E. Jean Carroll Archives - The Automatic Earth

“All hell is gonna break out” if the hostages aren’t released by January 20th.

Hamas is still holding 100 hostages including 7 American citizens.

Today is day 451 in captivity.

Biden has basically abandoned them. pic.twitter.com/XPudyxjmBx

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) December 31, 2024

Eva

What happens next in Germany is decisive for Europe’s entire future. If Germans finally let go of their World War II guilt complex, it’s game over for the globalist powers. Germany is/was their main stronghold. That’s why they’re having such a meltdown over Musk endorsing @AfD. pic.twitter.com/2MgVCrQei3

— Eva Vlaardingerbroek (@EvaVlaar) December 31, 2024

“..ceased to exist” as a functional state due to widespread graft and mismanagement..”

“Ukrainian leaders have transformed the nation into a “concentration camp..”

• Ukraine ‘Has Ceased To Exist’ – Ex-Commander (RT)

The Ukrainian state has essentially ceased to exist, is plagued by endemic institutional failure and corruption, with Kiev’s troops continuing to hold on by sheer will alone, a former commander has argued. He also warned that Ukraine’s defenses could collapse, allowing Russia to march all the way to the Dnieper River. In an interview with Novyni Live on Monday, Vladimir Shylov, former commander of the 3rd Company in the 134th Separate Territorial Defense Battalion, lashed out at Ukraine’s political leadership, stating that the country has “ceased to exist” as a functional state due to widespread graft and mismanagement. Shylov expressed concern that these woes could allow Russian forces to increase their gains, warning that they may be able to overrun frontline positions in Donbass and reach as far as the Dnieper River. The advances could be facilitated by internal chaos, he added, stating “In our country, everything is a mess…the front is holding only thanks to the Ukrainian people.”

Ukrainian leaders have transformed the nation into a “concentration camp,” Shylov claimed, highlighting systemic failures across all branches of government, including the legislative, executive, and judicial sectors. Shylov also specifically criticized the country’s leader, Vladimir Zelensky, for what he described as a blatant neglect of his defense responsibilities, alleging that his government had ignored Western warnings of a Russian offensive prior to the special military operation, resulting in the inadequate preparation of Kiev’s forces. The ex-commander went on to comment on Ukraine’s ongoing incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region, portraying it as a political ploy without any real strategic military value. He argued that the Ukrainian offensive had turned out to be a symbolic gesture which does not compensate for the substantial territorial losses Ukraine has suffered, particularly in Donbass.

Over the past several months, Russia has made significant gains in Donbass and elsewhere, with President Vladimir Putin noting that regular advances now amount to kilometers rather than hundreds of meters. Russian Defense Minister Andrey Belousov said earlier this month that Ukraine had lost one million service members since February 2022, with more than half of that number in 2024 alone, adding that Moscow’s forces are in full control of the strategic initiative. Meanwhile, Ukrainian battlefield commanders continue to complain of a critical shortage of manpower, despite Kiev implementing stricter mobilization rules and lowering the draft age from 27 to 25 this spring.

“..the full-scale aggression of a mad state against a civilized one.”

• Trump Eager To Settle Ukraine Conflict – Zelensky (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump is fully capable of achieving peace in Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky has said, suggesting that Trump understands the necessity of containing Russia. Zelensky made the remarks in his New Year’s address on Tuesday, stressing that “Ukraine is not alone” in its conflict with Russia, while praising Kiev’s Western allies, particularly the US, for their consistent support. He recalled conversations he had with both US President Joe Biden and Trump, noting that he has “no doubt that the new American president is willing and capable of achieving peace and ending [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s aggression.” According to Zelensky, Trump “understands that the first is impossible without the second. Because this is not a street fight where you have to calm down both sides,” calling the conflict “the full-scale aggression of a mad state against a civilized one.”

“I believe that we, together with the United States, are capable of exerting that force. Of compelling Russia into a just peace,” he said, adding, however, that “a truly just peace cannot be based on the principle of ‘let’s start with a clean slate,’” due to the numerous casualties and widespread destruction in the conflict. Trump vowed during the 2024 election campaign to swiftly end the Ukraine conflict, with his team’s reported peace plans calling for a 20-year delay in Ukraine’s NATO membership aspirations, a freeze of the conflict, and the establishment of a demilitarized zone patrolled by European peacekeepers to monitor the ceasefire.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has signaled that while Moscow is open to talks with the Trump administration, it will not accept NATO membership for Ukraine in any form. Lavrov stressed that Russia seeks a legally binding peace agreement ensuring its long-term security and opposes any freeze of the conflict that would merely prolong the hostilities. Moscow has said Kiev’s aspirations to join NATO are among the root causes of the conflict and insists that all the goals of its military operation, including Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification, must be achieved. Russia has also signaled that it is ready to declare an immediate ceasefire and begin peace talks as soon as Kiev begins withdrawing from all Russian territory, including the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye.

Ain’t seen nothing yet.

• Fuel Prices in Europe Surge Amid Looming End to Russian Gas Transit (Sp.)

Gas prices in Europe have shot up to $536 per 1,000 cubic meters during ICE trading, the highest since November 27, 2023, amid expectations of halted Russian gas transit through Ukraine starting January 1. Prices rose by over 4% since the day’s start. February futures at the Dutch TTF hub exceeded $536 per 1,000 cubic meters (€50 per MWh). The current transit agreement, allowing the transport of 40 billion cubic meters annually through Ukraine, expires on January 1. Russian President Vladimir Putin confirmed that no new agreement would be signed before the New Year, and Kiev announced plans to halt Russian gas transit at 8:00 a.m. Moscow time on January 1.

Ukraine stated, however, that it is open to resuming transit upon the European Commission’s request, provided it is non-Russian gas. Putin suggested contracts with third-party suppliers, including Turkish, Hungarian, Slovak, or Azerbaijani companies. Meanwhile, gas transit bids from Russia through Ukraine for January 1 have dropped to zero, according to data from the Ukrainian Gas Transmission System Operator. Supplies will end at 8:00 a.m. Moscow time (05:00 GMT) on January 1, according to a contractual document on gas transit. Ukrainian authorities have repeatedly stated they do not plan to extend the transit agreement.

“Ukrainian officials confirmed the cessation of transit, calling it a “historic event” in the interests of national security..”

• Russia Halts Gas Supplies To EU Via Ukraine (RT)

Russia has officially ceased gas transit through Ukraine as of 8am Moscow time on January 1, confirming the expected end of contracts that have been in place since 2019. Russian energy giant Gazprom announced the halt after negotiations to extend the transit agreements with Ukrainian companies Naftogaz and the Gas Transmission System Operator of Ukraine fell through. In a press release issued on Wednesday, Gazprom said, “Due to the repeated and clear refusal of the Ukrainian side to extend these agreements, Gazprom was deprived of the technical and legal opportunity to supply gas for transit through Ukraine starting from January 1, 2025.” As a result, gas supplies to Europe via this route are now completely suspended. The gas pipeline that traverses Ukraine leads into Slovakia, which had hoped to continue receiving Russian gas and urged Ukraine to extend the transit agreements.

In response to Kiev’s decision to stop the gas transit, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico threatened last week to cut electricity supplies to Ukraine. The five-year contract for Russian gas deliveries through Ukraine expired despite ongoing long-term agreements between Gazprom and several European buyers. Ukrainian officials confirmed the cessation of transit, calling it a “historic event” in the interests of national security. Kiev has long denied the possibility of a new transit deal with Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed the finality of the situation during his annual press conference on December 19, stating, “This transit contract will not exist anymore, it’s clear. But we will manage; Gazprom will manage.”

“The tech mogul’s stay at Mar-a-Lago allegedly began around Election Day..”

• Musk Living In Trump’s House – NYT (RT)

Billionaire Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk has reportedly been living in a cottage on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida since the US presidential election in November, according to The New York Times. Musk took up residence at the Banyan Cottage, which typically rents for $2,000 per night and is situated just a few hundred feet from Trump’s main house, providing Musk with easy access to the president-elect, the NYT reported on Monday, citing a person familiar with the property. This arrangement underscores Musk’s significant influence on Trump’s transition team and has allowed him frequent visits with the president-elect, including dinners and policy discussions, the newspaper noted. Since publicly endorsing Trump following a failed assassination attempt in July, Musk has gradually become one of his key advisors on both policy and personnel decisions.

He attended meetings at the Mar-a-Lago Teahouse, participated in phone calls with foreign leaders, and involved his employees in vetting candidates for senior administration roles. Recently, Musk joined Trump for dinner with Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, a rival in the tech industry. Musk’s financial contributions to Trump’s campaign have also been substantial: he reportedly spent around $250 million in the final months of the election cycle to support Trump. This level of backing has cemented Musk’s role as one of the most important donors and social media promoters for the president-elect. The tech mogul’s stay at Mar-a-Lago allegedly began around Election Day, during which he watched the returns with Trump.

He left the property briefly around Christmas but is expected to return soon, the newspaper wrote, noting that the exact amount Musk will pay for his stay at Mar-a-Lago remains unclear. Vice President-elect JD Vance has also been frequently seen at Mar-a-Lago during the transition period. Last week, Trump posted what appears to be a private text to Musk on his social media platform, extending an invitation to visit Mar-a-Lago. Screenshots shared by several outlets included Musk’s acknowledgment of the invitation but did not confirm whether he planned to attend. ”Where are you? When are you coming to the ‘Center of the Universe,’ Mar-a-Lago?” Trump wrote in a soon-deleted post, adding, “We miss you and X! New Year’s Eve is going to be AMAZING!!!” before signing off with his initials, “DJT.”

They have no idea what to do with his comments.

• Musk Predicts Election Loss For ‘Chancellor Oaf Schitz’ (RT)

Elon Musk has forecasted that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who he mockingly referred to as “Oaf Schitz,” as well as his Social Democratic Party (SPD) will lose the Federal Republic’s upcoming parliamentary elections. Germany will hold snap elections at the end of February; Scholz’s ‘traffic light’ coalition government has collapsed over disagreements regarding Ukraine aid, economic reforms and climate policy. Earlier this month, the SPD leader lost a vote of confidence in parliament, leading to its dissolution. According to Statista, 56% of Germans believe Scholz has done a poor job, while 37% are satisfied with his performance. The rating was influenced by Germany’s economic stagnation, his migration policies, and a general perception of ineffective government.

Musk, who has been a consistent critic of the current German government, took a jab at Scholz on Monday, predicting that “Chancellor Oaf Schitz or whatever his name is will lose.” The tycoon also suggested that the right-wing, anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party – which he previously praised as the country’s “last spark of hope” – would “win an epic victory” in the election. Musk’s apparent endorsement, however, has sparked a backlash from German officials, who described his comments as “intrusive and arrogant,” suggesting they constitute unwelcome interference.

