May 132026
 
 May 13, 2026  Posted by at 9:46 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  34 Responses »


Caravaggio The raising of Lazarus 1609


Trump Ready To Raise “Core of China’s Core Interests” In Xi Summit (ZH)
Iran Specifies 5 Demands To Restart Peace Talks With US (ZH)
Trump Considering Resuming Airstrikes As Talks With Iran Stall – Axios (RT)
Zelensky Chief of Staff Yermak Charged with Corruption, Money Laundering (CTH)
Tulsi Gabbard Probes 120 Foreign Biolabs Funded by US – 40 in Ukraine (CTH)
Nearly $22 Billion Secretly Shipped To Ukraine – Austrian Politician (RT)
John Brennan: Still “Legions” of His Allies at DOJ, FBI and CIA (CTH)
Here Are The People Accompanying Trump On His China Excursion This Week (JTN)
Minnesota Democrats Block Ilhan Omar Subpoena (JTN)
Scott Jennings Nukes the Democrats’ Gerrymander Hail Mary (Margolis)
Acting AG Blanche Warns Reporters To Expect Subpoenas In Leaks Probe (JTN)
Virginia Democrats Ask US Supreme Court to Reinstate Congressional Map (Hyde)
The Language Got a Little Salty on CNN Monday Night (Matt Margolis)
Socialist Storytime: AOC Spins Anti-Capitalist Fable About the Founders (Turley)
Media Spreads Hantavirus Hysteria In Attempt To Save Disgraced WHO (ZH)
Over 500,000 Waiting To Cross Into Europe From Libya – Greek Minister (RT)

 


 

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2053909037545357652?s=20 https://twitter.com/AlecLace/status/2054011075914342417?s=20

 


 


Big party for Trump?

Trump Ready To Raise “Core of China’s Core Interests” In Xi Summit (ZH)

Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to raise the issue of increasingly costly US arms transfers to Taiwan during their bilateral summit at the end of this week, spanning Thursday through Friday. Taiwan of course remains the “core of China’s core interests” – as Beijing has in the recent past characterized the issue. While Trump officials have previewed that it will be focused on trade and investment, the White House too is reportedly placing Taiwan and regional geopolitical hot button issues on the agenda.


“I’m going to have that discussion with President Xi,” Trump told reporters at the White House, specifically on the question of weapons sales. “President Xi would like us not to, and I’ll have that discussion. That’s one of the many things I’ll be talking about.”

Also there’s the looming question of the future of the Iran war and blockaded Strait of Hormuz. Currently there’s a stalemated situation and supposed ceasefire which is barely holding. By many accounts, Trump was hopeful that the Iran ‘excursion’ would be wrapped up by now, but it now seems to be sliding into protracted quagmire – critics point out. The WSJ says that Beijing is feeling confident as it prepares to receive Trump and what’s looking to be a rather large entourage: But behind the scenes, Beijing feels more emboldened, and more insistent on defending areas it regards as vital to its long-term strategic interests.

These include resisting U.S. pressure to relax its grip over global supply chains and fundamentally rebalance trade between the two countries. They also include urging Washington to look the other way as it pressures Taiwan, the self-ruled island that Beijing claims as its own, and as it projects military power across Asia. “They feel very well about how last year played out,” said Jonathan Czin, a fellow at the Washington-based Brookings Institution and a former U.S. intelligence officer focused on China. “They showed they could weather the storm and the administration had to climb down from the tariffs and spend most of the past year trying to mollify China.”

As for more implications of the Iran war dragging on as Trump goes to Beijing, CNBC writes: Iran’s ambassador to China Reza Rahmani Fazli in a Tuesday post on X pressed Tehran’s case with Beijing, saying that the relationship between the two is too strong for the U.S. to overcome. The bottom line is that higher energy prices are baked in for the foreseeable future. The price of crude oil makes up about half of the cost of a gallon of gas, according to the Energy Information Administration.

And U.S. elections are less than six months away. The 2026 midterm elections will be a crucial referendum on Trump and the Republican Party as they seek to retain a lock on both chambers in Congress. Trump early Tuesday put out the following message on Truth Social, teasing that the next regime change operations could be unleashed on China’s small island-nation ally in America’s immediate backyard…

For some further big picture analysis on how the Iran gambit has raised the stakes, and made the Beijing summit more unpredictable, the below is some fresh Rabobank commentary outlining related developments to watch:

In a case of curious timing, the US just imposed fresh sanctions on individuals and firms involved in facilitating Iranian oil sales to China, and Acting Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao yesterday released a new 30-year shipbuilding plan. That plan anticipates the acquisition of 11 nuclear-powered Trump class battleships, new underwater drones, and an ongoing review to the Ford class aircraft carrier design to increase lethality and reliability while reducing unit costs and production lead times. The planned expansion of the US fleet and shipbuilding industrial base is undoubtedly a reaction to China’s growing naval strength and substantial advantage in production capacity. The message to Xi is an unsubtle one.

The FT’s Gideon Rachman characterises Trump as arriving at Xi’s court in a state of supplication, having effectively lost the trade war vs China and the shooting war vs Iran. This perhaps overstates the weakness of Trump’s position by ignoring the fact that the US has tightened its grip on global energy supply chains and has shown that is has the power to put its foot on the hosepipe of Chinese energy imports whenever it likes. In the flurry of commentary over China’s bumper trade surplus in April, it seems to have been missed that import volumes for crude oil were down sharply, but values were higher. Yesterday’s April PPI figures for China also underscored the uncomfortable effects that the Iran war is having on the Chinese industrial economy.

Xi will be acutely aware of this, and he will also be aware that the US holds similar power to disrupt Chinese food imports if it was of a mind to do so. Seapower IS power, as the shipbuilding plan should remind us all. In this respect, Trump holds better cards than the FT is giving him credit for. Perhaps it is no coincidence that China bought more soybeans in April than it had done for months.

Some more of Trump’s latest commentary amid his hope for a ‘good’ Xi meeting:

Read more …

Iran “demands”? They don’t even want to talk about nukes. Perfectly unrealistic.

Even Saudi Arabia was bombing Iran.

Iran Specifies 5 Demands To Restart Peace Talks With US (ZH)

Iran on Tuesday revealed its demands in a counteroffer to the United States that President Trump shot down on Sunday, which has put the whole conflict and Pakistan-mediated talks in a holding pattern and stalemate, as the Strait of Hormuz remains effectively blocked. The demands hinge on war reparations, Iranian sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz and an end to US sanctions – things which the White House balked at, with war reparations especially being focus of rejection by the US side, and the lack of taking up the nuclear issue, which Iran has insisted is a non-starter and would only be dealt with after the war is settled.


Trump had previously made clear on Truth Social that “I have just read the response from Iran’s so-called ‘Representatives.’ I don’t like it — TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!” Al Jazeera correspondent Ali Hashem has listed the following five conditions that it sees as the basis for reentering talks:

1) Ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon

2) Lifting all sanctions

3) Releasing frozen Iranian assets

4) Compensation for war damages and losses

5) Recognition of Iran’s sovereign rights over the Strait of Hormuz

Again, all this according to Tehran must be agreed to while at the same time Iran is pushing back against nuclear negotiations. In a Monday press briefing Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei had publicly alluded to several of these, including in his words, “Demanding an end to the war, lifting the blockade and piracy, and releasing Iranian assets that have been unjustly frozen in banks due to U.S. pressure.” Also, there was mention of “Safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz and establishing security in the region and Lebanon were other demands of Iran, which are considered a generous and responsible offer for regional security” – before talks could begin in good faith.

Tehran apparently feels it can weather the tightening economic noose its under, given Tanker Trackers on Tuesday said Iran has not successfully exported any crude oil by sea over the past 28 days. To our best knowledge, Iran hasn’t successfully exported* any crude oil by sea over the past 28 days. Some refined products managed to escape because US OFAC did not slap sanctions on those tankers.

In addition, Kharg Island hasn’t loaded any tankers since 2026-05-06 as a result…
— TankerTrackers.com, Inc. (@TankerTrackers) May 12, 2026

Trump, just before his departure to China, remarked to Axios: “Iran will either do the right thing or we will finish the job… we are either gonna make a deal or they will be decimated.”

Read more …

If/when they go in again, it’ll be for a long haul.

Trump Considering Resuming Airstrikes As Talks With Iran Stall – Axios (RT)

US President Donald Trump is considering resuming the bombing campaign against Iran as peace talks remain stalled, Axios reported on Monday, citing three US officials familiar with the matter. On Sunday, Trump rejected Iran’s latest terms as “totally unacceptable” and said the ceasefire reached around a month ago was “on massive life support.” According to Axios, Trump was set to meet with his national security team on Monday to discuss next steps, including potentially resuming Project Freedom – an operation aimed at guiding ships through the Strait of Hormuz – as well as restarting airstrikes and hitting the remaining 25% of targets identified by the Pentagon but not yet struck.


The Washington Post, citing a CIA assessment, reported last week that Iran retained about 75% of its pre-war mobile launchers and roughly 70% of its missiles, and could withstand a US naval blockade for at least three to four months. Trump suspended Project Freedom within 24 hours of announcing it last week, following a request from Pakistan, which has acted as a mediator in the conflict. NBC later reported that the president shelved the initiative after Saudi Arabia refused to allow the US to use its bases and airspace to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said on Sunday that the US had “no alternative” but to accept Tehran’s terms. “The longer they drag their feet, the more American taxpayers will pay for it,” he wrote on X. Iranian state media described Trump’s demand to shut down the country’s nuclear sites as “a non-starter that Iran has rejected for decades.” According to Press TV, Iran’s conditions include the lifting of sanctions, reparations, and a new framework governing the Strait of Hormuz that would recognize “Iran’s sovereign control over this vital waterway.”

Read more …

You can accuse everyone in Kiev of corruption. Can’t go wrong.

Zelensky Chief of Staff Yermak Charged with Corruption, Money Laundering (CTH)

Andrey Yermak is not just some random high-level government official in Ukraine. Andrey Yermak was President Zelenskyy’s right hand, chief of staff, organizer of the functions of Ukrainian government and the guy who controlled the systems that keep all other government officials working on the agenda of the President. If you took Susie Wiles and Marco Rubio’s responsibilities and combined them into one job function, that would be the scale of importance and influence that Andrey Yermak controlled inside the Ukrainian government and the office of President Zelenskyy.

Today, following an explosive criminal corruption charge that surfaced less than 36 hours ago, Andrey Yermak appears in court to face charges of corruption, theft and money laundering. Yermak was under investigation for his role in theft through the energy sector and now stands accused of using construction projects near Kiev as a tool to launder money to himself and other high-level government officials.

There are three facets to this I find very interesting. First, is the timing. Second, is the often-overlooked admission by National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) about them working closely with FBI investigators in Europe and American intelligence units. Third, is the way they caught him: “The anti-corruption bureau shared part of a wiretapped conversation as part of its case and said six more people had been identified as suspects.”

(Via BBC) – “[…] For years he was a close friend of Zelensky, and led Ukraine’s talks with the US until an anti-corruption raid on his flat last November prompted his resignation. Ukraine’s Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office (Sapo) said it was asking the Kyiv court to either place him in preventive detention or give him bail of about $4m (£3m). The head of the National anti-corruption bureau (Nabu) stressed that Zelensky himself was not part of the pre-trial investigation.

Yermak had been the president’s closest adviser throughout Russia’s full-scale invasion, until he became caught up in a broader inquiry by Sapo and Nabu into an alleged $100m (£74m) embezzlement scheme in Ukraine’s nuclear energy sector. As part of Operation Midas, ex-Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov was charged with abuse of office, while businessman Timur Mindich reportedly fled the country after he was flagged as a suspect and ex-Energy Minister Herman Haluschenko was detained while trying to leave. Like Yermak, Mindich was once part of Zelensky’s inner circle and co-owned the president’s former TV studio Kvartal95, before sanctions were imposed on him. Mindich denies wrongdoing.

The latest claims center on an elite housing project called “Dynasty” in a village outside Kyiv where millions in construction funds were allegedly laundered. The anti-corruption bureau shared part of a wiretapped conversation as part of its case and said six more people had been identified as suspects. On November 17, 2025, reports surfaced indicating that Yermak, then head of Zelensky’s office, might have been recorded by NABU. Subsequently, Yermak’s residence was searched on November 28, and by evening, Zelensky had dismissed him from his position.

Since late April, Ukrainian media outlets and parliament members have continued to publish new excerpts from the recordings. These reveal Mindich discussing with Rustem Umerov, the current Secretary of the Security Council and former Defense Minister, details of embezzlement from multimillion-dollar contracts, funding for drone manufacturing through a company affiliated with Mindich, and potential candidates for the Ukrainian ambassadorship to the United States. Keep in mind, Rustem Umerov is the current lead negotiator and point of contact for U.S. peace efforts.

Russia Federation President Vladimir Putin suggested last weekend that the war in Ukraine was “coming to an end.”

Interesting timing.

Read more …

What do you use 40 biolabs for? Do we need to pay more attention?

Tulsi Gabbard Probes 120 Foreign Biolabs Funded by US – 40 in Ukraine (CTH)

According to a report within the New York Post, Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, is now investigating 120 foreign biolabs that are funded by the U.S. government – potentially involved in ‘gain of function’ or weaponized virus research. More than 40 of the labs are identified operating in Ukraine. Keep in mind, DNI Gabbard recently took control of the CIA development of Artificial Intelligence systems pulling In-Q-Tel, the CIA-backed venture firm, under management of ODNI. Through a series of what seems like well-coordinated moves by Secretary Rubio, CIA Director Ratcliffe and DNI Gabbard, a significant amount of the CIA’s operations is no longer in the dark network. https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2053944250870489500?s=20


USAID has been dissolved (Rubio/Ratcliffe); the Directorate of Analysis taken out of CIA and into ODNI (Ratcliffe/Gabbard); the President’s Daily Brief now assembled by the ODNI (Ratcliffe/Gabbard); Artificial Intelligence systems, In-Q-Tel under ODNI management (Ratcliffe/Gabbard), and now Intelligence Community (CIA) biolabs being identified, investigated and potentially removed from operation. The biolab issue is a current concern given the discoveries of former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director, Anthony Fauci, lying to congress and the American people about funding gain of function research in Wuhan, China. However, given recent events we might even file this under proactive election integrity measures.

WASHINGTON — Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is investigating more than 120 biological laboratories abroad that were funded by US taxpayer dollars for decades, as part of an effort to end potentially risky experiments with viruses pursuant to President Trump’s executive order on so-called “gain-of-function” research.Gabbard told The Post Monday in a statement that her team is going “to identify where these labs are, what pathogens they contain and what ‘research’ is being conducted to end dangerous gain-of-function research that threatens the health and wellbeing of the American people and the world.”

“The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the catastrophic global impact research on dangerous pathogens in biolabs can have,” the spy chief also said. “Yet despite these obvious dangers, politicians, so-called health professionals, like Dr. Fauci, and entities within the Biden administration’s national security team lied to the American people about the existence of these US-funded and supported biolabs and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth.” Under new guidance from Gabbard, the US Intelligence Community will review research at all US-funded biolabs, which would include facilities engaged in gain-of-function experiments that could increase the transmissibility of viruses, as well as work for defensive purposes against dangerous pathogens.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence officials noted that the foreign labs extend into more than 30 countries, and several had received funding in the past through a Department of Defense program that sought to dispose of weapons of mass destruction after the end of the Cold War. More than 40 of the biolabs under review are located in Ukraine — and could “be at risk of compromise” due to Russia’s war, ODNI officials noted. (read more)

Read more …

“Euroskeptic FPO leader Christian Hafenecker has called on Vienna’s money laundering watchdog to investigate..”

Nearly $22 Billion Secretly Shipped To Ukraine – Austrian Politician (RT)

A right-wing Austrian politician has demanded that the country’s Finance Ministry explain how nearly $22 billion in cash and gold was shipped to Ukraine from Austria since 2022 without triggering concerns about money laundering or regulatory oversight. In a statement published on Sunday, Austrian Freedom Party (FPO) Secretary General Christian Hafenecker called out what he described as Vienna’s “two-class justice system” for overlooking massive payments to Kiev, while keeping a tight hold on taxpayers’ purse strings.


“We’re not talking about play money here: 1,030 registered cash and gold shipments, around €12 billion ($14 billion) plus $7.75 billion, physically transported over 1,300 kilometers into the war zone,” Hafenecker said. “And the responsible finance minister simply tells me… ‘We know nothing, we’re not investigating anything, we haven’t collected any information.’ That’s not an answer, that’s dereliction of duty,” he added. By comparison, Austrian money laundering rules require a private citizen withdrawing as little as €12,000 from an inherited account to prove the origin of the funds, and any person crossing the EU’s external border with more than €10,000 in cash must declare it, Hafenecker said. “This is a two-class justice system in finance.”

