Menu Icon

Debt Rattle July 17 2025

Jul 172025
 
 July 17, 2025  Posted by at 8:51 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Portrait of Dora Maar 1943

 

• Trump Arms Ukraine. Russia Doesn’t Care (Kornev)
• Trump’s Tariff Revenues Reach Record Highs (Salgado)
• Federal Judge Takes Control of US Government (Spivak)
• Zelensky Not A Dependable Partner For US – Former Trump Adviser (RT)
• EU Is Funding The ‘Death’ Of Ukraine – Zakharova (RT)
• The Conflict in Ukraine Is Widening out of Control (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Kremlin Urges Trump To Pressure Kiev (RT)
• Zelensky Urges Trump To Revisit Ukrainian Missile Proposal (RT)
• Trump Sprang Ukraine Surprise On NATO States – Reuters (RT)
• The Battle For The Middle East Is Going Global (Sadygzade)
• MTG Tries to Stop US Funding of Israeli Aggression (Paul Craig Roberts)
• India, China, Brazil Facing ‘Consequences’ For Russia Trade Ties – Rutte (RT)
• EU Plan To Move Frozen Russian Money Would Be ‘Expropriation’ – Euroclear (RT)
• Adam Schiff Faces Federal Criminal Referral Over ‘Mortgage Fraud’ (Margolis)
• EU General Court Orders Le Pen Family To Give EU €300k (RT)

 

 

euro

GMO

Beck

 

 

 

 

“Russia’s layered air defense network, including the S-300, S-400, and S-500 systems, was designed with threats like ATACMS in mind. While a 100% interception rate is unrealistic, operational experience shows a high level of effectiveness..”

• Trump Arms Ukraine. Russia Doesn’t Care (Kornev)

On Monday, July 14, US President Donald Trump announced that he had decided to supply Patriot missile systems to Kiev, with the first deliveries expected in the coming days. The key element of this move lies not just in the type of weapons, but in the logistics behind them. While the deliveries will be formally carried out by Washington, the funding will come from NATO allies. The first batteries will be transferred from Germany, which will later be compensated by new shipments from the United States. In essence, a new mechanism is taking shape: American weapons, paid for with European money. But what does this actually mean in practical terms? Is this a major escalation, a political gesture, or simply a reshuffling of existing commitments? And more importantly, how will this affect the battlefield itself?

According to Trump, Ukraine will receive 17 Patriot systems – a statement that immediately raises questions. Most importantly, it’s unclear exactly what the administration considers a “system.” If he meant 17 launchers, that would translate into just three or four full batteries, since each battery includes a radar, command post, and between four and eight launchers. This would not represent a dramatic escalation, but rather allow the Ukrainian Armed Forces to replenish and rotate previously supplied batteries.A more ambitious interpretation would assume that Trump meant 17 full batteries. That would be the single largest delivery of air defense systems to Ukraine to date – several times more than what the country currently fields. While the US has the industrial capacity and inventory to provide this quantity, such a generous transfer would be uncharacteristic of Trump’s approach.

His goal is to make a visible impact, not to set records. The more plausible scenario is that this is a European-funded replacement for earlier systems that have been damaged or expended. In parallel with the Patriot announcement, details began to emerge about long-range missiles. According to The Washington Post, the Trump administration is considering removing all restrictions on Ukraine’s use of ATACMS missiles to strike targets deep inside Russian territory. It’s worth clarifying that Ukraine already possesses such missiles. Since 2023, its forces have deployed ATACMS variants with a range of up to 190 km, and since spring of 2024, longer-range versions capable of reaching 300 km. The change lies not in the hardware itself, but in the potential shift in how it can be used.

Up until now, Washington has forbidden Kiev from using these weapons to strike internationally recognized Russian territory. According to American press reports, those limits may now be dropped. While this move would entail risks, it doesn’t represent a strategic game-changer. Russia’s layered air defense network, including the S-300, S-400, and S-500 systems, was designed with threats like ATACMS in mind. While a 100% interception rate is unrealistic, operational experience shows a high level of effectiveness. The threat is real, but hardly decisive.

Read more …

“Tariff revenues reached a record level of $113 billion, representing a significant financial boost and hitting a new high for this year..”

“Compared to last June, this year’s figures are up 301%..”