Chancellor Scholz noted that the country’s future “will not be decided by the owners of social media channels” but rather by the country’s “vast majority of reasonable and decent people.” The billionaire’s comments follow a terrorist attack on a Christmas market in Magdeburg earlier this month, in which a car rammed into a crowd, killing five people and injuring nearly 200. The incident, linked to a Saudi asylum seeker, has intensified criticism of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government, with opposition parties and far-right groups blaming lax migration policies ahead of Germany’s snap elections.

Yeah, if you’re a head of state, you really want to get into a war of words with a foreign citizen. That shows statesmanship..

• Scholz Hits Back At Musk In New Year’s Address (RT)

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz took a veiled swipe at tech billionaire Elon Musk during his annual New Year’s Eve address, warning that the country’s future will be decided by its citizens, not the owners of social media platforms. In a televised message on Tuesday, Scholz highlighted national unity and called for solidarity amid economic challenges. However, he also addressed a more contentious issue: Alleged “foreign interference” in German politics, particularly by Musk, who has openly supported the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party as the country’s “last spark of hope.” “Where Germany goes from here will be decided by you – the citizens. It will not be decided by the owners of social media channels,” Scholz said, without calling the X owner out by name.

“In our debates, one might be forgiven for thinking that the more extreme an opinion is, the more attention it garners. But it won’t be the person who yells the loudest who will decide where Germany goes from here. Rather, that will be up to the vast majority of reasonable and decent people,” he added. Musk’s recent endorsements of the AfD, which is under surveillance by domestic intelligence for its alleged “extremist” views, has drawn widespread criticism from German officials. The billionaire, a key adviser to US President-elect Donald Trump, has been vocal on social media and in opinion pieces, praising the AfD and criticizing mainstream German politicians. Friedrich Merz, the head of the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), called Musk’s endorsement “overbearing and presumptuous.” Lars Klingbeil, co-chairman of Scholz’s Social Democrats, compared Musk to Russian President Vladimir Putin, claiming that both aim to weaken Germany and plunge it into chaos.

A government spokeswoman, Christiane Hoffmann, said at a news conference on Monday that while everyone has the right to an opinion, Musk is attempting to influence the German election. Scholz’s coalition government collapsed in November over disagreements regarding Ukraine aid and economic policies. The chancellor lost a confidence vote in December, leading to the dissolution of parliament and the scheduling of snap elections on February 23. The chancellor’s New Year’s Eve address also touched on other pressing issues, including Germany’s flagging economy, the recent attack on a Christmas market in Magdeburg, and the upcoming 35th anniversary of German reunification. Scholz urged Germans to resist manipulation and “not let ourselves be played off each other.”

According to Statista, 56% of Germans believe Scholz has done a poor job, while 37% are satisfied with his performance. This rating reflects concerns over Germany’s economic stagnation, his migration policies, and a general perception of ineffective governance. The AfD is currently polling second with around 20%, behind the CDU/CSU bloc at about 31%. However, a strong performance by the AfD could make forming a government more challenging, as all mainstream parties have ruled out a coalition with it.

AI is very dangerous. Make no mistake.

• Encode Joins Musk in Fight Against OpenAI’s For-Profit Transition (ET)

Encode, an artificial intelligence (AI) advocacy group, filed a brief in support of Elon Musk’s recent lawsuit against OpenAI, arguing that enabling the conversion toward a for-profit entity could endanger public interest. Musk filed a lawsuit against OpenAI last month, arguing that the entity was formed on promises that it would retain its nonprofit status focused on safe AI use. Musk said he invested in the project based on this premise. Disrupting the status quo “will seriously harm plaintiffs and the public at large,” the complaint said. In the brief, Encode is described as “a youth-led organization advocating for safe and responsible artificial intelligence (AI)” with “a network of over 1,000 volunteers across 40 countries.” On Dec. 27, Encode filed a proposed amicus curiae brief with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland Division, supporting Musk’s motion for a preliminary injunction against the transition.

“If the world truly is at the cusp of a new age of artificial general intelligence (AGI), then the public has a profound interest in having that technology controlled by a public charity legally bound to prioritize safety and the public benefit rather than an organization focused on generating financial returns for a few privileged investors,” the brief said. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has admitted that AI poses severe risks to humanity, Encode said. Altman signed a statement along with numerous luminaries, including Nobel Prize winners, saying that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority.” People worldwide are already facing challenges from AI technologies including disinformation, algorithmic bias, labor displacement, and democratic erosion, which makes keeping AI safe a “pressing, immediate concern,” the advocacy group said.

OpenAI currently runs a capped-profit subsidiary that is fully controlled by the OpenAI nonprofit parent company, which is expected to ensure the safe use of AGI. In Delaware, where OpenAI is incorporated, the boards of nonprofit charitable corporations owe fiduciary duties toward their beneficiaries, which in this case would be humanity, Encode said. By transferring operations to a Delaware public benefit corporation (PBC), OpenAI’s priorities would shift from ensuring the safety of advanced AI to shareholder interests. Allowing such a transition is harmful to the public interest, the brief said. In a Dec. 27 blog post titled “Why OpenAI’s Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission”, OpenAI said that transitioning to a PBC would be best for the long-term success of the nonprofit’s mission to ensure that AI benefits all of humanity.

“The PBC is a structure used by many others that requires the company to balance shareholder interests, stakeholder interests, and a public benefit interest in its decision making”, the post said. OpenAI began as a research lab in 2015. It had a goal of advancing AI in a way “most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return,” the post said. Out of the $137 million in donations it collected initially, less than a third came from Musk. After OpenAI management realized the project would require “far more capital,” they created the current for-profit structure controlled by the nonprofit in a bid to collect funds from investors. According to OpenAI, the new PBC “will run and control OpenAI’s operations and business, while the non-profit will hire a leadership team and staff to pursue charitable initiatives in sectors such as health care, education, and science.”

In a Dec. 13 post, OpenAI had dismissed claims made by Musk in his lawsuit. It said the lawsuit was the fourth legal challenge against OpenAI by the billionaire in less than a year. “In 2017, Elon not only wanted, but actually created, a for-profit as OpenAI’s proposed new structure. When he didn’t get majority equity and full control, he walked away and told us we would fail,” it said. “Now that OpenAI is the leading AI research lab and Elon runs a competing AI company, he’s asking the court to stop us from effectively pursuing our mission.” Besides the ethical concerns, Musk alleged in the complaint that OpenAI and its investor Microsoft roughly control around 70 percent of the generative AI market and engage in “anticompetitive conduct.”

OpenAI and Microsoft ban investors from funding OpenAI’s competitors, specifically Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI, it said. “OpenAI’s path from a nonprofit to for-profit behemoth is replete with per se anticompetitive practices, flagrant breaches of its charitable mission, and rampant self-dealing,” the complaint said. xAI was formed in July 2023. The company introduced the Grok-1 AI model on the X social media platform a few months later, in November 2023, and has introduced updates to the tool. In May, xAI raised $6 billion in funding. Last week, xAI said it has closed the funding and that the company’s progress is “accelerating rapidly.”

30-year old hearsay devoid of any evidence. Wonder what the Supreme Court thinks of that..

• Appeals Court Upholds Trump’s Liability in E. Jean Carroll Case (Spencer)

The election is over, Trump has been reelected, but the lawfare continues nonetheless. On Monday, a federal appeals court that must have been under the influence of some psychotropic drug upheld Trump’s liability for supposedly sexually abusing the partisan fantasist E. Jean Carroll in a Bloomingdale’s dressing room sometime in the 1990s. Carroll’s story has more holes than a slice of Swiss cheese that has been used for target practice, but despite lacking any evidence, she keeps winning in court — believe all women, doncha know, even the crazy mendacious ones. Trump’s team is going to keep on appealing, and that’s good. Maybe sanity will prevail at some point. Fox News reported Monday that the appeals court’s is “a blow to the president-elect,” and leaves him “on the hook for the $5 million payout ordered by the jury.”

An unnamed panel of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which consists of 27 judges in all, issued an unsigned ruling claiming that Trump’s attorneys had not succeeded in establishing “that the district court erred in any of the challenged rulings.” The Trump team “has not carried his burden to show that any claimed error or combination of claimed errors affected his substantial rights as required to warrant a new trial.” In the immortal words of Peter Lorre in the cinematic classic “All Through the Night,” “But that’s silly!” Back in Sept. 2024, the Post Millennial reported that Trump attorney Will Scharf, “speaking at Trump Tower in New York City after a hearing to ask to overturn the final verdict against Trump in the E Jean Carroll case,” pointed out quite correctly that the alleged victim’s story “at its heart is an utterly implausible, he said she said story.”

Serious allegations of this kind are supposed to be established on the basis of evidence and witnesses, but Scharf noted that in this case, there was “no corroboration for anything” that Carroll claimed about what went on between her and Trump. The fix was in from the beginning: Carroll’s attorneys never produced any “corroborating witnesses” or “confirmatory DNA.” She filed no police report at the time of the supposed incident, and couldn’t even say when exactly her encounter with Trump was supposed to have happened. “No surveillance evidence or witnesses have ever been found or come forward confirming any asked of E Jean Carroll’s story.” Even worse, the case only went to court in the first place because corrupt leftists changed the rules so that they could get Trump.

As PJM’s Ben Bartee noted back in Apr. 2023, Carroll was only able to file her case at all because of “an exception carved out in the New York state legal code that many speculate was crafted especially to enable the prosecution of Trump.” New York Magazine explained at that time that Carroll was able to file her suit “because of the Adult Survivors Act, a new New York state law that went into effect that same month giving adult survivors of sexual misconduct a one-year window to file civil cases that would otherwise be outside the statute of limitations.” So New York changed the law to get Trump, Carroll took immediate advantage and now the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is playing along with this vicious and partisan charade.

There are more problems besides all that. In 2019, Carroll appeared on the cover of New York Magazine beside a large headline that read: “This is what I was wearing 23 years ago when Donald Trump attacked me in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room.” Yet the Donna Karan dress she was wearing on the magazine cover wasn’t manufactured at the time of the alleged encounter between Trump and Carroll. And while the magazine cover is certain that the “attack” took place in 1996, Carroll has never been that definite.

This sort of thing should have gotten the case thrown out of court on the first day, but that would require those who brought it into court in the first place to be interested in justice when all they really wanted to do was get Trump. And get him they did: Fox notes that the appeals court’s ruling “comes after a New York jury last year found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll, a former Elle magazine advice columnist, in the dressing room of a Bergdorf Goodman store in the mid-1990s—and for subsequently defaming her when she came forward with her story during his first term in office.”