The politician demanded full disclosure on all cash shipments from Austria to Ukraine since the escalation of the conflict, a full audit by the country’s Financial Market Supervisory Authority, and a report by the Austrian Money Laundering Reporting Office in parliament. Earlier this year, the Euroskeptic FPO party demanded that Vienna cut all financial aid to Ukraine, denouncing the country as a corrupt “bottomless pit,” following a wave of high-level embezzlement scandals in Kiev.

Major probes by Ukraine’s Western-backed anti-graft agencies have implicated senior officials in Vladimir Zelensky’s government since last year. Two ministers and the Ukrainian leader’s chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, stepped down following the massive scandal. Russian President Vladimir Putin has slammed the current leadership in Kiev, calling it a “criminal gang” sitting on “golden potties,” and interested far more in personal enrichment than in the fate of ordinary Ukrainians.

Read more …

Obama, Clinton, Brennan, Clapper. You can fill a phonebook. “FBI Director Kash Patel has removed about ten percent of the problem in his agency.”

John Brennan: Still “Legions” of His Allies at DOJ, FBI and CIA (CTH)

Appearing on MSNBC to talk to Lawfare ally Nicole Wallace, wife of New York Times narrative engineer Michael Schmidt – the guy who received leaks from FBI Director James Comey via Daniel Richman, former CIA Director John Brennan notes there are “legions” of operatives still embedded within the DOJ, FBI and CIA who are working against President Donald Trump. This is not a surprise as we have noted the Trump administration continues to take apart the tentacles of Lawfare and Intelligence operatives in Main Justice, various U.S. Attorney offices, FBI Headquarters, FBI field offices and various Intelligence Community silos.


Marco Rubio has been working to clean up the National Security Council as well as the State Department operations, including USAID. Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe have been working on the NSA and CIA collaboratively, and Todd Blanche has been working through the Dept of Justice. FBI Director Kash Patel has removed about ten percent of the problem in his agency.

The core problem goes back to what we outlined on these pages {GO DEEP} and is not limited to those operatives who remain from the Obama/Biden era. Some of the problems surface as a result of ‘republican’ voices recommending “sleeper cell” staff and sketchy personnel for positions in the administration. [I’ll put an example below] One way to tell if the agency head or leader understands the challenge is by paying attention to how they talk about the agency’s mission objective. Leaders like Marco Rubio and Tulsi Gabbard have openly acknowledged the problem and are actively tackling corruption within their ranks. Even John Ratcliffe has admitted his agency was politically weaponized and has taken steps to address it. There’s still a lot of work ahead, but their actions show visible progress.

People like Pam Bondi and Kash Patel have praised the institutional embeds without drawing attention to the corruption beneath them. Thankfully, Acting AG Todd Blanche seems to be taking a more confrontational approach internally, so maybe Kash Patel will follow suit. This isn’t about style—it’s about results, and there’s an urgent need for action. To give an example of “sketchy” recommendations and predictable outcomes, I would draw attention to the lesser visible appointment of Morgan Ortagus. Do you remember this very weirdly worded announcement, two weeks prior to the inauguration?

I have no idea who “them” is referencing in the announcement.

[…] “I’m not doing this for me, I doing it for them”

There were always three options for “them”: (1) the strong republican support people; or (2) people in the Middle East who would be dealing with her; or (3) Stephen Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Regardless, of who “them” was, it was obvious President Trump was not thrilled by “their” request. Mrs. Morgan Ortagus is a long time Deep State operative with roots in the U.S. intelligence community and USAID {citation}. It was very predictable that she would undermine the goals of President Trump and she only lasted six months in the job. Ortagus was quietly dispatched from her position in June 2025.

CTH predicted Mrs. Ortagus would be a big mistake because she was, quite frankly, one of the “legion” insiders referenced by former CIA Director John Brennan. Ortagus’s entire career profile was/is textbook intelligence operative, likely legacy CIA. Not coincidentally, former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz was removed from his position only a month before Ortagus lost hers. On the day he was announced CTH said National Security Advisor Mike Waltz would be the first administration member to get the boot, because in the non-pretending world Waltz was a horrible choice just like Ortagus. Mike Waltz was removed as National Security Advisor in May 2025, Ortagus was removed as Middle East envoy in June.

If the goal was to eliminate the Deep State, President Trump couldn’t take on a deeply corrupt Intelligence Community while also appointing its allies. Their close ties to the Intelligence Community made the failures of both Waltz and Ortagus predictable. That said, behind the veneer of John Brennan’s statement on MSNBC is a guy who realizes the Trump administration has changed the dynamic and the agency systems Brennan is talking about no longer exist; at least they no longer have the same capabilities. The need for control is a reaction to fear, and Brennan’s fear is both visible and very well founded.

The DOJ and FBI operate under the influence of the Intelligence Community, which ultimately holds the reins. The key figures leading the IC have made changes to the institutions that have significantly reduced the impact of bad actors within the DOJ and FBI. The key positions are the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of State, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Marco Rubio, Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe are the people to watch, and we can tell by the counsel(s) they have put into place that each of them has clear eyes and a steady hand on those critical institutions. Since mid-year 2025, around the same time Waltz and Ortagus were dispatched, you will note significant changes began surfacing in the National Security Council, the State Dept, the DNI and importantly the CIA. Some of the changes make headlines, many do not; however, each is important and builds on a larger goal of dismantling a highly weaponized and political intelligence apparatus.

Internationally, what we see in the reaction of allied -or oppositional- governments and their intelligence agencies, is in large part a geopolitical reaction to the consequential changes being made by Rubio, Gabbard and Ratcliffe. Each building upon a system that fundamentally changes U.S. policy to be in alignment with President Trump. Each of them should be commended. Domestically, the accountability developments involving James Comey, John Brennan, John Bolton, Michael Atkinson, Eric Ciaramella and others yet to emerge, stem from the transparency brought by the same trio working upstream from Main Justice and the FBI. The combined intelligence apparatus of the U.S. can cut through the chaff and countermeasures of Lawfare operatives, and I feel optimistic watching them in action.

Again, it’s not just the silo heads that are making a positive impact, it is the personnel decisions they are surrounding themselves with. The amount of sunlight now coming over the horizon is toxic to the interests of those who organized shadow operations. As long as Rubio, Ratcliffe and especially Gabbard, keep pushing the truth to the surface; as long as they keep exposing all the corruption that was used to manipulate and weaponize our government; as long as they keep strategizing on ways to declassify evidence former officials buried under false pretenses; then the DOJ, FBI and more importantly We The People, will have information we can use to make decisions.

Ultimately, it is the truth which makes evil enterprise retreat.

Read more …

Excursion??

His name is not on every list ,but Nvidia’s Jensen Huang is very much part of the group. As Trump himself confirmed.

Here Are The People Accompanying Trump On His China Excursion This Week (JTN)

President Donald Trump will meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping in China this week and is taking a notable cohort with him to the Asian powerhouse. Trump arrives in Beijing on Wednesday for a two-day summit, which will include talks about sanctions on Iranian oil and the conflict in the Middle East at large. The group of powerful American CEOs and billionaires include Trump ally Elon Musk and Apple CEO Tim Cook, according to CBS News. Here is the rest of the notable American executives expected to go on the two-day excursion:


BlackRock’s Larry Fink

Blackstone’s Stephen Schwarzman

Boeing’s Kelly Ortberg

Goldman Sachs’ David Solomon

Meta’s Dina Powell McCormick

Micron’s Sanjay Mehrotra

Qualcomm’s Christiano Amon

Illumina’s Jacob Thaysen

Mastercard’s Michael Miebach

Visa’s Ryan McInerney

Cargill’s Brian Sikes

Citi’s Jane Fraser

Cisco’s Chuck Robbins

Coherent’s Jim Anderson

GE Aerospace’s H. Lawrence Culp.

The trip comes after the president postponed the original trip because of the conflict in the Middle East. The summit will take place May 14-15, with the president arriving May 13.

Read more …

“We have been absolutely ignored by a sitting member of Congress.”

Minnesota Democrats Block Ilhan Omar Subpoena (JTN)

Minnesota House Republicans want help from U.S. congressional oversight leaders after Democrats on a state committee blocked an effort to subpoena U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar over communications tied to the Feeding Our Future fraud investigation. Rep. Kristin Robbins, R-Maple Grove and chair of the Minnesota House Fraud Prevention and State Oversight Committee, announced Friday she has asked congressional leaders to assist in securing the records.


Robbins sent letters to U.S. Rep. James Comer, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights. The move comes days after Democrats on the state committee voted against authorizing a subpoena for Omar’s communications connected to the Feeding Our Future investigation. All five Republican committee members supported the motion, while three DFL members opposed it, leaving Republicans just short of the six votes required.

“Minnesota House Democrats chose to protect Rep. Omar rather than support our effort to get the truth,” Robbins said in a statement Friday. “Without at least one Democrat vote in support of the motion to subpoena these communications, we cannot get the two-thirds majority required to compel Rep. Omar produce the documents.” Republicans on the committee have repeatedly sought testimony and records from Omar related to trial exhibits introduced in the federal criminal case U.S. v. Bock. Robbins said Omar’s office has not responded to multiple requests, including an April 22 letter requesting records by May 5. “We have been ghosted,” Robbins said during Tuesday’s hearing. “We have been absolutely ignored by a sitting member of Congress.”

The committee’s Republican members have focused heavily on Omar’s sponsorship of the federal MEALS Act in 2020, legislation they argue loosened oversight requirements in federal child nutrition programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. “Rep. Omar had some role, whether inadvertent or not,” Robbins said Tuesday. “She passed the MEALS Act in March of 2020, and that took the guardrails off the federal school nutrition program, which created the conditions for Feeding Our Future.”

Federal prosecutors have described the Feeding Our Future case as one of the largest pandemic-era fraud schemes in the country, alleging more than $250 million intended for child nutrition programs was fraudulently claimed through fake meal reimbursements. Robbins said the committee became interested in Omar’s involvement after learning of communications between her office and individuals later convicted in the scheme. She also pointed to a 2020 video in which Omar promoted meal distribution efforts at Safari Restaurant, a Minneapolis site prosecutors later identified as a major participant in the fraud.

Democrats on the committee pushed back against the effort. Rep. Dave Pinto, DFL-St. Paul, questioned the timing of the subpoena. “We know the president and federal administration have got no hesitation going after political enemies and investigating them in all sorts of ways,” Pinto said. “If there’s any sort of wrongdoing by Congresswoman Omar—and if there’s no wrongdoing by Congresswoman Omar – I have no doubt the Trump Administration will do all it can with all the resources it has.” Rep. Isaac Schultz, R-Elmdale Township, argued the subpoena effort was part of a broader push to understand fraud in Minnesota government programs.

“Feeding Our Future is one part of the picture as it relates to what we know is to come in the fraud we’ve seen in Medicaid,” Schultz said. “Now, we have this opportunity to use our tools here in the House of Representatives to issue this subpoena to gain a greater understanding.” Robbins said Friday she hopes action from the congressional oversight committees will help Republicans obtain the records. “I hope the federal oversight committees will be able to help us get the facts about Representative Omar’s involvement in the case,” Robbins said. “If she has nothing to hide, she should testify before our committee and produce the trial exhibits.”

Read more …

“There is every reason to think the justices will leave this one where it belongs: in Virginia, under Virginia law, after Virginia Democrats tried to rig the map and got caught.”

Scott Jennings Nukes the Democrats’ Gerrymander Hail Mary (Margolis)

Virginia Democrats lost big time in the redistricting wars and have considered all kinds of ways to respond — including trying to force the retirement of all of the justices on the Virginia Supreme Court. That scheme isn’t likely to happen, but they are hoping to drag the U.S. Supreme Court into this. The whole saga is a perfect example of how a party can overplay its hand and then act stunned when the cards fall flat. The Virginia Supreme Court struck down the Democrats’ map, saying the process violated the state constitution and nullified the referendum vote. That map would have shifted Virginia from a 6-5 split to a 10-1 advantage for Democrats, which is exactly why they wanted it so badly.


And they’re trying to drag the Supreme Court into this? It’s a Hail Mary for sure and not a very good one. Does anyone actually believe that this will succeed, that the Supreme Court will even take the case? It makes no sense. There’s really no jurisdiction for the U.S. Supreme Court to get involved. The only thing this emergency appeal does is make them look more desperate.And Scott Jennings called them out on it. CNN’s The Arena, he mocked the idea that the U.S. Supreme Court would wade into this fight. “There’s a better chance of me sprouting wings and flying out of that window over there than the United States Supreme Court dealing with this in any way, because this is a state Supreme Court ruling on a state constitution.”

He added, “The U.S. Supreme Court doesn’t deal with these kinds of things, number one. Number two, the freakout in Virginia has been so extreme. You even have Democrats over there who are saying they want to effectively, politically decapitate the entire Virginia Supreme Court by putting an age limit of 54 so they can get rid of every existing justice and install people who will promise to rule a certain way on a certain case. “ “You know, they went from, ‘Oh, this is just a temporary map thing’ to ‘Let’s burn down the entire Virginia Supreme Court’ in about two seconds over there in Virginia, which tells you all you need to know about just how power hungry and corrupt the Democrats are in Virginia.”

That is the real story here. This was sold as a temporary map fix and morphed into a power grab so aggressive that even the state’s own courts slammed the brakes. “This is not going to work at the U.S. Supreme Court,” Jennings declared. “And this whole project of maximum warfare by Hakeem Jeffries is completely blown up in their face.”

The Supreme Court is set to decide on May 14 whether it will take the emergency appeal. There is every reason to think the justices will leave this one where it belongs: in Virginia, under Virginia law, after Virginia Democrats tried to rig the map and got caught.

Read more …

“Virginia’s General Assembly adopted a new map in February that would have favored Democrats in 10 of the state’s 11 seats in the US House ..”

Virginia Democrats Ask US Supreme Court to Reinstate Congressional Map (Hyde)

Virginia Democrats, along with their state Attorney General, have asked the US Supreme Court to override the Virginia Supreme Court’s decision last week that struck down a partisan redistricting plan. ABC News reports Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones wrote in the emergency application filed on Monday that the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” when it invalidated a ballot measure to amend the state constitution that would have netted Democrats as many as four new congressional seats.


The state Supreme Court had ruled last Friday, in a 4–3 decision, that Democrats had violated the state Constitution, by failing to follow proper procedures, while racing to get the measure on the ballot before the midterm elections. According to SCOTUSblog, Virginia’s General Assembly adopted a new map in February that would have favored Democrats in 10 of the state’s 11 seats in the US House—a potential increase of four seats from the current balance between Democrats and Republicans in Virginia.

The new map hinged on obtaining approval for an amendment to the Virginia constitution that would give the state legislature the power to draw a new congressional map outside of the normal cycle following the decennial census. In a referendum held in April, Virginia voters approved that amendment by a margin of three percentage points. The Virginia Supreme Court ruled that the referendum was not valid because the General Assembly had not followed proper procedures when it put the new amendment on the ballot.

In Monday’s 24-page filing, Jones argued: “The irreparable harm resulting from the Supreme Court of Virginia’s decision is profound and immediate. By forcing the Commonwealth to conduct its congressional elections using districts different from those adopted by the General Assembly pursuant to a constitutional amendment the people just ratified, the Supreme Court of Virginia has deprived voters, candidates, and the Commonwealth of their right to the lawfully enacted congressional districts.” Legal experts told ABC News last week that they believe Democrats have little chance of a successful appeal at the US Supreme Court because the state Supreme Court would be the highest authority dealing with state constitutional issues and no federal issues are at stake.

According to former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, “The Virginia Supreme Court is the final authority on Virginia constitutional questions. This is the end, folks. You will have the same map in 2026 that existed in 2024. That is now unchangeable and immutable.” Politico reports that Chief Justice John Roberts, who oversees emergency appeals arising from Virginia, instructed the Republicans who challenged the Virginia referendum to respond to Jones’ appeal by Thursday at 5 p.m.

Read more …

“Blanche, on Tuesday, indicated that the DOJ probe would use compulsory authority to bring in witnesses, including from the press.”

