and cripple supply-chains worse than the immediate aftermath of the covid shutdown. A stoppage – the first since 1977 – could involve up to 45,000 workers at ports that account for roughly 60% of U.S. shipping traffic, leading to a major disruption of shipments, Oxford Economics said in a report. “Even a two-week strike could disrupt supply chains until 2025,” Grace Zwemmer, associate U.S. economist with Oxford, said in the report. As Rabobank’s Michael Every adds, “US businesses could miss the key Black Friday/Cyber Monday peak sales period.

Port trade is around $2.12trn, and 72% would grind to a halt, a one-day strike reportedly taking six days to recover from, a one-week strike in October creating bottlenecks until mid-November, not factoring in Red Sea disruptions caused by the not-terrorist Houthis.” If goods are then forced to shift to the US West Coast ports, Rabobank speculates that Asia-US freight rates could leap to $20,000, far above the peak seen in the last supply-chain crisis. That would mean firms with low margins might opt not to import at all, creating empty shelves. The ILA has threatened to strike if a new labor agreement with East Coast port terminal and shipping companies represented by the USMX is not reached by the time the current contract expires on October 1. Although the sides continue to negotiate, the odds of a rare strike that threatens to shut down some of the nation’s busiest ports are rising.

“There will be a shutdown, assuming that there’s is no intervention, at midnight on Monday the 30th,” Bethann Rooney, director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the nation’s second-busiest port, told a briefing earlier in the week. Should that occur, all activity loading and unloading cargo containers and automobiles would come to a standstill, while cruise ships would continue to operate, Rooney said. The Port Authority isn’t involved in the bargaining between the ILA and USMX, bur rather leases space at the ports to shipping companies. Terminal operators and ocean carriers are “working to bring in as many ships as possible” ahead of a potential walkout, said Rooney.

Those steps include “working with truckers and the rail carriers to get as much cargo out as humanly possible, as quickly as possible,” the port director said. The two ports are currently unloading about 20 large container ships a week, and they expect 150,000 containers to be unloaded ahead of the strike deadline, Rooney said. “At the same time, ocean carriers are beginning to put essentially embargoes on export cargo “so that it doesn’t come into East and Gulf coast ports and then wind up sitting there,” she said. Container ships carrying imports bound for Newark and Elizabeth in New Jersey and Staten Island in New York City will end up moored at specified spots in New York Harbor or off the coast during the strike, or remain at sea until they can come in. The Coast Guard and U.S. customs and Border Protection would oversee arriving ships at the port facilities once a strike was over.

Read more …

The European elites have beaten themselves. Holland will “officially ask the European Commission for an opt-out on EU asylum and migration policies”. So will Hungary. Others will follow. Schengen’s open borders are gone. Germany has border patrols now. Others will follow.

• Scramble to Tighten Europe’s Borders (Sp.)

The scramble to tighten border policies in some EU countries is a sign that politicians are desperately “trying to play catch up” with public concern, Dr. George Szamuely, a senior research fellow at the Global Policy Institute, told Sputnik. Europe’s migrant crisis was imposed by the elites on their own population, he stressed. It was part of a “fateful alliance among the big corporations that want cheap labor and the kind of multicultural advocates who think that that’s a good thing for Europe to be more diverse,” Szamuely noted, stressing that this is “what’s causing this intense political feeling because people don’t really want it. This is something that the elites had desired.”After Germany instituted sweeping checks at its borders and stronger deportation laws, the new Dutch government announced it was aiming to set in place “the strictest admission rules in the EU.”

Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof said on Friday that the government would officially ask the European Commission for an opt-out on EU asylum and migration policies. “We cannot continue to bear the large influx of migrants to our country. People are experiencing an asylum crisis,” Schoof said. Echoing the same sentiments, Hungary is also going to request an opt-out from the European Union’s migration policies, Hungarian Minister for EU Affairs Janos Boka said in a post on X. As it is, Hungary has traditionally opted for a tougher migration policy than the rest of the bloc. During the 2015 European migrant crisis, Prime Minister Viktor Orban rejected the resettlement of hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees coming from Syria, Afghanistan and other countries torn apart by NATO warmongering.

Geert Wilders, the right-wing leader of the PVV (PfE) – the party that came out on top in the last national elections in the Netherlands – described the Dutch official request to opt out of EU migration policy as a ‘mini-Nexit’ in a nod to Brexit. “Tens of hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers come into Europe and then make their way into the most prosperous parts of Europe, becoming an additional huge burden on countries,” underscored George Szamuely.Europe is witnessing “complete abuse of the asylum seeker scheme,” said the researcher, adding:“It is a combination of these anxieties, and the rise of anti-immigrant populist parties that is leading to the stricter measures or, at least, demands for stricter measures throughout Europe,” noted Szamuely.

Regarding the opt-out of EU rules, the expert noted that such an outcome is very difficult to achieve, as it requires renegotiating the treaty and “that’s not something that’s easily doable, and could take a long time […] because EU rules are supposed to be binding on all member states.” The issue of immigration is besetting one country after another, and results of elections in European countries are starkly reflecting this. The issue of unrestrained immigration helped Wilders and his populist right Freedom Party win a plurality of seats in the Netherlands’ House of Representatives last November. In Germany, the success of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party in regional elections piled pressure on the government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz to tackle the migrant issue and close its borders, temporarily ending the Schengen-Visiting Zone.

Read more …

“Putin has accepted insult after insult, provocation on top of provocation in order to avoid a war that means death for humanity. No one gives Putin credit for this.”

• Everything You Need to Know about the Conflict in Ukraine (Paul Craig Roberts)

For unknown reasons except perhaps surprise–Putin was at the Sochi Olympics– Putin did nothing to prevent Washington’s coup. For eight years Putin relied on the Minsk Agreement, which the West used to deceive him, while Washington built up a Ukrainian army capable of overthrowing the Donbas republics that broke away and resisted Ukraine’s persecution and murder of the Russian population. When Putin and Lavrov’s efforts during December 2021 and February 2022 to achieve a mutual defense agreement with the US and NATO were cold-shouldered by Washington, NATO, and the EU, Putin had no choice but to intervene in order to protect the Donbas, a former Russian province attached to Ukraine by Soviet leaders, from massacre, as the Israelis are doing in Gaza and the West Bank. The West disingenuously called Putin’s “limited military operation” confined to Donbas an “invasion of Ukraine.”

It was no such thing. The fact that it was not an invasion and conquest of Ukraine was Putin’s mistake. It is the limited nature of Putin’s intervention that is the cause of the possible explosion of the conflict into a nuclear war. Putin, being a mid-20th century American liberal, had trusted diplomatic relations and good will between nations and did not understand that the West was at war with Russia. He and his Foreign Minister kept stressing their “American partners” and belief in negotiations, while the West organized its attacks on Russia. These attacks now include attacks deep into Russia far removed from the battle front. Russia has suffered many attacks from low-flying drones that evade air defense systems. As I write, Nato Secretary Stoltenberg and the UK prime minister are urging the Biden regime to give approval to US/NATO firing long range missiles into Russia. Putin has said that this is the final red line that will force him to acknowledge that Russia is at war with the West.

NATO General Secretary Stoltenberg says the West does not need to pay attention to Putin’s threat, because “There have been many red lines declared by Putin before, and he has not escalated.” We have reached the point that I said we would reach. Putin by his failure to act in response to aggression now has his back to the wall. He has three choices: He can surrender. He can end the Ukraine conflict with force, which puts the West on notice that the West is at risk if the conflict continues, or he can continue to ignore reality, thereby leaving the initiative in the West’s hands where it has been throughout the conflict. We are faced with Putin’s mettle. Is he a warrior or an out-of-date American liberal? I agree that this question is unfair. Putin is the only statesman the world has at this crucial time when the world’s continued existence is in question.

Putin has accepted insult after insult, provocation on top of provocation in order to avoid a war that means death for humanity. No one gives Putin credit for this. Stoltenberg, a nonentity, mocks Putin. Biden, a nonentity, insults him. Zelensky, a nonentity, vows to defeat him. We can see Satan’s hold on the West when the only leader determined to preserve human existence is demonized. Despite his honorable characteristics, Putin is failing because he cannot recognize the extreme evil that confronts him and the country he represents. As England’s ambassador Craig Murray has reported, the Western world is criminalizing free speech. Washington’s investigations of Scott Ritter, Dimitri Simes, and others indicate that those who talk with Russians are being criminalized for aiding and abetting Russian disinformation, which is being equated with espionage. How can the dangerous situation be resolved when talk is prevented?

Read more …

“The Ukrainian crisis has served to consolidate Russian society, with Russians “convinced that the West is only using Ukraine as a spearhead to bring Russia to its knees..”

• Who Seeks Russia’s ‘Defeat’ Should Remember Napoleon, Hitler – Schroeder (Sp.)

Former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has taken flak from the political class of his home country over his support for continued dialogue between Russia and Europe amid the Ukraine crisis. The Social Democrat politician was the architect of the German ‘economic miracle’ of the 2000s, facilitated by boosting energy cooperation with Russia. Anyone dreaming about “defeating” Russia militarily needs a history lesson, Gerhard Schroeder has said. “I recommend that everyone who believes this look at the history books. From Napoleon to Hitler, everyone failed because of this,” the veteran statesman told German media. The Ukrainian crisis has served to consolidate Russian society, with Russians “convinced that the West is only using Ukraine as a spearhead to bring Russia to its knees,” Schroeder added.

The 80-year-old politician, who participated in the Istanbul peace talks in the spring of 2022, said that contrary to claims in Western media at the time, “peace was in reach,” and included a rejection of Kiev’s aspirations to join NATO. The Ukrainian government was not able to agree to the deal, with “more powerful circles” behind it blocking peace in the hopes that continuing the conflict would strategically weaken Russia or even trigger regime change, Schroeder said. Schroeder believes the West underestimates the risks of the Ukrainian crisis escalating into a wider conflict. “We Germans in particular should behave cautiously and constructively against the background of the Second World War and the crimes committed in the name of Germany,” he said. He called on the European Union to tie whatever aid it provides to Kiev with demands for serious and realistic scenarios for peace.

“This war will have to be ended through negotiations. In any case, it cannot be decided militarily. It will take compromises,” the former chancellor believes. A well-known critic of Donald Trump over his administration’s efforts to sabotage the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project with Russia in 2019-2020, Schroeder said he has nevertheless found himself linking his hopes for peace in Ukraine with the Republican candidate, saying he trusts him to end the conflict before his inauguration if he wins, as Trump has repeatedly promised. It is in Germany’s and Europe’s interests to see the Ukrainian conflict end, because after Ukraine, the former have been “among the biggest losers” of the current crisis, according to Schroeder. Unfortunately, he says, the solidarity between major European powers Germany and France that existed ahead of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 is lacking today, as is the recognition that there are situations in which European and US interests conflict with one another.

Read more …

It’s Existential.

• Russia Has No Alternative to Victory in Ukraine Conflict – Kremlin (Sp.)

Russia has no alternative to achieving victory in its military operation in Ukraine, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. “For Russia, there have been no other alternatives in history, and there is no alternative to our victory now,” Peskov said in an interview with Russian journalist Pavel Zarubin published on his Telegram channel. Russia should regard the West’s stance seriously, given its intentions to defeat the country both “strategically and tactically,” the spokesman added. “They openly say that their goal is to defeat Russia strategically and tactically. This obliges us to take this position very seriously, to shape our actions in consideration of this threat and to continue the special military operation in order to achieve all our goals, fulfill all set objectives and achieve victory ourselves,” Peskov said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Turkmen counterpart, Serdar Berdimuhamedow, reaffirmed their commitment to bolstering the strategic partnership between the two countries during a phone conversation, Peskov said. “During the phone conversation, Russian President Vladimir Putin warmly congratulated Turkmen President Serdar Berdimuhamedov on his birthday. The mutual commitment to further comprehensive strengthening of the Russian-Turkmen strategic partnership was confirmed,” the Kremlin said in a statement. The two presidents discussed preparations for the upcoming Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) summit in Moscow and the BRICS summit in Kazan, the statement said.

Read more …

“If we are talking about long-range missile weapons, it is clear to everyone that the Ukrainians themselves will not be able to use them..”

• Talk of Nuclear Red Button ‘Inappropriate’ – Lavrov (RT)

Russia has no wish to start a nuclear war and considers it “inappropriate” that its warnings of an escalation in the Ukraine conflict are being portrayed as an intention to use atomic weapons, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Fears of an escalation between Russia and NATO have been intensifying in recent weeks, as Western states have stepped up discussions about allowing Ukraine to conduct missile strikes deep in Russian territory. Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this month warned that such permission would be taken as the West’s direct involvement in the conflict and would be met with an appropriate response. His words were taken by some to mean Moscow was ready to deploy nuclear weapons. In an interview with Sky News Arabia, Lavrov was asked whether this was the case.

The minister responded that while Russia indeed has “weapons that would have serious consequences for the handlers of the Ukrainian regime” – meaning the US and its Western allies – it has no wish to use them. “We talk about red lines, counting on the fact that our assessments and statements will be heard by smart, decision-making people. To claim that if tomorrow someone doesn’t do what we ask, we will press the ‘red button,’ is inappropriate,” the minister stated, adding that he believes Western decision makers understand this, because “nobody wants a nuclear war.” Lavrov stressed that Moscow also does not want an escalation of the Ukraine conflict that would drag the West in as a direct participant, but reiterated that this would inevitably be the case if Kiev is allowed to use long-range weapons deep inside Russia.