This isn’t over. Steven Cheung, a Trump transition spokesman and incoming White House communications director, stated: “The American People have re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate, and they demand an immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system and a swift dismissal of all of the Witch Hunts, including the Democrat-funded Carroll Hoax, which will continue to be appealed. We look forward to uniting our country in the new administration as President Trump makes America great again.” So do we, Mr. Cheung. We look forward to the day when all the plotters against our free republic are unmasked, and E. Jean Carroll is publicly known as what she really is. Are there still courts that are free enough of corruption and politicization to bring that day closer?

Jack is licking his wounds.

• Jack Smith Drops Appeal Of Classified Docs Case (JTN)

Special counsel Jack Smith on Monday withdrew his appeals request for his Florida classified documents case against President-elect Donald Trump’s co-defendants. The attorney dropped his appeal against Trump last month after Trump won reelection to the White House, citing a Justice Department policy not to prosecute sitting presidents. Trump will be sworn in next month. Smith previously accused Trump in 2022 of improperly taking classified documents from the White House to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. But the case was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in July, who cited the constitutionality of Smith’s appointment as special counsel.

Trump and the co-defendants, longtime Trump aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago employee Carlos De Oliveira, all pleaded not guilty to the charges. The new order withdraws Smith’s appeal in the prosecution of the two co-defendants, per ABC News. Smith also passed the appeal to federal prosecutors in Florida, including U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Markenzy Lapointe. It is not clear whether the prosecutors intend to continue the appeal. Smith is expected to step down from his post ahead of Trump’s inauguration next month.

Time for Trump to apply force. Without a speaker in place, everything he wants will be delayed.

• Even With Trump’s Endorsement, Johnson’s Speakership Is Far From Secure (JTN)

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R., La., faces a difficult path toward retaining the speaker’s gavel in the next Congress, even with President-elect Donald Trump’s endorsement. When the House votes on Friday, lawmakers will hold a formal contest in which the prospective leader must secure a majority of votes to lead the chamber. That process is likely to give irate conservatives an opportunity to keep the Louisiana Republican from returning to the top job. The House elections returned a narrow Republican majority, which will temporarily shrink as Trump has tapped members of the lower chamber to serve in his administration. In early 2023, Kevin McCarthy, then the Republican leader, struggled to claim the gavel as roughly 20 Republicans sought to extract budgetary concessions from him. McCarthy ultimately lost the post when roughly half a dozen Republicans voted with Democrats to boot him from the job.

Republicans won 220 seats in the 2024 House elections, compared to the 215 that went for the Democrats. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., left Congress after Trump named him as his pick for attorney general, though he later withdrew himself from consideration. His seat will not be filled by the time of the leadership contest. At least some journalists, however, have raised questions as to whether Gaetz may yet take the oath of office to vote this week as he was elected to the next Congress. Johnson will face a narrower majority than McCarthy did two years prior, and, arguably, a more frustrated bloc of budget hawks. Johnson only claimed the gavel after several other Republicans failed to win the support of the disparate wings of the conference. But Trump’s endorsement could prove a boon to him as he seeks to unify Republicans.

“Speaker Mike Johnson is a good, hard working, religious man. He will do the right thing, and we will continue to WIN. Mike has my Complete & Total Endorsement. MAGA!!!” Trump posted on Truth Social. That endorsement seems to have one over at least one member of the anti-McCarthy bloc that brought down Johnson’s predecessor. “Trump endorsing Johnson is ‘art of the deal’ level practicality. We could never have held up McCarthy two years ago for concessions if a Trump certification hung in the balance,” Gaetz posted. “Now, it does. We were able to hold up McCarthy because Republican voters weren’t all that eager to see us getting back to being Biden’s bitch (which Kevin ultimately did anyway). The resistance to [Johnson] is now futile. Let’s work to make him the best version of himself (which was more like the 2023 vintage of Mike).”

Unfortunately for Johnson, Gaetz’s ability to vote at all appears unlikely. Other dissidents, however, have suggested they will not support Johnson, with Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Victoria Sparz, R-Ind., among the most prominent of his critics. “I respect and support President Trump, but his endorsement of Mike Johnson is going to work out about as well as his endorsement of Speaker Paul Ryan,” Massie posted on X. “We’ve seen Johnson partner with the democrats to send money to Ukraine, authorize spying on Americans, and blow the budget.” “Mike Johnson is the next Paul Ryan. On January 3rd, 2025, I won’t be voting for Mike Johnson. I hope my colleague will join me because history will not give America another ‘do-over,’” he added.

“There are a lot of other people who are interested,” Spartz said Monday on “Fox and Friends.” “He didn’t deliver for President Trump, too, what he promised just recently.” “He needs to be able to convince the American people that he is able to do it,” she added.

“These groups form a censorship consortium where the suppression of speech attracts millions in federal dollars.”

• Let’s Get the United States Out of the Censorship Business (Turley)

On this New Year’s Eve, billions of people will gather with friends to ring in 2025 with the hope of a better year to come. For the first time in many years, free-speech advocates have a reason to celebrate. With 2024, we will say goodbye to one of the most reviled offices in the Biden Administration: The Global Engagement Center. I discuss the Center in my recent book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage as one of the most active components in the massive censorship system funded by the Biden Administration. The demise of the GEC is a good start. However, like weight loss resolutions, it will take much more of a commitment if we are going to restore free speech in the United States. It is time to make the ultimate resolution to rip out the censorship root and stem from our government.

This month, the Biden Administration fought to keep the GEC funded, but Republicans refused to include it in the continuing resolution for the budget. However, even with the closure of this one office, Biden will leave behind the most comprehensive censorship system in the history of the United States. Over the last three years, many of us have detailed a comprehensive system of grants to academic and third party organizations to create blacklists or to pressure advertisers to withdraw support for targeted sites. The subjects for censorship ranged from election fraud to social justice to climate change. I testified at the first hearing by the special committee investigating the censorship system funded or coordinated by the Biden Administration.

It is an unprecedented alliance of corporate, government, and academic groups against free speech in the United States. The Biden Administration established the most anti-free speech record since the Adams Administration. House investigations showed the critical role played by government officials in “switchboarding,” or channeling demands for removal or bans in social media. Officials evaded the limits of the First Amendment by using these groups as surrogates for censorship. Even with the elimination of the GEC, other offices remain in various agencies, including the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) in the Department of Homeland Security, which emerged as one of the critical control centers in this system.

CISA head Jen Easterly declared that her agency’s mandate over critical infrastructure would be extended to include “our cognitive infrastructure.” That includes not just “disinformation” and “misinformation,” but combating “malinformation” – described as information “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.” These groups form a censorship consortium where the suppression of speech attracts millions in federal dollars. Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) was created in association with Stanford University “at the request of DHS/CISA.” EIP supplied a “centralized reporting system” to process what were known as “Jira tickets” targeting unacceptable views. It would include not only politicians but commentators and pundits as well as the satirical site The Babylon Bee.

Stanford’s Virality Project pushed to censor even true facts since “true stories … could fuel hesitancy” over taking the vaccine or other measures. Emails show government officials stressing that they could not be seen as “openly endors[ing]” censorship while other groups sought to minimize public scrutiny of their work. For example, one article featured the work of Kate Starbird, director and co-founder of the University of Washington Center for an Informed Public. In one communication, Starbird cautioned against giving examples of disinformation to keep them from being used by critics, adding “since everything is politicized and disinformation inherently political, every example is bait.” Likewise, University of Michigan’s James Park is shown pitching that school’s WiseDex First Pitch program, promising that “our misinformation service helps policy makers at platforms who want to . . . push responsibility for difficult judgments to someone outside the company . . . by externalizing the difficult responsibility of censorship.”

“Trump for his part has less than zero incentive to be dragged into a further quagmire; leave that to the clueless European chihuahuas.”

• 2025: A Second Renaissance, Or Chaos? (Pepe Escobar)

FLORENCE – It’s a dazzling Tuscan winter morning, and I am inside the legendary Dominican church of Santa Maria Novella, founded in the early 13th century and finally consecrated in 1420, in a very special place in History of Art: right in front of one of the monochrome frescos painted in 1447-1448 by master of perspective Paolo Uccello, depicting the Universal Deluge. It’s as if Paolo Uccello was depicting us – in our current times of trouble. So inspired by neoplatonic superstar Marsilio Ficino – immortalized in a chic red robe by Ghirlandaio at the Cappella Tornabuoni – I tried to pull off a back to the future and ideally imagine who and what Paolo Uccello would feature in his depiction of our current deluge.

Let’s start with the positives. 2024 was the Year of the BRICS – with the merit for all the accomplishments going for the tireless work of the Russian presidency. 2024 was also the Year of the Axis of Resistance – until the serial blows suffered during the past few months, a serious challenge which will propel its rejuvenation. And 2024 was the year that defined the lineaments of the endgame in the proxy war in Ukraine: what remains to be seen is how deep the “rules-based international order” will be buried in the black soil of Novorossiya. Now let’s turn to the auspicious prospects ahead. 2025 will be the year of consolidation of China as the paramount geoeconomics force on the planet. It will be the year where the defining battle of the 21st century – Eurasia v. NATOstan – will be sharpened in an array of unpredictable vectors. And it will be the year of advancing, interlocking connectivity corridors – the defining factor in Eurasia integration.

Not by accident Iran is central to this interlocking connectivity – from the Strait of Hormuz (through which transits, daily, at least 23% of the world’s oil) to the port of Chabahar, which links West Asia with South Asia. Connectivity corridors to watch are the return of one of the top Pipelineistan sagas, the 1,800 km-long Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline; the International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC), which links three BRICS (Russia-Iran-India) and several aspiring BRICS partners; the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the flagship Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) project; and last but not least, the fast advancing Northern Sea Route (or Northern Silk Road, as the Chinese call it), which will eventually become the cheapest and fastest alternative to the Suez canal.

A few days before the start of Trump 2.0 in Washington, Russia and Iran will finally, officially sign a comprehensive strategic partnership deal in Moscow, over two years in the making: once again, a key deal between two top BRICS, with immense, cascading repercussions in Eurasia integration terms. A completely sealed channel of negotiation Dmitri Trenin, respected member of Russia’s Foreign and Defense Policy Council, has what is so far the most realist road map for an acceptable end of the proxy war in Ukraine. “Acceptable” does not even begin to describe it – because from the point of view of the collective West political “elites” which bet the farm and the bank on this war, nothing is acceptable except Russia’s strategic defeat, which will never happen.

As it stands, President Putin is in fact containing elite sectors in Moscow who favor not only cutting off the head of the snake but the body as well. Trump for his part has less than zero incentive to be dragged into a further quagmire; leave that to the clueless European chihuahuas.

Everything linked to healthcare will be fought in bloody battles. RFK, Makary, Bhattacharya et al. Too much money involved. Nothing to do with care quality. A sad picture.