Acting AG Blanche Warns Reporters To Expect Subpoenas In Leaks Probe (JTN)

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Tuesday indicated that the Department of Justice would subpoena reporters as part of its probe into leaks of classified materials. The FBI, this month, opened a probe into Senate Democrats over the possible leak of classified materials related to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s confirmation hearings. At issue was the leak of an intercept from the National Security Agency (NSA) concerning Gabbard. More recently, Trump has reportedly complained of rampant leaks related to the ongoing Iran war, The Hill reported.


Blanche, on Tuesday, indicated that the DOJ probe would use compulsory authority to bring in witnesses, including from the press. “Prosecuting leakers who share our nation’s secrets with reporters, in turn risking our national security and the lives of our soldiers, is a priority for this administration,” he said. “Any witness, whether a reporter or otherwise, who has information about these criminals should not be surprised if they receive a subpoena about the illegal leaking of classified material.”

The Trump administration has long maintained a strained relationship with the press, dating back to his first term, which saw pervasive leaks to the media, especially from the Department of Homeland Security over immigration enforcement efforts.

Read more …

“..the Supreme Court basically supported one vote, one person guaranteed in perpetuity, and the rest is just map wars..”

The Language Got a Little Salty on CNN Monday Night (Matt Margolis)

If Bakari Sellers thought he could trot out an emotional guilt trip and quietly justify racist gerrymandering on live TV, Kevin O’Leary wasn’t about to let that slide. He didn’t just push back—he pulled the curtain back on the whole performance, forcing a raw, uncomfortable showdown between the U.S. Constitution and Sellers’ political theater. And Sellers let loose with some salty language in the process. The exchange began with host Abby Phillip laying out the stakes in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling that racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional. She noted that states may soon try to redraw maps in ways that could leave the minority party with no meaningful representation, which isn’t true, of course.


I could get into all the states that have had conservative representation gerrymandered into oblivion, but I’ll do that another time. O’Leary jumped in with a blunt take, saying the Supreme Court had effectively settled the matter. “I think everybody should take confidence in the fact the Supreme Court basically supported one vote, one person guaranteed in perpetuity, and the rest is just map wars,” he said. “And I think we should get used to it. And I think it’s, as you said, a state-based situation. Add this to the mix. At the end of the day, the state decides at the state level. It’s in the Constitution. Get over it.” That, apparently, set Sellers off.

“The problem with that sentiment is that you were born in 1954,” Sellers shot back, immediately turning the argument into a generational and moral rebuke. O’Leary, never one to miss a chance to needle someone, replied, “Yes,” when Sellers noted his age, then joked, “By the way, I’m a vampire.” Sellers clearly wasn’t in the mood and just pressed on with patronizing O’Leary. According to Sellers, O’Leary had lived through the entire post-Brown era and should understand what that history means. “During your lifetime, we’ve actually had Brown v. Board of Education,” Sellers said. O’Leary interjected, “I remember.” “Yes, Brown v. Board of Education, I don’t know how you remember it. I think you were like two months old.”

The temperature kept rising as Sellers tried to ground his point in personal history. “My mother was born in 1951. She desegregated schools. My father was shot in the Civil Rights Movement,” he said. “Those people—” Before he could finish, Phillip stepped in to let him continue. Sellers accused O’Leary of being “utterly disrespectful.” Then came the line that guaranteed the clip would travel fast. “So, I’m going to finish this comment. So, what I’m telling you is that there are people in this country who fought, died, and bled for the right to vote. Don’t be a d**k, just understand. Just understand.”

O’Leary didn’t care for that and pushed back immediately, insisting he was simply defending the Constitution. “I’m not a d**k. I’m pointing something out to you. The Constitution’s being upheld. You have a problem with that? You have a problem with the Constitution of the United States of America?” he asked.

Phillip tried to restore order, scolding Sellers, “I just want everybody to reset with a modicum of respect at this table.” But Sellers didn’t care, “I want you to understand that there’s a price that was paid for this right. There is a price that we uphold. And whether or not you value that—” O’Leary cut in again, clearly not caring about Seller’s belittling tone. “Where are you going with this?” Sellers answered by making the point even more directly. “Whether or not you value that or not, there are people who bled, sweat, and died, and were in prison for access to the ballot box.”

Read more …

No kings, no billionaires!

Socialist Storytime: AOC Spins Anti-Capitalist Fable About the Founders (Turley)

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is fast becoming the greatest fabulist since Aesop. Recently, Ocasio-Cortez insisted that true billionaires are a capitalist myth since “you can’t earn a billion dollars.” However, her greatest work of fiction may be her insistence that the Framers fought against billionaires and would have joined her and other socialists in seeking to eradicate them today. Bertrand Russell once noted that “there is something feeble and a little contemptible” about those “who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths.”


The American left has long peddled such “comfortable myths” as the wealthy “not paying their fair share” of taxes. (The top one percent of income earners pay over 40% of federal taxes, and that percentage goes up to 70% for the top ten percent). However, Ocasio-Cortez has become a liberal Homer for her reputation for spinning collectivist tales. What is impressive is her myth-within-a-myth signature style: “You can’t earn that, right? And so you have to create a myth… you have to create a myth of earning it.” In a discussion at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, Ocasio-Cortez gave her revisionist account of the Founders as, surprise, budding anti-capitalists:

“I want to talk about how this is in the heritage of our country, because America was founded… you look at Thomas Jefferson writing to Madison in revolt of British aristocracy. The American Revolution was against the billionaires of their time. And we are declaring independence from such an extreme marriage of wealth and power and the state that the voices of everyday people did not exist.”In my recent book, “Rage and the Republic,” I discuss the economic philosophy of the Founders in exploring the history and future of this unique Republic.

While Ocasio-Cortez references our 250th anniversary, she ignores that it is also the 250th anniversary of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. Smith’s free-market theory was an instant hit with the founding generation. These men had just created the first major Enlightenment Revolution based on a belief in natural rights that came from God, not governments. Yet, they knew that true individual liberty could not be achieved without economic freedom. Smith’s economic theory was the perfect companion for their political theory.

The combination of American democratic theories and free market theories produced the world’s most successful and oldest democracy in history. In Rage and the Republic, I discuss the threats to this Republic, including from figures like Ocasio-Cortez, in spreading socialist myths. The book calls for a recommitment to what I call a “liberty-enhancing economy.” That is why this particular myth told by Ocasio-Cortez was so jarring. The Founders were great believers in capitalism and the free market. They were not fighting “the billionaires of their time” over their wealth. Many of the Founders were themselves quite wealthy, including banker Robert Morris Jr., who was known as the “Financier of the Revolution.”Adjusting for inflation and current rates, Morris would be a billionaire today.

The Founders believed in unleashing everyone’s ability to become a Morris. They fought against the taking or occupation of property by the government. Aat the very top of their stated purpose for the American Revolution was “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The phrase was virtually ripped from the page of John Locke’s “life, liberty, and property.” Locke believed that there was a natural right to property created by what God left “in common” for humanity. Preceding any government, it was a right that belonged to human beings by divine grant. Hardly a roaring endorsement of socialist ideals or, as Zohran Mamdani put it, the “warmth of collectivism.”

George Mason relied on Locke for his draft of the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which Jefferson relied on heavily. Mason wrote of “the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.” bOf course, the property reference was changed to happiness in the Declaration, which reflected the more transcendent values of these Enlightenment devotees. While reduced to “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,” the original language appeared in the Fifth Amendment and, later in the Fourteenth Amendment, protecting citizens from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property.”

In his 1792 essay “Property,” Madison echoed Lockean values in declaring that good government “secures to every man whatever is his own.” Other early figures, like Chief Justice John Marshall, wrote, “The power to tax is the power to destroy.” The new myth-making on the left is meant to revive what I previously described as “economic factionalism,” seeking political power with this type of “eat-the-rich” rhetoric. It is working (as it has in history). In California, many are pushing a “billionaire’s tax,” while far-left figures like Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are pushing for a federal variation. In states from Washington state to Virginia, Democrats are virtually chasing wealthy taxpayers out of blue states with planned millionaire taxes.

To achieve such radical change, you must first destroy the values upon which this Republic was born, convincing people that their fundamental ties to capitalism are as ephemeral as true billionaires. The greatest irony is that Ocasio-Cortez personifies what the Founders truly wanted to combat. They feared mobocracy and the tyranny of the majority, the arbitrary power that can come from majoritarian abuse. Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders, and others are truly not new or particularly interesting additions to the political dialogue. They are the same voices of democratic despotism that Madison and others sought to quell.

Read more …

A trial balloon?

Media Spreads Hantavirus Hysteria In Attempt To Save Disgraced WHO (ZH)

The establishment media has been drumming up fear after a recent outbreak of Hantavirus on a cruise liner traveling from Argentina to West Africa. The Guardian has used the opportunity to assert that the US is currently ill equipped to deal with future pandemic threats, largely because of Donald Trump (of course) and the dramatic US exit from the now disgraced World Health Organization. Is Hantavirus a serious danger to the world, or, is it another hyped up virus like Covid being used to trigger public hysteria? And if it is being hyped, who (or WHO) stands to benefit?


For decades the WHO constructed its image as a global angel of benevolence; the primary line of defense against what they said was the inevitable invasion of a population rending plague. However, when the time finally came in the form of a mutated Coronavirus (Covid), they dropped the ball, and evidence suggests they may have done it deliberately.During the initial outbreak in China, the WHO echoed CCP propaganda suggesting that human-to-human contact was unlikely and, knowingly or unknowingly, aided China in hiding details behind the outbreak.

Details surrounding the involvement of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the largest dangerous disease lab in Asia, were actively dismissed (or suppressed). Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus even praised China’s “transparency”. The WHO then set up a joint task force to determine the origins of Covid, only to let the Chinese dominate the investigation and lead it away from the activities at the Level 4 lab in Wuhan. The Chinese wanted to push the theory of animal-to-animal mutation instead of the gain of function research that was ongoing at the lab (partially funded by US interests in the Obama Administration).

Today, evidence overwhelmingly suggests that Covid originated in the Wuhan Lab. In January 2025, the CIA assessed that a lab-related origin is more likely than natural spillover. This determination matched with similar FBI assessments. In 2025, German Intelligence also reported their findings, indicating a 90% likelihood that Covid was engineered and originated at the Wuhan Lab in China. Of course, anyone who made this claim online during the pandemic response was called a dangerous “conspiracy theorist” and was deplatformed (much like Zero Hedge).

The WHO would go on to exaggerate the death rate of the virus, claiming an initial Case Fatality Rate (CFR) of 3.4%. This data was based on studies which ignored mild cases as well as asymptomatic cases, thus artificially pumping up the death rate. Dozens of studies as early as May 2020 showed that the median Infection Fatality Rate (a more accurate number) was only 0.27% (later adjusted to 0.23%). The WHO continued to spread disinformation and hysteria surrounding covid while ignoring the true IFR data. That is to say, all the lockdowns, the mandates, the social media censorship, the arrests, the push for vaccine passports, etc. – all of it was over a virus that 99.8% of the population would easily survive.

The WHO has been exposed as a perpetrator of pandemic disinformation and is no longer trusted by the public. The US under the Trump Administration has exited the organization on these grounds, and as a result the WHO has lost at least 20% of its total funding. It is now facing dire financial conditions. In response, the UN and the establishment media have been running a spin campaign to present the WHO as indispensable. It is therefore not surprising that the WHO and the media are suddenly jumping on the cruise line Hantavirus story as if it is significant, while at the same time arguing that Trump is putting the public at risk by not participating in the WHO’s antics. They need the money badly, and so they’ve decided to remind the public why we should be afraid.

For those who are unaware, Hantavirus is a common virus around the world and in the US. Estimates show around 100,000 cases of the disease occur annually. In 2023, there were 40 cases in the US. The virus is most often contracted when humans are exposed to dried rodent feces and urine, floating as particulates in the air which are then inhaled into the lungs. The spread from human to human is rare and only occurs with the South American strain. Contraction is difficult, with the virus passing from one person to another through “prolonged contact with bodily fluids”. It makes you wonder what kind of pleasure cruise these people were on when the most recent outbreak started? The point is, the story is being inflated from a normal event into a crisis event.

This is probably why the Spanish Government set up an elaborate bus transfer of supposedly highly infectious cruise passengers, only to drop off a psychiatrist with the Ministry of Health down the road without protective gear like he’s going home after school. The bottom line? Hantavirus is all over the world and it’s not a threat to the vast majority of people. The artificial media panic and the opportunism of the WHO may be an effort to test the waters for another fraudulent pandemic scare, but the majority of the propaganda seems to be aimed at restoring the WHO’s reputation and saving it from financial ruin.

Read more …

The North African nation poses the biggest problem for the bloc in terms of arrivals, Thanos Plevris has said

Over 500,000 Waiting To Cross Into Europe From Libya – Greek Minister (RT)

The EU might be on the verge of a new migrant crisis, with more than half a million people waiting in Libya alone to cross into Europe, Greek Migration Minister Thanos Plevris has said. The bloc was first inundated by asylum seekers from the Middle East and Northern Africa during the 2015 refugee crisis, when a million migrants entered Europe, straining welfare systems and prompting tens of millions of European voters to turn to far-right political parties. Greece remains one of the bloc’s main entry points, registering 48,771 arrivals in 2025, according to UNHCR data. According to the UN refugee agency, 7,589 migrants and asylum seekers have arrived in the Mediterranean country this year as of May 3, including 5,615 by sea.


Athens has introduced a number of tough policy measures in a bid to stem the flow over the past years, including detention for those denied asylum. Commenting on the situation on Sunday, Plevris said that Greece was “the first country to criminalize illegal residence” and would not allow those denied protection to just roam free. “Those who are not entitled to asylum will be detained,” the minister told a local broadcaster, adding that Athens would “operate within the law but will go to its limits to protect the borders.” He also described the situation in Libya as the biggest problem faced by his country and the EU. According to Plevris, around 550,000 people have gathered there and are now seeking to enter Europe.

In February, Plevris also announced that it was working together with Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, and Denmark to create “return hubs” for rejected asylum seekers outside of the EU’s borders, with Africa being the preferred destination. Libya became a key transit point for human trafficking and migration to Europe via the Mediterranean following a NATO-backed uprising in 2011 that led to the overthrow and assassination of longtime ruler Muammar Gaddafi. The EU has struggled to manage the migration crisis since 2015, with Greece, Italy, and Spain receiving the highest number of arrivals across the Mediterranean.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

May 082026
 


Pablo Picasso Les Demoiselles d’ Avignon 1907


US Conducts New Iran Strikes Along Hormuz Corridor (ZH)
Trump’s ‘Project Freedom’ Paused Following Saudi Arabia Support Withdrawal (CTH)
First Chinese Tanker Attacked Near Hormuz (ZH)
AI Models Close To Building a Better Version of Themselves (Rick Moran)
Medvedev: Russia Must Instill ‘Animal Fear’ In EU Warmongers (ZH)
Germany Officially Bans all Russian Symbols on May 9th (CTH)
Dana White Says Society Is Failing Young Men (David Manney)
Visualizing The Stunning Global Fertility Divide (ZH)
PM Carney’s Role in Organizing Commonwealth Trump Opposition (CTH)
Did President Trump Say That in His Outside Voice…(CTH)
DOJ to Ask Supreme Court to Intervene in E. Jean Carroll Lawsuit vs Trump (ET)
The Democratic Party Is Dead, Long Live the Jacobins! (Victor Davis Hanson)
Half of Vienna Secondary School Students Are Now Muslim (RMX)
‘Golden Thread of Devotion’: Trump’s National Day of Prayer Message (Salgado)
The Controversy Over Picasso’s Most Shocking Painting (BBC)

 


 

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2052399407300035009?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2052136045253407110?s=20 https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2052221470319968631?s=20 https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2052357491279777850?s=20 https://twitter.com/mcafeenew/status/2052117444865732913?s=20

 


 


How to keep the ceasefire intact.

US Conducts New Iran Strikes Along Hormuz Corridor (ZH)

CENTCOM confirms attack on Iran, and intercept of Iranian retaliation effort: “U.S. forces intercepted unprovoked Iranian attacks and responded with self-defense strikes as U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyers transited the Strait of Hormuz to the Gulf of Oman, May 7. Iranian forces launched multiple missiles, drones and small boats as USS Truxtun (DDG 103), USS Rafael Peralta (DDG 115), and USS Mason (DDG 87) transited the international sea passage. No U.S. assets were struck.


U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) eliminated inbound threats and targeted Iranian military facilities responsible for attacking U.S. forces including missile and drone launch sites; command and control locations; and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance nodes. CENTCOM does not seek escalation but remains positioned and ready to protect American forces.”