“It would be a direct war of NATO against Russia… NATO is already waging a war against Russia, but it is a hybrid war through the hands of Ukrainians. If we are talking about long-range missile weapons, it is clear to everyone that the Ukrainians themselves will not be able to use them,” he stated, explaining that tasks such as target guidance, data collection from satellites and forming flight assignments can only be carried out by specialists from countries that produce a particular weapon. Lavrov went on to accuse Western officials who are seriously considering allowing Ukraine to make indiscriminate attacks on Russia of having the “mindset of a child” playing with matches.

While there are still limitations on Ukraine’s use of some Western-made long-range weapons systems, Kiev has already repeatedly used them to target Russian territory, mainly striking civilians in Crimea and Donbass. In the past month, however, the US and UK have suggested they might allow these weapons to be used to strike targets deeper into internationally recognized Russian territory. The European Parliament earlier this week adopted a resolution calling on the EU to allow Ukraine to strike deep inside Russia with Western-supplied weapons.

Read more …

“..the public has not been provided with “a single piece of evidence” to prove their accusations against RT..”

• US Actions Against RT Are ‘Terrorism’ – Russian Human Rights Chief (RT)

The actions taken by US authorities against RT can be qualified as terrorism and a violation of media freedom, Russia’s top human rights official Tatyana Moskalkova has said. Moskalkova was commenting on a statement by the US-based Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), which has demanded that President Joe Biden’s administration provide the public with evidence to support their claim that the Russian channel was “engaged in information operations, covert influence, and military procurement.” On Thursday, FPF said the information released to justify new sanctions against the news channel, “did not include declassification of the underlying documents, but only their findings.” Writing on Telegram on Saturday, Moskalkova argued the public has not been provided with “a single piece of evidence” to prove their accusations against RT, but “the repressive mechanism has begun to work.”

The United States is cracking down on Russian media, and some journalists have had to leave the country for safety reasons, Moskalkova wrote. She also mentioned an incident in which an RT employee was searched and interrogated by FBI agents. “It is outrageous when 20 FBI agents burst into a woman’s house in the morning, arrange a search and a five-hour interrogation, seize mobile devices, and examine personal correspondence,” the official explained. Such actions “cannot be qualified otherwise than as terrorism and infringement of media freedom by the United States, contradicting the fundamental principles of democracy, which is so often talked about by the US authorities,” she emphasized.

Earlier in September, Washington announced new sanctions against several Russian media outlets, including RT, claiming they are attempting to undermine democracy in the US and elsewhere and eroding global support for Ukraine. Following the new restrictions, US tech giant Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, banned several Russian news networks, including RT, citing their alleged “foreign interference activity.” On Saturday, video-sharing platform TikTok deleted the accounts of RT International and several branches of the Sputnik news outlet.

Read more …

“State Department spokesman Jamie Rubin blamed RT for the fact that “so much of the world has not been as fully supportive of Ukraine as you would think they would be.”

• US Crackdown On RT To Fall Short of Expectations – NYT (RT)

The latest US crackdown on RT will ultimately not prevent it from bringing alternative viewpoints to audiences in the West and elsewhere, but will somewhat damage its outreach to new followers, the New York Times reported on Saturday, citing experts. Last week, the US announced a new raft of sanctions targeting several Russian outlets, after Washington claimed they had been trying to covertly “undermine democracy.” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken accused RT of “functioning as a de facto arm of [Russian] intelligence.” State Department spokesman Jamie Rubin blamed RT for the fact that “so much of the world has not been as fully supportive of Ukraine as you would think they would be.” Following the move, US tech giant Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, banned several Russian news networks.

Moscow has condemned the restrictions, labeling them a crackdown on free speech and an outright “aggression.” Several media experts told the NYT that while the sanctions “will sharply reduce the network’s audience numbers” in the short term, RT “can move to other outlets for distribution,” adding that “the Kremlin, when thwarted in the past, has quickly devised new ways to get its message out.” The paper recalled the impact of EU and Canadian sanctions on RT following the start of the Ukraine conflict, noting that while viewership fell off a cliff for a time, the outlet soon started operating through new resources. “If you are a really hardcore RT follower, you’ll find a way to access it,” Bret Schafer, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund told the NYT, adding that the sanctions, however, “really hurt… their ability to span platforms, to reach new audiences.”

RT relies heavily on messaging that portrays the West as “an imperialist aggressor,” the paper said, helping to explain why it is “extremely popular” in Latin America, the Middle East and Africa. “A big part of Russia’s PR strategy is to tap into criticism of America… and right now they have the easiest time in the world in that regard because American policy when it comes to Israel and Gaza is incredibly unpopular worldwide,” said H.A. Hellyer, a nonresident scholar on Middle East politics at the Carnegie Endowment. According to the NYT article, RT also has a variety of means for getting its message out through mirror sites, Reddit, or other platforms like Telegram, X, and WhatsApp.

Read more …

“Hamas right now, in my opinion, is winning this conflict. They are winning it strategically. They are paying a horrible price for it.”

• Scott Ritter: Israel’s Collapse Is Imminent Amid Escalation In Lebanon (MPN)

Anybody with any shred of common sense will immediately throw away their Western-made electronic device and source one from a country such as China, where Israel is not going to be able to infiltrate and corrupt the integrity of the electronic device to achieve either intelligence collection goals or assassination [goals].” While the Israeli military is vastly better armed and funded than Hamas, Ritter claimed that it was actually the Palestinian force that has come out on top after 12 months of fighting, stating: “Hamas right now, in my opinion, is winning this conflict. They are winning it strategically. They are paying a horrible price for it. But on October 6, nobody was talking about the creation of a Palestinian state. Today, it is on the tip of the tongue of so many people around the world. Why? Because the world has seen the truth about Israel.”

Not only that, but Israel is eating itself from within. Its military is seriously depleted; its economy has been shattered by rocket attacks, and by 12 months of war economy; and its society is beginning to fragment. The United States, too, has been damaged. It is increasingly isolated on the world stage, and its prestige is slipping. Fewer nations look to Washington for leadership and, instead, see organizations such as BRICS as the future. Later this month, a BRICS summit will be held in Kazan, Russia, bringing its core member nations together with its new invitees. Palestine will be a key issue, and no doubt countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates will be put under pressure to stop covertly aiding Israel and come to a solution to end the war.

BRICS has already succeeded in helping to lessen tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and it is possible that the new bloc can act to bring about peace in a manner that many hoped the United Nations would be able to do. Whatever happens, it is clear that October 7 fundamentally changed the situation for Israel and Palestine forever.

Read more …

Secret Service internal report..

Just a few rotten apples..

• Secret Service Agents to Be Disciplined Over July 13 Trump Shooting (ET)

Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe said Friday that some Secret Service agents who were involved in securing the July 13 rally site where former President Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt face discipline. In a Friday news conference in Washington, Rowe did not go into details about the staff or possible punishments that could be meted out. He said, however, that he hasn’t “asked for anybody to retire,” adding that reports saying otherwise “are false.” The “disciplinary process” will “be handled in accordance” with the Secret Service’s “table of penalties” and headed by its internal office of integrity, Rowe said, adding that he cannot comment publicly on specific details. Rowe’s statements followed the Secret Service’s release of a report on Friday that details a series of “communications deficiencies” before the shooting by 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks, who was shot by a Secret Service counter-sniper after firing eight rounds in Trump’s direction from the roof of a building less than 150 yards from where Trump was speaking.

A breakdown in security at the rally site was especially problematic for Trump’s protective detail, “who were not apprised of how focused state and local law enforcement were in the minutes leading up to the attack on locating the suspicious subject,” the report said. Had they known, the report says, they could have made the decision to relocate Trump while the search was in process. The report makes clear that the Secret Service knew even before the shooting that the rally site posed a security challenge, Rowe said. “While some members of the advance team were very diligent, there was complacency on the part of others that led to a breach of security protocols,” he said. “[It’s] important that we hold ourselves accountable for the failures of July 13th, and that we use the lessons learned to make sure that we do not have another failure like this again,” Rowe said, calling it a “mission failure.”

In the midst of the July 13 shooting and an alleged assassination attempt targeting Trump earlier this week, the “threat environment” is elevated and “is not going to evaporate anytime soon,” Rowe said. “We’re in the risk mitigation business,“ he said. “We are not in the risk elimination business. And so we have to be able to have the personnel, the assets, and be able to spread those out for an indefinite period of time” in case a similar situation emerges, he said. The Secret Service’s own investigation is one of numerous inquiries, including by Congress and a watchdog probe by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general’s office. Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle resigned in July after she faced criticism over the incident and an hours-long session in front of a congressional panel.

Rowe has said the July shooting and Sunday’s episode, in which 58-year-old Ryan Wesley Routh was arrested after Secret Service agents detected a rifle poking through shrubbery lining the West Palm Beach, Florida, golf course where Trump was playing, underscore the need for a paradigm shift in how the agency protects public officials. The protective agency has started to increase its security around Trump, Rowe said on Friday, noting on multiple occasions that the former president is receiving the highest levels of Secret Service protection. Both Democrat and Republican lawmakers have called for more Secret Service resources.

Read more …

“..despite Donald Trump calling on Congressional Republicans not to pass a spending plan without “every ounce” of the proposal..”

• Congress Reaches Shutdown Deal Without ‘Proof Of Citizenship’ SAVE Act (ZH)

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) on Sunday unveiled a 90-day band-aid to avoid yet another government shutdown which fails to include the SAVE Act, which would have required proof of citizenship at the time of voter registration – despite Donald Trump calling on Congressional Republicans not to pass a spending plan without “every ounce” of the proposal. So, instead of playing chicken over the key issue of election integrity, the new continuing resolution (CR) – negotiated by bother parties – would keep the government funded at current levels through Dec. 20, setting the stage for yet another funding fight before Christmas recess. It includes an additional $231 million to help the Secret Service protect candidates during this election season and into next year after Donald Trump was almost assassinated twice.

“There’s no doubt they need additional resources, but additional funding and resources is not going to solve the problem between now and Election Day,” said Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO), the top Democrat on a bipartisan task force established to look into the first assassination attempt. “We can’t mass-produce Secret Service agents,” Crow added while speaking with ABC’s “This Week,” noting that some agents are working 80 to 90 hours per week to cover various demands for protection. According to the Treasury Department, the US has spent around $6.3 trillion in FY24, which ends Sept. 30. Defending his missing spine, Johnson wrote in a Sunday letter: “While this is not the solution any of us prefer, it is the most prudent path forward under the present circumstances,” adding “As history has taught and current polling affirms, shutting the government down less than 40 days from a fateful election would be an act of political malpractice.”

“Since we fell a bit short of the goal line, an alternative plan is now required.” On Friday, Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said that talks were going well.”So far, nothing has come up that we can’t deal with,” he said. ““Most people don’t want a government shutdown and they don’t want that to interfere with the election. So nobody is like, ‘I’ve got to have this or we’re walking.’ It’s just not that way.” “While I am pleased bipartisan negotiations quickly led to a government funding agreement free of cuts and poison pills, this same agreement could have been done two weeks ago,” said Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, adding “Instead, Speaker Johnson chose to follow the MAGA way and wasted precious time.” Johnson caved after a bipartisan majority of the House voted last week to reject his plan which included the SAVE Act. In the ensuing days, Johnson went limp over the issue and dropped his demands.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Tesla
https://twitter.com/i/status/1837620320615698815

 

 

Dylan

 

 

Kirsch
https://twitter.com/i/status/1837541598315663396

 

 

Gecko
https://twitter.com/i/status/1837910246666211679

 

 

Family
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838088399841841161

 

 

Trap

 

 

Cats and dogs

 

 

Transform

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle June 2 2024

Jun 022024
 
 June 2, 2024  Posted by at 8:26 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  60 Responses »


John French Sloan East Entrance, City Hall, Philadelphia 1901

 

• Tyranny Is Upon Us: Law And Juries Are Weaponized (Paul Craig Roberts)
• The Trump Trial Harkens Back to a Dark Period of American Law (Turley)
• The Democrats Just Sealed Donald Trump’s Victory In November (Bridge)
• DOJ: You Can’t Hear The Biden-Hur ‘Memory Interview’ Because of Deepfakes (Sp.)
• Desperate, Lying Biden May Abuse AI to Pull the Ultimate Race Hoax (Sellers)
• Artificial ‘N****R’ (Sellers)
• RFK Jr. Slams Biden’s Decision to Allow Ukrainian Strikes Inside Russia (Sp.)
• Ukraine Conflict Is Reshaping War For the 21st Century (DeMartino)
• The Popski Syndrome – Allied Defeat Turns Into Battlefield Fantasies (Helmer)
• Presidents Who Gamble With Nuclear Armageddon (Jeffrey Sachs)
• Russia’s Victory Over Ukraine Is Drawing Near (Scott Ritter)
• Ukraine Won’t Exist In 50 Years – Tucker Carlson (RT)
• Dave Smith Burns Chris Cuomo To The Ground In Epic Covid Debate (ZH)
• Mark Rutte, The Dutch Invader, Is Sinking In The Hungarian Goulash (Helmer)
• Huge Anti-War Rally In Budapest, Hungary (RT)

 

 

 

 

RFK Elon

 

 

Flynn/Macgregor

 

 

 

 

Eric Trump

 

 

JD Vance
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796593469546287378

 

 

 

 

Eva

 

 

 

 

 

 

“..a single accounting reporting charge, a misdemeanor, was magically turned into 34 federal felonies of election violations..”

“..legally this is a case for which there are no legal grounds for bringing it..”