• COVID Catechists Come For Incoming NIH Chief Bhattacharya (JTN)

Proponents of once-dominant COVID-19 views and policy, from the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 to mandatory lockdowns, remote learning, masking and vaccines, often chose between two strategies to marginalize dissenters. They flooded medical licensing boards with complaints against doctors such as Minnesota’s Scott Jensen, who faced new investigations from Democratic Gov. Tim Walz’s administration after announcing his candidacy for governor, or sought to destroy their reputations in general, scientific and social media, calling them racist, cold-hearted and “fringe.” The Supreme Court will soon vote on hearing a First Amendment case that could put the kibosh on such license investigations, while COVID catechists are making a last-ditch effort to stop Senate confirmation of an epidemiologist targeted by name by his predecessor.

Justice Clarence Thomas scheduled a judicial conference for Jan. 10 on whether to block Washington state’s crusade against doctors based on their COVID views before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rules in the case by NBA legend John Stockton, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense and several doctors. The plaintiffs’ application for injunction, rejected by Justice Elena Kagan on Nov. 20, also invites the high court to accept the whole case “to provide a definitive nationwide ruling on whether physicians’ public speech is fully protected” and requires the strict-scrutiny standard of judicial review, given “an ongoing nationwide campaign to censor dissenting speech.” Scientific American raised eyebrows with a Dec. 19 opinion essay that allegedly retcons the mainstream response to Stanford medical professor Jay Bhattacharya, nominated by President-elect Trump for National Institutes of Health director, who is also a plaintiff in a First Amendment lawsuit rebooted after an early SCOTUS setback.

Its sibling Nature Medicine required the authors of “Proximal Origin,” covertly shaped by then-NIH Director Francis Collins and then-National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci, to completely rule out a COVID lab leak before it would publish their paper, which cemented natural origin as gospel. Bhattacharya made himself persona non grata with the public health establishment in spring 2020 by running a seroprevalence study in Stanford’s backyard that found infection was already widespread before lockdowns, undermining elite narratives of COVID’s universal risk. Months later he cowrote the Great Barrington Declaration against lockdowns and in favor of “focused protection” for populations most vulnerable to COVID, which played a role in Stanford faculty pressuring the university to dump the Hoover Institution, with which Bhattacharya and fellow lockdown critic Scott Atlas are affiliated.

Bhattacharya accused university leadership of cowardice for not speaking against faculty efforts to censor him, Atlas and meta-research pioneer John Ioannidis, whose seroprevalence studies similarly undermined COVID narratives and who first warned of the weak evidence for drastic mitigation efforts he compared to “an elephant being attacked by a house cat.” Collins told Fauci, who is now a non-teaching professor at Georgetown, that he wanted a “quick and devastating public take down” of the “fringe epidemiologists” who wrote the GBD, because they were “getting too much traction” and it was even signed by “a Nobel Prize winner,” Stanford biophysicist Michael Levitt. Bhattacharya told Just the News, No Noise before President Biden’s reelection withdrawal that he was working on a public health reform plan for the next president, which would remove large pharmaceutical influence from the Food and Drug Administration and refocus the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention away from politics and back on science.

Article’s much longer. Iran etc.

• Jimmy Carter’s Legacy Still Hampers A World Trump Must Fix (JTN)

As the tributes roll in before America bids farewell to Jimmy Carter, current global turbulence provides fresh reminders that the decisions the late 39th president made in office continue to impact the world four decades later and present both challenges and opportunities for the man about to assume the White House for a second term. Many of the issues confronting President-elect Donald Trump – Iran, the Panama Canal, the Education Department and appeasement diplomacy – have their roots in the Carter presidency, a reality that can’t be erased by the significant humanitarian achievements the former president aggregated after he left office or the widely recognized kindness of the God-fearing, Navy-serving peanut farmer who lived to be 100.

“I don’t think there’s anyone that would say a bad thing about him, personally,” said Nicholas Giordano, a political science professor at Suffolk Community College and a popular podcaster. “He was genuinely a good and decent human being. “But it shows you that sometimes being good and decent isn’t necessarily equating to success as president,” he added. Here are a few of the good-guy-bad-policy debates that arose in Carter’s final days on earth as Trump prepares to return to the White House next month.

Panama Canal The Panama Canal was an engineering marvel that the United States built and paid for in 1914 and that Carter gifted away in a 1977 treaty. That treaty gave Panama full control of the canal as of 1999 after decades of U.S. operation, but it also codified it would remain free and neutral to shipping traffic. Carter declared at the time the transaction removed “the last remnant of alleged American colonialism.” Critics like Ronald Reagan, however, warned the treaty gave away America’s hard-earned construction genius and would one day place the western world in a security lurch over one of the most important marine passageways in the world. “The canal is ours, we bought and we paid for it and we should keep it,” the late Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond said at the time.

China and Panama Those security concerns are coming into clearer focus today as communist China’s companies have won bids in the last decade for several major infrastructure projects like power plants, a bridge and canal locks near the site. To show his newfound influence in Panama, President Xi also made a state visit to Panama in 2018 after the Latin American country joined Beijing’s “Belt and Road” initiative. Today, Panamanian exports to China dwarf those to the United States and imports from Beijing have caught up to those from America, a tilt in economic allegiance that is nearly as concerning to members of Congress as the growth of the Chinese presence around the famed canal.

“A visitor to the Panama Canal might think they were in China. Ports at both ends of the Canal are managed by companies from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), while Huawei dominates the country’s telecoms system,” then-Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., wrote in a Newsweek Op/Ed a year ago as part of his leadership of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. “Panama illustrates the relentless advance of CCP influence across the Western Hemisphere,” he added. “…. The real prize is control—not only control of strategic points such as the Panama Canal and ports but of natural resources, telecommunications, and ultimately governments.”

Trump began raising such concerns in 2019 and he catapulted the issue to the front of public consciousness over the Christmas holiday with a bold declaration. If Panama doesn’t begin lowering shipping rates for passage through the canal, “we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, quickly and without question,” he wrote on Truth Social. Liberals and Panamanians scoffed at such a notion. But Trump’s declaration seized public fascination, prompting a debate unlike anything since Carter first touched off a firestorm with the treaty. Even left-leaning National Public Radio had to admit “it feels like 1976 all over again.” Wherever Trump’s quest on the canal ends, the debate was just one reminder in Carter’s final days that his decisions five decades ago continue to raise concern today.

[..] The Biden department’s advocacy for far-left ideologies like DEI and allowing transgender men in women’s sports also disillusioned many Americans, adding fresh public support for a smaller, if not eliminated agency. While the statistics show student performance has stagnated, many feel the overall state of education has declined. “All of these things have gotten worse since we created a Federal Department of Education,” Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters told Just the News on Monday. “We’ve allowed the left to win this argument for too long: give more power to bureaucrats, give more power to government, and our kids will magically get smarter. Well, that’s just not true,” he added. “As a matter of fact, the opposite is true. The more that you give power to the government, the less power families have.”

When the nation mourns Carter at his Jan. 9 State Funeral in Washington, D.C., he will accurately be remembered for his kindness, his faith, his service to country and the humanitarian achievements of his years out of office. But his successor as the 47th president will also be face global and national challenges that were also of Carter’s making, and history will ultimately write the final chapter on how those turned out. “Look, he was a statesman,” Walters said of Carter. “His impact, especially after coming out of the White House, was tremendous. You know, a guy that really gave a tremendous amount from him and his family to his fellow man. But listen, I. I think when you study history, we’ve got to be up front with our kids. “It doesn’t matter if you’re Republican, Democrat, what your background is. We’ve got to go in and say, here’s what happened while this person was president. Here were their policies. Here was the impact,” he added.

Saw the first clip a while back. Looks good.

• Paramount Series ‘Landman’ Surprises With Anti-Climate Agenda Message (ZH)

It’s been a long time since conservatives were treated like the “good guys” by Hollywood, largely because ESG initiatives and the over-representation of social justice cultism on social media convinced production companies that it was more lucrative to go woke. However, this assumption turned out to be a massive error in calculation as “Get Woke, Go Broke” became the mantra that ultimately toppled the media industry and the Democratic Party.Today, the majority of entertainment companies are struggling with failure after failure; most of their projects lose vast sums of money and producers have been unable to squeeze any blood from the classic franchises they used to rely on. When corporations like Disney are actually losing money on Star Wars and Marvel, you know that audience boycotts are becoming effective.

Well, it appear that someone in Tinsel Town is finally listening. Paramount, another company known for a steady stream of woke disasters, saw some streaming series gold with the success of ‘Yellowstone’ – The Kevin Costner led show featured conservative Montana ranchers battling to maintain their legacy. Though, the company could not help itself and started implanting woke messaging in the later seasons.Yellowstone might have given Paramount a taste of that old-school era of big money entertainment, and they have doubled down on what can only be described as an ultra-MAGA series called ‘Landman’ starring Billy Bob Thornton.

Thornton plays Tommy Norris, a “crisis executive” or “fixer” for a small Texas oil company. While the show does involve some extraordinary plot twists to keep the audience invested, each event ties back to very real problems related to the dangerous business of oil drilling, the open US border, Mexican drug cartels, government interference and disinformation from the environmental lobby. You might not find a more fair or factual depiction of the American oil industry in modern media.

Perhaps the most exciting thing about Landman is that someone at Paramount had the stones to green light a show that speaks against the man-made climate change agenda and the fraudulent claims of the “sustainable” energy lobby. It doesn’t glamorize oil, but it acknowledges that there are no practical alternatives. In terms of story, Thornton’s character is great at his job, but terrible at raising his family. This leads to some hilarious discomfort as his histrionic ex-wife, impulsive teenage daughter and strong-headed 20-something son come back into his life and collide. Though highly flawed, Thornton’s sharp Texas wit keeps you laughing at his domestic mistakes and misfortunes. Keep in mind, Landman is definitely not a family show.

Conservatives will probably gravitate to the straightforward depiction of the working man’s world and the dangers involved in resource industries like oil. These are the vital jobs and men that keep the world running, and many of them die while trying to earn a paycheck. Landman makes no attempt to demean or belittle blue collar workers and its simple exploration of their daily lives comes off as shockingly empathetic. Appealing to the working man in media without pandering is a tough balance, but Landman does it well. There’s also no absurd melodrama or unrealistic character changes to artificially drive the plot forward. What you see is what you get, which is incredibly refreshing these days.

Overall, Landman is definitely worth a watch. It’s important to encourage entertainment companies by rewarding them when they abandon woke messaging and make something intelligent. This is not to say that they won’t screw up the show by adding leftist propaganda in later seasons (we all know liberal executives can’t control themselves), but the first season of Landman is a win.