Confirmation of New US Military Attack
Fox News confirming a nighttime US miliary attack on Iran’s Qeshm port and Bandar Abbas, however, with US officials seeking to downplay that this marks a restart of the war and bombing campaign. This comes via Fox chief national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin: A senior US official tells me that it was a US military strike on Iran’s Qeshm port and Bandar Abbas moments ago but added this is NOT a restarting of the war or end to the ceasefire.

The strike on one of Iran’s oil ports comes two days after Iran fired 15 ballistic and cruise missiles at UAE Fujairah Port, eliciting anger from Gulf countries after top Pentagon leaders said Tuesday that the Iranian strikes did not rise to the level of breaking the ceasefire, calling it low level attacks that didn’t rise to that level. There have been allegations of UAE involvement. Since the initial explosions, more follow up blasts have been reported via state media, along with some emerging images:

US CONDUCTED STRIKES THURS IN THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ AREA: AXIOS
IRAN CLAIMS IT FIRED MISSILES AT THREE US DESTORYERS: TASNIM

Further emerging images: https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2052500450914762802
Read more …

“The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) wants a complete and final elimination of the threat Iran represents. They do not believe Iran can be negotiated out of that threat. The GCC view negotiations as an Iranian delay tactic. “

“.. the Saudi’s and GCC have been dealing with this extremist threat for decades. They are unwilling to compromise in order to give space for negotiations they view as futile.”

“Saudi Arabia and the GCC view Iran as an existential threat that cannot be dealt with diplomatically and they do not trust any negotiation.”

Trump’s ‘Project Freedom’ Paused Following Saudi Arabia Support Withdrawal (CTH)

In recent developments President Trump’s ‘project freedom’ operation to open the Strait of Hormuz for captured shipping interests has been paused following Saudi Arabia’s withdrawal of support and their revocation of Saudi air bases for U.S. operations. The issue behind the Saudi decision is not that complicated if you understand the longer-term background. However, the issue behind the Saudi decision also highlights a key flaw in the Promethean analysis of the relationship (and the reason I caution everyone to sip slowly from this information source).


The cliff notes version is that Saudi Arabia and many of the Gulf States look at the negotiations between President Trump and Iranian interests with skepticism. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) wants a complete and final elimination of the threat Iran represents. They do not believe Iran can be negotiated out of that threat. The GCC view negotiations as an Iranian delay tactic. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salmon, the main voice in the GCC position, has clear eyes and a long historic view on the threat Iran represents. They accept the people in control of the Iran regime will do and say anything to pause or remove the military confrontation; but they will never stop building the arsenal for war. There is zero, absolutely zero trust in anything the Iranians say on this matter.

As a consequence, Saudi Arabia understands the intent of President Trump’s request to support ‘project freedom’, however Saudi Arabia is not going to accept continued missile attacks from Iran during this ‘humanitarian’ effort to reopen the Strait. [Remember, this is also a Muslim Brotherhood issue. The Brotherhood is the political network behind extremist Islam.] President Trump is asking Saudi Arabia and the GCC states to view the continued Iranian attacks as small slights, small provocations, while he diplomatically tries to negotiate with the Iranian regime. MbS and the GCC are unwilling to take this position, to accept these continued attacks against their nations, simply to give President Trump the political benefit of his policy.

Again, the Saudi’s and GCC have been dealing with this extremist threat for decades. They are unwilling to compromise in order to give space for negotiations they view as futile. The U.S. can use all Saudi support venues to confront Iran militarily, but they are not going to support the political and diplomatic effort behind ‘project freedom’ while they are simultaneously expected to accept continued attacks from Iran. NBC News reported that Saudi Arabia revoked U.S. access to its bases for Project Freedom, a mission to safeguard the Strait of Hormuz from Iranian threats. A call between Trump and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman failed to resolve the dispute, forcing the administration to pause the operation. Political commentators described the move as a significant strategic loss for the U.S. in the Gulf region.

Essentially, the U.S. cannot say to the GCC: Please open your skies and bases, thereby exposing their energy infrastructure, only for everyone to discover afterwards the actual American policy was apparently: Oh by the way, if Iran attacks you with ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones in several waves, we won’t retaliate because we are chasing a negotiated deal. And this is exactly what shocked the Saudis.

It was not the issue of the Iranian attack; after all, the UAE/GCC expect retaliation , this is Iran; no one in the Gulf is naive about that. The shock came from the American reaction after the attacks against the GCC. Attacks against Emirati infrastructure, Fujairah was targeted, multiple waves involving drones, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles. And from their perspective Washington’s response was basically: “Meh. Minor incident. Let’s not escalate.” Minor incident?! From the perspective of the GCC this is madness. Thus, they withdraw support.

This is where it becomes critical to understand the position of the GCC as it relates to well over a decade of this Muslim Brotherhood/Iran extremist activity. It is not President Trump who triggered the GCC assembly to fight this radical Islamic extremism, a bastardized view of authentic Islam, it was Egypt and the GCC who have been confronting this stuff since President Obama triggered the “Arab Spring”. Long before President Trump took office in 2017, Egyptian President Fattah al-Sisi had confronted the Muslim Brotherhood and assembled a coalition of mid-east partners to address this Islamist threat. Sisi went to see King Salmon (MbS dad) first, to get his support. Egypt then assembled Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait and Jordan to confront Qatar, who was the bankers for the Muslim Brotherhood.

The GCC with all stable Arab state support then economically and diplomatically boycotted and isolated Qatar. The Qataris finally acquiesced to the pressure and in September 2014 the exiled leaders from the Muslim Brotherhood who were living in Qatar were sent to Turkey.

Read more …

China is not in first row.

First Chinese Tanker Attacked Near Hormuz (ZH)

There have certainly been escalating tensions in the Strait of Hormuz this week amid a wave of Iranian attacks on commercial ships after a U.S. military effort to escort merchant vessels through the maritime chokepoint. By midweek, tensions had simmered, and Iran is still reviewing a 14-point U.S. proposal to end the war, with Tehran expected to send its response to Pakistani mediators later today. President Trump said talks with Iran have been “very good” and suggested a deal remains possible. Iran’s Foreign Ministry confirmed the U.S. proposal is still under review.


But when chaos erupted on the world’s most critical waterway at the beginning of the week, a new report said that a large refined-products tanker owned by a Chinese shipowner was attacked off the UAE’s Al Jeer port on Monday, according to Reuters. Beijing-based business media outlet Caixin reported that the vessel’s deck erupted in flames after the attack. The outlet noted the vessel was marked “CHINA OWNER & CREW.” A shipping industry source told Caixin that this was the first time a Chinese tanker was hit in the three-month-long war, calling it “psychologically very hard to accept.”

Shortly after the Chinese tanker was attacked, it became clear why, two days later on Wednesday, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi called for the swift reopening of the Hormuz chokepoint. “The international community shares a common concern for the restoration of normal and safe passage of the strait,” Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Iran’s Abbas Araghchi, according to an official Chinese statement. “China hopes that the parties concerned will respond to the strong appeal of the international community as soon as possible.” China’s urgency to resolve the highly disrupted Hormuz chokepoint comes just over a week before President Trump flies to Beijing to meet with President Xi Jinping.

The big question is whether China will cooperate with the U.S. to end the conflict and reopen the Strait, as much of the tanker flow through this critical waterway is destined for Asia, and the disruption has led to fuel shortages and soaring prices of crude oil and related products in the region. “China likes to present itself as a great stabilizing force in the world, but imagine if they had a genuine diplomatic achievement, such as brokering the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, as proof of that,” Richard McGregor, senior fellow at the Lowy Institute, told Bloomberg.

He noted that some in Beijing would advocate for using the moment to “squeeze some concessions out of the US” on issues such as Taiwan. The first Chinese tanker attacked in the U.S.-Iran conflict, as well as the upcoming Trump-Xi summit, might be the catalysts for the international community to pressure Iran into a peace deal with the U.S. Meanwhile, a French aircraft carrier is transiting through the southern part of the Suez Canal and into the Red Sea, preparing to restore Hormuz tanker flows.

Read more …

They seem confused. I always thought that would be the issue. Why would there be humans involved?

AI Models Close To Building a Better Version of Themselves (Rick Moran)

“My prediction is by the end of 2028, it’s more likely than not that we have an AI system where you would be able to say to it: ‘Make a better version of yourself.’ And it just goes off and does that completely autonomously,” Jack Clark, who heads The Anthropic Institute, told Axios. Clark, co-founder of Anthropic, says his institute is seeing signs of “AI contributing to speeding up the research and development of AI itself,” a process known as recursive self-improvement. nClark adds, “It’s always been the case that humans outside the technology need to come up with the ideas that they then put back into it. What happens if we have a technology that can generate ideas within itself for how to improve itself? That’s a new concept.”


Too fast, too soon. The speed with which AI systems are evolving is far outstripping our ability to gauge the impact on humans and society. Lots of good things can happen in medicine, biology, and other sciences where AI is already making a big impact. The speed and autonomy of artificial intelligence models promise an abundant future. Or something totally unforeseen. “What do you do with a tremendous amount of growth or a tremendous amount of abundance in many, many different fields of science all at once?” Clark asked. “Today’s institutions have very, very narrow pipes through which you push new drug candidates. How do you massively broaden the size of those pipes in advance of this abundance?”

We don’t even know how much we have to broaden those “pipes,” nor can we foresee whether or not the act of broadening them might pose other critical problems. Too fast. Too soon. It’s like dealing with Russian Matryoshka dolls, or nesting dolls, which separate in the middle to reveal a smaller figure of the same sort inside, which, in turn, has another figure inside it, and so on. Each improvement of AI presents its own set of challenges that need to be addressed before opening the next doll. You can’t open the next doll without fully understanding the significance of the doll you’re working with.

“The motivation has always been: Tell the whole story,” Clark told Axios. “Sometimes that means that we talk about risks that we’re worried about. Sometimes that means that we’re going to talk about amazing, hitherto uncontemplated amounts of abundance.… I’m just trying to get ahead of what I think of as the next big question and get Anthropic ahead of that.” Anthropic’s Research Agenda is looking to get ahead of the AI learning curve. Axios: “The five-page document warns of a possible “intelligence explosion” — long a theoretical term confined to AI safety circles. Now it’s in writing, in an official Anthropic document.”

Clark told us an intelligence explosion is when AI systems suddenly start improving at blinding speed. Lots of bad things can happen (cyber meltdowns and biological attacks). And lots of good: “What do you do with a tremendous amount of growth or a tremendous amount of abundance in many, many different fields of science all at once?” he asked. “Today’s institutions have very, very narrow pipes through which you push new drug candidates. How do you massively broaden the size of those pipes in advance of this abundance?”

What’s new: The Anthropic Institute is part research arm, part early-warning system, with an agenda built alongside Anthropic’s Long-Term Benefit Trust. Clark certainly has an optimistic outlook for AI and its impact on humanity. He asks if AI is building itself, will we need AI companies in the future? “We and the other companies are going to be taking this technology and trying to get it to do good in the world,” Clark told Axios. “To help push forward things like biology or medicine or robotics… To steer that technology into domains where it’s really, really, really hard to make progress, like cancer research.” What we’re looking at today are earnest, altruistic efforts to protect society from the potential ravages of uncontrolled AI. Any system capable of acting autonomously is a threat to humanity. It’s good that Jack Clark recognizes that, but do the Chinese see it that way? The Russians? Other AI companies?

This is the reasoning behind my observation that AI development is already close to being out of control. Even well-meaning geniuses like Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and Jack Clark aren’t able to gauge all the ramifications of their creations. How could they? The industry is moving at light speed. Some of it is healthy competition, the kind of innovation that America does best. But in the rush to be best, are we sacrificing safety? The tech giants don’t think so, but I’m not as confident. It’s too easy for humans to confuse their own self-interest with what’s best for all. History is replete with examples of people acting in their own selfish interests while believing they were acting for the greater good.

Read more …

“.. if broader conflict with Europe opens one day, the European powers won’t be able to find an offramp before absorbing immense losses ../”

Medvedev: Russia Must Instill ‘Animal Fear’ In EU Warmongers (ZH)

Head of the Russian Security Council and former president, Dmitry Medvedev, has penned an article ahead of the 81st anniversary of Soviet victory over Nazi Germany, or Russia’s V-Day, lambasting Europe’s new path of reckless militarization. As widely featured in state media, he argued that the “animal fear” of unacceptable losses will prevent Germany and the wider “United Europe” from launching another attack against Russia. He wrote, “It is no secret that an attempt is being made to impose on us the doctrine of ‘peace through strength’. Our response then can only be ‘the security of Russia through the animal fear of Europe.'” He stressed that “neither persuasion, nor demonstration of good intentions, nor goodwill and unilateral confidence-building steps should be our tools to prevent a big massacre.”


“Only the formation of an understanding among Germany and the United Europe supporting it of the inevitability of their receiving unacceptable damage in the event of the implementation of the Barbarossa 2.0 plan,” Medvedev concluded. RT reviews and pinpoints why Medvedev is taking direct aim at Berlin in his written piece: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz openly vowed to turn the German military into the “strongest conventional army in Europe” in a speech just days after the world marked the 80th anniversary of the fall of the Third Reich last May.

Last month, the German Defense Ministry unveiled a plan to reach this goal and field 460,000 combat-ready personnel by 2039, the 100th anniversary of Adolf Hitler’s invasion of Poland. German and other EU officials repeatedly cited 2029 as the first stage deadline to be “war-ready” for a potential conflict with Russia. It is true that even after 4+ years of grinding war in eastern Europe, the Western powers have yet to intervene directly by sending their own forces, and after losses on both the Ukrainian and Russian sides have probably been in the hundreds of thousands.

The conflict is largely stalemated, with Russian forces in the east having had a very slow but steady, piecemeal momentum over the past year. However, Ukraine’s drone strikes deep inside Russia have been devastating of late, inflicting serious damage on Russian oil refineries – in some cases hitting key sites multiple times, with Russia’s anti-air defenses appearing powerless to stop these attack waves.

The Moscow region itself has been coming under repeat drone attack. While these operations have little or no impact on the frontline situation in the Donbass, Kiev hopes to inflict serious costs on the Russian government and population, the latter which is surely growing tired and weary of the war. But Medvedev’s point is also that if broader conflict with Europe opens one day, the European powers won’t be able to find an offramp before absorbing immense losses – no matter their efforts to revamp and expand their respective defense industries.

Read more …

Playing politics over 22 million dead bodies 80 years later is bizarre. They know how much it hurts the Russians.

“It is a time when the nation collectively reflects on its history, pays tribute to those who sacrificed their lives, and celebrates the enduring spirit of its people.”

Germany Officially Bans all Russian Symbols on May 9th (CTH)

Something is going to happen, I’m not entirely sure what it is, but something is going to happen on May 8th and 9th as Russia pauses the conflict with Ukraine to celebrate one of their most treasured holidays, Victory Day. My spidey senses are telling me, Ukraine and the EU are planning something very controversial to coincide with this national holiday in the Russian Federation. Germany has done this before, but this time with President Trump pulling back from NATO, this year holds a different context.


GERMANY – Berlin police published an administrative order on 6 May restricting freedom of assembly and access to public spaces in the areas around three Soviet war memorials from 06:00 on 8 May until 22:00 on 9 May. In the restricted zones of the Treptow-Köpenick, Mitte and Pankow districts, the wearing of military uniforms and insignia is prohibited, as is the display of the letters Z and V, St George’s ribbons, flags and items bearing Russian symbols, flags of the USSR, Belarus and the Chechen Republic, and portraits of their leaders, as well as depictions of Ukraine that exclude its occupied territories.

Russian military and marching songs – including all versions of Sacred War – are also banned, along with any actions that glorify Russia’s war against Ukraine. The ban applies to everyone present in the restricted areas, regardless of whether they are participating in demonstrations or not. (more) May 9, celebrated as Victory Day, is one of the most significant and heartfelt holidays in Russia, symbolizing resilience, unity, and remembrance. This day honors the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War II, known in Russia as the Great Patriotic War. It is a time when the nation collectively reflects on its history, pays tribute to those who sacrificed their lives, and celebrates the enduring spirit of its people.

The Russian people, ordinarily invisible regular people, take historic photographs of their loved ones lost in World War II and prominently display them. Some cities and towns have marches where citizens carry those photographs during slow processions in silence. It is something rather remarkable to see and highlights a strong bond to remember just how many millions of Russians were killed during the great war. It is more than just a day of respect, national pride and remembrance. It is a day that encapsulates the deliberate and hardened spirit of a nation. Nothing is open. The entire Russian Federation pauses to reflect on the character that defines what the word “Russian” really means. These are brutally stoic, deliberate and honest people; gifted culturally and generationally with an inability to pretend.