• Tyranny Is Upon Us: Law And Juries Are Weaponized (Paul Craig Roberts)

Jury Finds Trump Guilty on All 34 Felony Charges in New York Trial. Keep in mind that these are 34 made-up felonies based on how an expense was recorded by accountants and attorneys. Trump did not record the expense.The expense was recorded according to accounting standards. Keep in mind that a single accounting reporting charge, a misdemeanor, was magically turned into 34 federal felonies of election violations, if memory serves, the argument being that Trump won the election by misreporting the expense. There are so many civil and criminal show trials going on against Trump that it is hard to keep track of all the absurdities. Keep in mind that it is a case without complainants, without harmed parties. It is a case brought by a prosecutor who can show no party harmed. What is frightening is that legally this is a case for which there are no legal grounds for bringing it. Yet, the bar associations, the law schools, the media said nothing.

Getting Trump was so important that law was sacrificed for the purpose. Trump’s demonization made a fair trial impossible, and few jurors can resist using their power against a rich person. The weaponization of law in order to interfere with an election –in other words the prosecutor is guilty of interfering in an election–the charge brought against Trump– means the future of America is tyranny. An appeal will be made, but a state where justice is as corrupt as New York is incapable of producing a decision based on law. If there is any fight left in Americans, and I am unsure, a prison sentence from the totally corrupt judge should launch a civil war. Many would say it is about time or past time. If not, the people have submitted to tyranny. The North submitted to Lincoln’s tyranny. The South did not. Little is left of the South. It is unclear what stands against the tyranny of Washington.

Read more …

The constitutional law professor: “Even after sitting in the courtroom watching the trial and the verdict, I still have no idea what Trump was convicted of in the case..”

• The Trump Trial Harkens Back to a Dark Period of American Law (Turley)

After years of trying — in the words of the judge — “to get the damned rascal in this court,” it was a conviction that many welcomed. But those words were not from Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, and the conviction was not that of former President Donald Trump. Rather they were from US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, at the end of the 18th century, when America embraced political prosecutions to target critics and opponents. The man on trial then was James T. Callender, a muckraking writer critical of President John Adams. For accusing politicians of corruption, Callender was charged with sedition, fined $200 and put in prison. It was one of the many political prosecutions carried out by the Adams administration. Political prosecutions are something most citizens associate with dictatorships. But the Trump prosecution has forced many to confront the undeniable reality of the politicization of our legal system. In many respects, President Biden and Democrats have re-created the Adams era.

Biden has led calls for censorship of political critics and his administration has coordinated the silencing and the blacklisting of those with opposing views. Democratic politicians have pressured social-media companies to serve as surrogates for the government in banning, throttling and defunding individuals and groups. Indeed, I have previously written that Biden is now the most anti-free-speech president since Adams. The Adams era also reflected the same blind loyalty of many media outlets. Federalist publications supported the crackdowns while echoing charges against political opponents as seditionists and insurrectionists. Jeffersonian publications, like Callender’s, attacked Adams for his “unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice.” The nation was divided down the middle as both sides accused each other of being traitors and insurrectionists. Sound familiar? Yet, it is the politicization of the legal system that is the most chilling return to the Adams era.

Even liberal legal analysts and figures have admitted that the case against Trump was unprecedented and would not have been brought against anyone other than Trump. CNN legal analyst Elie Honig recently wrote that there should be concern over a judge being appointed (not randomly selected) who is not just a Biden donor but someone who “has earmarked donations for ‘resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.’” Adding to these concerns is the movement of the third-highest official in the Biden Justice Department to the staff of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to build the case against Trump. Before joining the case, Matthew Colangelo was also paid by the Democratic National Committee for “political consulting.” So Trump was convicted in a trial with a Biden donor judge, who has a daughter who is a major Democratic operative, a lead prosecutor previously paid as a DNC political consultant and a jury selected in a district that voted roughly 90% against Trump.

The trial itself was a travesty. Even after sitting in the courtroom watching the trial and the verdict, I still have no idea what Trump was convicted of in the case. The charges were built on a dead misdemeanor barred with the passage of the statute of limitations. It was zapped back into life by alleging that the falsification of business records occurred to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election. Merchan told the jury members that they did not have to agree on what those unlawful means may have been. Specifically, he allowed them to base their verdict on any one of three vaguely defined crimes of a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations.

Read more …

“The only thing better than that would be to witness the first president in US history to pardon himself as the Trump legacy goes full circle.”

• The Democrats Just Sealed Donald Trump’s Victory In November (Bridge)

Members of the Democratic Party continue to fail to understand that the more mud they fling at the former president, the dirtier they look by comparison. On Thursday, a unanimous decision from a 12-person jury declared Donald Trump guilty on 34 felony counts, which could see the former president sentenced to 136 years in prison. There’s just one catch: the notorious Orange Man will never spend a single night behind bars. The worst that will happen for the Republican presidential frontrunner is that he will enter the race with a criminal record. Because the crimes are nonviolent and Trump has no prior convictions, any chance of prison time is a long shot. What could happen instead is that Judge Juan Merchan could sentence him to house arrest – which would undoubtedly make ankle bracelets, much like the famous Trump ‘mug shot,’ the latest fashion accessory – probation or some other lighter form of supervised release.

Another option that would backfire in the Democratic Party’s face is the imposition of community service. While Democrats may relish the idea of Trump being forced to join a prison work gang as punishment, it’s too easy to imagine millions of Trump supporters turning out at some soup kitchen or animal shelter to throw their support behind the most controversial figure in American politics today. And then there is the question of New York, the site of the Trump case, which is only second to the state of California when it comes to liberal residents. Trump inveighed against District Attorney Alvin Bragg, calling him the “Soros-backed DA.” As The New York Times wrote of the Bragg-Soros connection, “Soros donated to a liberal group that endorses progressive prosecutors and supports efforts to overhaul the criminal justice system – in line with causes that he has publicly supported for years. That group used a significant portion of the money to support Mr. Bragg in his 2021 campaign.”

On November 21, 2022, The Times reported that the district attorney’s office “has moved to jump-start its criminal investigation” into Trump’s reported “hush-money payment to a porn star who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump.” This was the first indictment of a former president in US history. Trump pleaded not guilty, yet was found guilty of all counts on May 30, 2024, making Bragg the first prosecutor in US history to win a conviction against a former president. Trump, who will be sentenced on July 11th, denies ever having had sex with Daniels. Another aspect of the Trump case that has rallied many to Trump’s defense is the political identity of the judge presiding over the case, Juan Merchan, whom Trump has criticized as “conflicted.” That may be an understatement when it is considered that Merchan donates to an organization called ‘Stop Republicans,’ as well as the Biden campaign.

Finally, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that Loren Merchan, the judge’s daughter, is president of Authentic Campaigns, a Chicago-based progressive political consulting firm whose top clients include Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who was the lead prosecutor in Trump’s first impeachment trial. Merchan’s daughter helped raise at least $93 million in campaign donations – and used the Trump case in her solicitation emails – highlighting a major conflict of interest that have Trump supporters demanding Judge Merchan recuse himself from the case. Finally, there is the question of fairness when it is considered that New York is major Democrat country. Can Trump seriously hope for a fair trial to take place in this prominent Blue state? He certainly doesn’t think so.

Merchan imposed the 10th contempt of court fine of $1,000 for an April 22 interview in which the former president said: “That jury was picked so fast – 95% Democrats. The area’s mostly all Democrat.” While the Democrats may be rubbing their hands in glee after finally getting Trump entangled in the judicial net, they continue to ignore the fact that every scandal has only served to empower the 45th president. In the worst-case scenario, should Trump be sent to prison, this will not stop the flow of campaign cash from entering the GOP’s coffers; in fact, it is practically guaranteed that the spectacle of the Orange Man behind bars – complete with mug shot in prison garb – will be the best campaign promo of all time. The only thing better than that would be to witness the first president in US history to pardon himself as the Trump legacy goes full circle.

Read more …

Anything can be deepfake, and now you can’t hear any of it anymore. Unless it’s about Trump.

• DOJ: You Can’t Hear The Biden-Hur ‘Memory Interview’ Because of Deepfakes (Sp.)

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is attempting to prevent the release of the audio of the infamous “memory interview” between US President Joe Biden and special counsel Robert Hur, arguing that “deepfakes” may appear as a result. Hur was investigating Biden’s handling of classified documents he obtained as a senator and vice president. While Hur wrote in his report that Biden likely violated the law intentionally, he declined to press charges because he thought Biden would appear to the jury as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” It also noted that Biden had trouble remembering when he was vice president and which year his son Beau died. The DOJ issued a filing on Friday that argued “The passage of time and advancements in audio, artificial intelligence, and ‘deep fake’ technologies only amplify concerns about malicious manipulation of audio files. If the audio recording is released here, it is easy to foresee that it could be improperly altered, and that the altered file could be passed off as an authentic recording and widely distributed.”

While the DOJ admits that there is plenty of “other raw material to create a deepfake of President Biden’s voice” available to unscrupulous actors, it argues that if the public became aware that the legitimate recording was released, they would be more apt to believe a fake recording is legitimate. The filing was first obtained by Politico. It is not known how the court will respond to the strange reasoning. If a legitimate copy of the recording were released, it stands to reason it would become easier –not more difficult– to disprove fake versions. As the DOJ admits in its filing as part of its argument that the release of the audio recording is unnecessary, the full transcript of the interview has already been released. It would be trivial for someone with AI experience to use the “raw material” already available of Biden to create a deepfake version of the interview and say it was leaked. A legitimate version being released would make that much easier for other internet users and the media to definitively debunk.

The filing also comes after Biden used his executive privilege to stop the release of the tape to House Republicans who had sought to obtain it as part of their investigation into the Biden family. The latest filing was in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. The DOJ also argues that the release of the audio would be a violation of Biden’s privacy. However, since we already know what he said thanks to the transcript– and we have no reason to believe that the transcript is incorrect, the only thing that would be revealed is everything between those words. How long did Biden pause before answering? How many times did he stumble on his words? Did he sound confused or angry during the interview? These are the questions that could be revealed through the release of the audio and according to the filing, the DOJ doesn’t think it is in the “public interest” to reveal the answers, so much so that they are willing to resort to absurd fear-mongering over a new technology in hopes that the judge will be cowed into blocking its release.

Read more …

I split Ben Sellers’ piece in two. First, reality.

• Desperate, Lying Biden May Abuse AI to Pull the Ultimate Race Hoax (Sellers)

It is patently clear that 99% of what comes out of Biden’s mouth, and those of his surrogates is an abject, gaslighting falsehood. Many in the voting public have now woken up to this fact, which is why we’ve seen so many red-pilled ex-Biden backers suddenly flipping their support to Trump in protest of all—or even some—of the above. Taking a page from Adolf Hitler, Democrats already primed people for the so-called Big Lie, deflecting from the fact that they were in the process of committing it by, appropriately enough, projecting it preemptively onto Republicans Regrettably, we may now be on the cusp of what history will record as the “Biggest Lie,” if and when the truth ever comes to light—something so shamefully bald-faced, so transparently manipulative, that most will think, “They wouldn’t dare lie about that.” But indeed, Biden has proven nothing if not that he will lie about anything.

We are witnessing the remarkable confluence of several disparate factors that are leading us on the path to the biggest race hoax in recorded history—and yet, it seems obvious, like a black swan event, that something so dastardly would be the inevitable outcome of putting the declining Democrat ethos and the rise in artificial intelligence-generated disinformation together in a tinderbox that includes the bombastic Donald Trump.On Thursday, a former producer from Trump’s ABC television show The Apprentice drudged up a long simmering rumor regarding tapes of Trump having used the n-word to refer to contestant Kwame Jackson. Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung called it a “a completely fabricated and bullsh*t story,” Politico reported. Many critics have pointed out that President Joe Biden’s own troubled history when it comes to making controversial remarks about race often undermines his current posturing about being a champion of minority causes.

Nonetheless, Biden’s campaign—after recently botching the rollout on an eight-figure effort to win back black voters—made hay of the Trump smear, releasing an official statement to torque up the race-baiting allegation. “No one is surprised that Donald Trump, who entered public life by falsely accusing [b]lack men of murder and entered political life spreading lies about the first [b]lack president, reportedly used the N-word to casually denigrate a successful [b]lack man,” claimed Jasmine Harris, the Biden campaign’s director of black media. The campaign also appeared to have been coordinating with Pruitt on the story, which he released in a Slate op-ed, as it had canned footage ready to roll out of former Trump staffer turned critic Omarosa Manigault Newman leveling unsubstantiated ‘racism’ claims against her ex-boss.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1796222579759358116

Read more …

Second, AI.

“..a new low-water mark for America, as it faces a bombardment of structure tests from the radical Marxist subversives hoping to topple it for once and for all.”

• Artificial ‘N****R’ (Sellers)

Lost in the Trump Manhattan trial about his alleged falsification of business documents to pay off porn star Stormy Daniels was the fact that the $130,000 paid to Daniels by Michael Cohen did not fulfill its contracted purpose. Prior to the November 2016 election, the Wall Street Journal published a story that named Daniels and Playboy bunny Karen McDougal, alleging the two had received hush-money payments to keep quiet about their decade-old affairs with Trump. Within two years, some of the key players in the purported scandal were speaking openly about it. Suffice it to say, if Pruitt had the evidence at the time to support his allegation about Trump using the n-word on The Apprentice, those tapes would have found their way into the hands of interested parties somewhere along the way long before Trump’s third presidential run.