• Trump’s Tariff Revenues Reach Record Highs (Salgado)

Revenues from Donald Trump’s tariffs have hit record highs as of the start of this month, as the president announced more tariffs, especially on hostile countries. Tariff revenues reached a record level of $113 billion, representing a significant financial boost and hitting a new high for this year, Fox Business reported. Democrats, who prefer taxing Americans to tariffing foreigners, have bewailed the tariffs nonstop, but Trump’s optimism about the revenues seems to be justified so far. We need fewer taxes on Americans and more tariffs on belligerent nations that hate the USA. And companies that dislike the tariffs should bring operations back to America.

A June 30 press release from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) previously boasted that the majority of the tariff revenues collected this year are due to Trump‘s tariffs, with which he is leveling the international trade playing field and penalizing hostile countries. Fox News added more details on the newest numbers: The U.S. received more than $27 billion in customs duties in June, the highest figure so far this year, according to the Treasury Department’s “Customs and Certain Excise Taxes” data. Compared to last June, this year’s figures are up 301%. In January, tariff revenues hovered around $7.9 billion and more than doubled in April to $16.3 billion. Meanwhile, July is on track to continue as a revenue contributor for the federal government.

Even before the newest revenue numbers were announced, DHS was celebrating the tariffs’ success. “We are proud to help President Trump make America richer and reverse a broken trade system that resulted in millions of jobs shipped overseas and made us dependent on foreign adversaries for essential goods,” said an unnamed senior official. “This administration will always put the American first.” The U.S. slapped all the European Union countries and Mexico with 27% tariffs this month, Fox stated, and Trump imposed a particularly hefty 50% tariff on Brazil for attacking freedom of speech and undermining free elections. “Goods transshipped to evade this 50% Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff,” Trump wrote the Brazilian president Lula before warning, “If for any reason you decide to raise your Tariffs, then, whatever number you choose to raise them by, will be added onto the 50% that we charge.”

Many countries around the world have long imposed significant tariffs on American goods while demanding no reciprocal tariffs on their goods. Trump was determined to change that rigged and unjust system. That naturally infuriated the countries that had become accustomed to taking advantage of us, and Democrats always take part in those criticizing in America, but the change was actually long overdue. Trump also aims to bring manufacturing back to America and encourage both companies and customers to prefer goods made in America. As Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick reminded anti-tariff gripers, “Remember, there’s a ZERO percent tariff on all goods made in the USA!”

Read more …

Lawfare squared and cubed. Congress may not approve, nor may the Supreme court, but this judge is determined to find a way.

• Federal Judge Takes Control of US Government (Spivak)

Just days after the Supreme Court again made it clear that the separation of powers is sacrosanct, Indira Talwani, an Obama appointed federal judge in Massachusetts, has taken the unprecedented step of ordering the government to fund Planned Parenthood, purporting to enjoin implementation of a portion of the Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) passed by Congress. The BBB imposed a one-year ban on state Medicaid payments to health care nonprofits that offer abortions and also received more than $800,000 in federal funding in 2023. Three days after the president signed the BBB into law, Planned Parenthood sought a temporary restraining order (TRO). Without hearing from the government, complying with federal rules, or even providing an explanation, within hours after the filing, Talwani issued a TRO for at least 14 days that requires the government to spend money Congress declined to appropriate.

Four days later, the administration asked Talwani to dissolve the TRO because of its obvious infirmities. Instead, she doubled down, issuing an amended TRO that satisfied the technical requirements she had previously ignored. I work with Planned Parenthood’s very capable lead lawyers. Without the facts or the law on their side, they did the right thing. They found a far-left federal judge who has repeatedly ruled against the Trump administration and is willing to create a constitutional crisis to advance a political cause. Numerous Supreme Court decisions explain that merely because something is legal does not mean that Congress must fund it, or continue to do so. Just a few weeks ago, in Medina v. Planned Parenthood, the Supreme Court rejected Planned Parenthood’s challenge to South Carolina’s right to exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program.

For more than 40 years, the Hyde Amendment has generally prohibited federal funding for abortion, and the court has repeatedly held that the government is under no contrary obligations (e.g., Maher v. Roe and Harris v. McRae). Talwani’s order violates Article I of the Constitution, which could not be more clear: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” Article I vests the power to authorize spending exclusively in Congress. In OPM v. Richmond (1989), the Supreme Court confirmed that the Appropriations Clause conveys a “straightforward and explicit command” that no money “can be paid out of the Treasury unless it has been appropriated by an act of Congress.”