To the West they seem hard, but that’s not really what it is. In reality, Western cultures are enmeshed with polite indulgences that are foreign to the average Russian person. We take things for granted; they do not. We forget how good we have it, they see it. However, Russia also sees the downside to political correctness running amok, DEI and other gender-‘isms’ that create pretenses that ultimately become cultural rot and vulnerabilities.

Russians like the concept of Western ‘freedom’, yet they do not quite understand it because Russians do not respect the visible self-flagellation and suicide mission that seemingly accompanies the freedom they perceive. Do not ever fall into the trap of romanticizing Russia, it is a hard and unforgiving culture difficult for most because Russians do not accept false politeness, nor do they respect weakness. They are very deliberate; unnervingly so, and that makes them cold. I’ve said all that to emphasize the importance of his Victory Day holiday throughout the Russian Federation. This is not a day to disrespect Russia.

I’m not sure what snarky Zelenskyy and the cunning coalition of the willing have planned, but if they trigger a provocation that at this point seems predictable – they might not like the Russian response. Then again, that’s likely the goal. The ‘coalition of the willing’ want to force President Trump to remain actively engaged and on their side. Zelenskyy and his EU team are willing to provoke, then take, a massive counterstrike from Vladimir Putin against Kiev if that’s what it takes to keep the U.S. military engaged and aligned.= The Ukraine meat grinder must remain satiated in order for the EU power structures to remain in place. This is a dangerous moment.

Read more …

“You know who taught me to hold a door for women? My mother, the strongest person I’ve ever known.”

Dana White Says Society Is Failing Young Men (David Manney)

Dana White touched some nerves this week when he mocked modern concerns over toxic masculinity and warned that society is increasingly pushing young men aside. Cue the shrieks in 3…2…1…0 White’s broader point, however, resonated with millions of Americans who see young men struggling socially, economically, and emotionally while much of modern culture (read: feminazis) treats masculinity itself like a behavior problem needing correction. White appeared on The Katie Miller Podcast, where the host and wife of Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff for policy, asked him about the state of young men and women in America today.


White went on to argue that young men are struggling with a wildly different set of circumstances than the ones he grew up with. “Times are changing from when I was young,” he said. “These young men, I think, you know, we went through COVID and the whole woke era and all the weird s— that went on during that period. A lot of the young males felt displaced.” The UFC president noted that he often gets accused of outlandish things like “being the head of the manosphere, whatever that means” and of “toxic masculinity.”

Around 12 years ago, I ran into such a proud feminist who started to rip me a new one because I held a door open for her. I let her go for about five seconds before laying some truth on her, saying, “You know who taught me to hold a door for women? My mother, the strongest person I’ve ever known.” It stopped her cold. Maybe because of what I said, but I really think it’s because of how I said it. My guess was that she was used to rolling over men trying to be polite. For years, political activists, academics, and media commentators have used phrases like “toxic masculinity” to describe aggressive, destructive, or antisocial male behavior.

So when White opines on what manhood supposedly is or isn’t, it offers insight into the perspective of some men in the MAGA movement, which is deeply obsessed with performative masculinity. That’s why I found it pitiful to see him publicly berating men who openly discuss their mental health. White delivered his commentary, fittingly, on the podcast of MAGA influencer Katie Miller, who is married to White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller. White, after saying it’s a “man’s job” to make sure a woman feels “safe” and is “treated right,” admitted that his idea of masculinity is “toxic” and railed against men who talk about their feelings.

And that’s fair; real abuse, violence, and recklessness deserve criticism regardless of gender. Problems start when the conversation expands so broadly that ordinary masculine traits begin falling under suspicion too. Competitiveness becomes dangerous, stoicism becomes unhealthy, physical toughness becomes outdated, and leadership becomes problematic. Even fatherhood sometimes gets discussed less as a social necessity and more as an optional accessory. Young men notice.

Many of them also notice who usually delivers the lectures. Discussions surrounding masculinity often happen in universities, activist circles, corporate HR departments, entertainment panels, and political spaces where traditional male culture receives little respect. Blue-collar values, physical labor, risk-taking, hunting, mechanical trades, competitive sports, and military service were, for years, increasingly viewed through a skeptical culture lens instead of being treated as honorable parts of society.

White’s comments gained traction partly because he works inside one of the few major industries where unapologetic masculinity still openly exists. The UFC built an audience around discipline, competition, toughness, accountability, and merit. Fighters either win or lose, and excuses carry little value once the cage door closes. Many cultural leaders still respond by doubling down on criticism instead of asking why so many young men feel disconnected from institutions increasingly dominated by ideological messaging. Could it be that those institutions have been increasingly hostile in their ideological messaging?

Read more …

Africa it is then.

Visualizing The Stunning Global Fertility Divide (ZH)

A widening gap is emerging in global birth rates.nThis chart, via Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte, shows population-weighted total fertility rates (TFR) across major world regions, based on data from the UN World Population Prospects 2024 Revision, and how they compare to the 2.1 replacement level. While Africa remains far above this threshold, most of the world, including Asia, Europe, and the Americas, has already fallen below it. This split highlights where future population growth is likely to be concentrated.

Africa Stands Apart
Africa’s fertility rate of 4.0 children per woman is the highest of any region. It is nearly double the global average of 2.2 and close to three times Europe’s rate of 1.4. With a rapidly growing population base, Africa is expected to drive a significant share of global population growth in the coming decades. Higher fertility rates are often linked to younger populations, lower urbanization, and differences in access to education and healthcare.

Below Replacement in Most Regions
Many parts of the world now have fertility rates below the replacement level of 2.1. Asia, North America, and South America each sit at 1.7, while Europe trails at 1.4. These levels point to aging populations, slower natural population growth, and potential workforce pressures over time. In many countries, immigration and family-support policies are becoming more important parts of the demographic outlook.

Population Weight Matters
Asia accounts for 54% of the global population, meaning its relatively low fertility rate has an outsized influence on the global average. By contrast, regions like Oceania and the Middle East have higher fertility rates but much smaller populations. This helps explain why the global average remains at 2.2 even as most major regions fall below replacement.

Read more …

They hope if they get together they can take him. But even then…

PM Carney’s Role in Organizing Commonwealth Trump Opposition (CTH)

Susan Kokinda of Promethean Action PAC does a great job with this video presentation of how Canada is the tip of the spear in how the EU and Commonwealth are trying to undermine President Trump. In the background, this is where it becomes important for President Trump and President Putin to organize a strategic alliance.


“As attention focused on President Trump’s Iran breakthrough, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney met European and Commonwealth leaders in Armenia and said the rules-based international order is over, arguing it will be rebuilt out of Europe around Canada, the EU, the UK, and Australia. The episode frames this as a rival power center consolidating against Trump’s America, then highlights Carney’s appointment of Louise Arbour as Canada’s Governor General, emphasizing the office’s powers and Arbour’s role as a UN tribunal prosecutor and advocate for creating the International Criminal Court, alongside references to George Soros’s Open Society support for the ICC and Jack Smith’s work there.

The script then covers a Trump administration press conference on beef, citing declining cattle numbers, ranch losses, and consolidation among four meatpackers controlling 85% of processing, and links this to decades of cartelization and foreign influence in food and commodities.”

Read more …

“.. drugs coming in by sea are down 97% and now we’ve started the land force, which is much easier.”

Did President Trump Say That in His Outside Voice…(CTH)

During a White House event to celebrate Moms, President Trump introduced several prominent Moms in and out of government and celebrated their achievements. As he often does, President Trump also delivered unscripted remarks to accompany the themed script of the event.


I’m highlighting one specific impromptu, off the cuff remark that deserves a little attention. I’m certain somebody around Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum will also bring it to her attention. The moment happens at 35:51 of the video below. Watch (prompted):

…”drugs coming in by sea are down 97% and now we’ve started the land force, which is much easier. And you’ll hear some complaints from some people in, like, representatives from Mexico and other places, but if they’re not going to do the job, we’re going to do the job and they understand that.”…

Last week the DOJ indicted Mexican Governor Ruben Rocha Moya along with nine current and former Mexican officials for participating “in a corrupt and violent drug trafficking conspiracy with the Cartel to import massive amounts of fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine from Mexico into the United States.”

Keep in mind, while the U.S. media are not reporting on the issue; however, every ground report indicates that indicted Sinaloa Cartel Governor Ruben Rocha is being protected in an undisclosed location by the Mexican National Guard. Essentially, the Mexican military is protecting an indicted drug trafficker and politician in Mexico, while avoiding extradition to the U.S. That’s further context for President Trump’s remarks.

Read more …

The one piece of lawfare they pushed through. Based on the script for a cop show.

DOJ to Ask Supreme Court to Intervene in E. Jean Carroll Lawsuit vs Trump (ET)

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said it will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to allow it to intervene in President Donald Trump’s appeal of the $83.3 million jury award E. Jean Carroll won against him in a defamation lawsuit.The DOJ will ask the Supreme Court to substitute the United States for Trump in the lawsuit, arguing that in 2019, during his first term as president, when Trump denied Carroll’s sexual assault claims against him, he was acting as an employee of the government.


Assistant U.S. Attorney General Brett Shumate said in a filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on May 5 that the DOJ will invoke the federal Westfall Act in a bid to substitute the federal government for Trump as the defendant in the lawsuit. The appeals court previously denied the request to replace Trump as the defendant. The DOJ argues that Trump is immune from suit because he was acting within the scope of his presidential duties and speaking on matters of public concern when he made the statements about Carroll that led to the $83.3 million verdict. A federal jury ordered Trump to pay those damages over the statements in which he denied the sexual assault allegations and accused Carroll of lying.

The Westfall Act shields federal employees from common law tort lawsuits arising from their government employment. Common law refers to the body of law developed over centuries by court rulings, as opposed to statutes passed by legislatures. A tort is a wrongful act or infringement of a right that gives rise to civil liability. If a federal employee is sued in his individual capacity for a tort that occurred while he was acting within the scope of his employment for the government, the act states that “the United States shall be substituted as the party defendant,” and the court will dismiss the employee from the lawsuit.

Carroll, an author, testified during a 2023 trial that Trump attacked her around 1996 in a dressing room in a department store near Trump Tower in New York City. Trump denied the allegations. In its May 2023 verdict, a federal jury held Trump liable both for sexually abusing Carroll and defaming her when he made statements in October 2022 denying her allegations. The jury awarded Carroll $5 million in damages. The Second Circuit upheld both the $5 million verdict and the $83.3 million verdict on appeal.

Shumate urged the Second Circuit to stay the award, noting that the DOJ intends to file a petition with the Supreme Court challenging the circuit’s denial of a request to substitute the government as defendant in the lawsuit. The Epoch Times reached out to Carroll’s attorney, Roberta A. Kaplan, for comment. No reply was received by publication time. Separately, on May 5, Trump asked the Second Circuit to stay the award to give him time to prepare an appeal to the Supreme Court over the circuit court’s rulings. Trump previously filed a petition with the Supreme Court in November 2025 to challenge the $5 million verdict. It is unclear when the high court will act on it.

Read more …

“Today’s Democratic Party has abandoned its traditional working-class, patriotic roots and embraced a radical Jacobin ideology built on division, coercion, and political extremism.”

There’s nowhere to go to for millions of votes.

You can’t just switch to GOP, and the Dems are stark raving loonies.

The Democratic Party Is Dead, Long Live the Jacobins! (Victor Davis Hanson)

For the past century, the agendas of the Democratic Party were predictable. They professed concern for working Americans and supported blue-collar unions. Unemployment insurance, a 40-hour work week, disability insurance, and Social Security were their trademarks—often rapidly achieved by growing government bureaucracies and continually raising taxes. Still, many Democrats were socially conservative. By the 1970s, Democrats still deplored antisemitism. Party officials had rejected their own segregationists to champion civil rights. Presidents like Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and John F. Kennedy all supported strong defense and military deterrence. All that is now passé.


The only vestigial Democrat left in Congress is Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman, himself roundly despised by Democrat leaders. Today, supporting Israel and calling for campuses to stop their institutionalized antisemitism is Democratic political suicide. Forty years ago, any Democrat with a Nazi tattoo was political toast; today, he can become the party’s nominee for the Maine Senate race. So, the current Democrat Party is no longer truly democratic at all. Its new spirit and methods resemble the radical Jacobin Party of the French Revolution. Today, Democrats claim that if any opponent gives a Roman salute, he is a Nazi—while insisting that one of their own with a Nazi tattoo is not.

Jacobinism rejects Martin Luther King Jr.’s emphasis on the “content of . . . character.” It instead prefers fixating on “the color of . . . skin.” It aims to divide the nation arbitrarily between the noble oppressed and the toxic oppressors. So these new Jacobins have institutionalized racially separate college dorms and graduation ceremonies, along with hiring and promoting on the basis of race. The new Jacobins destroyed the southern border and welcomed in 10–12 million illegal aliens, seen as a future proletariat constituency. Today’s Jacobins would now ridicule Bill Clinton’s 1990s calls for secure borders and an end to illegal immigration as “fascist” and “racist.”

The most recent nihilist developments in American society can be attributed to these Jacobin “Democrats”: biological men competing in women’s sports; critical legal theory that normalizes cashless bail; race-based reparations; violent felons arrested and back on the street hours later; radical abortion on demand until birth; attacks on the concept of the cultural “melting pot”; and opposition to organized Christianity. These agendas lack broad majority support. So street theater and violence focus on Tesla dealerships, ICE officers, conservative campus speakers, and, at times, any journalists covering the unrest. Jacobins make excuses for pro-Hamas campus violence, which often targets Jewish students. The often violent and corrupt Black Lives Matter movement was a Jacobin ancillary.

Free speech is labeled “disinformation” and “misinformation”—synonyms for not toeing the Jacobin Party line. Until recent pushbacks, near-religious radical green agendas warred against fossil fuels and cost the working classes billions of dollars for sky-high fuel and electricity costs. Like the Robespierre brothers of old, the most radical Jacobins are so often to be found among the wealthiest and most privileged Americans. Radical New York mayor Zohran Mamdani grew up as a rich Ugandan. Radical, self-described communist Maine senatorial candidate Graham Platner attended one of the most elite and expensive prep schools in the United States. When avowed socialists Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders barnstormed the country, they did so via private jets.

Radical “Squad” member Rep. Ilhan Omar cannot decide whether she is worth $30 million or nothing. Hard-left California billionaire, gubernatorial candidate, and radical environmentalist Tom Steyer is a billionaire who jump-started his fortune by investing in coal plants overseas and offshoring profits to avoid taxes. At least 10 states are drafting laws to tax the net worth, as well as the income, of “billionaires and millionaires,” apparently for their “social” crimes. Mayor Mamdani taps on the window of philanthropist Ken Griffin as a warning to get out of town. The mayor of Seattle scoffs at the rich leaving her state with their billions due to new punitive taxes, offering a sarcastic “bye.”

In the old days, Democrats were embarrassed by their radicals and distanced themselves from the Weather Underground, Students for a Democratic Society, and the Black Panthers. Today, left-wing bomb throwers are the Democrat Party. Hasan Piker, another multimillionaire, $200,000 Porsche-driving communist, has openly supported “social murder.” So Piker praised Luigi Mangione’s targeted murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Meanwhile, Jacobins on social media expressed disappointment that all three assassination attempts on Donald Trump failed. The arsonist who burned down Pacific Palisades was a Mangione acolyte and saw his destruction as a revolutionary act, perhaps a form of mass “social murder.”

Jacobin politicians call for Trump to be “eliminated,” label him as a “fascist,” and call for “any means necessary” to end his presidency. The aim is to lower the social and psychological barrier to violence. The Jacobin Democrats of today are systematically destroying the legacy of the Democratic Party. And why not? Their model is not the American Founding, but the radical mandated equality—and violence—of the French Revolution.

Read more …

It is scary.

Half of Vienna Secondary School Students Are Now Muslim (RMX)

Almost half of students in Vienna’s public middle schools are now Muslim, according to new figures from the Vienna Education Directorate, marking the latest sign of a rapid demographic and cultural shift inside the Austrian capital’s classrooms. The data, cited by Heute, shows that Muslim students account for 49.4 percent of children in Vienna’s public middle schools — just short of an absolute majority. Across the city’s public compulsory schools more broadly, including elementary, middle, special needs, and polytechnic schools, Muslim students now make up 42 percent, up from 41.2 percent in the previous school year.