It is reasonable to infer that the absence of the tapes up to this point suggests they don’t exist. Frighteningly, what does now exist is a rapid surge in artificial intelligence technology that could allow the Biden campaign to produce fake tapes of Trump using the pejorative, sowing just enough suspicion among his nascent black supporters that they would flock back to the fold on the Democrat plantation. Already, we have seen the technology put to frightening use to imitate Biden’s voice in a fake robocall that went out to New Hampshire voters, telling them to stay home since he wasn’t on the ballot, despite an expensive write-in campaign to deliver him a victory in the Granite State. The deep-fake was traced back to the owner of a telecom company in Texas, who had previously donated money to Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign.

The technology also has been misused to create pornography of high school students and to scam a company out of $25 million with a phony conference call. And oh yea, the CIA has admitted it is taking full advantage of it for undisclosed purposes. Most perniciously, it has already been used for at least one race hoax. A disgruntled high school athletic director in Baltimore was caught using deep-fake software to mimic the voice of his principal going on a racist and anti-Semitic rant in retaliation for a probe of his misappropriation of school funds. The rant appeared on Instagram and quickly began to circulate. Although AI was suspected almost immediately, Pikesville High School Eric Eiswert was subjected to negative publicity and an intensive forensic investigation that drew in the FBI and experts from the University of California, Berkeley, before he was ultimately vindicated.

The potential for AI abuse, paired with the Biden administration’s penchant and proclivity for it, would certainly lead one to wonder, should a tape of Trump using the “n-word” suddenly surface, whether its authenticity could be trusted. Would Biden, or another bad actor working on his behalf, be willing to stoop so low as to falsely smear someone with an entirely made-up tape in order to deceive and manipulate a particular class of voters into making a misinformed decision? Sadly, if past is prologue, one need no longer ask questions about the depths to which they will stoop. Will it work? If so, it would simultaneously be a breakthrough achievement in AI technology—the successful passage, perhaps, of a sort of Turing test on the road to singularity—and a new low-water mark for America, as it faces a bombardment of structure tests from the radical Marxist subversives hoping to topple it for once and for all.

Read more …

“..authorizing Ukraine to strike targets deep in Russia. Using our weapons, trained in their use by our trainers..”

• RFK Jr. Slams Biden’s Decision to Allow Ukrainian Strikes Inside Russia (Sp.)

US presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr. condemned President Joe Biden’s decision to greenlight Ukrainian strikes using US-supplied weapons inside Russian territory. “More insane escalation by the Biden administration — authorizing Ukraine to strike targets deep in Russia. Using our weapons, trained in their use by our trainers,” Kennedy said on X. In a major policy shift, Biden authorized the use of US weapons against military installations in Russia. A State Department spokesperson insisted that the authorization was limited to what they called “counter-fire purposes” in Kharkov (also known as Kharkiv) region. The US has not authorized the use of long-range missiles, including ATACMS, inside Russia, the spokesperson told Sputnik.

Read more …

Drones. And the “turtle tank.”

• Ukraine Conflict Is Reshaping War For the 21st Century (DeMartino)

The weapons that shaped warfare in the 20th century: barbed wire, machine guns, tanks, long-range artillery, and battleships, still play significant roles on the battlefield in the 21st, but they are dwarfed in importance by one invention, from which multiple theaters have been affected: the drone. While specific numbers of their effectiveness are difficult to come by at this stage of the conflict (that will be a job for war historians) there is no doubt that it is the most significant innovation on the battlefield today, used by both sides to inflict large amounts of casualties on the other. During Ukraine’s failed 2023 counteroffensive, drones played a huge role in stopping that advance. With the possible exception of Russia’s distance mining equipment, which also took out large numbers of tanks, drones were pivotal in taking out NATO’s most powerful armor.

“[US media] admitted how useless the Abrams [tank] is when tens of millions of dollars per tank can be taken out by a $500 drone. It is a new model of warfare,” Mark Sleboda, a security and international relations expert told Sputnik’s Fault Lines on Friday. “But it is an evolution of warfare that is occurring before our eyes. So, the Chinese and Americans are certainly paying very close attention,” he noted earlier in the interview. It is an opinion shared by former Marine and UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter. Speaking on the Danny Haiphong show, he explained how everything from tactics to logistics has been changed by drones. “When this war started, people were working off of Cold War-era doctrinal thinking. That is: you have tank columns, you have artillery that operates in battery or battalion sized formations flooding a zone, you have big arrow movements and things of that nature,” Ritter recalled. “[Then] drones started coming in, not just for targeting purposes, not just for deep strike purposes, but tactical drones on the battlefront. These FPV drones are a nightmare for soldiers.”

“If I tried to take Marines into combat using the tactics that I was taught,” Ritter continued “[With] two platoons online, basic fire etcetera, my base of fire would disappear because it’d be swarmed by FPV drones… then my Marines attacking would be hit by these drones and they’re all dead.” Much like Haig, this was a lesson that the Armed Forces of Ukraine failed to learn during their counteroffensive. Rabotino was intended to be the first minor step during that offensive that would lead to Tokmak which would serve as the staging ground for an assault on Melitopol. But as armor assault after armor assault was destroyed, it became apparent that the Ukrainians would never reach their goal. But, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky needed something to show his Western benefactors, so Rabotino became the goal. It took 71 days to capture the tiny village with a pre-war population of about 500 people, largely using the same tactics they began with. Ukraine lost dozens of expensive tanks and thousands of men capturing and then holding the village.

The Ukrainian offensive never went any further and in May, Russia recaptured the village. Just as the invention of the tank helped break the stalemate of the First World War, new technologies are emerging to counteract the drone and there it seems Russia has a decided advantage on that front. According to Military Watch Magazine, Russian electronic defenses have rendered Ukraine’s best artillery weapons all but useless, including the Excalibur GPS-guided artillery shells, the vaunted HIMARS rocket artillery systems and the JDAM precision-guided bombs. “Everything ended [in 2023]: the Russian deployed electronic warfare, disabled satellite signals, and HIMARS became completely ineffective,” one senior Ukrainian military official was quoted as saying. But the innovations on the battlefield aren’t exclusive to high technology, often they come from the soldiers on the ground. As tanks were increasingly taken out by drones, soldiers started adding cope cages in an attempt to protect them. This eventually led to the deployment of what is affectionately called the “turtle tank.”

Typically beginning with a T-72 tank, so-called turtle tanks are outfitted with a metal shell that covers almost the entirety of the tank, leaving only the very front and its cannon exposed to drone attack. While limiting the driver in visibility and maneuverability, those drawbacks have proven worth it. The Ukrainians who initially laughed at the turtle tank’s awkward appearance and low-tech solution quickly stopped laughing as they retreated from turtle tank assaults across the Western front.

Read more …

“..the Russian response will not be nuclear. That is impossible. There are a thousand options between doing nothing and going nuclear, and we can be sure the General Staff are working on all of them..”

• The Popski Syndrome – Allied Defeat Turns Into Battlefield Fantasies (Helmer)

In war, exaggeration is a killer. In the media, exaggeration is a bestseller. In the current war there is a dearth of military and political analysts who for truth or money will tell the difference. Instead, when the mentality of the war fighters is a combination of racial superiority and spetsnaz derring-do, what you get is the conviction that with one more brilliant operation and one more super-weapon, victory can be snatched from every indicator of defeat because the adversary will be persuaded to accept negotiations as he loses his nerve. This is the meaning of the Anglo-American publicity which burst over the long Bank Holiday and Memorial Day weekend, as summer campaigning began in earnest for the July and November elections in the UK and US — with the incumbent in the former running 21 points behind, and the incumbent in the latter trailing on an approval margin of minus-16 points.

The Reuters propaganda agency, based in New York, is claiming to have found four Russians from “a senior level in the political and business worlds” to be talkative about what they say they know of the Kremlin’s end-of-war plans. “[President Vladimir] Putin can fight for as long as it takes, but Putin is also ready for a ceasefire – to freeze the war… Putin would, however, be ready to settle for what land he has now and freeze the conflict at the current front lines, four of the sources said. ‘Putin will say that we won, that NATO attacked us and we kept our sovereignty, that we have a land corridor to Crimea, which is true,’ one of them said, giving their own analysis.” With just one more successful push from the Ukrainian side, Reuters and its four Russians believe, Putin will agree to give up his war. This push, which the western media have been amplifying this week, is the drone attacks on Russian radar stations for early warning of nuclear missile attack at Armavir, Krasnodar, and Orsk, Orenburg.

Although Russian military sources claim these attacks were pinpricks, and the second of them was shot out of the sky before detonation, western media are reporting that it is now the battle strategy of the US, the British, and the Ukrainians to provoke Putin into retaliation, crossing the red line of tactical nuclear warfare. That’s a red line, the allies are calculating, which Putin would rather negotiate end-of-war terms than cross. A retired Moscow military analyst warns against the exaggeration, not of the attacks themselves, but of Putin’s power to decide end-of-war terms over the opposition of the General Staff and the new Defense Ministry. “It is obvious the Ukrainians have had a string of successful breakthroughs,” the source acknowledges, “– against ships, airfields, refineries, and now this radar site. We also understand it is not the Ukrainians: all target selection, identification, guidance, and the hardware are American or European. Where the command control of these launch sites is, we do not know but it might well not be in Ukraine.”

“But the Russian response will not be nuclear. That is impossible. There are a thousand options between doing nothing and going nuclear, and we can be sure the General Staff are working on all of them. So when people say this is provocation for a nuclear strike and that [Ukrainian President Vladimir] Zelensky is provoking it, we understand that, first, NATO planners know Putin will not go nuclear because he and his generals are too rational and sane. And second, Zelensky is not the one making the provocations. So the real red line now is not the nuclear arms provocations from the NATO side. That’s a fantasy of theirs. Just so, in response, I think it’s time Putin stops making threats and strikes at the source of these operations.” When desperate weakness triggers battlefield fantasies, call this the Popski Syndrome.

Popski was the call sign and unit nickname assigned by the British Army headquarters in Cairo to a tiny unit of behind-the-lines special forces operating against the Italian and German armies in the Libyan deserts from late in 1941 until September 1943, when the war moved on to Italy, taking Popski with it. Popski’s unit numbered 24 men to start in Libya; in Italy, by the war’s end, it had reached 80. Vladimir Peniakoff was Popski, born to wealthy Jewish Russians who fled the Revolution to install their aluminium business and themselves in Belgium, then the UK. With London publisher Jonathan Cape, Peniakoff imagined he could turn his small guerrilla war in the Libyan and Tunisian deserts into something approaching the bestsellerdom of the Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E.Lawrence’s story of the war of the Arabian peninsula tribes against the Turks between 1916 and 1918; first published in 1926.

Read more …

A timeline.

• Presidents Who Gamble With Nuclear Armageddon (Jeffrey Sachs)

The Doomsday Clock was at 17 minutes to midnight when Clinton came to office, but just 9 minutes when he left it. Bush pushed the clock to just 5 minutes, Obama to 3 minutes, and Trump to a mere 100 seconds. Now Biden has taken the clock to 90 seconds. Most presidents, and most Americans, have little idea how close to the abyss we are. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which was founded in 1947 in part to help the world avoid nuclear annihilation, established the Doomsday Clock to help the public understand the gravity of the risks we face. National security experts adjust the clock depending how far or how close we are to “midnight,” meaning extinction. They put the clock today at just 90 seconds to midnight, the closest that it’s ever been in the nuclear age.

The clock is a useful measure of which presidents have “gotten it” and which have not. The sad fact is that most presidents have recklessly gambled with our survival in the name of national honor, or to prove their personal toughness, or to avoid political attacks from the warmongers, or as the result of sheer incompetence. By a simple and straightforward count, five presidents have gotten it right, moving the clock away from midnight, while nine have moved us closer to Armageddon, including the most recent five. Truman was president when the Doomsday Clock was unveiled in 1947, at 7 minutes to midnight. Truman stoked the nuclear arms race and left office with the clock at just 3 minutes to midnight. Eisenhower continued the nuclear arms race but also entered into the first-ever negotiations with the Soviet Union regarding nuclear disarmament. By the time he left office, the clock was put back to 7 minutes to midnight.

Kennedy saved the world by coolly reasoning his way through the Cuban Missile Crisis, rather than following the advice of hothead advisors who called for war (for a detailed account, see Martin Sherwin’s magisterial Gambling with Armageddon, 2020). He then negotiated the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with Khrushchev in 1963. By the time of his death, which may well have been a government coup resulting from Kennedy’s peace initiative, JFK had pushed the clock back to 12 minutes to midnight, a magnificent and historic achievement. It was not to last. Lyndon Johnson soon escalated in Vietnam and pushed the clock back again to just 7 minutes to midnight. Richard Nixon eased tensions with both the Soviet Union and China, and concluded the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I), pushing the clock again to 12 minutes from midnight. Yet Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter failed to secure SALT II, and Carter fatefully and unwisely gave a green light to the CIA in 1979 to destabilize Afghanistan. By the time Ronald Reagan took office, the clock was at just 4 minutes to midnight.

The next 12 years marked the end of the Cold War. Much of the credit is due to Mikhail Gorbachev, who aimed to reform the Soviet Union politically and economically, and to end the confrontation with the West. Yet credit is also due to Reagan and his successor George Bush, Sr., who successfully worked with Gorbachev to end the Cold War, which in turn was followed by the end of the Soviet Union itself in December 1991. By the time Bush left office, the Doomsday clock was at 17 minutes to midnight, the safest since the start of the nuclear age.

Read more …

UKiev.