There is no basis in the Constitution or any Supreme Court decision to support the right of a court – any court – to interfere in congressional decisions to fund, or cease funding, a private organization. To the contrary, in Rust v. Sullivan (1991), the Supreme Court held that “the Government has no constitutional duty to subsidize an activity merely because the activity is constitutionally protected.”Planned Parenthood’s main argument is the equivalent of jury nullification. Because it is the dominant provider of abortion services in the United States, limiting its ability to carry out its mission would deprive women of access to such services. Even if true, that is a political argument unsuccessfully made during the last election and during the debate over the BBB.

Planned Parenthood asserts that the BBB is an unconstitutional bill of attainder because the criteria for defunding effectively single it out. That absurd argument flies in the face of an unbroken line of cases that apply the Article I prohibition on bills of attainder only to criminal or quasi-criminal punishment. Congress often funds, or defunds, individuals and organizations. In Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (1971), the Supreme Court rejected the proposition that an individual or defined group is subject to a bill of attainder merely because Congress singles them out. Talwani did not mention bills of attainder in her amended TRO. Planned Parenthood also claims that defunding its efforts constitutes viewpoint retaliation under the First Amendment, and a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment.

In Rust, the Supreme Court rejected similar claims. In its papers, Planned Parenthood cites no Supreme Court case compelling Congress to appropriate spending on these grounds. Nonetheless, in her amended TRO, Talwani relied on the First and Fifth Amendments to justify issuance of the TRO. She also rejected the government’s concern that it would be harmed if it paid money to Planned Parenthood, because, she averred, the government likely would instead use the funds to pay another provider. By that logic, a mugger is only taking money that his victim would probably spend on something else. The first hearing is on Friday. If Talwani does not relent, she can expect an unpleasant rebuke from appellate courts.

Read more …

“..in order for the US-Ukraine partnership to work, Kiev “must become transparent and corruption-free.”

• Zelensky Not A Dependable Partner For US – Former Trump Adviser (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and his chief of staff Andrey Yermak are not “dependable” partners for the US, former Trump adviser Steve Cortes has said, pointing to transparency and corruption issues in Kiev. Cortes made the statement in a reply on X to Ukrainian journalist Diana Panchenko, who had stressed the importance of knowing “the difference between helping Ukraine and helping Zelensky.” She claimed that “Ukrainians want peace” while “Zelensky wants money and to stay in power.” “Exactly,” Cortes responded, stating that in order for the US-Ukraine partnership to work, Kiev “must become transparent and corruption-free.” “Yermak and Zelensky are not dependable, believable partners for the United States,” he said.

Cortes, who previously served as a senior adviser to President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, has long been critical of the Ukrainian government’s internal practices. Earlier this month, he published a commentary warning of waning trust in Kiev’s leadership, singling out Yermak as a central figure in what he described as systemic corruption, calling him Ukraine’s “co-president” and accusing him of shielding officials under criminal investigation. Cortes argued that Yermak has become a nuisance in UK-Ukraine relations, noting bipartisan frustration with the aide. He specifically cited Yermak’s role in the dismissal of General Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, a popular and respected military leader, while officials like Deputy Prime Minister Aleksey Chernyshov—who has faced corruption allegations—remained in office. Chernyshov, however, was ultimately sacked earlier this week amid an ongoing cabinet reshuffle.

The former adviser’s remarks echo longstanding concerns expressed by Donald Trump, who has also described Zelensky as the “primary obstacle” to peace and has repeatedly criticized the scale of US support for Ukraine and the lack of accountability for the billions of dollars sent to Kiev. In March, Trump adviser David Sacks also called for a full audit of US aid to Ukraine, claiming there had been “tons of stories” about corruption and the misuse of American weapons. He said the only remaining question was “how much” had been stolen, calling Kiev’s leadership massively corrupt.

Read more …

“.. it’s a bit like being told to foot the bill for a meal someone else enjoys, only for them to end up dead afterward. Am I correct?”

• EU Is Funding The ‘Death’ Of Ukraine – Zakharova (RT)

The European Union is funding the “death” of Ukraine by paying for weapons sent to Kiev, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. On Monday, US President Donald Trump unveiled a proposal to continue delivering American weapons to Ukraine at the expense of EU taxpayers. Kaja Kallas, the EU’s top diplomat, said that the proposal was welcome, but that Trump should not take credit for aid unless the US is willing to “share the burden.” “Was Kaja starting to figure things out?” Zakharova wrote on social media on Wednesday. “Let’s help her: it’s a bit like being told to foot the bill for a meal someone else enjoys, only for them to end up dead afterward. Am I correct?”