Catholic students, once the dominant group in the city, now account for just 16.7 percent of children in the public schools included in the figures. Orthodox students make up 14.2 percent, while children with no religious affiliation account for 23.2 percent. The figures also reveal a stark divide between Vienna’s public and private schools. In private schools, Catholics remain the largest group at 45.39 percent, followed by students with no religious affiliation at 25.1 percent and Orthodox students at 10.6 percent. Muslim children account for just 7.6 percent of students in Vienna’s private schools.

Taken together, across both public and private schools, Muslim students now form the largest single group at 38.3 percent. Even when Catholic and Orthodox children are combined, they reach only around 33.6 percent.The numbers reveal how the city’s public schools are becoming the front line of a much broader cultural transformation. Earlier this year, Remix News reported that more than half of first-grade students in Vienna were listed as Muslim for the first time, while separate reporting from Profil described one secondary school where a Christian boy was allegedly the only Christian in his first-grade class.

At that school, 230 of the 390 students were Muslim, while 99 percent of the students had an immigration background. Only five children in the entire school were reported to have no migrant background. The Christian boy was reportedly mocked by classmates and called a “pig,” while teachers described classrooms marked by language barriers, social problems, and growing religious pressure.The school was said to include students speaking 32 different languages, with Turkish, Arabic, and Chechen among the most common home languages. One teacher said that the problems were so extensive that every class could use its own social worker.

Concerns over integration have also spilled into the school canteen. In October 2025, the Austrian Farmers’ Association warned that pork dishes such as schnitzel, ham noodles, and roast pork had become rare or had disappeared entirely from some Viennese school menus. The association said some schools now offered only vegetarian meals or meat dishes without pork, citing a mother who said her daughter could choose only between vegetarian food and “pork-free” food. “No one has to eat pork, but it must be offered. Pork is part of our culinary culture,” said Corinna Weisl, director of the Farmers’ Association.

The group’s president, Georg Strasser, said preserving choice was the key issue, arguing that “diversity on the plate means freedom of choice for everyone.” For some parents, however, the question is whether public schools can still deliver basic education. In February, Remix News reported the case of a Vienna mother who withdrew her daughter from a public primary school in Rudolfsheim-Fünfhaus after two years, saying only four children in the class spoke German fluently.

The mother, identified as Sabine G., said teachers spent much of the day translating instructions and managing basic communication rather than teaching. By the end of the first school year, she said her daughter still could not recite the alphabet, while several classmates had to repeat the grade. She also said her daughter had begun refusing pork after being told it was “unclean” and had started rejecting certain summer clothing.“I felt my child was being strongly influenced,” she said.

Read more …

“..thousands of Americans will gather on Sunday, May 17, on the National Mall to rededicate the United States as One Nation Under God. “

‘Golden Thread of Devotion’: Trump’s National Day of Prayer Message (Salgado)

President Donald Trump praised America’s “magnificent birthright of faith” during his May 6 message for the National Day of Prayer. During this year of America’s 250th birthday, Trump declared that “we pledge to never forget the countless blessings God has bestowed upon our people and our country.” The president stated, “From the cradles of civilization in the ancient world to the Christian empires of medieval Europe and the miraculous founding of our own Nation, the entire Western experience has been connected by a golden thread of devotion to God.” He especially emphasized the role of faith in America’s Revolution and founding.


For instance, Trump noted, the Second Continental Congress declared a day of “humiliation, fasting, and prayer” in order to invoke God‘s blessing on the fight against Great Britain “for freedom, virtue, and posterity.” Only weeks after that, “armed with unshakable faith, the Colonies declared their independence from Great Britain on July 4, 1776, and paved the way for freedom’s ultimate victory five years later at Yorktown,” Trump celebrated.

Our one nation under God has always acknowledged only one Divine King, as the song “My Country, ‘Tis of Thee” affirms. Trump continued, “In the years since, this proud birthright of faith moved our Nation to expand the promise of independence to the furthest reaches of our continent; preserve our Union in the midst of a bloody Civil War; abolish slavery; win two world wars; defeat the evil forces of atheistic communism; plant our Flag on the Moon; and advance truth, beauty, and goodness in our culture every single day.”

One fact of which Trump is very proud and which he often brings up is that after many years of declining religiosity, America is once again turning back to faith. In 2025, a Barna study found that 66% of U.S. adults “say they have made a personal commitment to Jesus that is still important in their life today,” which was a whopping 12-point rise over the statistics from just four years before, in 2021. Even more striking, for the first time Barna found the trend in spiritual commitment fueled by the youth of America.

In his National Day of Prayer message, Trump declared: “Today, faith in God is resurging on American shores like never before. Throughout this historic year, we rejoice in the triumph of the American spirit and in the love and grace of Almighty God. And just as our Founders came together in prayer before declaring independence, thousands of Americans will gather on Sunday, May 17, on the National Mall to rededicate the United States as One Nation Under God. ”

Trump has also called for a national Shabbat over May 15-16 to recognize the Jewish contribution to America. “This National Day of Prayer, we proudly recommit to our magnificent birthright of faith,” the president stated. “I encourage all Americans to come together today in prayer, reflecting on the many blessings God has given our Nation and asking for His continued protection, with ceremonies, events, and programs in their houses of worship and places of work, schools, and homes.” In conclusion, he urged, “Above all, we pledge that America will always, as it is written in Psalm 96, ‘Tell His glory among the nations’—and that we will never forget God’s role in creating, protecting, and sustaining the freest, strongest, most prosperous, and greatest country the world has ever known.”

Read more …

10 years ahead of his own time.

The Controversy Over Picasso’s Most Shocking Painting (BBC)

The confrontational painting Les Demoiselles d’Avignon has been both widely despised and loved, and over the decades has remained contentious. A century after it was created by Picasso, acclaimed US artist Henry Taylor reinterpreted and challenged the piece – and his version is now at the centre of a major exhibition at the Musée Picasso in Paris.


In 1907, Pablo Picasso invited a small circle of artists and friends to his studio in Paris. He wanted to show them a painting he had been working on for six months. Almost unanimously, the reaction from his peers was shock, horror and disgust. The French painter Georges Braque reportedly compared the experience to drinking petrol, and Henri Matisse is said to have called the women in it “hideous”. It wouldn’t be shown publicly until 1916, almost a decade later.

More than a century on, it has become one of Picasso’s most recognisable and controversial works. It has also been reinterpreted by the acclaimed US painter Henry Taylor. His version is currently displayed at a major exhibition at Musée National Picasso in Paris, and Taylor emphasises a key point about the earlier painting: it owes a lot more to African art than Picasso ever liked to admit.The painting Picasso had shown his peers was Les Demoiselles d’Avignon (1907), a large oil painting in which five nude women in a brothel in Barcelona demand the viewer’s attention. Two of the women have mask-like faces, three stare back at the observer, and all have jagged, disjointed bodies. It marked a sharp turn in Picasso’s creative journey and a dramatic departure from the artistic norms of the time.

“Picasso moved away from emotional, figurative painting toward breaking forms apart and rethinking how space and bodies are shown,” Joanne Snrech, a curator at Musée National Picasso, tells the BBC. “This shift was key to the development of Cubism and modern art more broadly.” Les Demoiselles d’Avignon (The Young Ladies of Avignon) was initially named Le Bordel d’Avignon (or The Brothel of Avignon) until 1916, when the title was changed to be less contentious. It is considered a fundamental work in the birth of Cubism, the 20th-Century art movement known for abandoning traditional, realistic forms of representation in favour of fragmented and geometric shapes.

As Picasso did in the Demoiselles, Cubism merged multiple vantage points of an object or person into a single image. “Part of what made the reaction so strong is that Picasso didn’t just change one thing: he changed everything at once,” Snrech says. “Even for artists who were already experimenting with new styles, this felt like a step too far.” But Picasso’s innovations didn’t come out of nowhere. Some of them, it could be argued, came straight from Africa.Months before creating this painting, Picasso had developed a particular interest in African masks and sculptures, spurred by a small figurine – from what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo – that Matisse had purchased in Paris in 1906.

Picasso began regularly visiting the African section of the Musée d’Ethnographie du Trocadéro, creating hundreds of preparatory sketches for his new masterpiece.”What struck him wasn’t just how they looked, but how they worked: the faces are simplified, distorted, sometimes quite intense or even unsettling,” Snrech says. “He was clearly inspired by this different approach to the human face, which allowed him to move away from naturalism and toward something more abstract and confrontational.”

Despite this work and many others being shaped by his encounters with African art, Picasso is known to have downplayed its influence. He famously said to a critic working on a series on African art for a journal in 1920 that he had “never heard of it”. Picasso’s reluctance to acknowledge the impact of African art on his work while directly benefiting from it later provoked accusations of cultural appropriation. Critiques highlight the cultural, religious and social significance of the objects that Picasso observed but seemingly ignored, and how this fed into the wider narrative of African art being seen as “primitive” at the time.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Juliedonuts/status/2052227280148009335?s=20 https://twitter.com/JasonJournoDC/status/2052160639561240826?s=20 https://twitter.com/Tips2Home/status/2052107725383877043?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 052026
 


John Singer Sargent Palmettos, Florida 1917


EU ‘15 Years Too Late’ To Prepare For Energy Shock – Dmitriev (RT)
Trump Reminds Iran “48 Hours Before All Hell Will Reign Down” (ZH)
Rescue Operation Underway After Iran Downs Two US Fighter Jets (RT)
Has Concern Over Hormuz Made Us Forget the Red Sea? (ET)
What Exactly Is the Purpose of NATO in the Year 2026? (Josh Hammer)
The non-Zionist Israeli Population Could Save the Day (Paul Craig Roberts)
Kevin Hassett on Latest Jobs Data and Economic Impacts from Iran Conflict (CTH)
Will the Jones Act Waiver Undermine Trump’s Immigration Policy? (Landrith)
Kamala Calls to Oppose New Court Nominees “Before They Happen” (Turley)
Trump; Boycott Bruce Springsteen Over ‘Incurable’ TDS (JTN)
The New York Times Made a Humiliating Error (Matt Margolis)
DOJ Is Done Releasing Epstein Files (MN)
SpaceX IPO: Don’t Bet Against Elon Musk (Tim O’Brien)

 


 

https://twitter.com/lovetocook12345/status/2040068475922628876?s=20

 


 


Maybe opening with this will wake some people up.

And yes, I am in Europe. And the lack of competence and vision is scary.

EU ‘15 Years Too Late’ To Prepare For Energy Shock – Dmitriev (RT)

The EU has failed to offer any real solutions to the current energy crisis, Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev has said, arguing that Brussels is too late to start preparing for a supply shock. The remarks came in response to EU Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen’s interview with the Financial Times on Friday in which he said that the US-Israeli war on Iran was likely to have “structural, long-lasting effects” on the bloc’s energy security. He added Brussels was preparing for “worst-case scenarios” and “looking at all possibilities,” including releasing strategic oil reserves and possibly rationing jet fuel or diesel. “Still only warnings, NO REAL FIXES,” Dmitriev, who serves as President Vladimir Putin’s special envoy for investment and economic cooperation, wrote on X on Friday.


“EU warns 15 YEARS TOO LATE it is not prepared for a ‘long-lasting energy shock.’ EU failed to diversify energy flows, guided by Russophobic, Green, and woke ideology,” he added.The EU implemented a set of energy reforms in 2009–2011 aimed at accelerating the transition to renewable energy and diversifying away from single suppliers, such as Russia. In his interview, Jorgensen ruled out a return to Russian energy imports, insisting that there would be no change to EU plans to end imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) by the end of 2026. The US and “other partners” will provide additional supplies, he said. Brussels will also phase out Russian pipeline gas imports by autumn 2027. Russia still accounted for an estimated 13% of total EU gas imports in 2025, according to official data.

President Vladimir Putin warned last month that Russia may withdraw from the EU gas market and redirect its supplies to “emerging markets” without waiting for Brussels’ ban to take effect. The energy crisis in the EU is the result of the “misguided policies” pursued by the bloc over “many years,” Putin said. The conflict in the Middle East has disrupted global supply chains and thrown energy markets into turmoil. On Thursday, the price of crude rose to around $111 per barrel, while the price of gas in the EU spiked to around €50 ($58) per MWh, a 56% increase from February.

Read more …

“Reign Down”?

Trump Reminds Iran “48 Hours Before All Hell Will Reign Down” (ZH)

With U.S. and Israeli air-delivered munitions still striking targets across Iran, and Tehran retaliating by hitting high-value sites around the Gulf area, while continuing to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, the conflict is now entering its sixth week with no credible signs of near-term de-escalation. Add in President Trump’s speech last week, which warned that intense targeting could continue for a few more weeks, and it’s a very fair assessment that the conflict will carry into next week, with momentum and escalation to the upside.


On Saturday, the U.S. military continued search operations for an American airman who ejected after an F-15E fighter jet was shot down over Iran, marking the first downed U.S. aircraft in the conflict. One crew member was rescued, but the second remained missing, with Iranian forces also racing to find the missing pilot. The downed F-15 jet came shortly after a U.S. Black Hawk was hit by ground fire, and an A-10 Thunderbolt II reportedly crashed Friday near the Hormuz chokepoint. Friday was not a great day for U.S. aircraft as the conflict intensified. C-17 Globemaster IIIs are on the move.

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2040333544023621698

In a rapidly escalating phase of the US-Israel war on Iran (now around day 36+ since late February strikes that targeted Iranian leadership and infrastructure), Tehran has intensified its retaliation while the US and Israel press air campaigns. Iranian missiles struck central Israel on Saturday, triggering widespread sirens and causing visible damage, including to residential areas and an industrial zone near Beersheba. Reports mentioned cluster bomb effects and shrapnel injuries, though Israeli defenses intercepted many projectiles.

At the same time, Israel launched heavy strikes on Tehran, targeting Iranian air-defense and ballistic-missile sites, while a projectile also hit the perimeter of Iran’s Bushehr nuclear plant, according to the semiofficial Iranian Tasnim news agency. The International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran had notified them about the incident.

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2040412534751313983

Let’s not forget President Trump’s speech on Wednesday, in which he suggested the conflict could continue for weeks and insisted the missing airman would not alter efforts to negotiate an end to the conflict. Iran launched a fresh missile barrage at central Israel, causing fires, damage in areas like Negev, Rosh Haayin, Bnei Brak, and reports of cluster munitions; minor injuries reported, with one man hurt in Bnei Brak. An apparent Iranian drone damaged the Dubai headquarters of the U.S. tech giant Oracle on Saturday after Iranian forces threatened dozens of US firms. Iran has been targeting Gulf area data centers, and reports of a water desalination plant on Friday made headlines.

Read more …

According to American media, two of the three pilots have been located and brought to safety

Rescue Operation Underway After Iran Downs Two US Fighter Jets (RT)

Iran shot down a US fighter jet over its territory on Friday, prompting a rescue operation for the crew, according to US and Iranian media.m,According to multiple outlets citing US officials, one of the two crew members of the twin-seat F-15E Strike Eagle has been rescued, while the whereabouts and status of the second remain unknown. Although Iran claimed it had downed a newer F-35 aircraft, analysts say that images of the wreckage, including an ejection seat, are consistent with an F-15. A second US military aircraft, a single-seat A-10 Thunderbolt II, managed to leave Iranian airspace before its pilot ejected and was rescued, US media reported.


US President Donald Trump has threatened to step up strikes on Iran, saying Iranian power plants could be targeted next. The announcement came just hours after US forces hit the country’s tallest highway bridge linking Tehran and Karaj, rendering it inoperable.“Our Military… hasn’t even started destroying what’s left in Iran,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Bridges next, then Electric Power Plants! New Regime leadership knows what has to be done, and has to be done fast!” Iranian military spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaghari responded, warning of immediate retaliation if Washington follows through.

“If the US proceeds with its threats regarding Iran’s power plants, immediate retaliatory actions will be taken,” he said in a video address, adding that Israeli energy and IT infrastructure – as well as regional companies with American shareholders – would face ”complete and utter annihilation.” The video featured footage of the Stargate UAE project, a major AI infrastructure hub under construction in Abu Dhabi, part of a US-backed initiative led by OpenAI. Zolfaghari said Iran would ”do whatever it takes” to defend its interests, suggesting these projects could become targets. Earlier, Iran said the Strait of Hormuz would remain closed ”in the long term” to US and Israeli ships. Trump urged Tehran to ”make a deal before it is too late.” Iranian officials have denied they are seeking a ceasefire or engaging in talks.