• Russia’s Victory Over Ukraine Is Drawing Near (Scott Ritter)

By the time the counteroffensive ground to a halt, in December 2023, Ukraine was a spent force militarily. Its armed forces had used up their reserves of manpower. NATO had depleted its stocks of available military materiel. And the West had become politically exhausted at the prospect of a never-ending conflict which seemed destined to result in an endless cycle of throwing good money after bad, all the while failing to bring about the strategic goal of defeating Russia. Moscow, on the other hand, emerged from the 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive in a good position. From a military perspective, the Russians had won the war of attrition with Ukraine and the collective West – basic military math had Ukraine consuming manpower and material resources at a far greater rate than they could be replenished, making Kiev grow physically weaker every day the conflict dragged on, while the Russians were able to accumulate manpower and material resources at a rate far greater than Ukraine was able to destroy, meaning Russia grew stronger every day te conflict continued.

Economically, Ukraine and its Western backers were exhausted. The blowback from the aggressive anti-Russian sanctions imposed by the West had severely curtailed the industrial capacity of the European members of the NATO alliance to sustain the scope and scale of its military support to Ukraine, while domestic political realities in the US, amplified by the fact that it was engaged in a hotly contested presidential election cycle, paralyzed the American ability to sustain Ukraine financially. The military and economic exhaustion of Ukraine and the collective West severely impacted the ability of this coalition to politically sustain support for a war that had no discernable prospect of ending well. While the conflict has not, by any stretch of the imagination, been without cost to Russia, the approach taken by the leadership, to create conditions on the battlefield designed to maximize enemy losses while minimizing their own, meant that Moscow entered 2024 in a much stronger position militarily, economically, and – perhaps most importantly – politically.

War, it has been said, is an extension of politics by other means, and this is no exception to the age-old adage. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s latest electoral victory has provided the leadership in Moscow with a political mandate that strengthens Russia’s hand considerably, especially contrasted with the weakened posture of Ukraine. It is within such a context that the Russian offensive north of Kharkov must be evaluated. From a military-political standpoint, the operation has a specific objective – to push Ukrainian forces back from the border with Russia so that Ukrainian artillery and rocket systems can no longer strike Russian territory. But there is a larger purpose for this offensive – to continue the process of grinding down the Ukrainian military, to complete the larger task of ”demilitarization” set by the Kremlin.

In this, Russia is succeeding. First and foremost, by attacking north of Kharkov, Moscow has compelled UKiev to commit not only the last of its mobile strategic reserves in response but, because these forces are inadequate in strength, to force Ukraine to strip away units on the eastern line of contact, in Kherson, Zaporozhye and Donbass, and to divert them to the Kharkov direction. The depletion of reserves is part and parcel of the overall Russian strategy of attrition. Moreover, as these forces displace to the Kharkov region, they are being interdicted by Russian air, missile, and drone strikes, further eroding their combat power. The result is that Ukraine is now defending a longer line of defense with even fewer forces than it started with.

Read more …

“They’re already selling off lands in Ukraine to foreign investors, and they will flood Ukraine with third-world immigrants and Ukraine will not exist in 50 years..”

• Ukraine Won’t Exist In 50 Years – Tucker Carlson (RT)

The US has “betrayed” Ukraine and will destroy the country by selling off its land and “flooding” it with third-world immigrants, American journalist Tucker Carlson predicted in an interview with former President Donald Trump’s son, Donald Jr. In a video interview published on Friday, Carlson and Trump Jr. both agreed that US President Joe Biden had brought the world to the brink of World War III, and that the US is essentially “at war with Russia.” “No-one’s articulated what victory in Ukraine looks like,” Trump Jr. said. “I don’t know what it means. Is it just like perpetual death of Ukrainians and Russians until they’re all wiped out and Blackrock comes in there and takes over all the farmland? That’s what it feels like to me.” Blackrock is the world’s biggest investment company, and controls an estimated $10 trillion in assets. The firm is one of Ukraine’s largest foreign bondholders, and in 2022 signed a memorandum of understanding with Kiev stating that it would manage Ukraine’s post-conflict reconstruction.

Several BlackRock alumni serve in the Biden administration, including Brian Deese, the head of the National Economic Council. After Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky signed a controversial package of land reforms into law in 2020, foreign investment firms like NCH Capital, BNP, and the Vanguard Group now control around 28% of Ukraine’s arable land, according to research by the Oakland Institute, an American think tank. Zelensky’s reforms were backed by the International Monetary Fund and US Agency for International Development. “They’re already selling off lands in Ukraine to foreign investors, and they will flood Ukraine with third-world immigrants and Ukraine will not exist in 50 years,” Carlson stated. “There’ll be no Ukrainian nation. We betrayed them like no other country ever.”

Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly promised that he would end the Ukraine conflict “in 24 hours” if re-elected this November, telling a Libertarian Party conference last weekend that he intends to “quit spending hundreds of billions of dollars to fight other people’s wars.” Trump has never fully elaborated on how he would do this, save for forcing Zelensky to negotiate with Russian President Vladimir Putin, but recent reports by Bloomberg and the Washington Post suggest that he would leverage the US’ massive military assistance to Kiev to pressure Zelensky into accepting the loss of some of Ukraine’s pre-conflict territory. However, Trump’s rhetoric on Russia has toughened in recent months, with the former president telling donors last week that he “would have bombed” Moscow when Russia’s military operation began in 2022. Trump did not lobby his Congressional allies to block a $61 billion aid package for Kiev in April, and said at the time that he would support lending, rather than gifting, money to Zelensky in future.

Read more …

“..you ate up every piece of propaganda, repeated all of it without any thought to whether it was true or not..”

• Dave Smith Burns Chris Cuomo To The Ground In Epic Covid Debate (ZH)

For the legions of us who still carry righteous rage about the tyrannical and destructive Covid-19 regime, the planets aligned on Friday and gave us the enormous, vicarious pleasure of watching one of libertarianism’s most articulate voices repeatedly pummel one of the most visible villains of that dark era. In a debate hosted by Patrick Bet-David of PBD Podcast fame, “Part of the Problem” podcaster and comedian Dave Smith took on former CNN anchor and Covid regime propagandist Chris Cuomo. From lockdowns to masks, vaccines, Ivermectin and the vilification of resisters, the debate covered a lot of ground, with Smith dropping one laser-guided bomb after another on Cuomo.

Let’s dive right into the highlights…First, Smith opened the debate with a gentlemanly gesture, giving Cuomo a copy of the Tom Woods book, “Diary of a Psychosis: How Public Health Disgraced Itself During Covid Mania.” Tongue in cheek, he said, “I know you like following the science, and there’s a whole lot of science in that book.” Before the next clip, recall that, in an infamous segment on CNN, Cuomo and Don Lemon smugly battered Joe Rogan and others who used Ivermectin to battle Covid. Despite the fact that Ivermectin has been used since 1975 with great success against a wide variety of human maladies, Cuomo and Lemon ran hard with the regime narrative that referred to the wonder drug solely as a veterinary de-wormer.

Earlier this month, Cuomo revealed to Bet-David that he’s now himself taking a “regular dose of Ivermectin” for purported long Covid. However, In this jaw-dropping sequence, Cuomo stunned anyone with a memory of his exchange with Lemon by saying, “I don’t like what people did to Joe Rogan about Ivermectin.” A stunned Smith replied, “YOU did it!” Cuomo denied it and challenged Smith to “find the clips.” The PBD crew obliged, promptly rolling the damning video: Smith condemned Cuomo for failing to do his job, which was to “be skeptical of power and to shine a light against the propaganda…you ate up every piece of propaganda, repeated all of it without any thought to whether it was true or not, and then smeared millions of Americans like myself who were opposed to this stuff.” Cuomo said Smith was guilty of using “hyperbole” in referring to the Covid regime as “totalitarian.” An unwavering Smith had a pointed and compelling response: Smith elaborated, explaining why “it was completely criminal for all of these governments to lock down”…

Asked whether lockdowns were a net benefit — or instead erred on the side of catastrophe — Cuomo drew audience laughter when he said, “The people I talked to — who made these decisions — stand by them.” Smith quipped, “I’m sure Dick Cheney stands by the war in Iraq too!” Smith grew indignant when Cuomo suggested that Smith’s focus was on drawing attention to himself — to the detriment of society. Smith countered: “You’re attacking my motives…meanwhile, when those CNN checks were coming in, you said nothing that would have put them in jeopardy, but now that you’re here, you’re starting to tell a little bit of the truth.”

[..] Alas, amid the joy of Smith’s outstanding performance, there was a wistful element too, as many who’d hoped Smith would carry the flag of liberty as the 2024 Libertarian Party presidential candidate were reminded of what a remarkable champion he would have been — in stark contrast to the leftist, open-borders, drag-queen-promoting, kid-transing doozie the party ended up with. That said, far be it from us to end a feel-good story on a down note. Our highlight reel just scratched the surface: If you’re looking for weekend entertainment, here’s the entire debate, which also covers much more Covid ground, Trump’s trumped-up conviction and a lot more:

Dave Smith CNN
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796766419709022460

Read more …

“We certainly can’t support the election of a person to the position of NATO’s secretary general, who previously wanted to force Hungary on its knees..”

• Mark Rutte, The Dutch Invader, Is Sinking In The Hungarian Goulash (Helmer)

The Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte was the first leader of a NATO state to try to send his soldiers on to the Ukrainian battlefield to fight Russian forces directly. That was in July 2014, in the aftermath of the Ukrainian shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. That Rutte scheme failed after it was vetoed by the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel; she insisted on more time to prepare the NATO forces in the Ukraine to fight Russia. Now that they are, Rutte is the US candidate to become the new secretary-general of NATO. For the first time, however, his appointment is being vetoed by a NATO member, Hungary, which has proposed an alternative candidate – the ethnic German Klaus Iohannis, who is President of Romania. Because NATO rules require unanimity on the secretary-general, the Hungarian objection puts the Rutte nomination in the soup — make that goulash.

Rutte’s plan to deploy up to 9,000 troops in the Donbass had been devised in the summer of 2014 with two other Dutchmen – David Petraeus, who is also a US national, a US Army general, and former CIA director; and Sandra Roelofs, a Dutch national who held Georgian citizenship because she was married to Mikheil Saakashvili, onetime President of Georgia. Their cover story was that the NATO military intervention force was required to recover the black boxes of the downed MH17 aircraft and the bodies of the passengers, most of them Dutch. Every one of Rutte’s attempts to go to war with Russia has ended in exposure of his personal lying; the collapse of the Dutch-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW); and the loss of almost €30 billion in bilateral trade – oil and petroleum products from Russia; Dutch pharmaceuticals, medical technology, financial services, cut flowers, seeds and plants.

None of these losses has had material or political impact on the domestic Dutch constituencies or the Dutch media, which have accepted the state propaganda line, and in the case of the Dutch media owner, Derk Sauer, the money to keep repeating it. The book documenting the collaboration of Rutte and his officials in fabricating the narrative of Russian culpability in the MH17 crash, concealing the role of Kiev president Petro Poroshenko, and manipulating the evidence at The Hague District Court show trial, can be read here. Defeated at the Dutch parliamentary election last November, Rutte has been replaced as prime minister by a coalition of parties led by Geert Wilders, who agreed this week to Hendrikus (“Dick”) Schoof as prime minister. Schoof is a Dutch deep-stater and career liar who was promoted by the MH17 affair into the Dutch equivalent of the FBI, and then into the top job of the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security.

According to a veteran Dutch political analyst, “the nomination of Dick Schoof is a terrible fact. He is the head of the secret services responsible for NATO agitprop on MH17, on OPCW, on the so-called Covid protective measures. Also, he was responsible for the protection of Geert Wilders [from Islamic attacks]. In a way Wilders has been his prisoner – Schoof has been the jailer who has held the keys to Wilders’s physical survival. Schoof has also been protecting Rutte from personal scandal. He’s the J.Edgar Hoover type of secret policeman.” The Russian reaction to Rutte’s nomination for the NATO post was muted until the Hungarian government announced that it is opting out of NATO operations, financial support and arms supplies to the Ukraine war; and that it will not accept Rutte at NATO. “We certainly can’t support the election of a person to the position of NATO’s secretary general, who previously wanted to force Hungary on its knees,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó said several weeks ago.

Read more …

“I’m saying this slowly so that Brussels would understand: we will not go to war. We will not go to the East for a third time, we will not go to the Russian front again.”

• Huge Anti-War Rally In Budapest, Hungary (RT)

Hundreds of thousands participated in a peace march in Hungary’s capital, Budapest on Saturday, denouncing the EU’s policy of escalating tensions with Russia. The event culminated with a speech by Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who accused Brussels of bringing Europe closer to a global conflict. The demonstrators marched from the iconic Chain Bridge to Margaret Island on the Danube River. Many carried flags, chanted pacifist slogans, and held signs reading “No war” and “Give us peace, Lord.” “Never before have so many people lined up for peace. We are the biggest peace corps, the largest peacekeeping force in Europe,” the prime minister said, as quoted by Reuters. “Europe must be prevented from rushing into war, into its own destruction.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1796910522383704217

Orban said his country must draw lessons from the devastation it went through the darkest times of the 20th century. “In the two world wars, the Hungarians lost 1.5 million lives, and with them – their future children and grandchildren,” he told the crowd. “I’m saying this slowly so that Brussels would understand: we will not go to war. We will not go to the East for a third time, we will not go to the Russian front again.” Orban urged everyone to support the “pro-peace and pro-sovereignty” agenda of the ruling Fidesz party in the European Parliament election next week. “Do we want to shed Hungarian blood for Ukraine? No, we don’t,” he said. The pro-war [forces] have gone beyond common sense by wanting to defeat Russia as they tried to do during the First World War and the Second World war.