Moscow has consistently argued that no amount of Western military aid will make it change its core goals in the conflict. The Kremlin has described the EU’s approach as an attempt to prolong the war “to the last Ukrainian” and harm Russia, using Ukraine as a proxy. Trump has emphasized that arms sales to Ukraine are a business opportunity for the US. His administration maintains the proposal is naturally shifting responsibility for Ukraine’s future to the EU, which it says has the most to gain or lose.

”Europe wants to take the traditional defense of Europe. They should,” US Ambassador to NATO Matt Whitaker told Fox News. “The reality right now in Europe is they cannot manufacture the armaments required on the battlefield of Ukraine, or on the battlefield if there is a potential war in Europe.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday that the EU was placing “improper pressure” on Trump to adopt a more pro-Ukrainian stance. He warned that escalating sanctions on Moscow – something Trump also threatened – would ultimately harm EU member states more than Russia.

Read more …

“The dilemma is that the US weapons industry is too powerful for peace.”

• The Conflict in Ukraine Is Widening out of Control (Paul Craig Roberts)

Since early 2022, more than three years ago, my theme has been that Russian President Putin’s unwillingness or inability to bring the conflict with Ukraine to a quick end will result in an ever-widening war culminating in a major conflagration far beyond Donbas and Ukraine. It was obvious to me, but not to Putin and to my critics, that by refusing to use sufficient force to end the conflict Putin was guaranteeing the increased participation of Washington and NATO in the conflict. Over the years of the conflict I have provided numerous updates on “The Ever-widening War.”

The war has widened into an attack on Russian strategic forces and recent talk of providing Ukraine with missiles to attack Moscow. According to news reports, Europe is preparing for war with Russia. The conflict has already gone far beyond Donbas. The point of a major conflagration cannot be far off. One Russian commentator says “World War III has already begun.” Putin, and as far as I can tell, few in Russia understand the Zionist neoconservatives doctrine of American hegemony. It seems that Putin has never heard of the three decades old Wolfowitz doctrine. Putin himself admits that he has only now understood the situation that confronts Russia. As John Helmer reports:

“Putin has just admitted this in a television interview on July 14. “I thought that the contradictions with the West were primarily ideological,” he said. “It seemed logical at the time – Cold War inertia, different views of the world, values, the organization of society. But even when the ideology disappeared, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, the same, almost routine deviation from Russia’s interests continued. And it was not because of ideas [ideology], but because of the pursuit of advantages – geopolitical, economic, strategic. The world respects only those who can protect themselves. Until we show that we are an independent and sovereign power that stands behind our interests, there will be no room for anyone to treat us as equals.”

President Trump, stopped by the Ruling Establishment from his domestic agenda, has turned to foreign affairs where he can remain in the limelight by bullying other countries to conform to his edicts. He has now given Putin 50 days to comply. To comply with what? With Zelensky’s demands? What is the agreement for which Trump demands Putin’s consent? As the conflict is between Washington and Russia, the agreement has to be made by Trump and Putin. Putin has made it clear that the agreement must deal with “the root cause” of the conflict, which is the absence of a mutual security agreement. But if Washington is set on hegemony, there can be no mutual security agreement.

Here is the real situation: Two heavily nuclear armed governments are both in denial of reality. Putin and Lavrov are governed by their illusion that the difference between Russia and the West can be resolved through words. Washington is dangerous because the Zionist neoconservative doctrine of American hegemony is institutionalized. To avoid the brewing conflagration, all Washington and the EU need to do is to agree with Russia to a mutual security treaty. Russia only wants threats off its borders. Russia has no territorial ambitions unless Russia is driven to them by security threats. Trump wants America to make money. How does America make money when US aggression cuts the West off from the majority of the world? The only reason for BRICS is Washington’s hostility to Russia, China, and Iran. The dilemma is that the US weapons industry is too powerful for peace.

Read more …

“..sanctions would be imposed on Russia and its trade partners unless hostilities are halted within 50 days. No similar deadline was issued for Ukraine.”

• Kremlin Urges Trump To Pressure Kiev (RT)

The Kremlin urges all nations to push Kiev to reach a negotiated settlement in the Ukraine conflict and hopes US President Donald Trump is privately doing so, spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Monday.Earlier in the week, Trump unveiled a proposal under which NATO member states supporting Kiev would purchase American-made weapons for Ukraine’s fight against Russia. He also warned that sanctions would be imposed on Russia and its trade partners unless hostilities are halted within 50 days. No similar deadline was issued for Ukraine. ”There were a lot of remarks about [Trump’s] disappointment [with Russian President Vladimir Putin], but we want to hope that in parallel to that, pressure is being applied to the Ukrainian side,” Peskov told journalists. “It appears that the Ukrainian side takes all statements of support as signals to continue war, not as signals for peace.”