Commercial

Διαφημισάρα! pic.twitter.com/ElpAgIKFzB

— Miyagii (@Miyagii2574471) December 31, 2024

Amish

NEW: About 60 Amish community members from central Pennsylvania build 12 tiny homes in Boone, North Carolina in just two days.

The men had to head back home but are coming back in January to build more.

Not only did they donate their time, but they also donated about… pic.twitter.com/Is7gN42YGj

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) December 31, 2024

Turtle

Whoever thought to put a turtle on a mini skateboard is a straight up genius! pic.twitter.com/PYitYBgQ2J

— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) December 31, 2024

Howl

Husky howling lessons..🐕🐾😅🔊⬆️ pic.twitter.com/liZxaXr3a0

— 𝕐o̴g̴ (@Yoda4ever) December 30, 2024

Great white
https://twitter.com/i/status/1874098182403330264

Kestrel

Head stabilisation of a kestrel
pic.twitter.com/2QmppEWRNW

— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) December 31, 2024

Heaven
https://twitter.com/i/status/1874127436289630505

Auld

Auld Lang Syne, a traditional tune to bid fairwell to the old year. Happy New Year from the West of Ireland! pic.twitter.com/lms0BF9Lgx

— Patrick Dexter (@patrickdextervc) December 31, 2024

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

Debt Rattle January 28 2024

Jan 282024

January 28, 2024 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:40 am Finance Tagged with: Boeing, border, E. Jean Carroll, Hunter Biden, ICJ, Nazism, Russian assets, Texas, Trump 49 Responses »

Balthus Therèse dreaming 1938

• RFK Jr. Praises Texas In Battle With Biden Over Border (Hill)

• Biden Vows To Shut Border If Lawmakers Pass Budget Deal (RT)

• How Trump and US Conservatives Deal a Blow to Ukraine Aid Package (Sp.)

• US Promised To Seize Russian Assets – Kiev (RT)

• Seizing Russia’s Money Would Endanger Euro – Italian Central Bank (RT)

• EU and NATO Heading for the Abyss Over Foreign Policy Foibles (Jay)

• ‘No Threat’ Of Russia Attacking NATO – Germany (RT)

• Davos, Dictators, and the Real ‘Threats to Our Democracy’ (Hollis)

• WH’s New Strategy on Ukraine ‘Will De-Emphasize’ Retaking ‘Lost Territory’ (Sp.)

• Putin Vows To Eradicate Nazism For Good (RT)

• ICJ Ruling May Entail Dire Consequences for Israel (Sp.)

• Who is Kevin Morris? Even Hunter’s Lawyer Seems Unsure (Turley)

• Hunter Biden Partner Rob Walker Confirms Payments To Biden Family (JTN)

• Boeing’s Nosedive: How Greed Ruined A Great American Company (Johnston)

• 83 million? (Victor Davis Hanson)

The alleged rape supposedly took place in 1996. With a script straight out of Law and Order. 16 years later, she’s a big fan of her “rapist”.

Note: the 83 million is not for the “rape”, but for defamation. Which she says cost her her job at ELLE magazine. ELLE has denied this.

Tucker Texas cartels

On Monday, a trucker convoy heads to Texas to try to protect our country from invasion. A conversation with one of the leaders of it, as well as with the attorney general of Texas on where the border standoff goes next. pic.twitter.com/tZ4PIViJua

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) January 26, 2024

“..Biden’s failure to secure the border leaves states no choice but to take matters into their own hands..”

• RFK Jr. Praises Texas In Battle With Biden Over Border (Hill)

Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Thursday backed Texas in its ongoing battle with the federal government over border authority, criticizing the Biden administration for its handling of the U.S. southern border. “Texas is right. Biden’s failure to secure the border leaves states no choice but to take matters into their own hands,” Kennedy wrote in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter. “As President, I will end this humanitarian crisis once and for all. I will secure the border and destroy the business model of the drug cartels. A country without borders is not a country at all.” Kennedy joins a growing list of politicians, most of them Republican, who have thrown their support behind Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s (R) fight against the federal government over the fencing and razor wire installed by Texas at the U.S.-Mexico border. In a major blow to Abbott, the Supreme Court ruled earlier this week that border agents can remove the razor wire erected on the border, siding with the Biden administration.

Abbott has defended the fencing as necessary for his state’s security, claiming he was forced to take matters into his own hands due to what he characterizes as a lack of action on the Biden administration’s part. The federal government, meanwhile, contends the state does not have the power to build the fencing, which it says prevents it from managing the border. Abbott railed against the high court ruling and contended his authority is the “supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes.” Texas appeared to continue installing razor wire after the ruling came down. Kennedy has previously spoken out against what he sees as a “border crisis” that is leading to the smuggling of drugs and humans. He called Biden’s border policies a “disaster” in a Newsweek op-ed last year. Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley also spoke out in support of Abbott on Thursday and called Biden’s position “absolutely ridiculous.”

RFK border

I made a 20-minute documentary about the border after I visited last June. Please watch it if you dare to believe that compassion and security can coexist. The tragic irony of our current open border policy is that it benefits nobody — not even the migrants themselves. #Kennedy24 pic.twitter.com/LLkBUdqKj2

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) January 28, 2024

“Biden already has authority to shut down illegal immigration. And now he’s telling us he’s willing to do that, but only if we pass a new law — one whose authors refuse to share with the public or even their own colleagues. Something’s not right here.”

Scott Adams: “The plan is to close the barn door after too many horses get out.”

• Biden Vows To Shut Border If Lawmakers Pass Budget Deal (RT)

US President Joe Biden has again urged Republican lawmakers to approve a long-stalled budget deal, vowing to shut down his country’s southern border as soon as he’s given the authority to do so. Republicans have been blocking the White House’s attempts to push through a $106 billion ‘national security package’ for Ukraine and Israel since October. They have demanded tougher security measures on the southern frontier be included in the agreement. ”For too long, we all know the border’s been broken. It’s long past time to fix it,” Biden outlined in a written statement on Friday. He described the border deal, now being negotiated in the Senate, as “the toughest and fairest set of reforms to secure the border we’ve ever had in our country.”

“It would give me, as President, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed. And if given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law,” Biden vowed. Under the bipartisan agreement, the administration would, among other things, be required to shut the border down if the number of migrants trying to get into the US illegally on any given day reaches 5,000, the New York Times reported. This threshold had been surpassed “routinely” in recent months, the paper stressed. Finding common ground on the immigration deal would be “a win for America,” the president insisted. “If you’re serious about the border crisis, pass a bipartisan bill, and I will sign it,” Biden said, addressing the Republican lawmakers.

The Washington Post described the comments as “a remarkable shift” in the Democratic president’s rhetoric on the immigration issue. The media outlet underscored “the urgency” of the situation on the border for his re-election bid. Biden’s statement came as Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson said on Friday that if the leaks about the deal’s content were accurate, it would be “dead on arrival” in the lower chamber. The likely Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump, slammed the border deal earlier this week, warning that it “would be another gift to the radical left Democrats.” The agreement “will be meaningless in terms of border security,” Trump argued, reiterating that the only way to solve the immigration issue would be voting for him in November.

“..the draft bipartisan agreement could allow up to 5,000 migrants to enter the US daily at the border..”

• How Trump and US Conservatives Deal a Blow to Ukraine Aid Package (Sp.)

Former US President Donald Trump and Republican policymakers have subjected a draft bipartisan US border security deal to harsh criticism, casting doubt on the future of military aid packages for Ukraine and Israel. The border security deal is seen by Democratic lawmakers as a necessary evil to ram a new multi-billion Ukraine aid bill through the US Congress. Last December neither chamber managed to reach a compromise on the provision of further funds to Kiev despite pleas and even threats from the White House. Eventually, Republican and Democratic senators come up with a draft border agreement. Even though the formal text of the deal has not been officially released yet, leaks keep coming irritating US conservatives, as per Just the News, an independent US media outlet.

Media reported that the draft bipartisan agreement could allow up to 5,000 migrants to enter the US daily at the border. To that end, the White House is reportedly requesting at least $14 billion to help cities to absorb the flow of migrants released by US border authorities into the country. Former President Donald Trump denounced that as a bad deal in every way: “I do not think we should do a Border Deal, at all, unless we get everything needed to shut down the invasion of millions and millions of people, many from parts unknown, into our once great, but soon to be great again, country!” he wrote on his Truth Social media site on January 25. The US mainstream media warns that the former president’s comment was a “serious blow to the talks”. Trump has emerged as the leading Republican presidential candidate following the party’s first two primaries this month, with the power to influence the outcome of the negotiations.

Punchbowl News reported that Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell told his colleagues on Wednesday that the situation had “changed,” and that Trump was going to build his re-election campaign around the border crisis. “We don’t want to do anything to undermine him,” McConnell allegedly said. However, on Thursday the GOP leader appeared to backpedal on his remarks, asserting to the press that he still backed the bipartisan migration deal. Deputy White House Press Secretary Olivia Dalton also signaled that the Biden administration as supporting the bipartisan immigration agreement. “The president has been clear, we need action on the border,” Dalton told reporters on Thursday. “We’ve been engaging in good faith, bipartisan negotiations with both Senate Democrats and Senate Republicans to that end. And we believe that there’s no reason that shouldn’t continue.”

Still, some US senators warn that the effort is doomed. US Senator Ted Cruz said on Wednesday that the Ukraine aid-border security supplemental bill is a train wreck and has no chance of passing the US House of Representatives. Senator Rick Scott echoed Cruz, saying that the bill will be dead on arrival in the House. Earlier this week the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft suggested that House Republicans may kill the foreign aid bill even if a bipartisan border security and immigration deal is passed. The lower chamber’s Republican majority has no appetite for throwing good money after bad to Ukraine, according to the institute. The DC-based think-tank also noted House Speaker Mike Johnson’s ardent support for a sweeping migration reform and his record of opposing Ukraine funding packages. Some House Republicans, such as Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, even threatened to introduce a “motion to vacate” and oust the speaker if Johnson passes funding to Ukraine.

“..a US Senate committee approved the “Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity (REPO) for Ukrainians Act..”

• US Promised To Seize Russian Assets – Kiev (RT)

The US assured Kiev that the Russian assets that remain frozen in the West are going to be seized and used to rebuild Ukraine after the conflict, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denis Shmygal has said. The US, EU, and their allies blocked some $300 billion of Russian central bank assets as part of sanctions in response to Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine. Around $200 billion of that money is held in the EU. Politico reported on Thursday that it asked Shmygal if he was concerned that US funding for the Kiev government would come to a complete stop if Donald Trump won the presidential election in November and returned to the White House for his second term. ”We have all the assurances from the US about long-term support for Ukraine – for example, the seizure of Russian assets to fund the Ukrainian recovery,” he claimed.