Latest developments: • Trump said he hopes that the pilot of a downed US aircraft will not be captured or harmed by Iranian forces. • Israel reportedly canceled some planned strikes on Iran to avoid interfering with the ongoing rescue operation. • An Iranian drone struck Kuwait’s Mina al-Ahmadi oil refinery, while the debris from an intercepted UAV set fire to the UAE’s largest gas processing hub, Habshan, authorities in the Gulf state have reported. • Iran has refused a 48-hour ceasefire offer from the US, delivered via a third country, according to Fars news agency. Indirect attempts to secure an armistice have “reached a dead end,” according to the WSJ. • Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said strikes on civilian infrastructure, including bridges, would not force Iran to surrender, calling them a sign of “defeat and moral collapse.”

Read more …

Colorful.

Has Concern Over Hormuz Made Us Forget the Red Sea? (ET)

Wartime concerns about the security of maritime energy traffic through the Strait of Hormuz—connecting the Indian Ocean/Gulf of Oman with the Persian Gulf—have overshadowed the fact that the related issue of Red Sea security is far from resolved and is, in fact, becoming more dynamic. The Red Sea–Suez link between the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean is of equal strategic importance to global trade as the Hormuz choke point and is, through geography and common players, intrinsically linked with the Persian Gulf conflict.


But it is Ethiopia’s civil war, brewing with different factions and with varying intensity since the coup against Emperor Haile Selassie I in 1974, which is again moving in ways that could prove decisive. Always, in the background, is the reality that Ethiopia could revive its historical influence over the Red Sea–Suez sea line of communication (SLOC). Inside Ethiopia, the conflicts that have been raging since 1974 between different governments and different factions are at a new level.

The four different Fano opposition militia groups, representing different areas of the Amhara heartland, have been fighting against the central government of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed Ali for several years. In early 2026, they came together with a united manifesto of their intentions. This has revived the momentum of the threat to Abiy’s Prosperity Party government. A statement issued by a united Fano on Jan. 17, 2026 (Tir 9, 2018, in the Ethiopian calendar) noted:

“So that the Amhara struggle may become one, the leaders of the Amhara Fano National Force and the Amhara Fano People’s Organization, through a historic decision that demanded courage, open-heartedness, decisiveness, and trust in the people, have been able to make Fano unity a reality. … We have designated one leader, one organization.” Significantly, the leadership of the united Fano all titled themselves as “Arbegna,” a nod to the Arbegnoch, the Patriots, who, under the banner of Emperor Haile Selassie I, fought against the Italian invaders of Ethiopia from 1935 to 1941. This led to the ouster of the Italians at the Battle of Gondar, in late November 1941, the first major Allied victory of World War II, in the ouster of an Axis power (Italy) from territory it had seized.

Today, the result of the four separate Amhara Fano groups fighting against the Abiy government over the past several years was the creation—finally—of the Amhara Fano National Movement (AFNM) as an umbrella for all civil and military operations. AFNM, however, described itself as working on behalf of all Ethiopians desirous of the restoration of the multi-ethnic empire. (Ethiopia is home to some 80 ethnic and linguistic groups.) Prime Minister Abiy, half-Amhara and half-Oromo, has consistently identified with Oromo causes and first fought against a Tigrean-dominated government of Ethiopia, and then against the Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) militia, which was forced into a ceasefire—essentially a military surrender by the TPLF—in November 2022.

Abiy’s Prosperity Party government has increasingly been rejected by his original Oromo militant supporters, who regard him as “insufficiently Oromo” in outlook, and the government’s writ—or its area of focus—now rarely extends beyond the capital, Addis Ababa. The exception for Abiy’s travels is to some major projects such as the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam in the Benishangul-Gumuz Region of western Ethiopia. The dam has been the subject of some hostility from Egypt, which sees its existence as infringing on Egypt’s “right” to control the waters of the Blue Nile, even though they originate in Lake Tana in the Amhara Highlands of Ethiopia, outside Egypt’s territories.

Read more …

NATO’s purpose was anti-Russia. That ended in 1989. Questions?

What Exactly Is the Purpose of NATO in the Year 2026? (Josh Hammer)

One month into Operation Epic Fury against the Islamic Republic of Iran, a long-overdue conversation has finally broken into the open: What, exactly, is the enduring rationale for NATO? For decades, this question has been treated in Washington foreign policy circles as heretical. But it isn’t. And to their credit, President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are now saying so plainly. As Trump recently put it, “They haven’t been friends when we needed them. We’ve never asked them for much. … It’s a one-way street.” Rubio has been similarly blunt: “If NATO is just about us defending Europe if they’re attacked but then denying us basing rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement. … So all that’s going to have to be reexamined.”


They’re spot-on. At best, America’s European “allies” have spent decades free-riding on the U.S. security umbrella. Despite repeated commitments to meet baseline defense spending targets, many NATO members still under-invest in their militaries and outsource their national defense to American taxpayers. The imbalance is staggering: The United States accounts for the overwhelming majority of NATO’s military capabilities, logistics, and strategic lift. Overall, American taxpayers contribute about 60% of total spending on NATO defense.

At worst, some of these same European allies actively undermine U.S. operations at critical moments. Major Western European countries such as Spain and France have restricted or complicated U.S. use of their airspace during Operation Epic Fury. That is farcical. A so-called alliance in which members obstruct one another’s ability to wage war is not actually an alliance — it is a liability.This raises the core question: Why, exactly, does NATO exist in the year 2026? Let’s recall its origins. NATO was founded in 1949 with a clear and urgent mission: to contain and, if necessary, defeat the Soviet Union. That mission was compelling — indeed, existential. Western Europe lay devastated after World War II, and the Soviet threat was real, immediate, and hegemonic. But that world quite literally no longer exists.

The Soviet Union collapsed three and a half decades ago. The Berlin Wall fell the year I was born. The Cold War is now a relic of history. By any reasonable metric, NATO achieved its raison d’etre by the early 1990s. But instead of declaring victory and recalibrating, the alliance drifted. It expanded ever further into Eastern Europe and shifted its ostensible mission into… well, something.Simply put, NATO is today an organization in search of a purpose.

Is NATO a collective defense pact against the geopolitical successor to the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation? If so, why do so many European NATO members fail to take that threat seriously enough to invest in their own national defense? Is NATO now instead a vehicle for global counterterrorism? If so, why have its members sat on the sidelines and refused to join the United States as it goes to battle against the world’s No. 1 state sponsor of jihad? Or is NATO nowadays just a political club for liberal democracies? If so, what does that have to do with a hardheaded conception of the U.S. national interest?NATO has become a catch-all institution, long on triumphalist platitudes but short on the strategic realities on which its existence was predicated.

Read more …

“Netanyahu’s party has 23.41% of the vote.”

The non-Zionist Israeli Population Could Save the Day (Paul Craig Roberts)

Trump’s blustering April Fool’s day speech would easily have served as a hilarious April Fool’s day joke. But it was just bluster to take the place of the discarded 10-day ultimatum that replaced the discarded 5-day ultimatum with a 3 or 4 week ultimatum. As I asked, if Iran is as totally destroyed as Trump asserts, what is the purpose of Trump’s ultimatum?


Time is running out for Trump, not for Iran. The last time an American president took America to war Constitutionally was 1941 when Congress gave the executive branch permission to enter the war with the Constitutionally required Congressional Declaration of War. As time went by Congress finally responded to presidential decisions to go to war without a Congressional declaration of war not by impeaching the President, which should have been done in order to protect the Constitutional political order and separation of powers, but by requiring the president who initiates military action without Congressional approval to come to Congress with a deadline of 60 days after initiating military action for congressional approval to continue the military action.

In other words, Congress failed to defend the Constitution’s Separation of Powers by allowing the executive branch to exercise a power it does not have to go to war and, afterward, to come to Congress for approval. In the past Congress has rubber-stamped the President’s decision. But this time it is different. Polls indicate that a majority of Americans do not share Trump’s concern about the Iranian threat to America. They do not support Netanyahu’s war. Even many American Jews do not support the war.

On April 2 the Times of Israel reported that “the US Democratic National Committee is set to consider a resolution at a meeting next week that “condemns the growing influence” of AIPAC. This is extraordinary considering that in the US Senate there are 9 Jewish Democrats and no Republican ones and that of the 25 Jews in the House of Representatives, 21 are Democrats. https://www.timesofisrael.com/democrats-to-weigh-resolution-against-aipac-fueling-concerns-about-undercurrent-of-antisemitism/

The Times of Israel reports that: “A recent NBC poll found that 57% of Democratic voters have a negative view of Israel, compared to 13% who have a positive view of the country. Meanwhile, a growing number of the party’s congressional candidates—and politicians thought to be seeking its 2028 presidential nomination—are swearing off AIPAC, and crossing its red line of supporting conditions on military aid to Israel.” What Trump has done is to ally the American Democrat Party against Israel and the Republicans with Israel Or to put it more correctly with the current Zionist government of Netanyahu.

Netanyahu’s party has 23.41% of the vote. To be in office Netanyahu has to rely on far right-wing extremist parties who fervently believe in Greater Israel from the Nile River to Pakistan. It is for this Greater Israel agenda that Americans have been fighting for the first quarter of the 21st century. But support for this agenda is not only weak in the US, it also seems to be week in Israel. Zionism has always been a minority position among Jews and the Israeli population. The Israelis tolerated Zionism because it did them no harm. No missiles fell upon them and the Americans protected them with money, weapons, and diplomatic cover.

But now the vaunted Israeli Iron Dome is penetrated at Iran’s will. The Iranian missiles have destroyed the American radar systems that enabled US defenses to prevent attacks on the Persian Gulf states and Israel. If Trump declares victory and goes home, Zionist Israel has no chance of survival. Israel’s nuclear weapons are cancelled by Iran’s demonstrated ability to hit the Israeli nuclear reactor at Dimona and Israel’s storage site of its nuclear weapons. Iran doesn’t need nukes to destroy Israel. A strike on the Dimona nuclear facility would suffice to spread radiation over tiny Israel.

Trump cannot stay in the war, because he cannot risk Congress rejecting his justification for attacking Iran and for continuing the war. For Trump, being defeated by Congress is worse than being defeated by Iran. Trump has until April 28 to extricate himself from the war. So what happens to Israel, defenseless from Iranian missile attack, when Trump leaves the scene? mNetanyahu, who is under indictment in Israel, also faces elections this autumn. What if he cannot put together another ruling coalition? What if the Israelis for the first time are experiencing heavy costs of the Zionist Agenda of Greater Israel and decide that the Zionist agenda does not serve the security of Israel?

There is a possibility that Trump and Netanyahu have made the Israeli population aware of the heavy cost of the Zionist agenda. I do not know what the odds might be, but it is not impossible that Israelis, with the cost of the Zionist agenda now brought home to them, will reject the Zionist agenda and announce that they are satisfied with Israel’s current borders. It is possible–I do not know the odds–that the non-Zionist population of Israel will take the agenda out of the hands of the Zionist war-mongers, and form a government that rejects the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel. This, other than Israel’s destruction, is the only avenue to peace in the Middle East.

Read more …

MAGAnomic .

Kevin Hassett on Latest Jobs Data and Economic Impacts from Iran Conflict (CTH)

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett appears on Bloomberg News to discuss the US March jobs report and oil market supply disruptions related to the military action in Iran against the impact of oil prices on the US economy. Director Hassett notes the continued goal of the Trump MAGAnomic plan is to build momentum, keep driving domestic investment and the short-term impact from Iran should mitigate quickly.

Read more …

“The Jones Act, formally known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920..”

Will the Jones Act Waiver Undermine Trump’s Immigration Policy? (Landrith)

There are moments when a temporary policy change forces an examination of deeper legal and strategic questions. The 60-day Jones Act waiver issued last month is one of those moments. While framed as a narrow national security measure, this waiver raises serious concerns about whether the very laws designed to protect American maritime strength and national sovereignty will be inadvertently undermined.


The Jones Act, formally known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, is a cornerstone of American maritime policy. It requires that goods transported between U.S. ports be carried on vessels that are built in the United States, owned by American citizens, and crewed by American mariners. The law was enacted as a vital national security safeguard. A strong domestic merchant marine provides critical sealift capacity during wartime or national emergencies, ensuring the military can move troops, equipment, and supplies without relying on potentially unreliable foreign vessels. On March 17, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) exercised its purported authority to issue a temporary waiver of the Jones Act for certain commodities.

Supporters argue this was a prudent, limited step to address immediate logistical needs amid ongoing global tensions. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has since implemented detailed compliance procedures: operators must provide advance notice, submit cargo manifests, meet vessel entry requirements, and file final voyage reports with the Maritime Administration (MARAD), which then posts them publicly.These steps show the government is attempting to maintain oversight. However, the waiver only suspends certain “navigation and vessel-inspection laws” under 46 U.S.C. § 501. It does not address — and cannot automatically override — other important bodies of federal law, particularly immigration regulations governing foreign crew members.

This is where the problem becomes serious. Most foreign mariners enter the United States under C-1/D or D crewman visas. These visas are intended for international voyages only. Federal immigration law is explicit: crewmen in this status “may not be employed in connection with domestic flights or movements of a vessel.” The law was written with the assumption that foreign vessels would engage primarily in international trade, not domestic shipping between U.S. ports. A Jones Act waiver may relax one statute, but it does not clearly authorize foreign crews to engage in purely domestic transportation under their existing immigration status.

This creates a gray area that has received far too little attention. During a time of heightened national security concerns — particularly with Operation Epic Fury underway against Iran — we should be increasing scrutiny of foreign personnel entering U.S. waters and ports, not potentially loosening controls. The risks are practical as well as legal. Immigration law imposes real obligations and penalties on both crew members and vessel operators. Overstays, unauthorized activities, and violations of crewman status carry civil and criminal consequences. Shipowners and charterers relying on this waiver may believe they are fully protected because CBP has approved the cargo movement. But satisfying one agency’s requirements does not necessarily satisfy every applicable federal statute.

Additionally, Congress recently strengthened the public reporting requirements attached to Jones Act waivers. Operators must now disclose the vessel name, flag state, ports of call, cargo details, and the specific national defense justification. MARAD is required to publish this information promptly. While transparency is generally positive, it also creates a public paper trail that could invite future congressional oversight, lawsuits, or enforcement actions if questions arise about immigration compliance.

This waiver is not occurring in a vacuum. America’s maritime industry has already been weakened over decades by high costs, regulatory burdens, and declining shipbuilding capacity. The Jones Act exists to prevent further erosion. Waiving it — even temporarily — sends a signal that domestic shipping rules can be set aside when convenient. If foreign-flag vessels and crews can now perform work traditionally reserved for Americans, there is a risk of accelerating the decline of our domestic merchant marine at the very time when great power competition and supply chain vulnerabilities make it more important than ever.

Supporters of the waiver argue it is narrowly tailored and time-limited. That may be true on paper. But policy often creates precedents. Once foreign vessels are allowed into domestic trade routes, pressure will build to extend or expand such waivers in the future. Shippers naturally prefer lower costs, and foreign operators will seek to expand their access to the lucrative U.S. domestic market and bypass visa requirements.

Before embracing this or future waivers, policymakers and industry participants should ask a disciplined set of questions: Exactly which laws have been waived? Which laws remain fully in force? Have we properly reconciled the conflict between navigation waivers and immigration restrictions? And most importantly, does this action strengthen or weaken America’s long-term maritime, immigration, and national security posture?

A temporary waiver may solve a short-term logistical problem. But if it creates uncertainty, invites legal challenges, or further weakens America’s domestic maritime capabilities or immigration enforcement capabilities, it could ultimately do more harm than good to national security. In an increasingly dangerous world, preserving the integrity and strength of the Jones Act should remain a high priority — not an afterthought.

Read more …

Nobody likes Kamala.

Kamala Calls to Oppose New Court Nominees “Before They Happen” (Turley)

Former Vice President Kamala Harris is rallying Democratic donors to oppose “additional justices” that might be nominated by President Donald Trump “before they happen.” Harris is heralding the fundraising by Josh Orton, president of the dark-money group “Demand Justice” (made infamous for its campaign to push Justice Stephen Breyer to resign). Demand Justice has pushed a radical agenda, including court packing. In a post on X, Harris highlighted a New York Times article on the “liberal organization” “preparing a multimillion–dollar effort to oppose potential Trump Supreme Court appointees before they happen.” Orton announced that “the project would cost $3 million to start and $15 million more if vacancies occurred.”


The group expressly cited the possibility of Justices Clarence Thomas (77) and Samuel Alito (76) retiring. Harris pushed people to contribute, posting that :“We must be clear eyed about what is at stake with the Supreme Court right now. We cannot allow Donald Trump to hand pick one, if not two, additional justices. The nation’s highest court must be stopped from becoming even more beholden to him.” Harris reportedly supports court packing and could use radical groups like Demand Justice to push through an expansion of the Court to produce an immediate liberal majority if Democrats take power. Harris is right about one thing. This is an clear-eyed, remorseless strategy on the left to remove an obstacle to an equally radical agenda.

Years ago, Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election.” However, he warned that “the Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described.” Therefore, the court must be packed in advance to allow these changes to occur.,mLikewise, Democratic strategist James Carville explained how this process of how the pack-to-power plan would work:

“I’m going to tell you what’s going to happen. A Democrat is going to be elected in 2028. You know that. I know that. The Democratic president is going to announce a special transition advisory committee on the reform of the Supreme Court. They’re going to recommend that the number of Supreme Court justices go from nine to 13. That’s going to happen, people.” The rhetoric for this renewed push for court packing and war chests on the left remains entirely unconnected to the actual record of conservatives on the Court, who have been repeatedly attacked by President Trump for voting against major cases by the Administration. From the tariffs decision to the expected birthright citizenship ruling, the conservative justices have routinely voted against the Administration.

Moreover, the vast majority of opinions on the Court remain unanimous or nearly unanimous. The ideological split on the Court is only present in relatively few cases each term. While those cases admittedly have significant impacts, this is not a rigidly or robotically divided court in most cases. Indeed, liberal justices have pushed back on the left calling for court packing or describing the Court as conservative or ideological. Yet, Harris continues to rally donors and voters with claims of an “activist” court.

What is most striking about the “clear-eyed” leadership of Harris is that her model for a new justice appears to be the only Biden nominee, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. Both conservative and liberal justices have publicly criticized Jackson in past opinions. Jackson has lashed out at her colleagues while adopting analysis that would effectively gut areas like First Amendment jurisprudence. Many of us have found Jackson’s opinions to be unnerving and unhinged. However, liberal groups and Harris would like to replicate her approach to jurisprudence — suggesting not only a packed court but one populated by unrestrained jurists.

For her part, Justice Jackson shocked many by effectively endorsing Harris in her presidential run. Jackson publicly praised her nomination on ABC’s The View as “historic” and something that “gives a lot of people hope.” With the millions being raised and radical groups positioning themselves for a court-packing push, there are many who see a second Harris nomination as a cause for “hope.” For the rest of us, it is not just “clear-eyed” but unblinking dread at what could await this country if this strategy succeeds in the coming years.

Read more …

He’s Obama’s best friend. And the people he would sing about, all vote Trump.

Trump; Boycott Bruce Springsteen Over ‘Incurable’ TDS (JTN)

Springsteen has been a long-time critic of the president, stating in 2016 that the “republic is under siege by a moron,” and spoke out against Trump last year in Europe. President Donald Trump called for his supporters Thursday morning to boycott famed singer Bruce Springsteen and his concerts over the icon’s “incurable case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.” The president’s call comes after Springsteen launched his new tour this week in Minneapolis, where he claimed: “The America that I love, the America … that has been a beacon of hope and liberty around the world is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent, racist, reckless and treasonous administration.”


Springsteen has been a long-time critic of the president, stating in 2016 that the “republic is under siege by a moron,” and spoke out against Trump last year in Europe. He also released a song about the fatal shooting of two protesters earlier this year titled “Streets of Minneapolis.” “Bad, and very boring singer, Bruce Springsteen, who looks like a dried up prune who has suffered greatly from the work of a really bad plastic surgeon, has long had a horrible and incurable case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, sometimes referred to as TDS,” Trump ranted in a post on Truth Social.

“The guy is a total loser who spews hate against a President who won a landslide election, including the popular vote, all seven swing states, and 86% of the counties across America,” he continued. “Under Sleepy Joe and the Dems, our country was dead, and now we have the ‘hottest’ country, by far, anywhere in the World. “MAGA should boycott his overpriced concerts, which suck,” he added. “Save your hard earned money. America is back!” Springsteen’s union, the American Federation of Musicians, slammed the president for “personally” attacking the singer, who it lauded as one of its “most celebrated members,” according to Deadline.

“Bruce Springsteen is not just a brilliant musician, he is a voice for working people, a symbol of American resilience, and an inspiration to millions in this country and around the world,” the union’s leaders said in a statement. “Musicians have the right to freedom of expression, and we stand in complete solidarity with Bruce and every member who uses their platform to speak their conscience. Local 802 and Local 47 will always defend that right.”

Read more …

“It’s hard to see how any European country will now be able and willing to trust the United States to come to its defense..”

The New York Times Made a Humiliating Error (Matt Margolis)

The New York Times set out Friday to embarrass President Donald Trump over his hardline stance on NATO. It wound up spectacularly backfiring on them. Several NATO nations have declined to join a U.S.-Israel military operation targeting Iran. Alliance members also refused Trump’s requests to deploy their forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, much to the chagrin of President Trump, who figures that if NATO allies won’t help the United States, then the alliance has become meaningless. So the paper ran a piece criticizing Trump’s threats to withdraw from the alliance, and the print edition’s headline asked a pointed question: “A North American Treaty Organization Without America?”


There’s just one problem. NATO stands for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The Times apparently forgot that detail, and, after being mocked on social media, quietly issued a correction through its communications team on X. Trump also joined in on the mocking. “The Failing New York Times, whose lack of credibility, and their constant Fake News attacks on your favorite President, ME, has caused its circulation to absolutely PLUMMET, referred to our severely weakened and extremely unreliable ‘partner,’ NATO, as the North American Treaty Organization,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social Saturday morning. ‘The correct name is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – A very interesting mistake! The hiring and educational standards have gone way down at the NYT.”

He added, “Bring back, ‘ALL THE NEWS THAT’S FIT TO PRINT’ and, Make America Great Again!” Here’s what makes this especially painful for the Times. The article wasn’t some throwaway weekend filler. It was a deliberate piece designed to frame Trump as reckless for pushing back against an alliance his critics treat as sacred. “Since his re-election, President Trump has threatened to leave the NATO alliance several times. On Wednesday, he did it again, frustrated that European nations had refused to join the so-far indecisive United States-Israeli war against Iran,” the article began. “But the more he disparages NATO and threatens to abandon it, the more hollow it becomes.”

The alliance, built after World War II to deter the Soviet Union and keep the peace in Europe, is in crisis, with some questioning whether it can survive. The Mideast war has brought existing doubts about American commitment to the alliance to the fore, argued Ivo Daalder, a former American ambassador to NATO. “It’s hard to see how any European country will now be able and willing to trust the United States to come to its defense,” he said. “Hope, perhaps. But they can’t count on it.” In his speech to the nation Wednesday night, Mr. Trump did not mention NATO, to the relief of allies. But a senior European official said he thought most Europeans did not believe that Article 5, the NATO commitment to collective defense, still had teeth.

The United States now seems part of the problem of world disorder, the official said, speaking anonymously given the sensitivity of the topic. The country is no longer the solution and the guarantor of last resort, he said. The whole premise depended on the Times looking like the serious, credentialed adults in the room. Instead, they demonstrated that they didn’t even know the true name of the organization they were defending — right there in the headline, in print, that no amount of corrections can erase.NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is scheduled to travel to Washington next week to try to smooth things over with Trump directly.

Read more …

And now they can all go after Todd Blanche..

DOJ Is Done Releasing Epstein Files (MN)

In a move sparking fresh skepticism among Americans demanding full accountability, the new acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has declared the Jeffrey Epstein files chapter closed. This came just hours after President Trump reassigned Pam Bondi, with Blanche – Trump’s former personal attorney – stepping in as acting AG and signaling it’s time to move on from the scandal. “The DOJ has now released ALL the files with respect to the Epstein saga,” Blanche stated on Fox News. He added, “I think that to the extent the Epstein files was a part of the past year of this Justice Department, it should not be a part of anything going forward.”

Jesse Watters pressed Blanche directly on whether he thought Bondi mishandled the Epstein files. Blanche responded, “First of all, I have never heard President Trump say that the Attorney General was, that anything that happened to her had anything to do with the Epstein files. So look, the Epstein files has been a saga that’s lasted for the entire for the past year.” He further defended the process, noting that Bondi and he “appeared in front of Congress voluntarily a couple weeks ago to answer any questions they had” and made documents available for review.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2039865199729983783

When Watters asked, “Who was Epstein spying for?” Blanche replied, “I don’t know that he was spying for anybody. Nobody’s ever said that.” He claimed there is “no evidence in the Epstein files” suggesting Epstein worked for a foreign country.

On the question of releasing names of men who abused girls, Blanche previously pushed back, asking “What does that mean? I don’t understand what that means.” He also stated plainly, “It’s not a crime to party with Mr. Epstein.”

https://twitter.com/Xx17965797N/status/2039969129382228244

Blanche doubled down on the administration’s position: “When Trump said let’s release the Epstein files… we did it.”The timing aligns with Trump’s decision to move Bondi to the private sector amid reported frustrations over her pace on key matters, including the Epstein files. Critics had highlighted her earlier claims of possessing a client list and distributing repetitive binders, followed by a DOJ memo stating no such list existed. Yet the assertion that “all files” are out faces immediate pushback. The DOJ reviewed roughly six million potentially responsive documents but released only about 3.5 million publicly, leaving millions still unreleased, redacted, or withheld.

This latest development deepens concerns over an Epstein cover up. FBI officers have raised alarms, with suspicions of document shredding after his death. Separately, a foreign hacker who cracked into the FBI’s Epstein files in 2023 was reportedly disgusted at the scale of child sexual abuse material uncovered, underscoring how much sensitive content may still remain hidden. Epstein survivor reactions and ongoing victim calls for transparency continue to highlight the stakes.

Blanche has remained guarded on specifics. His responses often circled back to congressional access rather than new public disclosures, while emphasizing a pivot to other fraud cases nationwide. The Epstein operation represented far more than one man’s crimes — it exposed a network that reached the highest levels of power, protected for years by institutional gatekeepers. Declaring the files “done” while millions of pages stay locked away does little to rebuild trust in a system long accused of shielding the elite. Americans who supported Trump’s mandate expect genuine sunlight on these matters, not a premature shutdown dressed as completion. The deep state’s habits of concealment die hard, and the demand for full disclosure — for the victims and the public’s right to know — will not fade quietly.

Read more …

Uomo Universalis?!

SpaceX IPO: Don’t Bet Against Elon Musk (Tim O’Brien)

Tesla isn’t just a car company, and SpaceX isn’t just a space exploration company. Elon Musk’s two marquee companies, and his many other ventures have a lot in common and complement each other by design. The common thread is that Musk wants to leave his mark on this world having changed civilization’s footprint. If he does that, he would be one of the most consequential humans who ever lived. To accomplish that, he had to create technologies that didn’t exist. Benchmark accomplishments have had to happen and still need to happen that, each one in its own right, is almost equivalent to the significance of Christopher Columbus discovering America.


In the course of creating self-driving, electric vehicles (EVs) at Tesla, Musk has been advancing robot and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. At SpaceX he’s led the way on space travel innovation in ways NASA once monopolized. He’s not doing these things just to say he did them. He’s got a vision, which he constantly talks about. He wants to colonize the Moon and Mars. He wants mankind to start to think bigger. His company Neuralink has created a brain-computer interface that translates neural signals into actions. The initial applications for this are for disabled people who can be aided by his devices which control computers and robotic arms with thought. As this technology evolves, it’s not hard to imagine how it can be used by able-bodied or disabled astronauts and human colonizers on other celestial bodies.

Musk’s satellite internet provider company Starlink is yet another capability that may become critical to realizing his vision in space. Already, the company operates thousands of satellites in low-Earth orbit to give users on the ground wireless internet access. While rural users and people in Third World have been some of the early beneficiaries of the technology, its future applications are limited only by Musk’s imagination. Another little-known Musk company is called The Boring Company, which is a tunnel-building firm. Right now, that company’s technology and capabilities are used to more efficiently build affordable tunnels faster. In Las Vegas, you can go to the Convention Center Loop and see how Teslas are used underground to transport people rather than use rail cars.

It’s never a good idea to judge a tech company by the first uses of its technology or platform. If you did that when Amazon first started, you would have just seen that company as an online bookstore, which is what it was at first, but that was never founder Jeff Bezos’s full vision for the company. The same is true here. Long before anyone took him seriously on any of this, Musk started seriously looking at what it would take for him to realize his vision. He knew he had the money to get started, and he knew if his ventures were successful, the money to further invest in his ideas would come.

So he worked backward. He started with that wild vision, and then he followed the pathway back to our current reality. With that, he had a list of technologies and solutions that needed to be invented. He knew the kind of companies that needed to be started. And he knew what problems those companies needed to solve in their infancy before they could do the big stuff. To date, all the headlines around Tesla was its EV advantage, helping people and governments realize the benefits of electric vehicles. But already, it’s possible to see that this was just a baby step for Tesla. The autonomous vehicle development at the company made it as much a robot company as an automotive one. In March, Musk’s Tesla and SpaceX launched a joint venture to consolidate all phases of semiconductor production in the same plant. That venture is called Terafab.

Self-sufficiency To more fully appreciate what Musk is doing, a term comes to mind – self-sufficiency. Musk realized he couldn’t achieve his master vision if he were counting on others and other firms for key parts of the puzzle. He needed the self-sufficiency it will take to get to Mars. He needed it to generate all the sustainable energy you need from the sun, to use that energy to power satellite networks. He’s needed it to go about city-building, for underground tunnel construction, and to do all of this while creating your own chips, doing the work with your own people, your own robots, and using your own AI platforms.

Compatibility is just as important and is part of the self-sufficiency equation. Anyone who has worked in tech knows that once you have two separate companies, a good deal of time, effort and work is focused on helping two companies’ technologies to talk to each other and work with each other. Musk’s consolidated approach eliminates a lot of that. When you look at it that way, the tunnel company makes perfect sense. Underground tunnels enable you to create more controlled environments on planets and moons. They reduce certain risks associated with living in these harsh environments, and they make the notion of living there more sustainable and a pragmatic possibility.

My colleague Rick Moran wrote about the potential opportunities that could come from mining asteroids, and in the process, he touched on the planned SpaceX Initial Public Offering (IPO). He also mentioned Musk’s role in all of this, which cannot be overstated. At the moment, Musk is even looking at ways to build datacenters in space which would generate power to be used here on Earth. Once again, Musk focuses on solving a real problem on Earth that falls right in line with giving him the new tools he needs to achieve his goal of expanding the human race to the moon and beyond. Since Musk is who he is and has lived the life he’s lived, he’s learned not to hit people with his grand vision all at once. It’s too easy to laugh off a guy like that. He’s learned to reveal his master vision over time to provide context by emphasizing his near-term focus.

Henry Ford spent his entire life on the automobile, and society was never the same as a result. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates spent their active careers personalizing computer technology, and once again, society was never the same. Musk has always thought so much bigger than that, that he’s had to learn to rein himself in so that he tends to talk about each step in its own time. NASA’s Artemis mission to the moon, along with increasing disclosures centered on that SpaceX IPO are making it more obvious that Musk’s disparate ventures are starting to converge. It’s becoming more apparent what he’s ultimately trying to do, and it’s not just talk.

https://twitter.com/defense_civil25/status/2039482814031167526

NASA has already selected the SpaceX Human Landing System (HLS) for Artemis as the means to land people on the moon. SpaceX’s Raptor engines and reusable rocket technology may also come to play.

https://twitter.com/theinformant_x/status/1986890516043337983

Not coincidentally, SpaceX this week took a major first step towards its IPO which will generate the cash SpaceX will need to further realize its potential and Musk’s vision. According to Bloomberg, SpaceX’s IPO could be the largest public offering ever after filing with the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). The newswire reported that SpaceX could raise up to $75 billion through the IPO.

Reuters has reported that while the company is valued at $1.25 trillion right now, Musk and SpaceX are seeking a valuation of $1.8 trillion through the IPO. While no official date has been disclosed, reports are to expect it in June. If you’ve only been casually paying attention to Musk and his various business ventures because they may have seemed too far out for you to get your head around, now may be the time to start paying closer attention. Even if all you have is a 401(k) or an IRA account, chances are pretty good that a part of your own nest egg will depend on Musk to achieve some of those goals of his.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 252025
 


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.

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 202025
 


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/MAGAVoice/status/1946637936180736461

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 272025
 


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.

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 222025
 


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.

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 112024
 


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.

 

 

 

 

 

Nov 072024
 


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.

 

 

 

 

 

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.