In public comments, Trump has alternated between assigning blame to Moscow and Kiev for the lack of progress toward his desired outcome in the conflict. His latest statements have focused on criticizing Russia. In May, Ukraine agreed to resume direct negotiations with Russia after the Trump administration indicated it expected such a step. However, talks stalled after the early June meeting, with Kiev declaring the process “exhausted” and indicating it had only participated to avoid appearing dismissive of Trump’s diplomatic agenda. Moscow has said it remains committed to achieving its core objectives in Ukraine but prefers a diplomatic solution if possible.

Trump’s threats were welcomed by hardliners in the US and Europe. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina issued a veiled threat of military action, writing on X that “if Putin and others are wondering what happens on day 51, I would suggest they call the Ayatollah.” Graham referenced Iran’s supreme leader, whose country was targeted last month by US and Israeli airstrikes. Officials claimed the attacks were necessary to dismantle Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure and prevent the development of a nuclear weapon, a goal that Iran denies pursuing.

Read more …

“..Kiev asked the US to station nuclear-capable Tomahawk cruise missiles in Ukraine..”

Great idea. Nazis with nukes.

• Zelensky Urges Trump To Revisit Ukrainian Missile Proposal (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky has called on US President Donald Trump to reconsider Ukraine’s proposal to host long-range American missiles. The appeal comes in the wake of Trump’s pledge this week to provide advanced weapons systems to Kiev, with the caveat that the costs will be covered by other nations. In an interview with Newsmax on Tuesday, Zelensky appealed for even more military aid, referencing part of his “victory plan,” which he had previously presented to both President Joe Biden and Trump in the lead-up to the 2024 US presidential election. ”I remember that we had a powerful deterrence package before President Trump became president. I wanted America to sell us such a package. But it was not done,” Zelensky said.

Previous media reports have suggested that Trump may deliver additional long-range weaponry to Ukraine as part of his new initiatives. Some outlets claimed he had encouraged Zelensky to target Moscow and St. Petersburg, though the White House has refuted them. Publicly, the US president has advised against attacks on the Russian capital. Zelensky first presented his “victory plan” to the US in September 2024. According to leaked classified details of the proposal’s “deterrence package,” Kiev asked the US to station nuclear-capable Tomahawk cruise missiles in Ukraine. The Biden administration reportedly rejected the request outright. Ukrainian lobbying efforts during the 2024 US election cycle drew scrutiny, particularly following Zelensky’s visit to an arms manufacturing facility in the swing state of Pennsylvania.

He was accompanied by prominent Democrats during the trip, including Governor Josh Shapiro and Senator Bob Casey, prompting Republican officials to take aim, accusing him of implicitly supporting the rival party. Zelensky’s subsequent interactions with Trump were also marked by tensions. The planned signing of a minerals deal during his February visit to the White House – an offer of broad US access to Ukrainian natural resources that originally was part of the “victory plan” – erupted into a public dispute in the Oval Office. The agreement was ultimately signed in late April. Moscow has accused Zelensky of prolonging hostilities with Russia despite mounting Ukrainian casualties in a bid to preserve his power through martial law despite his presidential term officially ending last year.

Read more …

“And I also suspect that internally in the administration they are only now beginning to sort out what it means in practice.”

• Trump Sprang Ukraine Surprise On NATO States – Reuters (RT)

Several NATO member states were not notified in advance that they would be asked to fund new arms deliveries to Ukraine under US President Donald Trump’s latest proposal, Reuters has reported, citing European officials. On Monday, Trump pledged to provide more US-made weapons to Kiev through a new scheme funded by European NATO members. “We’re not buying it,” Trump said during an Oval Office meeting with the bloc’s secretary-general, Mark Rutte. “We will manufacture it, and they’re going to be paying for it.” Trump noted that the plan is seen by Washington as a business opportunity. Rutte said six countries – Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, and Canada – were willing to take part in the arms procurement scheme.