Since the start of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine in February 2022, Orban has repeatedly accused the EU leadership in Brussels of dangerous brinkmanship with Moscow and warned that the bloc must not allow itself to be dragged into a full-blown war. Budapest has refused to provide any military aid to Ukraine and threatened to veto financial assistance to Kiev. Orban heavily criticized the economic sanctions imposed on Moscow by the EU, arguing that the bloc had “shot itself in the lungs” by undermining trade and its own energy supply.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Moore Peterson

 

 

Oxdog
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796805027706621955

 

 

Giraffes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796194713969537066

 

 

Thank you
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796891909656310164

 

 

Happiness
https://twitter.com/i/status/1797011583891116440

 

 

Fishing net

 

 

Emmanuel
https://twitter.com/i/status/1796791908389323179

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 24 2024

Apr 242024
 
 April 24, 2024  Posted by at 8:50 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  59 Responses »


René Magritte La trahison des images 1929

 

• Unsealed Court Filings Show Emails Between NARA, DOJ, Biden White House (ET)
• Biden’s America: 40% Of Renters Think They’ll Never Own A Home (ZH)
• Biden Terrifyingly Grows Ranks Of Government Spies (Gosztola)
• The Real Debt Problem (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Ukraine Has Lost Almost a Half Million Soldiers – Shoigu (Sp.)
• No Hiding From Draft Abroad – Kiev (RT)
• West Is Doing To Ukrainians What It Did To Indigenous Americans – Zakharova (RT)
• Germany Holds Massive Military Drills Near Russian Border (RT)
• A Nasty Little Book About The Allied Invasion Of Russia In 1918 (Helmer)
• Gaza Settlement Crucial For Islamic World – Erdogan (TASS)
• Iran Threatens To Wipe Out Israel (RT)
• Western Regime-Change Operations Enable Criminal Activities (SCF)
• US Would Beat China In A War – Intel Official (RT)
• Britain To Put Industry On ‘War Footing’ – PM (RT)
• German Leader Tells Putin He Can’t Quote Philosopher Kant (RT)

 

 

 

 

25 bullseyes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1782233148668985826

 

 

Watters Kise

 

 

 

 

Tucker Yon

 

 

 

 

Ron Paul
https://twitter.com/i/status/1782792998016761927

 

 


if we had never named covid 19 and swerved around it like it was a dinosaur in the road instead of a squirrel, we’d probably have barely noticed it. “huh, baddish flu this year” would have been about the end it of. no lockdown. no mask up. no EUA jab. just life.

 

 

 

 

Conspiracy, no theory. And scary. How do you get rid of something like this? It’s a huge cancer growth.

• Unsealed Court Filings Show Emails Between NARA, DOJ, Biden White House (ET)

Court filings newly unsealed on Monday in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case include emails between National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) officials, the Biden White House, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding former President Donald Trump’s presidential records. The trove of unsealed filings also revealed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) code name for its investigation into President Trump’s presidential records was “[Redacted] Plasmic Echo.” A key exhibit included with a motion to compel filed in January was an FBI case file labeled “[Redacted] PLASMIC ECHO; Mishandling of Classified or National Defense Information.” This file, now made public, summarizes an initial review of documents forwarded by NARA to the FBI on Feb. 24, 2022. The review uncovered 106 classified documents across 12 out of 15 boxes, totaling 767 pages.

Last year, President Trump pleaded not guilty to 40 counts related to allegedly mishandling classified documents. In January, the defense filed a motion to compel discovery along with several exhibits under seal, which included emails containing names and identifying information about government officials. The defense has argued that the emails unsealed on Monday indicate communication between NARA officials, the Biden administration, and the DOJ regarding President Trump’s records, alleging coordination in targeting the former president since 2021. One email from NARA’s general counsel to the national archivist discussed drafting a letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland concerning “missing Trump records.” Subsequent emails revealed coordination between NARA and the Biden White House counsel’s office regarding the handling of these records.

The Sept. 1, 2021, email revealed that NARA’s general counsel, Gary Stern, had been in touch with both the DOJ and the Biden White House “about this issue.” A subsequent email on Sept. 30, 2021, reveals that the White House counsel’s office “is now ready to set up a call to discuss the Trump boxes.” This email came after Mr. Stern emailed Deputy White House Counsel Jonathan Su two days earlier to “check back in to see when and how you want to proceed re [sic] meeting with [redacted], [redacted], [redacted], and NARA to discuss the Trump boxes?” Furthermore, the defense highlighted instances where NARA officials didn’t disclose certain actions to Trump representatives, suggesting bias in the investigation process. The defense alleged that Mr. Su didn’t disclose to a Trump representative that NARA had already drafted a DOJ referral letter when contacting them to discuss access to notes “from the Trump administration relating to records handling.”

The unsealed emails show that NARA took into consideration the Democrat-led January 6 Committee’s investigation when considering the timing of reporting to Congress on their issues of getting access to President Trump’s posts on Twitter (now X). On Oct. 5, 2023, Mr. Stern wrote in an internal NARA email that the release of a letter to Congress “can be timed with our public release of the Trump social media records … as well as our release to the 1/6 Committee of responsive tweets on the day of January 6.” Mr. Stern noted that NARA had “issues” getting President Trump’s “social media records” because the Trump White House didn’t “capture them through the use of third-party archiving tools.” “I do not think that these problems are something that the AG/DOJ can deal with, but it could be appropriate to report them to Congress, especially since the January 6 Committee has specifically requested Trump’s Tweets from the day of January 6,” Mr. Stern wrote in the email.

Mr. Stern adds that the Biden White House counsel “is now also aware of this issue, and has asked that I keep them in the loop to the extent that we make any reference to the White House Office of Records Management.” Another email shows Mr. Ferriero saying that he had run “out of patience” amid back-and-forth communications with Trump representatives regarding “missing boxes” that, according to a draft email to the attorney general, were reported as having been “possibly destroyed.” The defense, along with a coalition of news media, asked the court to unseal these exhibits, arguing that the court filings are “matters of public record.” The defense has accused the prosecution of withholding potentially exculpatory evidence and alleged bias in the investigation. The filings made public on Monday revealed previously sealed information while limiting the redactions to keeping secret the names of government witnesses.

They were included as exhibits in a motion to compel the prosecution to produce discovery material. In the Jan. 16 motion, they argued that the office of Special Counsel Jack Smith has engaged in discovery violations and has disregarded fundamental fairness in its pursuit of prosecuting President Trump. The disclosures come amid a protracted battle over court documents, with Judge Aileen Cannon having reminded both parties in various court filings of the “strong presumption of public access” in the criminal proceedings, showing a preference for making public as much as possible. In January, she ordered that no unclassified material be sealed unless there were clear risks to personal safety or national security. The back-and-forth over documents has extended the pre-trial motions stage and delayed the original May 20 trial date.

Rising
https://twitter.com/i/status/1781030864681374166

Watters CIA

Mollie

Read more …

“Gen Z renters are by far the most likely to believe they will become homeowners (maybe it’s because they are also the dumbest)..”

• Biden’s America: 40% Of Renters Think They’ll Never Own A Home (ZH)

Bidenomics 101: the American dream of owning a home has become the American nightmare for almost half the US population. As housing specialist Redfin reports, rising home prices and mortgage rates “are making it harder to believe in the American dream of homeownership. Lack of affordability is the most commonly cited reason renters don’t believe they’ll ever own a home.” The details are dire: Nearly two in five (38%) U.S. renters don’t believe they’ll ever own a home, up from roughly one-quarter (27%) less than a year ago. This is according to a Redfin-commissioned survey of roughly 3,000 U.S. residents conducted by Qualtrics in February 2024. This report focuses on the 1,000 respondents who indicated they are renters. The relevant questions were: “Do you believe that you will ever own your own home in the future?” and “Which of the following are reasons you aren’t likely to purchase a home in the near future?” The 27% comparison is from a Redfin survey conducted in May and June 2023.

Lack of affordability is the prevailing reason renters believe they’re unlikely to become homeowners. Nearly half (44%) of renters who don’t believe they’ll buy a home in the near future said it’s because available homes are too expensive. The next most common obstacles: Ability to save for a down payment (35%), ability to afford mortgage payments (33%) and high mortgage rates (32%). Roughly one in eight (14%) simply aren’t interested in owning a home. Buying a home has become increasingly out of reach for many Americans due to the one-two punch of high home prices and high mortgage rates. First-time homebuyers must earn roughly $76,000 to afford the typical U.S. starter home, up 8% from a year ago and up nearly 100% from before the pandemic, according to a recent Redfin analysis. Home prices have skyrocketed more than 40% since 2019, due to the pandemic homebuying frenzy and a shortage of homes for sale. And the current average 30-year fixed mortgage rate is 6.82%. While that’s below the 23-year-high of nearly 8% hit in October, it’s still more than double the record low rates dropped to in 2020.

Home prices have risen 7% in the last year alone, and monthly mortgage payments have risen more than 10%, which helps explain why renters today are more likely than they were last year to say they don’t see themselves owning a home anytime soon. Many renters can’t fathom homeownership because they’re already struggling to afford their monthly housing costs. Nearly one-quarter (24%) of renters say they regularly struggle to afford their housing payments, and an additional 45% say they sometimes struggle to do so. Rents have soared over the last few years because so many people moved during the pandemic, upping demand for rentals. The median U.S. asking rent is roughly $2,000, near the record high hit in 2022–but the good news for renters is that prices aren’t growing nearly as fast as they were during the pandemic, partly because an influx of apartment supply is taking some of the heat off prices.

“Housing costs are high across the board, but renting is a more affordable and realistic option for many Americans right now–especially those who have never owned a home and aren’t able to tap into equity from a previous sale,” said Redfin Chief Economist Daryl Fairweather. “While owning a home is usually a sound longterm investment, the barriers to entry and upfront costs of buying are higher than renting. Buying typically requires a sizable down payment and approval for a mortgage–things that are difficult for many people today, when the typical down payment is near $60,000 and mortgage payments are sky-high. The sheer expense of purchasing a home is causing the American Dream of homeownership to lose some of its shine.” Broken down by generation, Gen Z renters are by far the most likely to believe they will become homeowners (maybe it’s because they are also the dumbest). Just 8% of Gen Z renters believe they’ll never own a home, compared to 22% of millennials, 40% of Gen Xers and 81% of baby boomers.

Read more …

“Section 702 may be used to force business landlords, cleaning contractors, delivery personnel, utility providers, etc, to help U.S. security agencies spy without probable cause..”

• Biden Terrifyingly Grows Ranks Of Government Spies (Gosztola)

On April 20, Edward Snowden declared, “America lost something important today, and hardly anyone heard. The headlines of state-aligned media screech and crow about the nefarious designs of your fellow citizens and the necessity of foreign wars without end, but find few words for a crime against the Constitution.” The NSA whistleblower was referring to the United States Senate reauthorizing and expanding surveillance under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. President Joe Biden circulated a memo that cast the Fourth Amendment right to privacy as a “threat to national security.” Biden National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and Attorney General Merrick Garland called members of Congress to ensure that they voted to give spy agencies renewed power. Specifically, “Patriot Act 2.0,” as Representative Zoe Lofgren called it, broadened the definition of service providers and exponentially increased the power that the government has to force numerous business and industries to aid warrantless surveillance.

Senator Ron Wyden strongly opposed the legislation and even introduced an amendment that would have prevented this assault on civil liberties. But the Senate rejected his effort to protect privacy. “The Senate waited until the 11th hour to ram through renewal of warrantless surveillance in the dead of night,” Wyden stated. He also added, “It is clear from the votes on very popular amendments that senators were unwilling to send this bill back to the House, no matter how common-sense the amendment before them.” Although the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) renewed Section 702 until April 2025, allowing lawmakers plenty of time to appropriately draft and amend legislation, panic was stirred by Biden and the national security state.

Wyden, who has a track record of challenging surveillance, did not mince words. He described the provision that he fought, which was dubbed the “Make Everyone A Spy” provision, as “one of the most dramatic and terrifying expansions of government surveillance authority in history.” “It allows the government to force any American who installs, maintains, or repairs anything that transmits or stores communications to spy on the government’s behalf. That means anyone with access to a server, a wire, a cable box, a wifi router, or a phone. It would be secret: the Americans receiving the government directives would be bound to silence, and there would be no court oversight.”

The Biden administration applauded the passage of legislation that expanded warrantless surveillance. “The President will swiftly sign the bill into law, ensuring that our security professionals can continue to rely on Section 702 to detect grave national security threats and use that understanding to protect the United States,” Sullivan stated. Section 702 used to primarily apply to telecommunications or technology companies. Now, as detailed by Demand Progress, Section 702 may be used to force business landlords, cleaning contractors, delivery personnel, utility providers, etc, to help U.S. security agencies spy without probable cause. Entities and individuals required to help with surveillance cannot speak about it. Their First Amendment speech rights are curtailed as they violate their customers’ Fourth Amendment privacy rights.

Read more …

“The minute the dollar goes, American power goes with it. Most of the world can hardly wait for it to happen.“

• The Real Debt Problem (Paul Craig Roberts)

The US dollar is in trouble, but it is trouble of Washington’s making. Republicans and the financial press, to the extent that one still exists, blame the dollar’s trouble on rising public and private debt. The US runs massive trade and budget deficits. These deficits for decades have been alleged to mean the death of the dollar. The narrative was that the dollar would be weakened by having to finance rising trade and domestic debt. When I was in the Congressional staff and later as Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury for Economic Policy, I had to deal with this ignorance, and it was frustrating. No one in Congress, on Wall Street, in the banks, or in the economics departments of universities understood the meaning of the US dollar as reserve currency.