On Wednesday, a US Senate committee approved the “Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity (REPO) for Ukrainians Act,” which should help pave the way for such a move by Washington. If it passes both houses and is signed into law by President Joe Biden, Washington could seize the Russian central bank assets, using such a measure against a country that it’s not directly at war with for the first time in history. Reuters reported this week, citing a senior official in Brussels, that the EU will be unlikely to join the US in confiscating the Russian funds as there’s no agreement on such a step between the bloc’s member-states. Earlier in January, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov warned that Moscow would respond to a possible seizure of its assets by the West, inducing tit-for-tat measures.

Previously, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that the confiscation of Russian funds would amount to “outright theft” by the West. He told reporters that it would undermine the trust in the US and EU financial systems around the globe. Shmygal also stated that Kiev is “working hard with the administration of President Biden and with Congress to have support for 2024.” As for the continuation of the aid in 2025, “we’ll see how conditions develop,” he stressed. ”I believe that any president of the US will support our fight for civilized values, our mutual values,” the Ukrainian PM said. The US has provided Ukraine with around $111 billion in economic and military support amid the conflict with Russia. But the flow of funds subsided dramatically in recent months as Republican lawmakers continue to resist attempts by the White House to push through another $60 billion in assistance for Kiev.

“..weaponizing a currency inevitably reduces its attractiveness and encourages the emergence of alternatives..”

• Seizing Russia’s Money Would Endanger Euro – Italian Central Bank (RT)

The EU should not use the euro as a tool in sanctions wars and political disputes, as it would harm the currency’s image and standing, Bank of Italy Governor Fabio Panetta warned on Friday. He as commenting on discussions in Brussels regarding frozen Russian assets. The EU, US, Japan and Canada froze some $300 billion of Russian central bank assets in 2022 as part of Ukraine-related sanctions against Moscow. Some $200 billion of that is held in the EU, largely in the Belgian clearing house Euroclear. Brussels is currently working on plans to apply a windfall tax to the profits Euroclear is making on the frozen funds, while opting not to seize the immobilized money outright.

However, Italy is one of several EU member states, including Germany and France, that have been skeptical of moves involving the assets, arguing that using them could prompt investors from other countries to doubt the safety of their own holdings in the EU and quit the bloc’s market, ultimately weakening the euro. “This power must be used wisely,” Panetta said, referring to euro’s standing as a global reserve currency. “International relations are part of a ‘repeated game’: weaponizing a currency inevitably reduces its attractiveness and encourages the emergence of alternatives,” he warned at an event in Riga, marking the 10th anniversary of Latvia adopting the euro. According to the official, the recent surge in the use of the yuan in trade between China and Russia is “instructive in this respect,” because it was Western sanctions that prompted the trend, as they made it difficult for Russia to use US dollars and euros in cross-border trade.

“The Chinese authorities are explicitly promoting [the yuan’s] role on the global stage and encouraging its use in other countries, including those sanctioned by the international community following the invasion of Ukraine,” Panetta said, adding that the share of Chinese trade financed in the domestic currency has doubled in the past three years, allowing the yuan to overtake the euro as the world’s second most-used trade currency. The official warned if the need to “be alert to the possibility that politics will have a greater impact on international currencies in the coming years.” Western currencies have been largely phased out in Russia-China trade, as nearly 95% of all transactions between the countries are now carried out either in rubles or yuan. Russia is not the only major economy to use the Chinese currency for trade settlements, as more and more nations seek alternatives to the dollar and euro. These include Argentina, Saudi Arabia, Brazil and Iran.

“..this BS is being fed into the echo chamber because a panic is setting in both on a EU level and national one as elections are looming and the smell of defeat is beginning to fill the lungs of the corrupt..”

• EU and NATO Heading for the Abyss Over Foreign Policy Foibles (Jay)

A number of odd statements have been coming from the EU in recent days, coupled with some even odder skulduggery giving rise to thought that the entire project is having its ‘last days of the Roman Empire moment’. Is it possible that the EU that we know is on its last legs and what we are witnessing is the final demise? Ursula von der Leyen, whose grandparents were probably Wafen SS officers has said that if she doesn’t get her way in finding new money for Ukraine she will have to resort to dirty tricks. Well, she didn’t actually say “dirty tricks” but this is what is implied. And what might those underhand moves might be? In fact, there is already a motion in the EU corridors to make Hungary effectively a non-EU member state, a sort of rogue member which is still in the EU but has no voting rights.

Given that the EU is anything but a democracy and that the institutions in Brussels are monolithic and consensus-driven (there is no ‘opposition’ in Brussels like in most democratic countries) it is hardly surprising to see nefarious activities which would make an African dictator proud of his handy work. The EU, or rather the super federalist elite which run it in Brussels like von der Leyen and her mates as Pfizer – yes, multinational corporations really wield the most power in Brussels and more or less own the European Parliament – are getting worried. The project is starting to indulge in in-fighting and creating a lot of mixed message in the media. Gardner-in-chief Josep Borrell wants a new shiny state for the Palestinians but Ursula is perfectly happy with the present genocide program. Perhaps she sees in investment opportunities in offshore gas off the coast of Gaza?

And so with the economy in the doldrums and the EUs most powerful member state Germany looking more and more like the Czech Republic in the late 90s, the uber elites like Ursula and the most vile MEP the European Parliament ever had – Guy Verhofstadt – are worried that the project can be hijacked by far-right MEPs come the next euro election in the summer. Ironically, in such a scenario where the European parliament’s main majority bloc would be a far-right group, the support for Netanyahu would peak and even save him from falling into his own quagmire of corruption charges, as the far-right in Europe support the Zionists, shifting from the once popular idea of wiping them out under Hitler’s ‘final solution’ plan.

But the EU would never be the same again. These MEPs support reversing the centralisation of power back to member states. And so it is hardly any surprise at all that Verhofstadt, a man so bereft of charm that he makes a pile of damp towels look exciting, gives another one of his fiery speeches in the European parliament with always the same theme: all our problems can be resolved if we has more money, more power and an EU army. The fault is with member states, the European parliament’s top wanker-in-chief argues as he throws his head around and animates very much like a power hungry leader in the 1930s who got us in this mess in the first place. Have you noticed lots of media reports pointing to war with Russia? Wonder what this is based on? Of course there is no imminent war with Russia but the pundits can’t help presenting one to us, proclaiming that Putin wants to take the odd European country, like a rich man who collects them like pets.

The reality is that this BS is being fed into the echo chamber because a panic is setting in both on a EU level and national one as elections are looming and the smell of defeat is beginning to fill the lungs of the corrupt who have been feeding from the same trough for too long. Create a panic about a war looming and enough stupid Europeans and Americans will accept spiralling consumer prices, high pump prices, insane utility bills (like in the UK), poor growth and no jobs. Few westerners see through the lies and see the ruse in the making. Even the Germans.

“..this is just a “snapshot” of the current situation and there’s no way of knowing how things would turn out in the future..”

• ‘No Threat’ Of Russia Attacking NATO – Germany (RT)

There’s currently no threat of Russia attacking NATO or any of the partners of the US-led military bloc, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has suggested. Moscow’s military is now fully occupied with the Ukraine conflict, Pistorius explained, in an interview with the tabloid Bild on Friday. ”At the moment, I don’t see any danger of a Russian attack on NATO territory or on any NATO partner-country,” he added. However, the minister stressed that this is just a “snapshot” of the current situation and there’s no way of knowing how things would turn out in the future. Pistorius warned against underestimating the alleged risks related to Russia, saying that NATO needs to rely on “the principle of deterrence, as we know it from the times of the Cold War.” During that time, things between the West and Moscow were “much more predictable than the situation we have today,” he argued.

”We are coming out of 30 years of peace… from which we have all benefited. And now the journey is going the other way,” the minister said. NATO and Germany must “really pick up the pace” in order to be able to face the emerging challenges, he stressed. Germany has given to Ukraine “a lot of systems” that Berlin needed for itself since the outbreak in February 2022 of fighting between Moscow and Kiev, but “we will get them again,” Pistorius vowed. Earlier this week, commenting on the possibility of a direct conflict between NATO and Russia, the bloc’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that “we don’t see any direct or imminent threat against any NATO ally.” He stressed, however, that NATO “closely monitors what Russia does” and has increased its “vigilance and presence in the eastern part of the alliance” in order to be able to counter any moves by Moscow.

Pistorius told ZDF on Monday that Germany should be ready to respond to a possible Russian attack. In order to be able to resist an aggression “that you don’t know if and when it will occur, then that means you have to arm yourself – and that’s what we’re currently doing together with allies in NATO,” he explained. On Tuesday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov dismissed Pistorius’ speculation about a possible conflict between Russia and NATO, saying that, due to internal problems the EU faces, its politicians “now need to somehow pump up public opinion, artificially agitate it, by inventing an external enemy.” Speaking at UN headquarters in New York the following day, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stressed that “no one wants a big war,” especially Moscow. “We have lived through ‘big wars’ many times in our history,” he added. President Vladimir Putin last month rejected as “complete nonsense” claims that Russia could attack NATO. Moscow has “no geopolitical, economic… or military interest” in doing so, he pointed out. Russia is, on the contrary, interested in developing ties with the bloc, he said.

“..American voters see where the threats of authoritarianism truly lie, and it isn’t with Donald Trump…”

• Davos, Dictators, and the Real ‘Threats to Our Democracy’ (Hollis)

The former Soviet Union collapsed politically because its centrally planned economy suffered disaster after disaster. Government takeover of the Venezuelan economy destroyed that once-prosperous country, plunging its residents into abject poverty. When the president of Sri Lanka banned nitrogen-based fertilizer, the country’s agricultural sector collapsed, as did its exports, leaving Sri Lankans without adequate food, fuel, or oil to heat their homes. Here in the United States, we have witnessed the nasty consequences of plenty of government policy failures: the health risks of COVID-19 shots; the spectacular failure of wind power in Texas during the 2021 winter storm; the inability of electric vehicles to start in the bitter temperatures across the northern U.S. two weeks ago; California’s water shortages and the struggling capacity of its electrical grid.

Egotists like WEF founder Klaus Schwab and his God-complex, like-minded cronies across the globe never consider that they could be wrong about anything. But they are always wrong about something. Trump voters do not want a dictator; they do not want an imperial presidency at all. They want a president who understands that free and independent businesses operating in a minimally regulated environment are the lifeblood of American prosperity. They recognize that an executive branch that refuses to enforce federal laws is failing in its primary constitutional obligations to the American public. They understand that a justice system that picks and chooses whom to prosecute based upon their race, ethnicity, or political belief is no justice at all. They are tired of inflation caused by misguided energy, trade, and environmental policies.