However, high-ranking sources at the embassies of two of those countries told Reuters they only learned of their supposed participation when the announcement was made. “It is my clear sense that nobody has been briefed about the exact details in advance,” one European ambassador told Reuters. “And I also suspect that internally in the administration they are only now beginning to sort out what it means in practice.” Several countries have already distanced themselves from Trump’s plan. According to Politico and La Stampa, France and Italy will not be financially supporting the effort. Hungary and the Czech Republic have also declined to participate, with Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala saying Prague is focusing on other projects.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, on the other hand, has welcomed the proposal but emphasized that Washington should “share the burden,” stating that if European countries pay for the weapons, it should be considered as “European support.” Since taking office in January, Trump has renewed pressure on NATO members to increase defense spending and warned that the US may not defend allies who do not meet their obligations. Russia has repeatedly condemned Western arms supplies to Ukraine, arguing that it only prolongs the bloodshed and does not change the course of the conflict. The Kremlin maintains that foreign military aid is being used to escalate the hostilities rather than seek a diplomatic resolution.

Read more …

“..the Middle East, where the actions of the US and Israel are seen as manifestations of Western hegemony, while BRICS nations and their partners are increasingly positioning themselves as defenders of multipolarity, sovereignty, and a just international order.”

• The Battle For The Middle East Is Going Global (Sadygzade)

Global events increasingly reflect the growing confrontation between the Western bloc, led by the United States and its allies, and the countries of the so-called “World Majority,” coalescing around BRICS. This geopolitical tension is particularly evident against the backdrop of escalating conflicts in the Middle East, where the actions of the US and Israel are seen as manifestations of Western hegemony, while BRICS nations and their partners are increasingly positioning themselves as defenders of multipolarity, sovereignty, and a just international order.

On July 7, US President Donald Trump hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. The two leaders discussed two major issues: the upcoming negotiations with Iran and the controversial initiative to relocate Palestinians from Gaza. These topics underscored Washington and West Jerusalem’s efforts to reshape the Middle East’s security architecture – framed under the banner of offering a “better future,” yet unfolding amid growing accusations of violations of international law.= During a working dinner, Netanyahu stated that Israel and the US had been consulting with several countries allegedly willing to accept Palestinians wishing to leave Gaza. He emphasized that the proposed relocation would be “voluntary,” offering a better future to those who seek it. According to him, agreements with a number of countries were already nearing completion.

Initially, Trump refrained from making a clear statement on the matter, but later remarked that “neighboring countries have been extremely cooperative,” expressing confidence that “something good will happen.” This ambiguity may reflect either an attempt to soften the political sensitivity of the issue or a reluctance to prematurely reveal the details of a plan that has drawn considerable criticism. Previously, Trump had proposed transforming Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East” and relocating its population – an idea harshly rejected both by the residents of the enclave and by international human rights organizations, which characterized it as a form of ethnic cleansing. Behind the scenes of the dinner, indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas were ongoing, focused on securing a ceasefire and a hostage exchange.

The meeting marked the third in-person encounter between Trump and Netanyahu since the Republican leader’s return to the White House in January. Just two weeks earlier, the US had carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in support of Israeli military action. Days later, Trump helped broker a short-term ceasefire in the 12-day war between Israel and Iran – an achievement likely intended to bolster his own diplomatic credentials. During the meeting, Trump announced that his administration had scheduled formal talks with Iran. He said that Tehran had shown a willingness to negotiate following substantial military and economic pressure. US Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff confirmed that the meeting was expected to take place “within the next week.”

Trump also indicated he was open to lifting sanctions on Iran under the right circumstances. Meanwhile, Iran’s newly elected president, Masoud Pezeshkian, expressed hope that tensions with the United States could be resolved through diplomacy. These statements suggested a potential, albeit limited, window for resetting US-Iranian relations, though both sides appeared driven primarily by tactical considerations. The political significance of the Trump-Netanyahu meeting was further underscored by protests outside the White House. Hundreds of demonstrators, waving Palestinian flags, demanded an end to US military support for Israel and called for Netanyahu’s arrest in light of the International Criminal Court’s warrant against him for alleged war crimes in Gaza.

Read more …

“..it is impossible not to be thankful for Trump. But Trump’s subservience to Israel is dispiriting and shameful..”

• MTG Tries to Stop US Funding of Israeli Aggression (Paul Craig Roberts)

US Rep. Greene has introduced legislation to remove military aid for Israel from the US budget. Marjorie Greene has done several things that members of the US House and Senate are trained not to do. She acknowledged Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons. Members of the US government are not supposed to acknowledge Israel’s nuclear weapons, because the Symington Amendment forbids aid to governments that enrich weapons grade uranium and produce nuclear weapons outside of International Atomic Energy Agency controls. The Israeli controlled US government avoids the Symington law by refusing to acknowledge the fact that Israel has acquired, with Washington’s assistance, nuclear weapons totally outside the IAEA controls

US Rep. Greene also points out the incongruity of Israel armed with nuclear weapons needing American military aid. This is especially the case when American men and women were killed and wounded fighting Israel’s wars against Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Hezbollah the protector of Lebanon, and then were abandoned by Washington and are living on the streets. The US military is now being urged to die for Israel in Iran. Americans have been so successfully brainwashed by the Israel Lobby that they see no difference between the interest of America and Israel. This is Netanyahu’s constant message. Israel and America are the same country.