When a country’s currency is the reserve currency, a role the US seized from Great Britain as its World War II victory prize, it means that there is unlimited demand for your debt. The reason is that your debt is the reserves of the world’s central banks. An increase in US debt is an increase in the reserves of the world banking system. As central banks desire more reserves, there was always a demand for US Treasury debt. There was zero financing problem. All of the nonsense we heard for decades about the impossibility of paying off the US debt was unbridled ignorance. The debt did not need to be payed off. If it had been, the reserves of the world banking system would have collapsed, and the Great Depression that the Americans experienced in the 1930s, due entirely to the Fed’s failure to expand bank reserves, would be worldwide.

Being the world currency, a role Roosevelt stole from England, means the US can pay its international bills by printing money or issuing debt. What has put this American privilege in danger is Washington’s stupid, indeed mindless, imposition of economic sanctions that then are evaded by ceasing to use the US dollar as world money. When countries cease settling their international balance of payments accounts in dollars, as Russia, China, Iran and other countries are doing, demand for Treasury debt drops. This means as the sanctioned central banks move to gold and non-Western currencies as reserves, that the demand for US Treasury debt drops, and for the first time in recent history, financing America’s tremendous public debt becomes a problem.

To be completely clear, the ONLY reason the US dollar is in danger of a large reduction in its value, is that Biden’s sanctions are driving countries away from the dollar. US debt can become a problem only from the abandonment of the dollar as world money. As US debt is denominated in US dollars, the Federal Reserve can always pay off the US debt no matter how large it is by printing money and buying the bonds. The problem is not that the debt can’t be paid. The problem is whereas the Fed can print dollars to meet any debt payments, it cannot print foreign currencies with which to buy dollars in foreign exchange markets. When US Treasury debt is redeemed, the debt holders (largely foreign central banks) receive dollars. If they have lost confidence in the dollar, they sell the dollars in the currency markets, and the enormous supply of dollars drive down its value.

When the dollar’s value is driven down, the offshored production of American firms, who produce in Asia and Mexico the products they sell to Americans and which comes in as imports, rise in price, thus causing domestic inflation, reducing the dollar’s purchasing power and causing more exit from the dollar. In other words, it is a death scenario–one produced by the Federal Reserve, the incompetent or bought-and-paid-for American economists, a mindless American government, and the mindless financial press. The minute the dollar goes, American power goes with it. Most of the world can hardly wait for it to happen.

JFK

Read more …

To achieve what?

• Ukraine Has Lost Almost a Half Million Soldiers – Shoigu (Sp.)

The Russian armed forces have the initiative along the entire contact line and are pushing the enemy away from the occupied borders, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said at a meeting of the Defense Ministry’s board. Ukraine has lost almost half a million soldiers since the beginning of the special military operation in 2022, Russian Defense Ministry Sergei Shoigu said on Tuesday. “In total, the losses of the Ukrainian armed forces amounted to almost half a million military personnel since the beginning of the special military operation,” Shoigu told a Defense Ministry meeting. According to him, the Kiev regime failed to achieve its goals in the counteroffensive prepared by NATO instructors. “Our servicemen have dispelled the myth about the superiority of Western weapons,” the minister noted. The Russian military will more intensively target Ukrainian logistic centers and storage facilities storing Western weapons, the minister said.

“We will increase the intensity of strikes against logistics centers and storage bases for Western weapons,” Shoigu said. Most of the $61 billion assistance package that the United States allocated to Ukraine will finance the US military industry, Sergei Shoigu said. “Washington intends to allocate almost $61 billion to the Kiev regime to prevent the collapse of the Ukrainian armed forces. Most of the allocations will finance the military industry of the United States. The US authorities cynically declare that Ukrainians will die for their interests in the fight against Russia,” Shoigu said. The Russian military industry will continue to increase the production of weapons and military equipment in proportion to the threats posed by the United States and its allies, the minister added. The Russian Army will receive the first units of new-generation anti-aircraft systems, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said. “This year the troops will receive: the first units of the new-generation S-500 anti-aircraft missile system in two modifications – long-range anti-aircraft missile systems and missile defense systems; S-400, S-300V4, Buk-M3, Tor-M2U anti-aircraft missile systems; and new-generation radar stations,” Shoigu said.

NATO has deployed up to 33,000 servicepeople, about 300 tanks and more than 800 other types of armored vehicles near borders of Russia, the Russian defense minister said. “Today, the grouping of NATO reinforcement troops near our borders numbers up to 33,000 people, about 300 tanks and more than 800 other armored combat vehicles,” Shoigu said. Shoigu also said that NATO drills involving up to 90,000 servicepeople are taking place right now, and the exercises are mimicking supposed impending Russian aggression. The Russian minister also said that the alliance is trying to strengthen its activity in the Arctic, while Sweden’s accession to NATO has increased tensions. “Sweden’s entry into the North Atlantic Alliance in early March has increased military and political tensions in the Western and Northwestern strategic directions,” Shoigu said.

Read more …

“According to EU officials, an estimated 650,000 Ukrainian men of fighting age are living in the bloc..”

• No Hiding From Draft Abroad – Kiev (RT)

Ukrainian consular offices will not serve fighting-age men living abroad who are unwilling to risk their lives for their country’s survival, Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba said on Tuesday. Kiev’s diplomatic missions in several Western nations stopped processing such service requests on Tuesday, according to multiple Ukrainian media reports. Documents that have been finalized for fighting-age Ukrainian men are being withheld, reports claim. Kuleba confirmed in a social media post on Tuesday that he had ordered the policy change and that it is meant to encourage men to come back to Ukraine for possible call up for military service. ”How it looks like now: a man of conscription age went abroad, showed his state that he does not care about its survival, and then comes and wants to receive services from this state. It does not work this way. Our country is at war,” he wrote.

The order to deny consular services to all men aged 18 to 60 was first revealed by Ukrainian media on Monday. Kuleba has since described his decision as “fair” and in line with the controversial military mobilization reforms, which President Vladimir Zelensky signed into law this month. The changes include various punishments for avoiding the draft. According to EU officials, an estimated 650,000 Ukrainian men of fighting age are living in the bloc. Kiev has identified that pool as a significant untapped source of manpower for the armed forces. When they come into force next month Zelensky’s reforms will lower the draft age from 27 to 25, tighten exemptions and oblige potential conscripts to update their personal data with the Defense Ministry.

All men aged 18 to 60, regardless of eligibility, will be required to carry papers confirming their registration with a conscription office. Asked in early April how many troops Kiev intended to mobilize, Zelensky dodged the question and claimed that Moscow had plans to enroll 300,000 additional servicemen. Russian officials denied his claim, pointing out that its military attracts enough volunteers to meet personnel goals.

Read more …

“They bought Manhattan Island for beads, and Ukrainians don’t even get those, only an American noose around the neck,..

• West Is Doing To Ukrainians What It Did To Indigenous Americans – Zakharova (RT)

Kiev’s policies will result in the extermination of Ukrainians on behalf of its Western puppet masters, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has claimed. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry intends to deny all consular services abroad to male citizens aged 18 to 60, except for preparing documents to return to Ukraine, local media reported on Monday, citing the ministry’s internal correspondence. The policy is presumably meant to force men of fighting age to leave foreign nations and be conscripted into military service under a new mobilization law signed by President Vladimir Zelensky this month. The people are being “erased by Western elites and their executors in Ukraine – Zelensky and his pseudo-Ukrainian gang,” Zakharova said on Tuesday, reacting to the news.

She claimed that while Ukrainian governments that have been in power since the 2014 US-backed armed coup in Kiev posed as nationalist, their policies came “from people who historically had nothing to do with the country.” “After most of Ukraine was pillaged and looted, its history rewritten, and monuments destroyed, they moved on to the physical elimination of its indigenous population,” she said. ”Everything just like with the aboriginal population of North America, who were killed in the tens of thousands by the ‘civilized’ folk. They bought Manhattan Island for beads, and Ukrainians don’t even get those, only an American noose around the neck,” Zakharova added. Moscow perceives its conflict with Kiev as a proxy war which Washington initiated and is willing to conduct “to the last Ukrainian.”

Senior Western officials, including US Senator Lindsey Graham and former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, have praised the Ukrainians’ willingness to fight and die for Western interests. ”There could be no more effective way of investing in Western security than investing in Ukraine, because those guys without a single pair of American boots on the ground are fighting for the West,” Johnson said earlier this month, as he bragged to students at Georgetown University in the US about his record of arming Kiev.

Read more …

Drills are all German troops are capable of.

• Germany Holds Massive Military Drills Near Russian Border (RT)

More than 3,000 German military personnel are taking part in the Grand Quadriga 2024 drills that kicked off in Lithuania on Tuesday. The maneuvers are part of the larger, months-long Steadfast Defender 24 series of NATO exercises that began in late January. Lithuania shares a border with Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave, as well as Moscow’s closest ally, Belarus. In a separate development earlier this month, Berlin deployed an advanced military team to the Baltic country as part of plans for a full-strength armor brigade permanently stationed there. Moscow has described the plans as a threat requiring “special measures” in response. The Grand Quadriga 2024 exercise is scheduled to wrap up in late May, and will involve 200 pieces of German military hardware, including Leopard tanks as well as Puma and Boxer infantry fighting vehicles.

In a statement last Thursday, the Lithuanian military wrote that the “exercise is centered around moving two divisions from the Central European region to the Eastern.” “Lithuanian units training side by side with the German participants will plan and execute operations,” the document read. The Bundeswehr revealed that its armored division would be transported by boat, rail and road to Lithuania, where it would “practice defense and counter-offensive [exercises] on the allied territory.” Several more military drills will also be taking place in Lithuania concurrently, including Saber Strike, Brave Griffin 2024/II and Thunder Strike – all of which are part of NATO’s Steadfast Defender 24. Hailed as the largest exercises that NATO has held in decades, the maneuvers will feature some 90,000 troops from all 32 member states, according to Supreme Allied Commander for Europe Christopher Cavoli.

Some 1,100 combat vehicles, including 133 tanks and 533 infantry fighting vehicles, will be involved, as well as more than 50 naval vessels and 80 helicopters, drones and fighter jets. In January, General Cavoli said the drills would simulate an “emerging conflict scenario against a near-peer adversary,” covering thousands of kilometers all across Europe. Commenting on NATO’s war games in early March, the secretary of the Russian Security Council, Nikolay Patrushev, said they were “undoubtedly increasing tensions and destabilizing the situation in the world.” He claimed that a “scenario of an armed confrontation with Russia is being rehearsed.”

Read more …

“..the “independent charity that champions Ukrainian culture” which, the institute financial reports reveal, is paid for by George Soros.”

• A Nasty Little Book About The Allied Invasion Of Russia In 1918 (Helmer)

In the last war which the Americans, British, and French fought against the Russians, they were all defeated and forced to run away. Now it’s happening again. But if Anna Reid, author of a new history of the Allied powers’ invasion of Russia and war against the Bolsheviks, titles her book “A Nasty Little War” (lead image, left), what title does Reid give to the present war which the Doughboy alliance is losing for the second time? A Nasty Big War doesn’t quite do their plan for destroying Russia enough justice, does it? A Nasty Little Defeat followed by a Nasty Big Defeat comes closer to the truth, but Reid has written her book in the conviction that it will not and must not come to that again. One hundred and six years since the Russia Intervention of 1918-20 is long enough for Reid to conclude with one of her contemporary British officer sources: “‘Of course it could not possibly be otherwise. But it is unfortunate that events worked out as they did.’ It could have been the epitaph for the whole Intervention,” Reid adds from the British point of view, then but not now.

“So ends a not very creditable enterprise”, she quotes from a report on the desk of British Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon in April 1920. Curzon then crossed out “not very” and wrote in “highly dis”. Reid is so certain this is not the lesson of today’s allied war against Russia she declares her conclusion at the very beginning of her book. “There is no simple read-across from the Intervention. Today’s war is not a civil one, and the impressive and staunchly democratic Ukrainians are not the inept, revanchist Whites. The lazy lesson from 1918-20 – that Western meddling in the region failed then, and will again now – is completely mistaken. If the Intervention does have something to teach, it is that Putin will fail for the same reason the Whites did: because he underestimates the desire for freedom of the non-Russian nations…” This declaration is at page 10. Reid’s history runs on for another 350 pages of the same.

Reid cannot bring herself to introduce or mention the Russian president by his full name. He first appears, first name-less, on page 9 “as Putin’s Russia attempts to reconquer its thirty-years independent Ukraine.” Felix Dzerzhinsky, Bolshevik head of intelligence, is more fortunate with Reid. He gets his full name, but Reid adds: “the weasel-faced psychopath in charge of the Cheka”. Dangerous adjectives, weasel-faced psychopaths in glass houses with hands full of them. Reid has similar tongue trouble with how to identify the Russians in the war by name. She repeatedly refers to them as “the enemy”, because the war diaries and operation reports of the British commanders she was reporting described them so at the time. Their soldiers called them “Bolos” or “Russkis” if they were men; if they were women, they used fonder terms. These men did not want to fight – there were mutinies by the Quebec infantry in the Canadian force, as well as in US, French, and British units. More committed to killing Russians were the Japanese and Greek forces. At every turn of events, Reid continues to wage her war against the Russian history of what happened:

“The Americans arrived [in Vladivostok] just in time for a coup. Soviet historians accused the Interventionists of waging a colonial war. This was anachronistic – the hey-day of imperialism was over and untrue insofar as the Allies had no ambition permanently to annex Russian territory.” “Vilified by Cold War-era historians on the left as absurd and hysterical, most of the material [in the British Foreign Office’s Blue Book of Bolshevik war crimes] is in fact perfectly credible”. “Foreshadowing, ironically, a late-Soviet propaganda trope, he [Winston Churchill, then British war minister] blamed what pogroms there were on Ukrainian ‘hordes’.”“There is some truth…in that the Intervention played into a long-standing Russian narrative of encirclement by hostile powers. But it is hard to see, had the Allies stood back, that relations would have been much better. A one-party state explicitly dedicated to worldwide revolution, the Soviet Union was never going to be a normal diplomatic partner”.