They are tired of our veterans suffering and dying with their physical and mental health needs unmet; tired of homeless people living in the streets; tired of open borders, of tens of thousands of Americans dying of fentanyl overdoses, and tired of unpunished crime, all while hundreds of billions of our hard-earned tax dollars get laundered through foreign wars into the pockets of multinational defense contractors, corruptocrat politicians, and warmongering toadies who never saw a foreign conflict they didn’t want to exploit. These Americans reject the globalist overlords pushing their anti-human philosophies down everyone’s throats, and they fear being enslaved by governments infiltrated by mindless drones in thrall to the latest apocalyptic power grab. The press and the Left can hand-wave and hyperventilate all they want about “threats to our democracy.” But American voters see where the threats of authoritarianism truly lie, and it isn’t with Donald Trump.

Just give up.

• WH’s New Strategy on Ukraine ‘Will De-Emphasize’ Retaking ‘Lost Territory’ (Sp.)

The Biden administration’s new strategy will “de-emphasize” Kiev’s recovery of the so-called “lost territories” this year and instead focus on Washington helping the Zelensky regime survive amid Russia’s ongoing special military operation, the Washington Post quoted unnamed sources as saying. The sources were apparently referring to the territories previously reunited with Russia as a result of popular referendums. They claimed that the Biden administration, “still smarting” from Kiev’s bungled counteroffensive in 2023, is “putting together the new strategy,” which includes helping the Zelensky regime strengthen its armed forces and economy in the face of the Ukraine funding impasse in the U.S. Congress.

The strategy’s other purpose is to help Kiev strengthen its fighting force and economy in the face of Ukraine funding-real impasse in the US Congress, according to the sources. “The emerging plan is a sharp change from last year, when the US and allied militaries rushed training and sophisticated equipment to Kiev in hopes that it could quickly push back Russian forces,” insiders pointed out. One source added that “it’s pretty clear” that it will be difficult for the Ukrainian Armed Forces to try to achieve “the same kind of major push on all fronts that they tried to do last year.” The idea is help Ukraine “hold its position on the battlefield for now, […] and “get them on a more sustainable path,” per the source. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu declared in late December that the Russian armed forces had achieved last year’s main goal by thwarting Ukraine’s summer counteroffensive.

“The main efforts of the past year were focused on achieving the goals of the special military operation. The main one was to stop the counter-offensive of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, which was loudly proclaimed by Ukraine and its NATO allies. This task was successfully accomplished,” Shoigu emphasized at the time. The statement came after Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces Valery Gerasimov told reporters that Ukraine had lost some 160,000 troops and over 3,000 armored vehicles, including 766 tanks, as well as 121 aircraft and 23 helicopters in all areas during the six-month counteroffensive.

“..in a number of European countries, Russophobia is being promoted as the state policy.”

• Putin Vows To Eradicate Nazism For Good (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has vowed to crush modern-day forces that promote Nazism, singling out Ukraine and the Baltic states as countries where the authorities have embraced such ideologies. Speaking on Saturday at the opening of a memorial to Soviet civilians killed by Nazi German forces in Leningrad Region, the Russian head of state said: “these days the outcomes of the Nuremberg trials are effectively being revised.” He claimed that some countries have gone from rewriting history and whitewashing the Nazis to “arming themselves with Hitlerites’ ideology and methods.”

President Putin cited the Baltic states, in an apparent reference to their treatment of Russian-speaking minorities, which Moscow deems discriminatory. “The regime in Kiev lionizes Hitlers’ accomplices, SS members, and uses terror against” those who resist it, the Russian leader alleged, accusing the Ukrainian authorities of subjecting the elderly, women and children to “barbaric shelling.” According to President Putin, “in a number of European countries, Russophobia is being promoted as the state policy.” “We will do everything – everything to undercut and eradicate Nazism for good,” the Russian head of state pledged.

“..South Africa was after the provisional ruling to force Israel to agree to a ceasefire in Gaza.”

• ICJ Ruling May Entail Dire Consequences for Israel (Sp.)

“Provisional measures is what South Africa wanted,” noted Carrillo, “that there is enough evidence to show that Israel has violated the 1948 Genocide Convention. “This is what South Africa wanted when they filed this suit because a final ruling by the courts can take months, it can take years. South Africa was after the provisional ruling to force Israel to agree to a ceasefire in Gaza.” Still, Carrillo noted that Israel often ignores world opinion and discounts measures taken against it in the international arena, such as when the Soviet Union led a 1975 effort in the United Nations to declare that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination. “Israel has a long history of disregarding the rulings or the opinions of international organizations,” said Carillo. “They do as they will, and they have the complete protection of the United States who at best is going to issue a lukewarm statement about protecting civilians. That’s what I think we should expect.”

However, host Jamarl Thomas noted the significant “moral weight” the decision carries as Carillo insisted Israel “did not refute any of the evidence, they did not disprove any of the South African evidence.” Amidst a rapidly emerging multipolar world order, Carillo suggested Global South countries and their allies may enforce material consequences against Israel for their actions in Gaza, where 70% of the more than 26,000 deaths are said to be of women and children. “We will have to see, because we are seeing a polar shift in the geopolitical sphere,” said the analyst. “Maybe we will see countries like Russia, maybe like China, or maybe like South Africa or other BRICS members, find a way to stop or to punish Israel in a way.”“Economically, Israel is already facing dire consequences,” Carillo claimed. “Its ports are empty, its workforce is completely depleted, and, among other things, their currency is on the downward trend.

So if you add on top of these, as you said, the moral weight of committing genocide and then more than likely not stopping, how are nations not aligned with the US, why would they continue dealing with Israel? Where is the benefit?”Israel also continues to face economic repercussions as a result of the effective blockade in the Red Sea enforced by the Houthi movement in Yemen. Despite Yemen’s status as one of the poorest countries in the Middle East, Yeminis have demonstrated strong support for the Palestinian cause, with hundreds of thousands taking to the streets to protest US and UK-led retaliatory strikes in the country. “There will always be resistance to oppression,” Carillo insisted. “Always. We know this through human history.”

“The problem is that when you are “everything” to a client, you may end up with nothing when it comes to confidentiality.”

• Who is Kevin Morris? Even Hunter’s Lawyer Seems Unsure (Turley)

Kevin Morris testified last week in the House. The question that lingered then, and now, is who is Kevin Morris. The Hollywood lawyer, producer and Democratic donor has emerged as a major figure in the corruption scandal surrounding Hunter Biden.For years, some of us have complained that we are not sure what Morris was at any given moment.What became clear in the deposition is that Morris does not appear certain himself. He’s Hunter’s confidant, art patron, business partner, and his lawyer. That could prove his undoing … both for himself and his client. Morris seems to move effortlessly between roles in his relationship with Hunter Biden.Hunter met Morris when he attended a political fundraiser as a major donor. Soon thereafter, he warned Biden associates that Hunter’s unpaid taxes raised political problems during Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential run.

He later proceeded to pay off Hunter’s taxes and to subsidize his lavish lifestyle. He also took an apparent lead in planning public campaigns against the critics of the Bidens, reportedly pushing a scorched-earth approach to attack potential witnesses and accusers. Then Morris seemed to take on the role of Hunter’s bank and art patron. He reportedly gave millions to Hunter while insisting that they are loans, not gifts. Most recently, it was revealed that, despite accounts of buyers flocking to buy Hunter’s overpriced art, it was Morris all along who bought most of the pieces. The overpriced art could be used to excuse some of these “debts” — a type of special crafts project for the president’s son to write off millions. The most striking thing about the deposition from his House interview was the speed at which Morris seemed to put on and remove his various hats.

He invoked attorney-client privilege at least 17 times over questions related to his payments and work for Hunter Biden. Yet, while refusing to answer those questions, he admitted to an array of other financial ties and transactions with his “client.” To the extent that Morris was not acting as a lawyer but as a businessman or a friend, these conversations (and related records) may not be protected. In his deposition, Morris also discusses his ownership of 10% of Bohai Harvest RST LLC (BHR), through his acquisition of interest in Skaneateles LLC. Those are business interests associated with Hunter Biden Morris seemed to be working through his own identity crisis with the help of House investigators. While insisting that his legal representation of Hunter Biden was “global and complete,” Morris detailed how his relationship floated from loan giver to friend to patron to film producer.

His counsel insists that all loans and roles were clearly laid out for Hunter in writing and reviewed by outside counsel. House investigator: “How did it come up that you were going to purchase Skaneateles? Or why did you buy Skaneateles of all the companies that Hunter Biden was involved with? Why that one?” Morris: “That’s privileged. I am not going to answer that because of attorney-client privilege.” That prompted a quick intervention by his lawyer. Morris reversed and agreed it was not protected and said that he “evaluated it as a businessman, and I thought it was something that could be a very successful investment.” Morris’ confusion often left his answers in an unintelligible morass. When asked about his decision to do a movie on his client, Morris again seemed to merge his roles, saying these are “just materials being collected for representation that may be used in the future after the representation.”

Later, Morris seemed to invoke an open-ended, running privilege. At one point, Morris claimed he was “like a general counsel” in Hunter Biden’s “virtual corporation.” He explained, “Counsel, in my job, I represent high-profile individuals. … [H]igh-profile individuals have basically virtual corporations. And in those virtual corporations, they have all kinds of staff and assistants. You know, agents and managers … publicists. You know, whatever. And what I do is I oversee … sort of the squad. Sort of like a general counsel.” With that, Morris was viewed as asserting a type of floating privilege because “I am involved in everything. And the same is with Hunter. If you check my retainer agreements, you’ll see that it’s not — it says all matters.” The statement is both factually accurate and ethically dubious. It seeks sweeping privilege claims despite the layers of different relationships, from loaner to donor to lawyer to producer. If Morris is called to testify in court, this may not fly. The problem is that when you are “everything” to a client, you may end up with nothing when it comes to confidentiality.

“..The relationship between James Biden, Hunter Biden, Ye, and other partners resulted in at least $9 million in payments to Biden-connected companies in 2017 alone after Joe Biden returned to private life..”

• Hunter Biden Partner Rob Walker Confirms Payments To Biden Family (JTN)

Hunter Biden associate Rob Walker appeared for a transcribed interview with the House Oversight Committee Friday as the latest witness in the impeachment inquiry and weeks before Hunter Biden is set to testify. According to a source familiar with Walker’s testimony, he confirmed reports that Hunter Biden’s work for the Chinese energy company CEFC began while Joe Biden was still Vice President, in 2015. In December, Just the News reported that the impeachment inquiry had assembled a growing body of evidence that Hunter’s work with the Chinese energy company started years before its million dollar payments began to flow into the Biden family coffers in 2017, following Joe Biden’s departure from office. “Today we learned that Joe Biden met with the now-missing Chairman of CEFC, Ye Jianming, as Hunter Biden and his associates received $3 million from a Chinese entity CEFC controlled. Evidence continues to reveal the Bidens sold the ‘Biden Brand’ to enrich the Biden family,” Oversight Chairman James Comer said in a statement released by the Oversight Committee.

“Today’s interview confirmed Hunter Biden and his associates’ work with the Chinese government-linked energy company began over a year before Joe Biden left the vice presidency, but the Bidens and their associates held off being paid by the Chinese while Joe Biden was in office,” he continued. “The Chinese company paid Hunter Biden and his associates $3 million shortly after Joe Biden left office as a ‘thank you’ for the work they did while Joe Biden was in office. Members of the Biden family received payments from the Chinese deal even though they did not work on it. This is the type of swampy influence peddling the American people want us to end,” Comer said. The relationship between James Biden, Hunter Biden, Ye, and other partners resulted in at least $9 million in payments to Biden-connected companies in 2017 alone after Joe Biden returned to private life.

The payments included a $3 million “thank you” in March 2017, a $5 million loan in August 2017, and a $1 million legal retainer fee to Hunter Biden from CEFC official Patrick Ho after he was indicted on bribery charges, according to documents gathered by Congress and federal prosecutors. Yet, evidence from Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop and FBI interviews with Biden business partners provided to Congress show that the relationship dates back to at least 2015 and 2016. One email from Rob Walker to another of Hunter Biden’s business partners referenced an apparent letter from Hunter to Zang Jianjun, the executive director of CEFC China Energy, who worked directly for its founder and Chairman Ye Jianming.

In an interview with the FBI, Walker told investigators that he recalls two meetings that Vice President Biden had with CEFC officials, one after leaving office in 2017 and another while he was still in office. The interview was provided by IRS Whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joe Ziegler to the House Ways and Means Committee in their probe of the IRS and DOJ investigation into Hunter Biden. “Any times when he was in office or did you hear Hunter say that he was setting up a meeting with his dad with them (CEFC) while dad was still in office?” an FBI agent asked Walker. “Yeah,” Walker responded. After this admission, the investigators inexplicably changed course and did not follow up on what Walker had just told them.

“..hunter killer assassins meeting boy scouts.”

• Boeing’s Nosedive: How Greed Ruined A Great American Company (Johnston)

The singular event cited as marking the beginning of Boeing’s downfall was its 1997 merger with McDonnell Douglas, which put it on a collision course with a culture steeped in cost-cutting and financial performance. Somewhat perversely, although Boeing had acquired McDonnell, it was the latter that took over. McDonnell’s executives ended up running the company and its culture became ascendant. Scores of cut-throat managers battle-hardened in the company’s perform-or-die culture were brought in. A federal mediator once likened the partnership to “hunter killer assassins meeting boy scouts.” The self-effacing and introspective Bill Allen, Boeing’s genteel CEO through the post-war era and the man behind the 707 gamble, described his company’s ethos as “to eat, breathe, and sleep the world of aeronautics.”

But a new generation of leaders was emerging who brought new priorities and a new vocabulary. It was no longer about making great airplanes; it was about “moving up the value chain.” What it was really about was maximizing shareholder value. Now looming like a colossus over Boeing was the figure of Harry Stonecipher, McDonnell’s CEO. The blunt, hard-nosed son of a coal miner, Stonecipher was known for vicious cost-cutting, emails written in all caps – and for jettisoning executives who didn’t hit financial targets. But Stonecipher was a ‘winner’: McDonnell’s stock price had risen fourfold under his tenure. What predictably ensued was nothing short of a complete transformation of Boeing from being a company run by engineers to one that prized financial profit over all, and was willing to cut all manner of corners to reduce costs and boost returns.

The quality of the product was, to put it mildly, severely compromised. Downstream from these changes are the spectacular failures we all know about: the outrageous cost overruns, delays and production issues in making the Boeing 787, which ended up being temporarily grounded for battery fires that regulators attributed to flaws in manufacturing, insufficient testing and a poor understanding of an innovative battery; the abject failure of the jimmy-rigged 737 MAX, which saw two deadly crashes and, most recently, a harrowing incident in which a sealed-off emergency exit blew out mid-air in an Alaska Airlines flight, leaving a gaping hole in the fuselage. m It is possible to see Boeing’s merger with McDonnell as simply an unfortunate mistake, and the rise of the likes of Harry Stonecipher as simply an instance in which the wrong person found his way to the top; and the outsourcing and cost-cutting as simply a misbegotten strategy.

But this would miss the wider trends at work in the American corporate landscape at the time. Boeing was hardly alone on this path. The writer David Foster Wallace once wrote that “America… is a country of many contradictions, and a big contradiction for a long time has been between a very aggressive form of capitalism and consumerism against what might be called a kind of moral or civic impulse.” What is evident is that starting roughly in the 1970s, this “aggressive form of capitalism” became ascendant in the US and for a long time overwhelmed – and is arguably still overwhelming – the “moral and civic impulse.” However, to view this as simply a moral failing is to miss the greater economic pressures at work.

The ‘70s were, in the words of historian Judith Stein, the “pivotal decade” that “sealed a society-wide transition from industry to finance, factory floor to trading floor, [and] production to consumption.” America had emerged from World War II with unquestioned manufacturing supremacy, but within a few short decades, US companies had begun falling behind. Whereas Japan, Germany, and, later on, China invested heavily in their industrial bases in the post-war period, the US came to emphasize innovation at the expense of capital investment. The 1970s were when nascent industrial powerhouse Japan pulled off its so-called ‘revolution of quality,’ which went a long way toward putting American manufacturers on the back foot.

“..Trump will have to soldier on. He must stay controlled amid the tsunamis, not play into the hands of his accusers, and remember that he may soon be the only eleventh-hour hope to stop this mockery of American law, customs and traditions.”

• 83 million? (Victor Davis Hanson)

Donald Trump in furor stormed out of a New York courtroom for a while, in the defamation suit brought by author and dating/boyfriend/sex-advice columnist E. Jean Carroll. It was just settled against Trump for $83.3 million! The Carroll suit was largely subsidized by Reid Hoffman the billionaire capitalist, and mega-donor to the Democratic Party and leftwing causes. The subtext of Trump’s rage, aside from the outrageous monetary size of the defamation ruling, is that he was facing—and angered—a leftwing claimant, a quite hostile leftwing judge, and a leftwing New York jury. The civil suit serves as a mere preview of four additional leftwing criminal prosecutions, leftwing judges, and leftwing juries to come—all on charges that would never had been filed if Trump either had not run for president or been a liberal progressive. Yet here we are.

The E. Jean Carroll case is the most baffling of all five. She, the alleged victim, did not remember even the year in which the purported sexual assault took place, nearly three decades ago. Observers have pointed out dozens of inconsistencies in her story. It was never clear what were the preliminaries that supposedly (Trump denies meeting her) led both, allegedly, willingly to retreat together to a department store dressing room, where during normal business hours the alleged violence took place. Moreover, the sexual assault complaint came forward decades post facto—and only after Trump was running for and then president. Carroll eventually sued him for battery, but well after the statute of limitations had expired and thus the case seemed defunct.

Her claims of defamation injuries arise from being fired from her advice column job at ELLE magazine. She claimed that Trump’s sharp denials and ad hominem retorts led to her career ruin. But the loss for anyone of a column at 76 does not seem such a rare occurrence, and the absence of a salaried job in one’s late seventies for four years does not seem to equate to a $83 million hit. And note the allegation that her dispute with Trump led to her firing was strongly denied by the very magazine that cut her loose. But then another strange thing happened. In 2022, a new law (“The Adult Survivors Act”) was passed in the New York legislature. It also post facto established a twelve-month window (beginning six months from the signing of bill) that permitted survivors of long ago alleged sexual assaults suddenly to sue the accused long-ago perpetrator—regardless of the previous statute of limitations.

That unexpected opening suddenly gave Carroll’s prior unsuccessful efforts a rebirth. And she quickly refiled with the help of arch-Trump hating billionaire Hoffman. Yet the bill may have been introduced with Trump particularly in mind—given the legislator who introduced it, Brad Hoylman-Siga, was known as another Trump antagonist. More interestingly, he had earlier introduced and had passed another Trump-targeted bill. That “TRUST” act had empowered particular federal Congressional committees to have access to the New York State once sealed tax returns of high-ranking government officials—such as Trump. That bill’s generally agreed subtext was a green light for anti-Trump members of Congress to obtain legal access to Donald J. Trump’s tax returns.

So there is an eerie feeling that the New York legislature may have abruptly passed legislation that was aimed at the past conduct of Donald Trump but only after he entered the political arena. While these are not quite bills of attainder, there is something unsettling if they are post facto laws aimed at targeting the most famous and controversial man in America and the leading candidate for the presidency. In essence they were targeted statutes designed to make Trump’s prior legally unactionable behavior suddenly quite legally actionable. Trump will be subject to such special treatment all summer and fall. Prosecutors Bragg, James, Smith, and Willis will synchronize their court business for maximum effect.

Trump again will face leftwing prosecutors, judges, and juries on charges that are politically driven, involving alleged behavior that is either usually not criminalized or not to the same degree as Trump’s case. (Do we remember the nearly $375,000 federal fine belatedly leveled at an exempt Obama but only five years after his 2008 illegal garnering of, and not reporting, foreign campaign contributions?) The stakes are higher each day as Trump closes in on the nomination and thus becomes the hope of half the country to end the Biden madness. Somehow Trump will have to stay calm, give no opening to his legion of hostile prosecutors, while conducting a nonstop campaign against Biden (and for a while Hayley), and while fighting to keep his name on various state ballots.

So what we are witnessing is not even the extralegal efforts of Steele/Fusion GPS, Perkins Coie/DNC/Hillary Clinton in 2016, or the 2020 “Russian disinformation” ruse/change the voting laws/infuse half a billion dollars to absorb the work of the registrar machinations against Trump. We are way beyond all that. The legal system itself, hand-in-glove with leftwing politicos (compare campaign boasts of James and Willis, or prosecutorial visits to the January 6 committee and the White House) is turning the process of balloting and elections into an embarrassing farce. Still, Trump will have to soldier on. He must stay controlled amid the tsunamis, not play into the hands of his accusers, and remember that he may soon be the only eleventh-hour hope to stop this mockery of American law, customs and traditions.

Wild dogs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1751228420925562943

Baby goat
https://twitter.com/i/status/1751252951375712290

The bearded vulture is the only known animal whose diet is almost exclusively bone

Fata morgana

This phenomenon is known as Fata Morgana that takes place when the color of the sea is a perfect match for the sky above it. pic.twitter.com/50Qp01BL63

— Historic Vids (@historyinmemes) January 28, 2024

Monarch
https://twitter.com/i/status/1751398451152044152

Clay
https://twitter.com/i/status/1751471302169227699

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