President Trump has done a good thing for Americans by closing the border to immigrant-invaders. The Biden regime used American tax dollars to pay for the inflow of millions of non-ethnic Americans across an undefended border to transform the country into a Tower of Babel. President Trump did another good thing in eliminating the intentional discrimination against white ethnic Americans by the Biden regime’s DEI policy which refused to promote white heterosexuals until there was a specified percentage of homosexuals, lesbians, pedophiles, transgendered, and peoples of color. This Democrat liberal/leftwing policy was called “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion,” but white people were not included. So, it is impossible not to be thankful for Trump. But Trump’s subservience to Israel is dispiriting and shameful.

Read more …

Yeah, threatening China is a real slick move if you’re located in the North Atlantic.

• India, China, Brazil Facing ‘Consequences’ For Russia Trade Ties – Rutte (RT)

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has warned India, China and Brazil of “consequences” if they continue to do business with Russia. Rutte’s comment came after a meeting with US Senators on Tuesday, following President Donald Trump’s announcement on providing new military aid for Ukraine and a threat to impose 100% secondary tariffs on purchasers of Russian exports, unless a peace agreement is reached within 50 days. “My encouragement to these three countries, particularly is, if you live now in Beijing, or in Delhi, or you are the President of Brazil, you might want to take a look into this, because this might hit you very hard,” Rutte told reporters.

“So I urge you to make a phone call to Vladimir Putin and convey to him that he needs to get serious about peace talks, because if not, the consequences will have a massive impact on Brazil, India, and China,” he added. Since 2022, India and China have significantly increased their oil purchases from Russia. In May, New Delhi emerged as the second-largest buyer of Russian fossil fuels, with estimated purchases totaling $4.9 billion, of which crude constituted about 72% of the total value, according to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air. The US and India are engaged in negotiations for a trade agreement and are racing to meet an August 1 deadline set by Trump, in order to avoid reciprocal tariffs.

Rutte’s warning echoes US Senator Lindsey Graham, who in June said that he was working on a sanctions bill that he called an “economic bunker buster,” aimed at the three countries. Indian diplomats and officials have spoken with the Republican senator who sponsored the bill, which has Trump’s backing. Since he began his second term in January, Trump has issued direct threats to BRICS and imposed new duties on countries perceived to be aligned with the bloc.

Read more …

Euroclear issues warnings, but at the same time it transfers money to Ukraine.

• EU Plan To Move Frozen Russian Money Would Be ‘Expropriation’ – Euroclear (RT)

European Union plans to move frozen Russian sovereign assets into riskier investments would amount to expropriation, the Belgium-based settlement house Euroclear has warned.In an interview with the Financial Times published Wednesday, Euroclear Chief Executive Valerie Urbain said such a move could expose the EU’s financial system to both legal and systemic risks. Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, the US and EU have frozen more than $300 billion in Russian state assets. In May, the EU approved a plan to channel profits from those assets to support Ukraine, while some member states have pushed for outright confiscation.

Some $213 billion of the assets are held by Euroclear. The securities depository is currently reinvesting proceeds from Russia’s maturing assets – such as coupon payments and redemptions – primarily through central banks. The G7 is using those returns to support a $50 billion loan to Ukraine. However, as profits have declined following interest rate cuts by the European Central Bank, the European Commission is reportedly considering moving the funds into higher-yield investments to boost Kiev’s funding. Urbain has warned that seeking higher returns could lead to retaliation from Moscow and compromise Euroclear’s central role in the global financial system. “If you increase the revenues, you increase the risks.” Last year, Euroclear transferred €4 billion ($4.3 billion) to Ukraine, and so far this year it has paid €1.8 billion ($1.9 billion), according to Urbain.

She said the EU may try to raise those amounts by creating a “special purpose vehicle” to channel Russian assets into higher-risk investments that could bring “more revenues.” She cautioned that such a structure would involve “a lot of risks for Euroclear and for the European markets globally.” Legally, she said, the move would constitute “expropriation of the cash from Euroclear” without relieving the institution of its liability to the Russian central bank, “a position that we cannot bear.” Moscow has repeatedly warned that seizing its funds would violate international law. Legal and political concerns – particularly over sovereign immunity and property rights – have so far prevented the EU from endorsing full confiscation.

Read more …

The facts do seem obvious.

• Adam Schiff Faces Federal Criminal Referral Over ‘Mortgage Fraud’ (Margolis)

President Donald Trump demanded on Tuesday that California Democrat Sen. Adam Schiff be “brought to justice” following allegations of mortgage fraud tied to his Maryland property. The statement came after a federal housing agency reportedly referred the matter to the Justice Department for a criminal investigation into Schiff’s real estate dealings. “I have always suspected Shifty Adam Schiff was a scam artist,” he wrote. “And now I learn that Fannie Mae’s Financial Crimes Division have concluded that Adam Schiff has engaged in a sustained pattern of possible Mortgage Fraud.” “I always knew Adam Schiff was a Crook,” Trump continued. “Mortgage Fraud is very serious, and CROOKED Adam Schiff (now a Senator) needs to be brought to justice.” Schiff, of course, denies the allegations.

These aren’t wild allegations plucked from thin air; the evidence is pretty clear. According to records, Schiff claimed his main residence was a spacious 3,420 square foot home in Maryland, a move that conveniently secured him better mortgage rates — rates designed for people who actually reside in those homes as their principal dwelling. Simultaneously, he grabbed a homeowner’s exemption on a much smaller 650 square foot condo in Burbank, Calif., handing himself a tidy cut of about $7,000 off his tax bill by also insisting that the property was his “primary residence.” Two homes, both allegedly his principal residence, in two different states, reaping benefits from both ends. Is that some kind of bureaucratic miracle? Or a calculated abuse of the system he’s sworn to oversee?

Schiff’s own paperwork — mortgage forms, exemption claims, and that curious personal check he used to pay California property taxes (listing his Maryland address, no less) — tells a story of someone playing the system with both hands. Adding insult to injury, Schiff only made that personal check payment once, in 2017. The evidence is serious enough that a senior administration official confirmed to The New York Post that the Federal Housing Finance Agency, responsible for overseeing Fannie Mae, has submitted a criminal referral to the Justice Department, calling for a full investigation.

“It is extremely serious and [Schiff] is not taking it seriously,” the official told the Post. The source added that Schiff had a criminal count for each time he paid his monthly mortgage. The Federal Housing Finance Agency, under the leadership of Bill Pulte, has remained tight-lipped, declining to comment on the referral involving Schiff. But it was Pulte who, just a few months ago, referred another high-profile Trump adversary, New York Attorney General Letitia James, to the Justice Department over alleged mortgage fraud tied to properties in Brooklyn and Virginia.

Read more …

Whatever Macron says. What kind of court is that?

• EU General Court Orders Le Pen Family To Give EU €300k (RT)

The EU General Court in Luxembourg has ordered Marine Le Pen and her two sisters to repay more than €300,000 (over $350,000) to the EU. The funds were “considered to have been wrongly received” by their father, the late opposition leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, during his time as a member of the European Parliament, the court said in a statement on Wednesday. The legislative body claimed in 2024 that Le Pen “had improperly invoiced personal expenses” and demanded repayment. The latter, however, sought to appeal. Following Le Pen’s death in January, his daughters pursued the proceedings as his legal heirs.

Jean-Marie Le Pen was founder of the right-wing National Front and a longtime critic of EU integration. He served as an MEP from 1984 to 2019. His outspoken positions on national sovereignty and immigration challenged the French political establishment for decades. What were once dismissed as fringe positions have since become major issues in European politics. The ruling comes just months after his daughter, Marine Le Pen, former leader of the right-wing National Rally (RN) and three-time presidential candidate, was convicted of embezzling EU funds. Although she denied any wrongdoing, she received a prison sentence, was fined €100,000 ($116,000), and barred from holding public office for five years, a decision widely seen as eliminating a leading contender from the 2027 presidential race.

Le Pen has appealed the conviction. A verdict is expected in the summer of 2026 and will prove decisive in her bid for the presidency. The previous election in 2022 resulted in a run-off between Le Pen, who won over 42% of votes, and Emmanuel Macron, who secured 58%. Le Pen’s conviction triggered a wave of protests, with her supporters condemning the ruling as politically motivated and aimed at silencing dissent. US President Donald Trump accused the French political establishment of employing lawfare against the right-wing figure, urging Paris to “free” her.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Oil

Damascus

No idea

Honda Rube

Don’t miss

 

 

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