This is history topsy-turvied to fit a political message. “Excellent background to today’s events” – this is the endorsement of Reid’s book by Anne Applebaum, wife of the Polish foreign minister, Radoslav Sikorski, whose Siklebaum profiteering from Russia war-making can be followed here. In London, Reid shares direction of the Ukrainian Institute with Applebaum — Applebaum is a patron, Reid a trustee of the “independent charity that champions Ukrainian culture” which, the institute financial reports reveal, is paid for by George Soros.

Read more …

“..The Islamic world needs to come together..”

• Gaza Settlement Crucial For Islamic World – Erdogan (TASS)

The Islamic world needs to come together and find a solution to the Gaza crisis, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told his pool reporters on his return from Iraq, where he was on a visit on April 22; the Anadolu news agency quoted his remarks. “Gaza is where the Islamic world needs to focus, engage in reasoning for a solution, and formulate realistic and effective policies,” the president said. Erdogan added that Turkey will continue to discuss these issues with both representatives of the radical Palestinian Hamas movement and the leaders of countries. This is Turkey’s top priority and it will do everything it can toward this end, Erdogan went on to say.

In his opinion, it would be a mistake to view the Gaza issue solely from the perspective of October 7, 2023, when the Palestinian-Israeli conflict sharply escalated. “The massacres and Israeli mobilization for the destruction of Gaza should change the approach to the issue. Israel’s occupation of Gaza opens the door for other occupations. We will try to involve the UN secretariat and take joint action. If the Islamic world does not come to its senses from the massacres reaching genocidal proportions, it may lose its reflexes completely. Therefore, we cannot remain silent, we must mobilize,” the Turkish president stressed.

Read more …

“..if it attempts to attack Iran again..”

• Iran Threatens To Wipe Out Israel (RT)

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi has threatened Israel with annihilation if it attempts to attack Iran again. Raisi arrived in Pakistan on Monday for a three-day visit. He addressed the recent tensions between Tehran and West Jerusalem at an event in Punjab on Tuesday. “If the Zionist regime once again makes a mistake and attacks the sacred land of Iran, the situation will be different, and it is not clear whether anything will remain of this regime,” the state news agency IRNA quoted Raisi as saying. Israel never officially acknowledged an April 1 airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria that killed seven senior officers of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force. Tehran nevertheless retaliated on April 13, firing scores of drones and missiles at several targets in Israel.

Iran has shrugged off a series of reported explosions near the city of Isfahan last Friday, which were rumored to be a response from Israel. West Jerusalem did not acknowledge the reported attack, while criticizing a cabinet minister who spoke about it out of turn. Tehran chose to ignore it rather than deliver the promised swift and severe reprisal. The Islamic Republic has vowed on multiple occasions to wipe out, destroy or annihilate the “Zionist regime,” as it calls Israel. Speaking in Lahore on Tuesday, Raisi vowed to continue “honorably supporting the Palestinian resistance.” He also denounced the US and the collective West as “the greatest violators of human rights,” pointing to their support for the Israeli “genocide” in Gaza.

So far, more than 34,000 Palestinians in the enclave have been killed in Israeli military operations. Israel declared war on Hamas after the October 7 raids by the Gaza-based Palestinian group that claimed the lives of an estimated 1,200 Israelis. Raisi has promised to boost Iranian trade with Pakistan to $10 billion annually. Relations between the two neighbors have been rocky since January, when Iran and Pakistan traded air and drone strikes aimed at “terrorist camps” in their respective territory.

Read more …

“The slave trade in Ukraine has become one of the most serious problems of our time..”

• Western Regime-Change Operations Enable Criminal Activities (SCF)

The slave trade in Ukraine has become one of the most serious problems of our time. Since the 2014 coup d’état, Kiev has been a key player in modern slavery, particularly for human trafficking and sexual exploitation networks. The political and social instability that has affected the country since the Western-led regime change operation is one of the main factors for the growth of such human rights violations. A recent investigative report published by the Foundation to Battle Injustice showed in details the seriousness of the slave trade in Ukraine. According to the organization, Kiev has become one of the main global hubs in the human trafficking market, with free exploitation and circulation of irregular workers – in addition to the well-known trafficking of women and children in the predatory sex market.

The study points out that more than 300,000 Ukrainians were victims of the slave market between 1991 and 2021. This situation, however, has deteriorated even further since Vladimir Zelensky came to power. It is estimated that since the beginning of Zelensky’s government, more than 550,000 Ukrainians have been enslaved. These numbers are alarming and place Ukraine as one of the main agents of human trafficking in the entire world. In its report, citing sources familiar with the topic and several insiders, the Foundation exposed how the slave trade in Ukraine is not limited to the exploitation of Ukrainian citizens. Since 2021, two reception centers for refugees from Africa have been operating in Ternopil. These facilities were used not only for receiving migrants but also for selling them on the European black market.

An alleged member of the Ukrainian Presidential Cabinet, on condition of anonymity, reported to investigators that the organizer of the Ukrainian human trafficking network is Ruslan Stefanchuk, current chairman of the Verkhovna Rada. It is said that Stefanchuk is the main beneficiary and coordinator of human trafficking networks in Ukraine, working both in the sale of Ukrainian citizens on the international black market and in the exploitation of foreigners who arrive through migratory flows and are handed over to criminal networks in Europe. Relatives of the Ukrainian parliamentarian also appear to be involved in such activities, as a large network of private companies is legally registered in the name of people close to him, such as his brother, Mykola Stefanchuck, and his wife, Marina Stefanchuk.

Stefanchuk and his relatives’ companies have the function of disguising the slave trade, making it appear to be a legal business. Advertisements are made to “help” people in various ways, such as offering employment or financial assistance. Thus, migrants, refugees and vulnerable Ukrainians are lured into meetings and interviews by supposedly legal and responsible companies, but soon after the meetings their documents are confiscated, and these people are captured and handed over to criminal networks. “Everything is built to look as legal as possible. Ukrainian women, children and men are invited for interviews at respectable companies in Kiev, Ternopil, Lviv or Ivano-Frankivsk. They are made tempting financial offers and paradisiacal working conditions. Then, under a plausible pretext, their identity cards are confiscated. After that, they can do absolutely anything they want with them,” source told investigators.

Read more …

Oh sure. “..we’re not going to know they’re not good until they’re shooting at us, and I don’t want to be in a position where I find out, ‘Oh, they actually are that good’. That’s a problem.”

• US Would Beat China In A War – Intel Official (RT)

If a conflict between Washington and Beijing broke out today, the more experienced American force would prevail but with significant casualties, a US military intelligence official has told reporters. The unnamed official gave a background briefing on Monday about threats facing the US military. He downplayed the Chinese H-20 stealth bomber, currently in development, as “probably nowhere near as good” as the American B-2 or the upcoming B-21 – while praising the Chinese J-20 fighter as “highly capable.” “The biggest… challenge for the Chinese side is actually not so much capability of actual systems, it’s more capability of personnel to effectively employ those systems at speed and at scale,” the official was quoted as saying by Defense One and Breaking Defense.

While the US military has “a lot of experience fighting wars,” the Chinese “don’t really have anybody right now at all, in the [People’s Liberation Army] PLA, who’s actually been in a war.” This relative inexperience would translate into the US winning a hypothetical war with China – although with large-scale losses – should one break out today, said the Defense One source. The Pentagon is proceeding with plans to modernize the US military because Chinese President Xi Jinping “almost certainly” believes a war with Washington is inevitable, noted the official. “I don’t want to rely on the Chinese not being good. Because we’re not going to know they’re not good until they’re shooting at us, and I don’t want to be in a position where I find out, ‘Oh, they actually are that good’. That’s a problem.” the official concluded.

Discussions about Chinese capabilities in Washington have been taking place against the backdrop of a debate about the B-21 bomber program. In February, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall urged the government to commit to the program, arguing that for at least 20 years, China has been building a military “purpose-built to deter and defeat” the US. Earlier this month, however, Air Force chief of staff General David Allvin told the Senate that new developing technologies might complement the B-21, so the service might not end up getting 100 of the bombers as originally planned. The plane, intended to become operational by 2030, is still under development at Northrop Grumman.

Read more …

“We must not overstate the danger. We’re not on the brink of war, and nor do we seek it..”

• Britain To Put Industry On ‘War Footing’ – PM (RT)

The UK is set to embark on the “biggest strengthening” of its national defense “in a generation” and plans to gradually increase defense spending to £87 billion (around $108 billion) annually by 2030, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has announced. Sunak made the remarks on Tuesday at a joint press conference with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg while on a visit to Poland. Sunak pledged to gradually increase Britain’s defense spending, promising to even surpass the NATO-targeted 2% of GDP by the end of the decade. Annual spending is expected to reach the £87 billion ($108 billion) mark in 2023, he said, constituting some 2.5% of Britain’s GDP.

London is set to allocate additional long-term funding for ammunition production, Sunak stated, arguing that the Ukraine conflict has clearly shown the country needs deeper stockpiles should it find itself in a large-scale high-intensity war or even a global conflict. “We will put the UK’s own defense industry on a war footing. One of the central lessons of the war in Ukraine is that we need deeper stockpiles of munitions and for industry to be able to replenish them more quickly,” Sunak said. “Today is a turning point for European security and a landmark moment in the defense of the United Kingdom. It is a generational investment in British security and British prosperity, which makes us safer at home and stronger abroad,” he stated, hailing the spending plan as the “biggest strengthening of our national defense in a generation.”

The defense spending announcement comes as the UK, one of the top backers of Ukraine in its conflict with Russia, unveiled its biggest-ever military aid package for Kiev, valued at £500 million ($617 million). The “vital munitions” package will include more than 400 combat vehicles, 60 boats, and an undisclosed number of long-range Storm Shadow missiles. “Defending Ukraine against Russia’s brutal ambitions is vital for our security and for all of Europe,” Sunak alleged. “If [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is allowed to succeed in this war of aggression, he will not stop at the Polish border.” Speaking earlier in the day in Warsaw, however, the prime minister admitted that a large-scale conflict was not actually imminent and its danger should not be blown out of proportion. “We must not overstate the danger. We’re not on the brink of war, and nor do we seek it,” he acknowledged.

Read more …

“..the philosopher’s call “to live by one’s own wits” is as relevant today as ever..”

• German Leader Tells Putin He Can’t Quote Philosopher Kant (RT)

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has lashed out at Russian President Vladimir Putin for quoting iconic German philosopher Immanuel Kant. Speaking on Tuesday at an event marking the 300th anniversary of Kant’s birth, Scholz accused Putin of trying to “poach” the great thinker as well as misrepresenting his ideas. Kant was born in 1724 in Koenigsberg (present-day Kaliningrad), which belonged to the Kingdom of Prussia before later becoming part of the Russian Empire. The philosopher is famous for his work on ethics, aesthetics and philosophical ontology, and is considered one of the pillars of German classical philosophy. “Putin doesn’t have the slightest right to quote Kant, yet Putin’s regime remains committed to poaching Kant and his work at almost any cost,” Scholz said at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences, as quoted by Die Zeit.

Scholz said Russia’s role in the Ukraine conflict contradicts Kant’s fundamental teachings. He referred to Kant’s words on the interference of states in the affairs of other nations, and defended Kiev’s decision not to engage in peace talks with Moscow. He said Kant believed that forced treaties were not the way to reach ‘perpetual peace’ – a reference to one of Kant’s major works. Putin has been known to praise and quote Kant, even suggesting in 2013 that the philosopher should be made an official symbol of Kaliningrad Region. During a meeting with university students in Kaliningrad in January, Putin called Kant “one of the greatest thinkers of both his time and ours,” and said the philosopher’s call “to live by one’s own wits” is as relevant today as ever.

“A country must live by its own wits… This does not mean that we do not care about the interests of others… but we will never allow Russia’s interests to be neglected. In some countries, among our neighbors, this thesis has been forgotten. Many live by someone else’s wits. This will not bring them any good,” Putin stated. The administration of Kaliningrad Region responded to Scholz’s statement on Tuesday, saying no one has done more than Russia to “perpetuate the memory of the great philosopher and his teachings.” “Immanuel Kant died as a subject of the Russian crown. It seems to me that this, more than any words of all possible German politicians, shows the position of the great philosopher regarding Russia,” the governor’s press secretary, Dmitry Lyskov, said in a statement.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Morgan Musk

 

 

Musk Oz

 

 

Great white
https://twitter.com/i/status/1782690700087169273

 

 

Catnip

 

 

Carrot
https://twitter.com/i/status/1782584172659519490

 

 

Battle cats
https://twitter.com/i/status/1782829098131173629

 

 

Fox cat

 

 

Moose

 

 

Babies
https://twitter.com/i/status/1782742456582160451

 

 

Poetry
https://twitter.com/i/status/1782482151096590529

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries